The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > What is the Opposition's policy regarding the current asylum seekers controversy?

What is the Opposition's policy regarding the current asylum seekers controversy?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 16
  7. 17
  8. 18
  9. Page 19
  10. 20
  11. 21
  12. 22
  13. ...
  14. 39
  15. 40
  16. 41
  17. All
Yabby: "for to come to Austrlia and win first prize, you need some serious money by third world standards."

I am not sure why I am replying, as you clearly so focused on justifying your "the immigrants are the evil ones, not us" meme that mere facts are unlikely to discourage you.

Nonetheless, there are holes in your argument that you can sail a ship though so I may as well point them out. You said the these people are coming to Australia for purely economic reasons. You now also say they are comparatively well off, and so were presumably living a good life compared to their neighbours. Nonetheless you claim they are willing to risk death to endure a fair amount of hardship to become a small fish in a big pond, rather than the big fish in a small pond they once were. This is so at odds with normal human behaviour it doesn't require further comment.

Yabby: "Afghans and Sri Lankans already here, would be egging them on."

The asylum people from the previous waves also have people here. The Iraqis, and the Vietnamese to name a few. The Vietnamese in particular are moderately well off. By your logic they should still be risking their lives in unseaworthy boats to get there. Yet no, when the unrest in their local area settled down, so did they.

You are obviously making this up as you go along. That might be work if you put some thought into it, but you seemingly posting the first thought that comes into your head that justifies your position. The inconsistencies with the situation on the ground are so glaringly obvious it is having the reverse effect from what you presumably intend.

Thus my lament above about the standard of your posts. What have you done with the old Yabby, the one who said entertaining things and made think? I what him back.
Posted by rstuart, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 8:33:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rstuart

The major difference is that with the scrapping of the temporary protection visa, which limited the duration and mobility of the asylum seeker, and the use of mandatory detention only when the person is deemed to be a security risk.

This means that if the person has no documentation, and cannot be confirmed as a security risk the authorities are forced to release him on Australian territory with a residence visa.

There is nothing stopping him hopping on a ferry to the mainland and applying for housing etc, even before his asylum status is verified. This means that his acceptance is virtually guaranteed after a short detention period, which was certainly not the case previously.

The boat people are not completely gullible, are informed of the implications as it affects their life savings, so their perceptions are not solely based on the smuggler's sales pitch. However, the smuggler's are certainly going to make sure that they have the positive information at their finger tips. They have been waiting patiently for years for the right opportunity, and Labor has given it to them.

Labor is directly responsible for the surge in boats, and thus indirectly responsible for the 12 lives lost when tthe boat sank a couple of days ago.

The drubbing that Labor got in the polls indicates that I am not the only one that thinks this way. If this crisis continues for much longer there may not be a Labor gov in 2011.

My prediction for this is that with the collapse of the "Indonesian solution" (which was a thinly disguised pacific solution) with the increasing unpopularity of this in Indonesia, and facing voter rebellion, Rudd is going to be forced to roll back most of these changes by the middle of next year.

The cynic in me says that the coalition will then delay this as much as possible to allow labor to continue to haemorrhage up to the next elections.

So far I have been right on the money.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 9:02:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And so the demonisation of asylum seekers continues.

Shadow Minister, who has referred to 10s of thousands of refugees on boats, has been everything *BUT* right on the money. It's typical, uneducated scare mongering based on anti Labour sentiment. In not *ONE* post from SM on this topic has he shown one ounce of compassion or sympathy or humanity towards asylum seekers. EVERY post he's written has been slanted specifically for POLITICAL spin; and his motives for his posts are clear and transparent (he's betrayed by his own language). What he cares about, as shown by his written language, is that those deaths give him the opportunity to try to blame people for the deaths. Political spin AT IT'S WORST! Twice he's blamed Labour for the deaths, and twice he's not written even one tiny word of sympathy or regret over those deaths..... his motivation is clear.

Some people JUST DON'T CARE.

And so the demonisation and myths and opinions continue.

Some sections of our community have simply lost their humanity.

Luckily they're a minority. Those latest polls place Coalition support BELOW Labour support, and Mr Rudd remains far and away the preferred leader compared to the opposition leader's extremely low rating. So the majority of Aussies in the poll still prefer Labour. That's not my "opinion" ..... that's FACT.
Posted by TZ52HX, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 10:52:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby

<< When I applied in the 70s ... >>

How telling. So you've been granted the privilege of resettlement in this country, and now you're going out of your way to deny the same right to others, and others BTW who are no doubt much needier than you ever were. Aren't you struck by the hypocrisy of your position?

<< So we tend to see those people with serious money ... >>

Some might have money. A few might have a lot of money. And BTW, having money doesn't negate ones right to seek asylum if needed. The vast majority of asylum seekers who arrive by boat however do not have 'serious' money. Most sell all they own to scrape together enough to pay for one escape passage.

<< Afghans and Sri Lankans already here, would be egging them on. As Bronwyn has confirmed, many have relatives here. >>

Refugees are entitled to live with their families too you know, or is that another privilege you think should be denied them? Many spend years separated from their spouses, parents or children. Australia’s Temporary Protection Visas kept families split for years on end. They were the reason so many women and children, desperate to be reunited with their husbands and fathers, were on board the ill-fated SIEV X. Having a relative already settled in the country in which you're seeking asylum is a huge advantage, both for the asylum seeker and for the adoptive country.

<< But money indeed is the driver for the huge migration that we see from Africa and Mexico. >>

Thousands of refugees in Africa are driven from their homes every year as a result of famine and war. To argue they leave their homes for no other reason than money is both crass and ignorant.

Mexico has been exploited by its all-powerful neighbour for so long and so ruthlessly that its government is no longer able to provide jobs for its citizens. They cross the border to survive, Yabby.

TBC
Posted by Bronwyn, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 11:10:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bronwyn
You are as usual far more reasoned and reflect more of reality than the "hard liners" '*I'M* all right crowd' (subtext and I FEEL that any other takers will lessen MY comfort [sic] therefore MY opinion is SPECIAL ). This also applies to the politically based posts.

The big problem with proponents of this attitude tends to take the Oppositional (typified by various degrees of hostility and 'arguing' by extremes or absolutes (elevating exceptions/anecdotal/specifics to represent the norm and therefore absolute proof ).

(IMO)many such arguments in the OLO context are exchanges where either or both sides refuse to learn from the exchange.(a subtle difference but an important one. The missing element is any effort towards objectivity).

It's like media 'balanced arguments' (sic) more about flash or technique than facts or perspective. Both sides say their piece but come to no conclusion beyond their starting point.

Both types therefore tend to be non or counter productive in advancing the truth. On the plus side those reading on the side lines may see the comparative objective weight.

Many of the opposing posts facing you now fall into the above opposition by extreme or emotion not objective reason. Keep up the fight.
Posted by examinator, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 12:33:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby (cont)

<< I accepted the decision of the Govt, in having an orderly system. That’s what we now need for asylum-seekers. >>

An orderly system for migration might be feasible, but it's virtually impossible when it comes to constantly shifting refugee movements. Thousands of government agencies and NGOs have been trying for decades to create fair systems for refugees. If it were as easy as you make it out to be, it would’ve been done long ago. Of course, everything's easier when you dispense with the need to treat people humanely.

Rstuart

<< What have you done with the old Yabby, the one who said entertaining things and made think? >>

Yes, I like that Yabby too. Funny though, having debated Yabby many times on asylum-seeker and animal rights issues, I’m inclined to think the real Yabby is in fact what we’re getting here. I’ve always believed a person’s views on animals are a revealing window into their soul and Yabby’s performance here only confirms that.

Shadow Minister

<< There is nothing stopping him hopping on a ferry to the mainland and applying for housing etc, even before his asylum status is verified. >>

This isn’t correct. The only time it’s happened is when a small group of teenaged boys, with no family and in need of community guidance, were brought to the mainland before their claims were finalised. It’s not normal practice and you’re wrong to promote it as such.

<< Labor is directly responsible for the surge in boats, and thus indirectly responsible for the 12 lives lost when the boat sank a couple of days ago. >>

People like those on the Oceanic Viking are taking to boats because they know it’s their only chance of gaining asylum. It’s the ‘turn-them-back and warehouse-them-in-Indonesia’ policies, of both the Howard and the Rudd governments, which are leading to increasing desperation among asylum-seekers and forcing them to risk their lives in leaky boats. The boats have never stopped coming. It’s just that asylum-seekers are finally realising they’ll likely never receive a resettlement option from Indonesia.

Examinator

Thanks Buddy. :)
Posted by Bronwyn, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 12:54:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 16
  7. 17
  8. 18
  9. Page 19
  10. 20
  11. 21
  12. 22
  13. ...
  14. 39
  15. 40
  16. 41
  17. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy