With Tony Abbott`s latest proclamation re "turning
around the boats!": I hear many loud indignant voices
condemning Tony Abbott`s policies, many from vested
interest groups and many from migrants themeselves,
yet at the same time I hear many people on the streets
calmy stating their indignation regarding this rapidly
increasing invasion of "foreigners" using "persecution"
as their excuse to take advantage of this gullible
government and it`s subservient people.

I wonder why we do not hear these people speaking out
against what they see as a threat to their own future
security?

Is it because of the fear of being condemned as a
"racist" that they maintain their public silence, or is
it that they suffer the fear of reprisal from some of these
"extremist" recent arrivals or self-interest groups who
are openly condemning any moves to cut-back on this external
invasion?

Nobody should be condemned, ostracized or penalized for
speaking out about any action that he or she may consider
detrimental to ensuring a secure and strife-free future
in which to raise a family and plan a future.

Australia is predominantly a Christian society and with
the recent rapid increase in "other religions" who
practise what some may consider to be "extremist" habits and
beliefs, it thus creates a situation of fear and distrust in
regard to future events in the eyes of the "native"
inhabitants!

Multiculturalism in a minority is possibly a good thing,
however practised to majority can result in widespread
racial and religous violence, as these groups form their
own communities and attempt to impose their own religous
beliefs upon a confused and angry "native" population.

I saw Sea Patrol the other night also, and it sure was an eye-opener. Not only were they fishing in Australian waters, but they also had a rabid pitbull below deck, and I didnt like the way they lasciviously eyeballed our Lisa McCune.
It is a bit of a one-sided issue, however you deal with it its the poor folks at the bottom that suffer the most. If you turned the boats back, all the passengers would lose their money. The flow-on would be bad publicity for people smugglers, maybe less future attempts.
I'm not sure how true it is, but I heard that all the folks from the Tampa have migrated to Australia ages ago. Which brings me to my next point, New Zealand. I would like to see visa conditions expanded for New Zealanders, and a strict cap on how many of them can be here at any given time. Then over time, the numbers of permits for New Zealanders can be reduced to an acceptable level. Macqarie or Herd Island would make an excellent offshore processing facility.

What's that.....damn there goes that dog whistle again.
and there goes the echo

I gotta say I am perpetually bemused by how boat-people is such an emotive topic. I really couldn't care less. How is it such a big issue?

Just like the time when I came back to Australia to find the country was obsessed with dancing (though now it's cooking) I am just not with it. I cant understand it in any way.

95% of illegal immigrants arrive by plane. Why does nobody get upset about plane people?

To me it's like people being scared of the boogie man.

What's going on here, Howler? I'm finding myself agreeing with you on various threads.

Will the real Houellebecq, please stand up
is this one of your games?.....I'll bite I agree with you too.

Send them all back:
Boat people and plane people.
Misplaced "compassion" is rightly viewed as weakness and taken advantage of.
Howard was not weak and the boat people dried up.
Rudd is weak and the boat people and people smugglers know it.
Australia has the right to shape its own destiny,
not be dictated to by lifestyle shoppers.

Proxy wrote, "Australia has the right to shape it's own destiny".

Now, don't forget that from 1788 we didn't give the right to Aborigines to "shape their own destiny in their own country".

Proxy, if you "truly" believe that Australia has the right to shape it's own destiny, then you must also believe that the Aboriginal Nation also had the same right way back from 1788 onwards. So tell us Proxy, tell us about your activities in defence of Aboriginal sovereignty. I'm sure you've been very active in this area, and that you don't practice hypocracy

Crackcup, are you afraid that boat people will do to us what our ancestors did to the Aboriginal people?

benq,
<<hypocracy>>
Is that governance by hypocrites?
I'm sure the term would be widely applicable.

The Aboriginals had no capacity to defend their borders,
and are fortunate indeed that it was the British who colonised this country.

Australia's current inability to defend it's borders is borne of an ideological sickness infecting the minds of multiculturalists and other relativists who elevate that ideology above Australia's own sovereignty.

I support Australian sovereignty against those who seek to undermine it but I don't support the lost cause of Aboriginal sovereignty.
The Aboriginal people can't seem to run their own communities,
so how could you expect them to run the country?

I agree with Examinator, C.J Morgan, boat people are not issue for Australia of sufficient magnitude to defy International conventions, understandings and Law about.

It's a beat up from Australia's hillbilly right. What scares me, is when I ask myself the question , "just how many Australian's share these xenophobic attitudes exactly"?.

I don't think I want to know.

And Benq is a student of history pointing out the obvious flaws in a philosophy of prejudice

Thanks Proxy for your reply. It's good to know that you at least openly admit your hypocracy on the matter: Some wouldn't. It gives us a more accurate idea of where you're coming from. Thanks.

We have done this subject so many times before.
We do it again with a whole new group of one eyed people.
6.000 boat people that is the numbers.
Yes no flood but without doubt far more Australians will change their federal voting intentions because of this issue.
I think the red necks and uniformed will out number those who stay left of center over the issue.
Talk of sending them all back is as silly as a hat on a bullfrog.
I guess now both sides are poll driven fair ways of dealing with the issue are over.

Simple, strict character rules for permission to take up residency- and mental, emotional or belief flaws picked up are a ticket back to the country they claim to come from (or else a third country), to ensure we never let someone in who would be incapable of integrating into Australian society.

The need to humanely shelter someone fleeing prosecution comes to a stop if that person were a fanatical wahabi terrorist fleeing Iran (as a silly example, but makes a point).

Terrorists don't enter countries via leaky boats, after spending years in internment camps, and then officially apply for permanent residency.

They enter via plane, like almost all illegal entrants.

Houellebecq,
Why are you bemused that people are emotive about illegals arriving? Do you like being conned? Would you let the uninvited barge into your house? That is exactly what is happening here. They are deceiving us by destroying their papers and taking advantage of us being soft. They impose themselves on us and at our cost.

As for your figure of 95% of illegals arriving by air. You are either ignorant or deliberately trying to mislead.

Those that arrive by air without, or invalid, visas are sent packing back to their point of embarkation by the airline that brought them. These are the equilivant to the illegal boat people. There are very few of these, as it costs the airlines, and most are gone within 72 hours.

Belly,
You say talk of sending them back is silly. Well that is exactly what the PM, K Rudd, said he would do prior to the last election. Still thik it is a silly statement? He also said he would be tough on border protection, oh yeah!

He has simply opened the door and put out the welcome mat, by the promise of permanent residence. At least 50 have died since he assumed power. Another boat missing the other day with 100 plus on board.

You say the figure is 6000 and there was a recent figure of each illegal entrant costing us $80,000. Hey, that is only $480,000,000 which I suppose is peanuts compared to the insulation fiasco or the BER shomozzle.

Dear Banjo,

Tony Abbott is talking about bringing back
the "Pacific Solution," and temporary visas.
Do you know how much the "Pacific Solution,"
cost Australia? I haven't looked it up, but
I believe it was in the millions. Nauru was
making a fortune out of us.

Banjo, what's your solution?

I'm talking about a practical, workable, real world solution.

Something that will solve the issues to your satisfaction.

So Banjo, what's your solution?

Dear Banjo,

Well I looked it up...

The original policy, according to
Crikey.com for processing each
applicant was $500,000 and estimated
to have cost about $1 billion over
5 years. And all this expense went
down the gurgler because according
to Crikey.com - 90% of the Temporary
Visa holders under the Howard Government
were eventually given Permanent Visas
anyway.

One solution being considered is a massive boatyard/immigration facility somewhere near the gas thingy. Many of these boats are in need of repair, many of the passengers have limited English skills but evidently experience with these types of crafts. Keep it all fenced off, and keep distributing travel brochures for other countries amongst them. Eventually they'll get the idea and sail off into the sunset happily.

Planepeople are a different matter entirely. Unfortunately, on a family site such as this, expletives must be used sparingly at best. And so I cant actually verbalise it appropriately despite my adequate locqacity, the aeroplane armrest hog. Lord Howe Island prison with 1800's conditions would be too good for armrest hogs.

And let me tell you, I dont see why I should be discriminated against for simply having sexy, svelte, shapely, and to-die-for elbows. I mean sure, they look great... but even these babies (*starts trying to kiss and lick elbows*) could do with a rest every so often.

What I don't understand is - if illegal
arrivals by air are processed so quickly
and sent back according to one poster,
(unless they are legitimate refugees) the
same rule should surely apply to boat people
as well.

If they are accepted as refugees -
my suggestion is
they should be asked to sign a minimum
ten year contract (to act as a deterent)
to live and work in
designated rural areas instead of allowing
them to disappear into urban communities.

If they break that contract, they should
be found and deported back to their last port
of call outside Australia.

This may act as a deterent for others whose
ambition may be to come and live in the major
population centres.

In the late 1940s and 1950s refugee migrants
who were accepted into the country after World
War II, had to sign 2 year contracts to work
on various government projects throughout
Australia. The Snowy Mountain Scheme as an
example, and forestry work in Tasmania,
road building in NSW, cane-cutting in Queensland,
railways in Victoria and Western Australia, coal
mines in La Trobe Valley, just to name a few. These
jobs brought in refugee migrant workers
some of whom worked longer than their 2 year contracts
- and ended up settling in the vicinity of their work

Facts do matter, emotive slings and arrows remain to be judged by truth.
FAR more illegal migration comes via air ports.
Carrying the right documents to enter Australia, but the wrong intentions, to work hide and stay not just be a temporary tourist is a fact.
Sending them back?
To what place?
Many destroy their papers and no country will except them.
more than ten times as many come via air ports as boats, even much more than that.

BOAT PEOPLE...GREEN SUPPORT.. UNPACKING THE NETWORK.

Folks.. it's alll about 'politics, power and pennies'...lots of them.

The Greens see votes in marginal seats in 'Assylum Seekers'.
Labor wants to be seen to be 'sympathetic' for similar reasons.

Is it out of the goodness of their hearts and their unparalleled compassion ? :)

HaaaaHAAAA-de-haaaaaa-HAAA... ohhhh my what a joke!

If the 'green' lemmings only knew..(don't worry Australia..I'll soon let them know)

Australia...when I reveal the Green/Labor network of snouts in the Green trough, you will never vote Green or Labor again.

The level of cronyism, corruption.. conflict of interest, blatant political oppotunism, the hypocrisy, the graft and corruption... it will blow your mind.

From now on.. whenEVER you think of Labor/Left/Green..think "corruption/pseudo capitalism/global governance/Total social control/power/money/Neo Facism" as I will soon point out. (Irrefutably)

The "Boat People" are just pawns in the big plan...and that plan..is HUGE -bigger..much bigger than Ben Hur..

SHOCK HORROR.....

Foxy says...

If they are accepted as refugees -
my suggestion is
they should be asked to sign a minimum
ten year contract (to act as a deterent)
to live and work in
designated rural areas instead of allowing
them to disappear into urban communities.

Wow.. and I agree 100%.. now.. all you need do is apply this newfound common sense and patriotism to 'other' groups :)

I would add one extra Foxy.. -That the contract include a proviso as follows;

If they engage in political activity.. demonstrations.. and protests related to overseas conflicts... OUT you go..there's a good boy and girl..OUT OUT OUT.

Foxy and Benq,
My solution is simple. Do not give them what they seek and they will stop coming.

Yes the Pacific solution was Howards first step. then christmas island was set up as an alternative. But the main factor that stopped the attempts was that they could no longer get permanent residence. Permanent residence unables them to then bring out others in the 'family reunion' catagory. That is why, in the main, the recent arrivals have been young men. Once here they can bring other family out by 747.

Look at the figures objectively, the boats stopped coming when permanent residence was withdrawn, the boats started again when permanent residence was promised.

Another solution could be to stop giving 'permanent residents' the right to sponsor others under family reunion catagory. This would impact on other legitimate immigrants , but I am in favour of reducing immigration anyway.

Australia should gain from immigration. At present the only ones to gain are the immigrants them selves.

Foxy,
The reason an instant determination can be made in relation to those that arrive here by air, without proper visas, is because we have information as to their nationality and where they embarked.

So simple, no valid visa , no entry.

The illegal boat people destroy their papers so we cannot establish who they are or their nationality. Other countries will not take back people unless we have proof of nationality.

They fly to Malaysia, then travel to Indonesia where they board the boats. They are coached in what to tell our officials on arrival. I know you would not lie, but these people are selfish enough to say anything to get their way.

There really is something positive that can be achieved through immigration, regardless of whether or not immigrant status is deemed legal or not.

There is no question that immigrants are determined to do well in Australia, they embrace education, are focused, family oriented, determined to develop and are industrious. Let’s face it; any opportunities Australia has to offer socially, economically and prospectively are better than what they have left behind.

Why don’t we process them quickly, primarily for security, skills and health, empty the detention and immigration centre’s and move them to remote communities on a work for benefits principle for say three years?

The immigrants get the opportunities they seek, they get paid for their contributions until they get employment, they contribute to the development of remote communities by applying their skills in building, education and small business development. Our indigenous communities benefit from immigrant skills, determination, participation and educational opportunities. Australia benefits by seeing a single program that focuses on the better application of Federal funding of all types including housing development.

Sounds like a win / win to me.

Dear Spindoc, Banjo, and others,

Farmers are complaining that they need workers
fo stay afloat. We need roads to be built,
(when will the Hume to Sydney ever be finished?),
and heaps more to be done. I was suggesting mandatory
contracts be signed, and they be moved to
designated rural areas - for the work that
desperately needs to be done. As Spindoc says,
boat people could help towards buidling industries
in rural communities and Aboriginal communities.
It would be a win/win situation indeed. Much
better than going back to the "Pacific Solution"
which failed miserably - cost a fortune ($1 billion
over 5 years) and 90% Temporary Protection Visa
holders ended up with permanent visas anyway.

There is no chance of Kevin Rudd backing down on boat people, and it is for the same core reason Kev wanted a carbon tax. That core reason is a "track record" to take with him to the U.N. when touting for his next job, we are just a stepping stone for Kev, and he will not protect our interests over his own.

I like your idea spindoc.

Many of the people who spend the longest in detention centres are those where it is difficult to ascertain identity or where entry has been refused and lawyers are still fighting it out in the courts.

If I guage the responses right most people are all for helping legitimate asylum seekers it is those who thwart the system that create the negative stigma.

Perhaps we should add the rule "no identity papers = no entry" to ensure speedier processing.

While I can see a rare case or two where gathering up papers may prove difficult under restrictive circumstances, in most cases if time and money can be found to locate and pay people smugglers, surely some forward planning in ensuring you have your identity papers should be relatively easy by comparison.

Foxy,
I am cynical of both political parties and I can tell you to my mind Tony Abbott is not the sharpest knife in the draw. The only thing I will give him credit for is stopping the ETS. Turnbull was a bigger idiot for supporting it.

You say the money spent on the Pacific solution was wasted. On the contrary, that and later Christmas Island together with Temporary visas stopped the boats from coming. The ones that were eventually given Permanent residence were those already in the system. The boats stopped coming because the illegals could no longer get what they wanted.

I think what your and Spindoc's ideas are certainly worth looking at.Seems to me though that there is a need for temporary visas to get such schemes going.

Belly,
Comon mate, they are strawmen you are putting up. Overstayers have nothing to do with this issue as most are simply tourists that overstay short term. You would have to get long term overstay figures up. There will always be some people who go underground and unless they can obtain false tax file numbers and Medicare cards, etc. they are very vulnerable to unscrupulous employers and landlords. The only way to stop that is to make ours a police state.

The boat people are after ligit residence so they are part of our system. In essence they are conning their way here by rorting and lying.

<< Tony Abbott is not the sharpest knife in the draw>>
and Banjo is not the sharpest speller in the fourem

Proxy,
Yep, right on both counts.

To be completely honest about it, Boatpeople dont impress me all that much. If they came by hot air balloon, elaborate solar glider, reclining tandem pedal boat, or biodiesel powered carbon fibre jet ski... Well that would sure be something to see. As it is they come by rickety old boats, probably full of tributyltin and lead paint, to become mudcrab habitat while the case drags on.

Benq asks:

"Crackcup, are you afraid that boat people will do to us what our ancestors did to the Aboriginal people?"

GOOD POINT BENQ.

Take a look at the lot of Aborigines. Do you want to be a member of a conquered people?

Will the boat people be our conquerors?

Very unlikely. Probably impossible in fact.

--But was the European invasion the last invasion that Australia will suffer?

--What form could future invasions take?

--Would we recognise a future invasion for what it is?

In the interests of transparency I am an immigrant.

--Am I an invader?

--Are "immigrant" and "invader" mutually exclusive descriptors?

Steven,
Further to your post

"One day millions of men will leave Arabia to go to Europe. And they will not go there as friends. They will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory."former Algerian president Houari Boumedienne

This bloke was the President of Algeria 76-78

When I see what is now happening in Europe, this bloke may well have been a prophet and may be proving to be correct.

Banjo:
I am getting very sick of being told incessantly
by politicians and do-gooding bleeding hearts
that we have to be "humanitarian" and accept every
"poor", "starving", "underprivileged", "persecuted"
"opportunist" who wants to come to this country to
get "part of the action", action which we have all
contributed to in some shape or form, to make it
what it is today.

If we continue to allow every dead-beat that can find
a few thousand dollars to buy himself a passage on an
unseaworthy skow to make his way into our international
waters, knowing full well that the bleeding hearts that
inhabit this country, like fleas on a dog`s back, will
extend a grandiose welcome as they recruit these newcomers
to support their cause of increasing multiculturalism.

The number of Migration Agents practising in Australia
today is fast becoming a plague. Migration itself has
become a very lucrative industry and is simply adding
to the rapidly increasing number of voices supporting the "humanitarian" outcry that is bringing rapidly
increasing numbers to this country, based on the
knowledge that it will be highly unlikely that they
will be turned away, because the Government would be
too embarrassed in the eyes of the rest of the world!

Anybody who cannot see the problems ahead if this
continues, should take a close look at what has happened
in Britain, especially the highly industrialized areas
in the north of England, where the white caucasian Brit
has now become a second rate citizen in his own country.
Australia historically seems to follow Britain`s lead
by around 10 or so years!

I know that my indignation will bring cries of "racism"
etc, however I believe that far from my being racist,
the perpetrators, instigators and supporters of these
acts of humanitarian abuse, should themselves be charged
with "acting against the best interests of the people
of Australia!"

Crackcup,
You're perfectly correct of course.
However the problem is not restricted to the UK but also includes Europe where
“the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes” - Najmuddin Faraj Ahmad (Mullah Krekar)

Dear Crackup....

I feel your frustration.

HERE is where it all comes from.. the 'WHY' of all the things you mentioned..

http://racetraitor.org/abolish.html

The man who wrote that shares the same ethnic background as Karl Marx.
He was a Harvard History professor. Another who shares that same background is Herbert Marcuse (the vid below refers to him)
It is an ideological mafia.. they just are not "Italian"

http://racetraitor.org/ that is the home page of that marxist group.

Read..and learn old son.

You will find THIS very illuminating if u've not already seen it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

cheers mate.