Picture this:
A couple arrive at Gatwick. Their bags are checked, 18,000 cigarettes & 28 kgs of tobacco are discovered.
Enough to incur a 10,000 pounds tax.

The male ( the only who speaks), makes out it was all a mistake.
“Why would I bring my wife if I was intending to do anything dishonest…”
But when this doesn’t evoke the desired get off.
Morphs in the twinkling of an eye into an asylum seeker :
“If you send my back to India I’ll be killed
“ I’ll kill myself here and now
“I’ll kill myself here and now if you want
“I want asylum
And, produces *real tears* ( no doubt evidence of deep trauma!)

Incredible ? http://fixplay.ninemsn.com.au/customs/3/8258534/episode-16

Someone trying to extract himself from a tight situation –yes, no doubt.

But you don’t get such a conditioned response unless there is more to it. And the more to it is that for much of the developing world it is common knowledge that most Western nations are suckers for the asylum seekers ruse.

As it turns out, this passenger eventually reneges and returns to India after wining an agreement that customs would not reveal his little escapade.
He had been, this time, primarily concerned about making a little exact money.

But if next time he decides to head down south to Christmas Island ,ditch his passport , claim to be from one of the UNHCRs top of the pops list of bad places, then cries: ‘If you send me back I’ll kill myself “ -– little doubt he’d be “found to be a genuine refugee”

SPQR,

There's nothing worse than cigarette smuggling refugees, I'm sure you'll agree.

Let's hope the authorities turn all those adults and kiddies upside down and shake them just to make sure there's no contraband before they even consider asylum.

My answer to this asylum seeker's situation is simple- if he is either a potential danger, religious nut, criminal, demonstrates no morals, mentally-or-emotionally unstable or violent, or presents himself in any way that would imply he is not going to integrate into Australia society as a safe and (reasonably) honest citizen, then send him back regardless of consequences.

If not- give his claim a second look (let him stay in the community), or find a third country where he will be safe.

Unlike, in my view, the other two posts I get your point and agree very much so.
Worth noting a few things.
This refugee like most arriving here by boat had cash,
This one clearly is dishonest, great for the country he was entering .
My memory's of refugees,the people who helped my country become the great nation it is, is tattered and worn suit cases arriving by boats but big ones, welcomed by our immigration and ready to show us so much.
The Emotive word refugee, is being miss used,being used to show love,concern, fear for people.
But blindly and wrongly,ignoring the real refugee not breaking our door down, not kicking it in, lets double our in take, but from those who wait.

The purpose of my initial post was to show that certain emotions/behavours that are often cited as evidence of genuineness can easily be manufactured to impress the more naïve.

A big thankyou to King Hazza and Belly for their inputs,
and a prolong raspberry to Poirot for hers

@Poirot
Right you are : border personnel report that checks of POOR asylum seekers have found no cigarettes and no tobacco.
Plenty of mobile phones , on the latest premium plans.
Plenty of blackberrys.
And, a few Molotov cocktail making kits & iron bars.
But absolutely, definitely, NO tobacco products.

A thousand pardons - SPQR, I couldn't resist.

Now I have to wipe the evidence of your "prolonged" raspberry off my computer screen....just as well it gave me a good laugh : )

“If You Send Me Back I’ll Be Killed!”
Australia, as a Nation can not afford to let itself get blackmailed by this kind of pleading. This is for the simple reason that to a large degree people coming here in the boats are not genuine refugees. It is what I feel but can not prove, neither can the pro boat arrival crowd prove that these people are genuine.
How about every pro boat arrival trumpeter volunteer to take on financial responsibility for a boat arrival for two years until they can be proven to be/not to be a risk to Australia.

I think we should apply a simple test

Lock them in a room, & give them a very sharp knife.

If they do kill themselves we will know they were genuine, [probably frightened of what the family will do to them for wasting the money], & should give them a decent burial.

If not, they were lying, we don't want them, send them back.

Would save much money in detention centers, & settlement costs for the smarties.

Hasbeen,

Plumbing the depths this morning.....

A particularly gross comment on your behalf.

This forum is certainly an eye-opener as to how some people think...an extraordinary insight into the meager version of humanity available to the limited of intellectual breadth and compassion.

Dear SPQR,

I watched that particular episode filmed at Gatwick Airport and was impressed by the professionalism of the staff involved. The gentleman in question was dealt with swiftly and found not to be a genuine refugee. He changed his mind regarding seeking "asylum" status very quickly after his bluff was called - which as the airport staff suspected was merely a ploy. The man also had a history of bringing cigarettes into the country.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with this case - except perhaps to taint all asylum seekers with the same brush? That would be most unfair - as according to the available statistics - even during the time of Howard's "Pacific Solution" most asylum seekers were found to be genuine refugees and were allowed to stay. People make up all sorts of excuses for their devious behaviour when caught out - whether it be at air-ports or locally - for drunk-driving, driving without a licence, speeding, etcetera. Asylum seekers however are a different matter. Why would you assume that they are not genuine? They are entitled to seek asylum in this country and their requests must be taken seriously because Australia has signed and International Agreement to take in a certain number of asylum seekers. Of course they will have - security, identity, health checks etc - done, and will be processed as quickly as possible by the appropriate professional authorities. I'm sure that those who aren't genuine will be dealt with accordingly. We need less fear-mongering because there is clear evidence that there is no need to be concerned.

Lexi,

<< I watched that particular episode… The gentleman in question was dealt with swiftly and found not to be a genuine refugee>>

Well, Lexi, if you watched it you didn’t watch it very well, because the gentleman was NEVER “found not to be a genuine refugee”. No determination was made, because he recanted before it got to that stage. The staff did indeed expect it was a ploy, but they had no authority to make a determination.

<< People make up all sorts of excuses for their devious behaviour when caught out>>
Absolutely. It was his attempt to get off with minimal fuss.
He wasn’t serious (at least, this time around!) about seeking asylum.
If he had, he would have done what most asylum seekers do:
1) Ditch his passport /ID ,and
2) Claim to be from one of the UNHCR hot listed countries.

And , If he had done that –who could have faulted him?

As to : << I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with this case >>
I’ll say it again: The purpose of my initial post was to show that certain emotions/behavours that are often cited as evidence of genuineness can easily be manufactured to impress the more naïve.

<< according to the available statistics - even during the time of Howard's "Pacific Solution" most asylum seekers were found to be genuine refugees and were allowed to stay>>
On most occasions our processes cannot accurately determine if someone is a genuine refugee
If they claim to be from one of the danger zones and tell a good story, chances are, they’ll be “found to be a genuine refugee”

Poirot,
How much compassion do your wallet & bank balance permit ?

Dear SPQR,

May I suggest that you Google the subject of Criteria that has to be met by asylum seekers in Australia. There are numerous fact sheets put out by the Australian Government on the web that explain exactly how asylum seekers are assessed in this country. It will possibly give you a better understanding of the subject and may make you realize that your concerns although understandable - are unwarranted.

The Refugees Convention by the way does not oblige signatory countries to provide protection to people who have left their country of nationality on the basis of war, famine, environmental collapse or in order to seek economic opportunities. Assessments are made by trained departmental officers and asylum seekers have to put their claims in writing, they are interviewed by several panels and judgements are made on an individual basis in accordance with Australian legislation, case law, and up to date information on conditions in the applicant's country of origin. The procedure is quite a complex and involved one.

Lexi,

<<May I suggest that you Google the subject … >>
Thank you for sharing your sources with me, but I have already googled all the sites you visit. And judging by your inability to counter my arguments –a good many more.

<<The Refugees Convention … does not oblige signatory countries to provide protection to people who have left their country… seek economic opportunities>>

Yes, I know that Lexi.
And asylum seekers are not so daft that they’re going to declare: “I came here for a big house & car” ( well, most aren’t anyway!)
They come well briefed on Oz protocols---but their actions betray their real motives:

“here are several reasons why Tamil asylum-seekers from Sri Lanka come to Australia instead of going to Tamil Nadu. Some are attempting to use Australia as a conduit to the West generally, as seen in the Oceanic Viking stand-off, where a note thrown to Australian journalists and published in The Age said: ‘Australia doesn't want to accept us. Send us to other countries like Canada, Norway, Switzerland, New Zealand.’ “
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/beware-of-asylum-seekers-bearing-tales-of-woe/story-e6frg6zo-1225850659899

<<Assessments are made by trained departmental officers…>>
It is heartening to see such innocent faith .
But tell me, if they are so thorough & professional –how do you explain this?

1) “ there are a pair of brothers who allegedly participated in crimes where there was a notorious concentration camp. … they entered Australia allegedly as legitimate refugees after the exodus that happened around 1995-'96-'97… hundreds, if not thousands of people living in Australia may have committed crimes against humanity in different parts of the world “
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2715237.htm
or,this:
2) “FEDERAL police are investigating local Muslim leaders over suspicions they are encouraging dozens of young men to return to their homeland to join Islamic jihadis … Somali community figures said Mr Ali was one of 30 or 40 Australian Somalis who have returned to fight since last December”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/somalia-jihad-drive-probed/story-e6frg6of-1111115033793
or, this:
3) “The…terror plot was designed to bring a fatwa down on Australia and had its genesis in …a small group of Muslim men, some of them refugees”
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/three-melbourne-men-guilty-of-planning-terror-attack-on-nsw-army-base/story-e6freuzi-1225975368101

Belly,

Couldn't agree more!

Hasbeen,

Plumbing the depths this morning.....

A particularly gross comment on your behalf.

This forum is certainly an eye-opener as to how some people think...an extraordinary insight into the meager version of humanity available to the limited of intellectual breadth and compassion.

Smile....yes and The MAN BEAR PIG or other wise known as the great APE thats far too well evolved to see anything else:)

Hasbeen. You do live up to your name:) Would you like a banana:)

You know, I can see why you would put all you have into a boat that nobody would take the chance on, and do you know what and why they do it? Its because Australia is the best place in the world, and they know it......

I keep saying, save your island you take for granted.......but who see's:) Not I said the wolf in sheep's cloning:) Its cryptic:)

“If You Send Me Back I’ll Be Killed!” yeah we have the same sitcho here at the dole office......and I wonder who's asleep at the wheel:)

If Dick Smith had died tomorrow, would turn in his grave.

“If You Send Me Back I’ll Be Killed!” and if we fill our country with the rats from all the sinking ships in the world, just guess who's going to be sinking next.

Its your land/planet....

I just watch:)

Good luck where ever you are.

LEAP

Oh and watch out for this great eye opener.

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2011/05/airdate-go-back-to-where-you-came-from.html

Then you will see how lucky you are.

I think this is what hasbeen was thinking:)

Peace and all that jazz.

LEAP

Quantumleap,
I have only seen half a million promos for that show but already I can guarantee you that it's just another brainwashing toss by the weirdo gender mob.

Quite frankly my compassion only extends to the sane and civilized arrivals who actually want to adopt the community they want to move to (instead of cash in on the lucrative lifestyle of a kaffir nation).

As I said- anyone that fits my criteria of being able (and willing) to integrate- comes as a refugee they should be treated with dignity and processed in the community;
Anyone that doesn't should be instantly deported.

For me its not how they come that bothers me- it's what mindset one might have- and I don't owe compassion to someone who would only stab me in the back in thanks. Helping people that will only make you regret it isn't pious- it's plain stupid.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Dear SPQR,

Glad to read that you've done some selective Googling on the subject. However from your remarks I can see that you're hell bent on continuing to present only one negative side of the story and frankly I'm not interested in viewing things through this narrow prism. So I'll leave you to it.

"There is a grave risk that asylum seekers might escape injustice and oppression in Afghanistan or Sri Lanka, travel thousands of kilometers in a leaky boat on the open ocean and legally claim refugee status in this country under a 60 year international treaty that Australia is a signatory to and won't even get locked up..."

The people caused this, should be sent back to where they came from quick smart. I agree with many on this subject.

http://www.youtube.com/user/NewsAustralia?blend=2&ob=5#p/u/0/ANYRnhFlYcM

LEA

Oh and this one, yes Lexi....Good Australian tax dollars going to a great cause, yeah right. The more people in the country, the more the cash registers ring, thats what its really all about, and what about our own children that need jobs...well we can see who's going have them dont we.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Zoink555?blend=3&ob=5#p/u/0/_5j6yyb8-GY

Australia! the dumping ground.

LEA

Dear QL,

I guess antipathy is always greatest against those groups who remain relatively impoverished, like asylum seekers in this country. And this sentiment is strongest among people who feel most threatened by any economic progress and competition for scarce resources (jobs, etc) of the minorities. All immigrants had it tough at first in this country. Things change though once they become part of the mainstream.
We can only trust this will happen again - given enough time and education of the locals. The number of asylum seekers is so small in comparison to the size of our vast country - that it should not make that much of a difference to any of our life-styles. Did you know that the population of Mexico City is 23 million? Australia's entire population is approx. 22 million. So how can less than a thousand asylum seekers a year affect anyone?

So how can less than a thousand asylum seekers a year affect anyone?
Lexi,
Do your maths after one generation & think about the rules under which would live, hmmh exist !

Dear lexi.

I feel the problems a little more completed than just a numbers game. Sure I see the comparisons with your population figures along with Indy's rabbit forecast, but the real worry I see is these poor people are going to come out of these detention centers with all degree's of mental health issues backed with deep hatred scorched into their minds on how they were treated. Its like when a prisoner is released from jail for the first time, I mean these people are damaged goods and mental-illness is already a problem here. Well I think its not the best time or the best investment.

"And this sentiment is strongest among people who feel most threatened by any economic progress and competition for scarce resources (jobs, etc) of the minorities"

I look at future growth forecasts of populations for the coming decades, and since Australia's infrastructure is less than adequate for our masses now, its not the best time, that's all I'll say for now.

"AS HER government prepared to deliver its first budget on May 10th Julia Gillard, Australia’s prime minister, launched her latest plan to stop asylum-seekers reaching the country by boat."

"Three days earlier, Ms Gillard announced Australia had struck a deal with Malaysia to swap refugees. After the arrangement comes into force, the next 800 boat people to land on Australia’s shores will be sent to join the thousands of asylum-seekers who are already waiting to have their claims processed in Malaysia.

"In return, Australia will admit 4,000 of the group stuck in Malaysia who have already been assessed as refugees, taking them in over a period of four years.

Empathy must be moved aside here, our own children should take first priority before the generosity card is played.

I back the Gillard Government on the new plan for processing, but I don't like any of this, however Iam not in the Hot Seat.

LE

I started this thread to show that what is often presented as evidenced of genuineness can be manufactured.

It has been my observation that many who claim to be refugees are in fact economic migrants.
And some, even worse, are:
1) According to this ABC report --- war criminals
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2715237.htm
2) Or, according to this article – Jihadi’s
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/somalia-jihad-drive-probed/story-e6frg6of-1111115033793

Our processes seem incapable of making accurate determinations

But there are people who don’t want to hear this. And those same persons when presented with such unpleasant truths , are liable to accuse one of “fear mongering” –or worse.

They are also wont to quote from sites like NEW MATILDA as if they were quoting pearls of wisdom from a sacred book .

It seems that even my link to the customs /airport incident was misread : “The gentleman in question was …found not to be a genuine refugee”

If we are passing asylum seekers on the basis of the Refugee Convention it needs to be because they satisfy ALL its criteria –not because they are good actors. or story tellers.

And, the, “they are only small in number” line is a furphy –the real issues are:
1) Are the asylum claimants we pass genuine – many are not .
2) Are the persons passed compatible with our values/mores –at least some are not .
3) Can we control our borders – if we cannot we will become like parts of Europe which cannot stop and cannot return illegal’s -- -or Mexico City, drowning in its own overcrowded squalor , and worse since we’ll have no USA to offload our excess numbers onto.

Dear SPQR,

How many I wonder, of previous arrivals to this country in the past could be classified as crims, refugees, or economic seekers - who today make up our very diverse society?

Australia's early white settlers, unlike their American counterparts who left England to the promise of a richer and freer existence, were dragged kicking and screaming from the dungeons of Newgate and the hulks of Bristol to the living death of an isolated and barren land. Their language bore the marks of shackles and carried the inflections of the destitute and the whine of the shanty Irish.

You're probably of the generation that as a kid was taught that this country's survival depended on putting a wall between us and "the hordes to the North." You probably took for granted then, that everyone up there wanted to come down here. You're probably of the generations who can see boat people as the advance of unimaginable numbers - let even a few arrive and, God knows, Australians could end up looking like the people on Christmas Island.

Until we are willing to face our fears - we'll continue to deal with them in a way that is essentially an expensive national farce out of which our leaders continue to make political hay

between us and "the hordes to the North."
Lexi,
Couldn't you try a little harder to come up with more stupid argument ? Why use such stupid phrases ? Why can't you just be a little more realistic & say our fear of becoming so overpopulated that Australia will not be able to cope in any which way. Why the bloody hell do you have to drag a racial aspect into this ? It doesn't matter where people come from. Overpopulation is overpopulation no matter what. Do you want to live in a 2 room house with 20 others ? If so, why not go to these countries & try it for ten years ?

Dear Individual,

My post was in response to SPQR's post.
Kindly re-read it.
You've obviously misunderstood a few things.

As for overpopulation - that is another issue alltogether.
I'll respond to it at a later time in more detail.
Now, I've got to run - I'm late.

Dear lexi

You can ignore me if you like, but that was pretty lame comeback. I read the Scottish tone there and hey! Scotland's Scotland because of it:)

I know you dont need a history lesson:) ( Invaders )

However Indy is quite correct and if you want to play the race card go ahead, cause no-one will buy it. Over-population is a serious problem right around the world and Australians Dont want it here. Yes go to Mexico for a while or Bangladesh perhaps or maybe parts of Africa may tickle your love for over crowded places.......yes I can see why you've got to run:)

Then second problem.

Humans need space to grow.

In time people numbers around the world will reflect on the word Iam typing now. Future people will look back and read my words, then they will read yours......What do you think they will say?

And dont be ignorant, like some people are.


http://www.google.com.au/search?q=overpopulation&hl=en&rlz=1C1LAVG_enAU414AU414&prmd=ivnsb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=1JL1TYDUFIPEvgPC1bDDBg&ved=0CEIQsAQ

Yes Lexi, take a good look. This is coming here.

LEA

Gentlemen:

I've just been watching the news on television and we were told that
Turkey has received over 15,000 Syrian refugees in the past few days.
The Turkish Government is frantically building new refugee centres along the Syrian border with the expectation of thousands more.
According to available Australian statistics - since the boat people issue began - Australia has been receiving an average of 800 boat people a year.

Talking about "overpopulation" in 1950 the Australian population was 8.5 million and some people were in a panic that it will reach 12 million by the 1970s. Today the population is approx. 22 million and some people are still in a panic over a boat-load of refugees. Some things don't change apparently.

The predicted population by 2050 for Australia is expected to reach
34 million people. What we should be looking at is providing the infrastructure to deal with this increase because according to the experts - it's going to happen, whether some people like it or not.

When discussing migrants, especially non-British migrants, people are sometimes tempted to lump all newcomers together and treat them as one homogeneous species. Nothing is further from the truth. Australian immigrants vary a great deal in their ethnic backgrounds, religions, and educational levels. Their current social and educational needs are not homogeneous, either. People have settled in Australia for various reasons, economic, change of life-style, adventure, refugees, family reunions and so forth - and I imagine that this trend is going to continue.

At present, Australia is one of the most ethnically diverse societies in the world.

However, there are still many people who obviously are comfortable with a singular national identity and assimilationist policy. That's par for the course.

exi,
One minute you’re arguing that they have ALL been thoroughly checked and passed, and they have ALL been found to be genuine refugees (whom we are under the Refugee Convention thereby obligated to accept).

Then the next -- when the weight of evidence I presented above makes it clear that people are getting through who do not meet the Refugee Convention standards-- you retreat to: << How many I wonder, of previous arrivals to this country in the past could be classified as crims, refugees, or economic seekers>>

Whoa-up a bit!

So, are you now proposing that: even if they don’t satisfy the Refugee Convention criteria
(or, our own security checks) -- that that’s OK? We should accept them anyway because some of our ancestors were also shady characters?

You were appealing for SPECIAL ENTRY for these people on the basis that they were “REFUGEES” –remember?
That being the case, the motivations of past settlers are of no relevance: if you are using the Refugee Convention as a justification, the only measure that matters (to you) should be: are they genuine refugees?

Lexi,

<< I've just been watching the news …Turkey has received over 15,000 Syrian refugees in the past few days>>

Interesting indeed, I also heard the new .
Al Jazeera was reporting that Turkey was proposing to establish a special neutral zone along the border *to contain* (i.e. isolate) the refugees.
And you can be sure of one thing – their stay will be temporary : a TPV as it were!
Turkey with UN assistances may feed and shelter them for a time, but once the situation has quietened down it will be pushing them to return home ---unlike Australia where once a refugee is here they’re allowed to stray permanently--even if peace breaks out in their former homeland.

Lexi when your folks came here migrants were accommodated in a migrant hostel of some description. They were expected to get a job, & do for themselves.

They had to find housing & make their own way. That so many are now in comfortable retirement shows the sense of these policies. Those post war refugees, & migrants worked hard, & did well for them selves. In doing so they imposed very little cost on the tax payer.

For some crazy reason those coming today are not expected to do this. We supply public housing at a half a million dollars cost to the tax payer, & tens of thousands of dollars in resettlement grants.

We then find that over well 50% are still on welfare four years later, & you suggest that they are not ripping us off. I strongly resent these people getting better treatment than many of our own who have payed taxes for a lifetime.

Further to Hasbeen’s :

<<We then find that over well 50% are still on welfare four years later>>

Then under Lexi’s marvellous state sponsored multiculturalism some govt funded bureaucracy will do "a study that will finds” that this could only be due to disadvantage and deep, deep, deep, discrimination and the only way to overcome it –while all the time allowing even more such persons into the country – is to introduce special training programs and special jobs and special broadcasting services and special commissions to cater for and watch over such disadvantaged groups.

And some of this disadvantaged group will still not appreciate all ( or, perhaps any!) of this, for they will seek job opportunities overseas –though still maintaining their links with Centre Link.:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/somalia-jihad-drive-probed/story-e6frg6of-1111115033793

And then the special broadcasting service will run the same documentary 20,000 times whose theme is always a variation on: how horrible white’s are to everyone else. And the more naive seeing suich programs –and knowing no better —will fan-out (locust like) across cyberspace taking to forums and blogs with a zeal --that Osama would envy – to defend the disadvantaged from those horrible racist, shogunistic, redneck, neocons .

Dear SPQR,

Before you make sweeping generalisations about what I supposedly said - kindly re-read my posts and try to comprehend what I actually did say.

Dear Hasbeen,

Of course there are immigrants who abuse our system, just as there are people born here who abuse our system. The truth is that the majority of today's immigrants bring with them an infusion of the same values that our ancestors personified, the values Australia is so sorely lacking. They on the whole are people willing to work hard for long hours to make a better life for themselves and their families. Our children do not stand to be corrupted by their values, so much as their children stand to be coprrupted by ours. The scapegoating of today's immigrants makes a mockery when we collectively say no to compassion.

Compassion need not, indeed should not, be considered synonymous with profligate financial expenditure. It means a mental commitment to accept the possibility of options we had theretofore not considered.
Throwing money at a problem, it is true, is not always the answer.
But throwing understanding, compassion, always helps.

The history of the world proves that where the haves do not share with the have-nots, the have-nots always rise up. And when the have-nots in turn become the haves, they either share with the new have-nots or not. We who are the descendants of those who had not, yet managed to rise up to a new life for ourselves and our children, must now recognise our challenges and responsibilities. We must do onto others as we would have others do unto us.

Many of us have a tendency to moralize, to say endless things to other nations about how they should clean up their houses. Surely we must clean up ours. The days are long gone when we had the genuine moral authority from which to preach to others. Let us regain that ground, take a fearless moral inventory, do the work on ourselves that we still need to do. It will heal our hearts and free our souls.

Lexi, you can't reclaim any moral high ground by trying to buy it from the rip off merchants coming in here now by boat.

It is obvious that our illustrious Labor party have been trying to buy the vote of boat people, & fellow travelers with their policies.

We now see that they realise the flow of votes is negative. They are loosing more votes pandering to the rip off merchants, than they are gaining.

Amazingly a new policy appears, one perhaps more in Oz peoples advantage. I wonder what could have precipitated such a change of policy? Surely not some polling.

How anyone can vote for these cynical bast4rds is beyond me.

Dear Hasbeen,

I take your word for it that it's beyond you.

However, the following website might clarify a few things for you -
especially why some voters could never vote for Tony Abbott and Co.

http://newmatilda.com/2011/05/16/why-abbotts-budget-economic-twaddle

However, the following website might clarify a few things for you -
Lexi,
You rather take the fantasy of a Labor voting tosser before allowing yourself to realise that Tony Abbott's team are a viable alternative to the present circus.

Dear Individual,

Did you actually read the link?
The possibilities of Tony Abbott getting in -
scares the living daylights out of me.
Australia will be stuffed if he gets in.
The guy's a nut-case.

The guy's a nut-case.
Lexi,
If that's the case then what description do you have for the present Government's leader ?

Lexi
Regrettably, someone needed to remind you of what you said -- you seem incapable of remembering it otherwise.

Let me remind you of your opening comments:

<<I’m not sure what point you're trying to make with this case - except perhaps to taint all asylum seekers with the same brush? That would be most unfair - as according to the available statistics - even during the time of Howard's "Pacific Solution" most asylum seekers were found to be genuine refugees…I'm sure that those who aren't genuine will be dealt with accordingly. We need less fear-mongering because there is clear evidence that there is no need to be concerned>>

When this became unsustainable, you tried to divert the discussion with:

<< How many I wonder, of previous arrivals to this country in the past could be classified as crims, refugees, or economic seekers>>

If you were appealing for SPECIAL ENTRY for boat people on the basis that they were “REFUGEES” the character /motivations of past immigrants is irrelevant .

As repeatedly stated: “The purpose of my initial post was to show that certain emotions/behavours that are often cited as evidence of genuineness can easily be manufactured to impress the more naïve.”

It was NOT about GENERAL IMMIGRATION, but those who are seeking to use the Refugee Convention as a pretext for immigration

So lengthy soliloquy’s about the JOYS OF DIVERSITY --full of the same faux-emotions we saw exhibited by the cigarette smuggler-- are irrelevant.

As are school marmish retorts like:
<<Before you make sweeping generalisations about what I supposedly said - kindly re-read my posts >>

To sum-up/conclude:
It is pretty clear that on most occasions our processes cannot accurately determine if someone is a genuine refugee.
If they claim to be from one of the danger zones and tell a good story, chances are, they’ll be “found to be a genuine refugee”

Thanks again to everyone who participated

Cheers

Dear Individual,

What description do I have of our current Prime Minister?
She's a very determined and capable professional whose goals are to serve the nation in the interests of the majority and to drag Australia into the 21st century. To make Australia a prosperous and recognized leader in our region.

Dear SPQR,

As I've written earlier - there are people who are opportunists and will take advantage of any situation in their own interests - at the expense of others no matter what their origins be it from overseas or locally. The point that is important to remember however is that we do have rules and regulations and laws in place that determine legitimate seekers of asylum. Unfortunately I must admit that our authorities are too slow in applying these processes compared to other nations when dealing with refugees. New zealand seems to be able to process them a lot faster and don't seem to have the problems we have.

There will be economic refugees who will take advantage of the world crisis situation to try to get ahead of legitimate applicants - but that's stating the obvious - and it's something we all know. It's part and parcel of the "Me" mentality of modern cultrue that we see in our everyday life. It's not something that only specific to asylum seekers and it appears more prevalent in some cultures.

Julia Gillard is an empty-headed moron who clearly, more than any past PM, merely reads out what someone else writes for her to say;

However, Tony Abbot IS a psychopath and a moron who admitted he can't cope with budgeting an opposition member's salary, is a religious nut, and is happy to backflip on his own policies (including border protection) to bribe other parliament members.

Needless to say, I don't vote for either party because both of their leaders a frightening bunch.

And individual, to answer your points about compassion- I'd refer back to my initial screening process; my compassion stops at religious fanatics, tribal, mentally/emotionally-unstable, amoral, crooked or criminally-inclined individuals needing my help- much in the same way I would never let some drug-addicted psychopath into my house- even if he were being chased by a gang.
No good deed goes unpunished.
And to your "who would notice a few thousand"- the people they're moving next door to definitely would- and I'm sure they would appreciate my criteria being applied too.

She's a very determined and capable professional whose goals are to serve the nation in the interests of the majority ,
Lexi,
That's great to hear. Any idea when she is going to start to do all that ?

who would notice a few thousand"- the people they're moving next door to definitely would.
King Hazza,
Totally agree.

Dear Individual,

Thanks for making me laugh.
That was an excellent question.
And of course the answer is - hopefully
sooner than later.

hopefully sooner,
Lexi,
Now there's some wishful thinking.

Dear Individual,

It looks like there's a lot of wishful thinking going around in the world of politics today. Makes you wonder though what's really going on and what's going to happen next? It seems that they've all thrown the book of rules out the window - and now it's every person for themselves. Gee whiz.

King Hazza

>> Tony Abbot IS a psychopath and a moron <<

And that's an oxymoron. Psychopaths have excellent verbal skills and above average intelligence, they do lack emotional intelligence however.

Therefore, T Abbott is just your garden variety moron.

As for Julia - I really am having difficulties with her - not what she appeared to be.

Finally BOTH major parties have lost their way morally, and I don't see either side returning from the land of the emotionally bereft any time soon.

emotionally bereft
Ammonite,
Aren't you a little harsh there ? Julia shed some fairly big tears during the floods & Anna Bligh almost topped Julia's effort. A person has to have some emotion to get the idea of producing tears for the cameras.

Dear Individual,

Come on. How can you doubt their sincerity? It was a dreadful time for the entire nation. Anna Bligh was tremendously affected - she's a
Queenslander after all and these were her constituents. She behaved
beautifully, took control, and in my opinion was beyond reproach in the very difficult situation. And, for that matter, I don't doubt that
our Prime Minister was genuinely affected as well by what she saw.
How could anyone not be?

However, the Opposition leader in his budget reply speech was at the height of hypocrisy when he said he was reaching out to "police, nurses, the fighters, teachers," all of whom are dependent on direct
or indirect public funding. They would be the first to be out of work when an Abbott government cuts public spending.

Lexi,
How can you make such statements ? You're simply expressing your dislike for anyone that wants to & can do better than the people you'd prefer. I understand your loyalty but don't you think the evidence is all around us that you should seriously contemplate questioning your loyalty to these people who clearly aren't managing well at all. From what I have heard Anna Bligh is still hanging onto a lot of millions from the flood appeal. Doesn't she know that people desperately need help or is she just trying to collect more interest to pay for her treasure's incompetence.
You nor I have any reason upon which to base your assumption that he would put Police, Nurses & firefighters out of work. What economic sense would that make ? Clearly you object to anyone upstaging your academic friends in the field of competence.

Dear Individual,

I'm judging Ann Bligh by her behaviour during the floods and it was in response to your questioning her tears (and the PM's) during that
time.

As for my judgements regarding the leader of the Opposition. Those were made as a result of his budget reply speech - in which Mr Abbot
made it quite clear that his economics is to sustain and expand the Howard government's middle-class welfare. Mathematically, that means there would have to be deep cuts in all other areas of government spending - health, education, transport, security and all other public goods which provide material benefits and strengthen our economy.

If we are to compete in a tough world we need to invest in education, public health, infrastructure, environmental repair and industry adjustment - but these public investments would be sacrificed to sustain the Howard-Abbott weelfare system.

In his criticism of the Government's mild retraction of middle-class welfare Abbott would have us believe that a household income of $150,000 is commonplace. It is correct that many people, in around 45-55 age group enjoy high incomes for a few years, but the inconvenient reality is that only 17 percent of household have incomes of $150,000 or more and rthe median household income is about $74,000. We're yet to hear what Mr Abbott's National Party colleagues, elected by many farmers think about $150,000 as an income benchmark.

Lexi,
Again, your argument is based on your predictions. I base mine on evidence.

Dear Individual,

No - not predictions - straight from the horses mouth during
the budget reply speech. The evidence was there - all you had to
do was listen.

The evidence was there.
Lexi,
c'mon, Tony Abbott hasn't done anything yet. Julia Gillard said no to the Carbon Tax before the election, wasn't that evidence ? What is your excuse on that ? At least John Howard had the decency of telling the voters about the GST up front just like Tony Abbott is doing now.

Dear Individual,

With all due respect I don't want to get started on political flip-flops by the Liberals - there's a 350 word limit afterall. As Abbott admitted - "you can't trust anything I say," or words to that effect. As for Tony Abbott not having done anything yet - you've got that right, and hopefully he won't be given the chance in the future.
See you on another thread - for me this one has run its course.

you can't trust anything I say,
Lexi,
He didn't say that. He said anything that is said in the heat of a debate should not always be taken as Gospel. You can't ask for honest an answer more than that.

Dear Individual,

What Mr Abbott actually said to Kerry O'Brien on the ABC's "Seven Thirty Report," was "Don't believe everything I say." Mr Abbott then clarifed that statement with the fact that he doesn't always tell the truth and that voters should not believe every pledge he makes unless it is written down as the "gospel truth." Of course the following day - Mr Abbott did lots of back pedalling.

As you said Lexi,
or words to that effect.... he doesn't always tell the truth...
he also said in the heat of a debate...
When bombarded with questions based only on bias no remark should be taken as gospel truth, such is the truth.
Julia & Kevin promised us good transparent Government & moving forward. What happened to that ? Pink Bats, more boats, the beef fiasco ?...An education system that teaches mindlessness ? PC imposed on Kindy ?
The only way you'd get me to speak well of the ALP is when they go back to being Labor.

Dear Individual,

We're on the same page here. The only way you'll get me to speak well
of the Libs is when people of the calibre of Malcolm Fraser, John Hewson, and even Sir Robert Menzies, are back in the party. The current mob are a lack lustre lot except as I stated earlier - perhaps except for Malcolm Turnbull. Who at least is flexible, intelligent, and definitely could represent us on the global scene with panache.

‘If you send me back I’ll kill myself “
Maybe his wife family kids might do the job for him.
To runaway and leave your family & many of these men do is not our way.
We have in Australia a great reputation of our fallen of men fighting to protect their family's & country.
The best way to help these people is to support them in their own country starting with the woman and kids.
Maybe we could question these men more and bring their children & wives here then send the man back.
That has a happier ending for Australia I think.