There is one FACT which should be addressed above all others - and that is WE have to STOP the boats, come hell or high water, no ifs, buts, excuses.
Would you sit back and let someone walk into your home and set up house? Not on your Nelly. So, what's the difference? They may be just as needy as any asylum seeker (say, any one of the thousands living 'rough' on our streets). So, what's your excuse for not letting them stay for as long as they like, with you feeding and clothing them, etc?

So with Oz, WE have to be in charge of who we invite, and on what terms, else we are just plain suckers.

And, since we are a secular society, with due separation of Church and State, every individual seeking residence MUST have and demonstrate a primary allegiance to the State (ie the Nation of Australia), and its laws and Constitution.
How can anyone apply this to boat people seeking residence?
Exception upon exception, it's a losing battle, with us the losers all the way.

We wouldn't invite all and sundry to bring their wars here, and we can't accommodate all those fleeing wars and strife around the world, so why are we kidding ourselves that by taking 'boat people' we are taking the most needy? (Especially since we know this to be false.)
It is and must be OUR right to choose how we help those in need and strife, and by this I mean the OZ people, not our government, not the UN or Amnesty International, or the Greens or Ms Gillard.

Something has to be done to stop people killing one another. Share the wealth, use diplomacy, bring all the religious (or anti-religious) scoundrels before the International Tribunal, send drones or assassins to kill all despots - something - BUT taking in refugees hand over fist is no solution, it just invites more problems to our shores (and more and more boats).

Saltpetre,

Yes, well I hope they never turn your post into a bronzed plaque and pace it beneath a statue.

I much prefer this one....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Colossus

And still you are in denial, Philip S.

>>Pericles - So what you are telling people is you can not dispute the FACTS but because I inform people about them I am Quote "stir up fear and loathing".<<

Let me repeat my position on this - my opinion, if you will - that this isn't about facts at all, it is about the conclusions that you and your fear-mongering white-bread cronies draw from those carefully-selected facts. Which I illustrated as follows, with some cut'n'paste excerpts from your mates.

>>how else can the secularist/socialist destroy the west other than infiltrate people who hate our way of life... At what point can we start describing advocates of Third World immigration as "Rape Apologists"?... Asylum scammers bribe and bully their way to our shores... If you’re an asylum scammer you’ll wind up with free bed and board and for life, the “right” to bring out all your relos, and the "right" to send your kids (cost free) to the fundamentalist school of your choice... many of these people will not or cannot integrate into our society and we should stopp allowing them to come... helping Third World criminals and economic refugees flee their homeland is apparently a better use of funds...<<

And this is hardly analogous:

>>So what you are saying every news presenter who reports a story or newspaper that prints a story is to quote you "stir up fear and loathing".<<

News media have standards. They have a commitment to balanced reporting. You have neither, it would seem.

This is purely a dog whistling exercise by the Opposition. The Opposition was the government that extended Temporary Visas allowing asylum seekers to live in the community. Was this also irresponsible? The whole debate is deep seated in hypocrisy on both sides.

In hindsight the TPVs were probably a better option than the farce and chaos of the current detention system. It is indeed a difficult issue but this is the issue that needs bipartisan support much more than whether politicians get to line their pockets with more dollars from the public purse.

Groups of asylum seekers are like any other group of people. Some will commit crimes (ie. a small percentage). To imprison all asylum seekers on the basis they 'might' commit a crime is akin to oppressive dictatorships and certainly not part of a functioning democracy.

For those asylum seekers who do commit a crime, they will feel the full force of the law as any other person with a good chance of being deported to country of origin once the sentence is served.

Pericles - Quote "News media have standards. They have a commitment to balanced reporting. You have neither, it would seem."

You have just shot your own argument down because the FACTS came from the main stream media.

If you read the thread heading "Truth about refugee crimes is starting to come out" so the conclusion is that the Government LIED, a FACT you can't deny.

Logic
on March 1st 2013 Government said "'a handful'' - or five or less - had been charged with a crime."

That means it could be 5 people -
4 is less than 5 so it could be 4 people.
3 is less than 5 so it could be 3 people
2 is less than 5 so it could be 2 people
1 is less than 5 so it could be 1 person

When calculating the newly released information the figure is over 300 criminals that is based on around 52,000 refugees.

These figures do not include the 100 detainees where involved in a brawl at Darwin's Wickham Point detention center April, 2012.

Just admit the FACTS or admit you are wrong and have a hidden agenda.

PhilipS,

I would not feel obliged to respond to Pericles’s posts.They consist of little more than him asserting that he knows better than you (and any/everyone else) without any attempt to support it.

What hasn’t “sunk into” Pericles head is that your concerns have little to do with “fear” and much to do with:
1) Our right to be told the truth, and
2) Our right to control our borders


Tellingly, every time someone raises concerns about our immigration/refugee policies Pericles reads it as “fear mongering” –a psychiatrist might be needed to provide some insight into that.

As for <<The news media has standards>>
Yes , and the most important of those standards is to report the full story –not hide or edit it (for political purposes.

_________________________________________________________

Pelican,

<<For those asylum seekers who do commit a crime, they will feel the full force of the law as any other person with a good chance of being deported to country of origin once the sentence is served>>


We currently have jailed foreign nationals who are convicted drug pushes who will never be deported, due to UN covenants we’ve signed. We have Tamils who have been deemed security threats ( read lead figures in the Tamil tiger campaign of terror) who are not likely to be ever deported. And we have judges/magistrates declaring they do/did not want to jeopardize “asylum” claims when handing down sentences.

___________________________________________________

Poirot,

Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhubarb!
The only thing you’d be happy to see bronzed is the Communist Manifesto.