Dear onthebeach,

You made some statements about the Main Stream Media (MSM)
and I've just read them. I believe that we should read
from a wide variety of sources in order to glean an
informed opinion and as you know the MSM is notoriously
narrow in its point of view. I gave you the link from
the University of Oxford in the UK - which has done a great
deal of research on migration information. Much of is is
very relevant today. I made the
assumption that you were genuinely interested in having
a discussion on the topic rather than playing politics and
finger-pointing. Obviously I was wrong.
I shall leave you to continue as you were. And won't
interfere any further. Just one more link before I go:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/business/media-2/ten-reasons-why-most-australian-msm-journalists-are-absolute-shyte/

Lexi,

I wanted to know why you would prefer a dated, irrelevant article written by a researcher in England who has not had access to recent Australian information to very recent statements by the Australian PM and Foreign Minister, both of whom are relying on the advice of DFAT, Dept of Immigration and government research.

The PM and Foreign Minister are Labor too and you would normally be hanging on their words as Gospel. But you reject what they say out of hand and without prooof to back yourself up.

Have you ever considered that you yourself might be biassed? You are dismissing facts known about fraudulent 'asylum seekers' that prove they are economic migrants.

As a way ahead, what about you propose a way of breaking the business model of people smugglers that is costing so many lives?

Lexi - All media has an agenda, but the do provide facts supported by other source and that is what I use you have been unable to dispute anything I have said, correct me if i am wrong.

Also your article before was 9 years ago, as I stated before Please come into the new century.

Like usual you fail to answer the hard questions so here they are again.

With the passage of time say the last 2 years the overwhelming weight of evidence that has eventually come out is that the majority of people are ECONOMIC refugees, very little if any has come out to support that the majority are genuine refugees.

Now do you honestly have the same conviction to your cause now as you had 2 years ago, if so what evidence do you use to support that?

Dear onthebeach,

Kindly read the link I gave earlier. Suggested answers
are there as well as the problems that nation states
are faced with when dealing with this complex issue.

We all have a certain amount of bias - not matter what
the issues being discussed. However, doing one's
research from a wide variety of sources helps us to make
more informed decisions - and that is something that I
strongly recommend.

As for economic refugees. And
what can be done about them? I believe that Foreign
Minister Bob Carr stated that the Rudd government is
about to rewrite Australia's refugee assessment process.
Senator Carr stated that immigrants who were not part of any
ethnic or religious minority could not argue that they
were being persecuted in their home country. "I think it's
unarguable that if someone is leaving a country and they
are part of the majority religious and ethnic group, then
they're not being persecuted in the way that the Refugee
Convention describes," said Mr Carr.

Lexi is doing what she accuses the media of doing, cherry-picking to support her pre-determined view. That is prejudice.

There is a lack of fair dealing, dishonesty and fraud, by economic migrants and by those who advocate for them and that is because of the huge rewards, courtesy of the long-suffering Australian taxpayer. Where there is $$ there is graft.

What is truly offensive is the continual sledging of the Australian population and now the new Labor PM and Foreign Minister as 'racists' for pointing out the obvious.

Lexi - Quote "We all have a certain amount of bias" Yours is that you continually fail to avoid answering questions.

The reasons for this failure could be numerous from dementia, to you just failing to have any counter to provided facts.

There was one thread you failed 6 times to answer questions by myself alone not to count the questions posed by others.

May I suggest a name change for you to Emu (head buried in the sand) or turtle (withdrawn into your shell).

It amazes me how you continually manage to fail to see posts directly below or above yours.