Deleted for abuse.

Foxy,

You are talking complete bollocks. You cannot compare what was happening 5 years ago with what is happening now. For a country of about 21m people there are relatively few abuses, and those predominately are aimed at ex Tamil Tiger guerrilla leaders who themselves are far from innocent. The vast vast majority now live in relative peace.

Those coming in boats are also not dissidents, nor are most of them fleeing persecution or torture. That 37 of the 41 recently returned were Sinhalese supposedly from the winning side puts kills that theory.

Reality check!

<<Foxy whinges: The Australian Government is actively colluding with …one of the most brutal regimes in Asia.>>
<< Redux whines: a country which has almost universally condemned for continuing human rights abuses …>>

What rubbish!

All you two are doing is demonstrating the limits of your knowledge --or limitlessness of your gullibility. Practically every country in south Asia has been labelled an abuser and torturer by one group or another--care to name one that has not?

Stop the beat-up --stop your nonsense.

What better test or demonstration can we have than to see that under the supervision of the UN thousands of Tamils from various sites (except Oz of course!)have been resettling in Sri Lanka!

That will do Lester 1, I didn't like Gillard but your language is not what we want here.

Yes Steele I am sure we are being lied to by boat loads of liars.
The UN is happy to send people back so why didn't you follow my link
and read about the returning Tamils ?
The UNHCR has people on the ground ready to help them resettle.

Why is it that those so ready to quote the UNHCR will not accept what
the UNHCR says ? Really weird, and they get upset when I say their
attitude is stupid. I know they are not stupid people but like everyone
else they can do stupid things.

The only reasonable way to understand their attitude is to believe it
just follows their long held political belief.
Doesn't backing oneself into corners ring a bell ?

to ALL -

“Australian international law experts have uniformly condemned Australia’s return of asylum seekers to Sri Lanka as a violation of international law that risks sending vulnerable people back to persecution and torture”

. . . However . . . . . the REAL issue here is HOW exactly we wish to define the key terms of “vulnerable person”, “persecution”, “torture”.

For instance, if Australia were to accept that their legal definition of these terms could potentially amount to any possible arrival claiming to be a refugee who fled from “persecution” and that IF we return them to their origin place THEY CLAIM [i.e. heresay] that their life would be in danger, then what is to stop EVERY potential refugee using this clause to FORCE our nation to grant them full status and entry?

Dear Shadow Minister, and others,

The following link may put things into perspective
for you:

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/asylum-seekers-my-country-my-shame-20140704-zswgi.html

"Human rights issues transcend mere political issues
and they give rise to a duty to espouse them!"