Is this crisis off the coasts of Thailand ,Malasia and Indonesia the start of the big breakdown of civilization?
If these countries are willing to tow these boats back out to sea and wait for the passengers to die, then surely this is the end for our world.
It will be our turn one day if we let this happen.
Migrants From Myanmar, Shunned by Malaysia, Are Spotted Adrift in Andaman Sea
They said that they had been on the boat for three months, and that the boat’s captain and crew had abandoned them six days ago. Ten passengers died during the voyage, and their bodies were thrown overboard, the passengers said
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/world/asia/burmese-rohingya-bangladeshi-migrants-andaman-sea.html?_r=0
Muslims Flee to Malaysia and Indonesia by the Hundreds
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/world/asia/more-than-1000-refugees-land-on-malaysian-resort-island.html?_r=0

Compassion can only be extended for a limited time before it turns to enough is enough.

Robert LePage, one simple question for you how many homeless people are you willing to let stay at your house all of there expenses to be paid by YOU?

The world wide number of refugees is in excess of 52 Million that stops compassion.

Robert the Rohingya could simply go back to Bangladesh where they belong but they choose to go to Malaysia because it has a higher standard of living.

quote from article that Robert posted

'Many of the migrants are believed to have been abandoned by their traffickers with little food or water.'

thankyou Scott Morrison for closing down this horrific business. I was told by a person directly involved in this business that they were so happy when Rudd came to power. It opened up their business after Howard had shut it down.

What fairy land do you live in Robert?

How do you think most of us have to spare after we have covered all our living costs? The last thing we can afford to do is support a bunch of freeloaders, who won't fit into our society, from countries who won't support their own.

It really is time you grew up. If you want to play fairy good mother to the world, go do so, but do it yourself, rather than wanting someone else to pay to ease what ever bee you have in your bonnet.

Please tell us just what you have done for these people, personally, & where the money came from, before giving out any more criticism of others.

'morning Robert,

Humans have always exhibited heroics and compassion, along with few nasty bits. The issue is not about compassion it's about politics.

Progressives will eventually have to wear the responsibility for the human tragedies unfolding. Firstly because it is progressives that have cried wolf once too often. PC has worn so thin that many cannot reconcile our national generosity since WWII, these are the immigration policies upon which some damn fine nations have been built.

Progressives have destroyed this generosity by demanding even more than donors are capable of absorbing, both by volume and by cultural differences.. They have created amongst potential immigrants, a mantra of victimhood and international entitlement. Sugar on the table.

Western societies are slowly beginning to realise the difference between the faux compassion of progressives and and genuine compassion as expressed by social tolerance.

There will be a time in the not too distant future, when those of your ilk are held to account. There will be no escape for you when this moment arrives and you will become the refugee seeking a place to to avoid persecution.

Where will you go when that moment arrives?

Dear Robert,

Thank you for this discussion.

It is one worth having.

The following link may be of some interest:

http://openborders.info/blog/tag/boat-people

'Morning Foxy,

If this is a discussion worth having, would you like to tell us why?

Dear spindoc,

That would be a waste of my time.
You simply would not understand
judging from your posts.

However, you could try by at least reading
the website I gave to Robert.
Who knows you may surprise all of us.

Sorry Foxy, there is no way I would wast my time rereading anything that starts with such emotive crap as that bit of rubbish you linked.

I'm surprised you would expect any reasonable person to read it. Have you actually read it?

If that is all the pro boat people can come up with, one would have to be anti Australian to agree with them.

'morning Foxy,

Your link is amazing hypocrisy, how dare you speak of "putting people to death" when your progressive policies were responisible for the deaths of some 1,500 boat people seeking to enter Austrailia? I guess because you were not personally involved in fishing the bodies of parents and babies out of the ocean, you feel you can avoid the responsibility for progressive policies that caused these?

Sleep well and hold your children close, cretin.

Foxy sometimes I honestly think the only way to make any sense out of the perspective you offer, is to assume you are just playing devil's advocate. In general you appear to be quite sane but when you start defending the boat people's right to enter Australia, especially using the Open Borders website as a reference, it seems you are a couple sandwiches short of a picnic.

If I were you I would not want to be associated with the Open Borders mob or letting anyone know I read their loopy propaganda. But, I'm not you.

This will get me in hot water with your protector Poirot, but I've often wondered if some women feel the only way to prove themselves as equals, is to disagree with whatever a man says or thinks, in fear that if they agree, they will not be given credit for having their own opinion.

Perhaps the following links may clarify things
for you people:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/21/if-europe-listens-to-tony-abbott-the-future-for-refugees-will-be-cruel

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/15/migrants-cant-be-left-to-die-in-the-seas-of-europe

Malaysia’s home ministry said in a statement that of the 1,158 people who landed on Sunday on Langkawi island, 486 were Burmese citizens and 672 were Bangladeshis. There were 993 men, 104 women and 61 children.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/12/malaysia-migrants-boats-rohingya-bangladesh-myanmar-burma
So the "refugees" are 85% adult men 8% women and 7% children, children being a euphemism for minors, so people under the age of 18, teenage boys in other words. From those figures and figures from our own government we can come up with an accurate definition of asylum seeking, the term Asylum Seeker must be interpreted as "Man", the activity named "Seeking Asylum" is an economic activity performed almost exclusively by men and boys from the third world.
Discrimination is not the same as persecution, this is another trick of language used by the Anti Australia lobby, the dishonest assertion that attitudes always led to violence, there have been riots and tit for tat violence in Burma over the last few years, Muslim mobs have attacked Buddhists and vice versa.
Readers will notice though that the term "Asylum Seeker" has disappeared from the media and from the press releases of governments over recent months to be replaced by the word "migrant", changes of diplomatic language like this don't happen without a good reason and it is a significant difference.

Spindoc, keep your rug on, historically even when Europe has been flattened and her cities burned to the ground it's only take a few years to recover,"there but for the grace of God.." is a silly thing to say. There's no crisis in the Third World, as other posters have noted the different races and ethnic groups have different ways of life, ours is materially superior to many of the others so they want to come here, for work and for welfare, it's simple enough.
If you want to scare yourself silly with apocalyptic daydreaming then I recommend Camp Of The Saints by Jean Raspail or any of J.G Ballard's science fiction work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Camp_of_the_Saints
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_Wild_(novella)

Here is another website that explains things:

http://theaimn.com/facts-boat-people-government-media-lying/

Dear Spindoc,

Seeing as you called me a cretin - the
following is a quote from Umberto Eco on
the subject:

"There are four kinds of people in this world: cretins,
fools, morons, and lunatics...Cretins don't even talk; they
sort of slobber and stumble...Fools are in great demand,
especially on social occasions. They embarrass everyone
but provide material for conversation ...Fools don't claim
that cats bark, but they talk about cats when everyone else
is talking about dogs. They offend all the rules of
conversation, and when they really offend, they're magnificent...

Morons never do the wrong thing. They get their reasoning wrong.
Like the fellow who says that all dogs are pets and all dogs
bark, and cats are pets, too, therefore cats bark... Morons will
occassionally say something that's right, but they say it for the
wrong reason ...A lunatic is easily recognised. He is a moron who
doesn't know the ropes. The moron proves his thesis; he has
logic, however twisted it may be.

The lunatic on the other hand, doesn't concern himself at all with
logic, he works by short circuits. For him everything proves
everything else. The lunatic is all "idee fixe" and whatever he
comes across confirms his lunacy. You can tell him by the
liberties he takes with common sense, by his flashes of
inspiration ...

At first they seem normal, then all of a sudden ..."

Foxy - When you provide a link please read it first to make sure it applies to the thread.

To quote part of your link "Imagine you come across a small child who has fallen into a pond and is in danger of drowning. You know that you can easily and safely rescue him, but you are wearing an expensive pair of shoes that will be ruined if you do. We all think it would be seriously wrong to walk on past the pond, leaving the child to drown, because you don’t want to have to buy a new pair of shoes – in fact, most people think that would be monstrous. You can’t compare a child’s life with a pair of shoes!"

This is totally stupid in relation to the current situation, as the refugees are mostly illiterate for starters therefore the chances of finding them employment is virtually zero therefore requiring welfare for life. Secondly the quote applies to one child if the scenario involved 1.5 million children which is how many Rohingya refugees there are it would be different besides most are not children.

Economically it would break any country.

Foxy's link to the Facts About Boat People blog (on a website called the Australian Independent Media Network aka AIM Network)) presents a one sided discussion from Glenn Murray that completely fails to consider the long term ramifications if the boat people keep coming, and are admitted.

The blog says boat people aren't cue jumpers but in the summary offers this contradictory statement - "I’m saying we should separate our onshore and offshore refugee quotas, so boat people don’t take places of resettled camp refugees."

Glenn Murray then goes on to offer this ridiculous piece of advice- "we shouldn’t be using ‘population’ issues as an excuse to turn ‘boat people’ away. If there are population issues (which I don’t believe there are), curtail regular immigration. At least then the people being turned away will merely be inconvenienced. They won’t be killed, tortured or wrongfully imprisoned."

A quick Google search reveals Glenn Murray is essentially a no body with lot's of (predictably left leaning) opinions and his own blog offering his "ramblings" on everything from supporting burqas, anti-corporate rants, anti-Coalition government rants, climate change fear mongering etc.

Goggle the AIM Network and all you will find are links back to their articles. It doesn't appear anyone has reviewed the AIM Network's balance/bias. Reading through the AIM Networks article titles, it looks like the ABC in disguise; you won't find any support for the current government or opinions that question Islam, global warming, over population, illegal immigration, the nanny state, or political correctness.

I wonder how anyone finds and gets turned on by these kind of websites, the One Borders website being another example.

I repeat.

"If these countries are willing to tow these boats back out to sea and wait for the passengers to die, then surely this is the end for our world."

Robert

'"If these countries are willing to tow these boats back out to sea and wait for the passengers to die, then surely this is the end for our world."

the history of the world is littered with cruelty. None more than the slaughter of the unborn. The world will end in God's timing. For now He gives people the opportunity to repent and receive forgiveness.

Robert, no it doesn't, civilisation is based on keeping barbarians out of your territory or empire, multi racial as their empire was to be a Roman you had to at least worship their gods, obey their laws and pay your dues.

The Anti Australia movement hasn't got a leg to stand on, they blame western intervention for the problems of the east then demand more western intervention to influence the outcomes of tribal squabbles abroad. Aceepting illegal Rohingya job seekers and insurgents means taking a side in the civil affairs of another country and as we've seen with the Tamil, Lebanese and Kurdish uptake they come with the aim of setting up committees and support groups to fund and direct the insurgencies and criminal networks in their native lands.
None of this is new, I remember back in about 1984 meeting a Christian Lebanese girl whose two cousins had just been sent off, with the backing of the community to fight in Lebanon, a few weeks later I heard that one of them had been killed. It's a pattern that goes back into Australian history with Fenians and later IRA supporters being the target of special branch surveillance and all of the post WW2 intrigue among eastern European migrants, ASIO and KGB.

Dear ConservativeHippie,

Perhaps the following website may appeal to you more.
It's written by a "somebody," Ben Doherty - whose credentials
are on the web, as are further articles by him on this
subject:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/dec/31/stopping-the-boats-a-fiction-as-australia-grows-ever-more-isolationist-on-asylum

Foxy,
Ben Doherty like most other journalists is a Left Wing activist of the old school, there are only two types of journalists in the mainstream press leftists like Doherty in the majority and left liberals like Andrew Bolt in the minority.
100% of journalists support immigration, 100% are "anti racist" and 100% are against White, working class Australians having any say.
You can see the exact same sentiments in all mainstream discussion of immigration, the left just frame it as a moral issue the liberals as economic, the left see "racism' as a moral failing and the liberals see it as economic sabotage.

We come back to the old question, why do people with Brown skin get to choose where they live and people with White skin don't? Where's our better life?
I'm sure I could make a great life for myself in Burma if the government gave me a small monthly stipend, a house, priority medical and dental treatment, free language lessons, free public transport, legal aid, free education for my kids and the Buddhist charities clothed me, gave me food parcels, trained me to do a job and organised job placements ahead of the locals.
Yes Ma'am, I believe I'd be sitting pretty in a beautiful and hospitable country, trouble is, if I turn up there in a boat, pour sea water into the fuel tank then collapse to the deck in a swoon they're not going to give me what I want are they?

I am disgusted with the inhumanity expressed by some of the posters on this forum.
I have just read the paper this morning about all the Asian countries near Australia following our 'lead' and 'turning back the boats'.

https://overland.org.au/2015/05/the-last-time-they-turned-back-the-boats/

The only difference between this current humanitarian crisis of turning away boatloads of people in distress, and the times Australia has done the same, is that we are actually hearing about and seeing the consequences of this action.
Abbott and his Navy kept all their actions secret from the public.
I am embarrassed to be Australian re this subject.

Have we sunk so low as human beings that some applaud the actions of others turning thousands of fellow humans back out to the open seas for almost certain death?
Does anyone not think that these death voyages aren't known about before the desperate men, women and children embark on them?

And Runner, can we please just have ONE discussion on this forum without you preaching, or bringing up the dreaded 'unborn'?

Suseonline

'And Runner, can we please just have ONE discussion on this forum without you preaching, or bringing up the dreaded 'unborn'?'

well Susie if you stop moralising about boat people when the ideology you support led to so many deaths I just might. The fact is that the killing of the unborn is just as inhumane as towing boats to nowhere, obviously I fact you don't wamt reminding of.

What is it with you ladies.

This admission of all these refugees & middle eastern migration is most definitely bequeathing civil war to your grand kids. There is not a country that has developed a sizable minority group with in it's boarders what has not ended up that way.

Even countries where the new people were of the same ethnicity, but spoke a different language conflict has followed, with civil war if the numbers were large enough.

Tell me, why do you hate your grand kids.

Dear Suse,

Thank You for your comments.

It is depressing reading some of the postings on
this discussion.

Instead of personal attacks what we should be doing
is having a broader conversation about this
global problem - because as
many political commentators have pointed out - the
answers lie in understanding the situation and
trying to come up with better responses to meet the
overwhelming needs asylum seekers face. The current government
police of concealment, silence, obfuscation is indeed
shameful. Some have called it "the mushroom policy."
Keep them in the dark and feed them BS.

Dear Hasbeen,

I think that you are swallowing the hype.

As our history has shown over many years
the majority of refugees and immigrants to this
country - have settled and adjusted to our way
of life quite nicely.

You expressed concern about
the Middle-East. I take it you are referring to
Muslims. Muslims according to the last census
make up only 1.5 per cent of our population.
And, 36 per cent of Australian Muslims were
born here. Almost 50 per cent of Australian
Muslims are aged 24 and under. Despite your
expressed concerns - the vast majority of Australian
Muslims see no conflict of loyalty between Islam and
Australian citizenship.

I think that your concerns are unwarranted.

Another example of enough is enough.

Israeli government to refugees: Go back to Africa or go to prison

HOLOT, Israel — As Europe struggles to stem a spring flood of migrants from Africa and the Middle East trying to cross a deadly Mediterranean Sea, Israel has begun to toughen its stance toward refugees, telling unwanted Africans here they must leave now or face an indefinite stay in prison.

Israeli authorities are sending letters to the first of 45,000 Eritrean and Sudanese refugees, informing them they have 30 days to accept Israel’s offer of $3,500 in cash and a one-way ticket home or to an unnamed third country in Africa, or face incarceration at Saharonim prison.

Israeli leaders have proclaimed that their tough approach — building a fence along the country’s border, denying work permits for illegal migrants, forcing them into a detention center in the desert — may ultimately save lives by dissuading migrants from attempting a perilous journey. Critics of the Israeli policy counter that a country built by refugees should be more accepting of those fleeing war, poverty and oppression.

But these days, even liberal Europe is considering a more muscular approach. The European Union began a push Monday for U.N. authorization to deploy military force in the Mediterranean to stop migrant smuggling ships.

REST OF STORY

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/toughening-its-stan...

Correcting above
they have 30 days Should read "they have 30 days"

Hasbeen, I don't have any grandchildren yet, but if I did, I would rather they showed compassion for their fellow human beings than displaying the ugly traits of bigotry and selfishness.

I can't believe that we, as Australians, are willing to stand by and watch what is unfolding in the seas near us, and not do something about it.
If it were 6000 white British or American citizens in those boats, we would all be falling over ourselves trying to get help for them....

Above all, do no harm.

Though commendable, no one should be required to sacrifice their expensive shoes in order to save a child.

If people drown at sea, it's OK to say "that's their problem": it may not be nice, but it's OK.
But if you forcibly tow away a boat without the consent of its occupants, or if you capture and lock them up, then you are a PIRATE.
If we fail to protest when others who claim to "represent us" do this in our name, then we too are... guess what... PIRATES!

Though I gave my preference in the last elections to the Liberals over Labor, it had nothing to do with this issue - it was in order to stop the NBN. Governments do what they want, they don't care for any of us anyway - nevertheless it has now become my duty to proclaim: NOT IN MY NAME!

Dear Yuyutsu,

Thank You.

The Australian Civil War? And they say the climate change mob make some far-fetched predictions... I think we can file that one in the same category as Mayan apocalypses and the Rapture.

Tony Lavis, it's entirely possible that there will be violence among the descendants of the European settlers, at the moment the levels of hostility toward "progressive" ideals are rising and both sides are pitching their case to potential migrant allies.
Legal immigrants and especially their children absolutely hate boat people, if you're horrified by this discussion you've obviously never had it in real life. We don't have many football hooligans or "Ultras" here but there are equivalent street gangs, the main White gang in Melbourne the FBS are now allied with Reclaim Australia and they will bring in whichever of the more "vibrant" ethnic hoodlums they are allied with.

According to a recent poll conducted by the
Australian National University (ANU) posted in
the Sydney Morning Herald
more than 80 per cent of Australians think
immigrants are good for Australia despite what
a small number of ranters would have us believe.

And of course as Peter Costello pointed out -
outside Australia's Indigenous people, we are all
immigrants or descendants of immigrants - some
earlier than others - but all with an experience of
immigration during the foundation of modern Australia.

Absolutely correct Foxy.
It appears that some forum members seem to forget they are all descended from foreigners who migrated to Australia for whatever reason.

Yuyitsu was correct. Those that drag other ships back out to sea against their will are pirates. And Australia should also hang it's head in shame, because instead of 'stopping the boats' to save people from drowning, they are the first of a number of countries to push boats back out to sea where the occupants will either starve to death or drown anyway.

What an absolute disgrace.

Foxy says "because as many political commentators have pointed out - the answers lie in understanding the situation and trying to come up with better responses to meet the overwhelming needs asylum seekers face."

Why should anyone meet their needs? If we open the borders and allow unlimited access, eventually 100,000 or more will come. When the word is out, Australia is open it will be a free-for-all. Oh, you say, I don't mean open borders for unlimited numbers to flock in... well what's the cut off point? For those of us expressing support for the current government policy, we have already reached the cut off point. Why is your cut off point any different to ours?

Foxy also quotes "a recent poll conducted by the Australian National University (ANU) posted in the Sydney Morning Herald more than 80 per cent of Australians think immigrants are good for Australia despite what a small number of ranters would have us believe."

Foxy / Suse - Why not do your own random survey and go into any shopping mall and ask 10 people if we should throw the borders wide open to all comers? Ask if they have any problem with the number of Muslims doubling in this country via boat people arrivals? If you get 8 out 10 agreeing with the above poll, I'll run around the block naked waving a rainbow flag.

Hippie, I have never seen anyone saying to open our borders to everyone?
You are being hysterical.
Of course every country has to have a cut of point, and that is why we elect politicians to make these decisions.

I ask you one question. Do you agree with the current actions of some Asian countries to turn back out to sea boatloads of obviously starving, dehydrated and sick people?

Dear ConservativeHippie,

Please don't put your words into my mouth.
That's no way to debate. Read what was actually
said - not your own interpretation of it.

The point being made was simply there has to be a
better, more humane way of tackling the asylum-seeker problem.
Our current polcy of concealment, silence
and obfuscation has been referred to as a "mushroom
policy." Keep them in the dark and feed them BS.
It has been widely criticised - and it is one of
which all of us should be ashamed.

If you approve of what our current government is doing
regarding asylum seekers. That's your right. Just as
mine is to disagree with you.

Dear ConservativeHippie,

If you want to run around the block naked carrying a
raibow flag - don't let me stop you.
I prefer to spend my time somewhat more constructively.

To Suse & Foxy, it is a sad state of affairs that thousands of people are so desperate that they are willing to get on a leaky boat with too many others, in the hope they will end up somewhere that will take care of them. And its sad some of those boats sink and many die.

But as long as the boats are being rescued the people will keep trying and some will continue to die. Those getting on boats need to be discouraged. Perhaps First World governments need to actively encourage the Third World nations people are fleeing, to offer tolerance and better living conditions for their poorer inhabitants.

I don't have the answers but I also can see the current situation right around the world is dire. You can't have millions of Africans entering southern Europe without associated negative flow on effects. Its the same in Thailand, Indonesia, and here in Australia. If the number of migrants wishing to enter another country goes unchecked, word gets out 'this country will accept you' and the hordes follow. At some point every country has to say "sorry, we've taken all the refuges we can afford to, both financially and socially, the border is now closed."

The only real difference I see between you and me, in these discussions is the number we are willing to accept. I feel we have taken enough unexpected/unauthorised arrivals already. I'm happy with the governments willingness to take a designated number of refugees every year (which I believe is around 20,000); but I am totally against encouraging people to risk their lives by travelling across the sea in the hope if they get to our shores, we will welcome them with open arms.

con't...

con't

According to the 2011 census, 476,291 people, or 2.2% of the total Australian population, are Muslims. 4.5% of Great Britain is Muslim. Most of the Third World asylum seekers are Muslim.

Although its not a controlled or coordinated plot, Islamic countries are becoming over populated and the worst off are crossing borders to survive. Its Islamic expansionism by default.

Small populated countries such as Australia and New Zealand simply cannot afford to accept the responsibility for relocating these unfortunates without risking their values, their societies, and their way of life.

The problems in Great Britain is a prime example of what we can expect if we allow 50,000 boat people into Australia per annum over the next 10 years. 50,000 is a small number by world standards.

You would think that all of those buff young men and male youths who deal with criminal people smuggling gangs and plot and scheme to trick western democracies into allowing them in would instead think of their female relatives back home. Y'know, standing up for their women and siblings and getting them some education and release from the abomination of tent dresses and the like.

That is instead of running off to stand in the 'Wonderful Centrelink' queue and trying to introduce the Sharia law in their host country to subjugate more women and kids.

Conservative Hippie, do you agree with the actions of some Asian countries re turning back out to sea boatloads of obviously starving, dehydrated and sick people, with no one on board qualified to sail the boat?

To my mind, that is murder on a grand scale.

Foxy, now tell us what that biased, eurocentric report found in relation to people's attitudes toward illegal immigration? Wasn't the figure in the same ballpark of 80% against allowing boat arrivals to settle here?
"Immigrants" is a broad term, what would the results be if the questionnaire got into specifics about race, ethnic origin and religion?
What do Aboriginals think of Tongans? What do Chinese think of Vietnamese? Indians of Lebanese?

Hi Suseonline

In answer to your question I do not like the actions of some Asian countries turning back out to sea boatloads of obviously starving, dehydrated and sick people, with no one on board qualified to sail the boat.

I've answered your question, so its only fair I expect you will answer mine: Can you please provide the number of boat people refugees you would feel comfortable allowing into Australia over the next five years?

I ask this question to gauge how far apart we are on this issue. If you are thinking 1000-10,000 people that's one thing, but if you have no problem with letting a 1,000,000 come, then we are on very different wave lengths. Please be honest, tell us what you feel is acceptable, maybe we have you wrong

"Why not do your own random survey and go into any shopping mall and ask 10 people if we should throw the borders wide open to all comers? Ask if they have any problem with the number of Muslims doubling in this country via boat people arrivals? If you get 8 out 10 agreeing with the above poll, I'll run around the block naked waving a rainbow flag."

Is that a promise, ToryPussy (ConservativeHippie)? Will you really do a nudie run (you may carry the flag of your choice - I favour the St. Andrews Cross, even though I'm a 4th generation Aussie) if you don't get the result you're hoping for?

The restaurant in which I work is closed on Mondays. I'm quite happy to conduct my own random survey, and I'm quite happy to report the results on this website. Are you happy to pay the forfeit you promised if things don't work out in your favour?

With the UN reporting that for the first time since WWII there is now over 50 million people world wide whom they class as refugees, asylum-seekers, or internally displaced persons. This number is growing rapidly, with no likelihood of it reducing anytime soon.
Correspondingly, the tide of displaced persons on the move world wide is also growing.
Unless more is done to take people from a situation of short term humanitarian care, or in the extreme cases total abandonment, and into a real world of long term self-reliance, the position can only deteriorate, both for those seeking life improvement, and any possible hosts, including Australians.
The development of the "Fortress Australia" policy and its ensuing actions by the Abbott government can only be effectual in the short term at best. The present policy does nothing to elevate the growing refugee problem in our region. At sometime in the future Australia is going to have to adjust, and implement a more favorable and sustainable solution, if for no other reason than for our own benefit. Otherwise a less than desirable outcome could be imposed by others, simply through the sheer numbers of these disaffected peoples.

Paul,
The only sustainable solution is to end all immigration, nobody should be allowed to migrate anywhere at any time.
You can see the future just by looking at Greece, Italy, the Balkans or the south west of the U.S.A.
Norway can't make the compassionate approach work, the U.K can't make it work, Sweden can't make it work so what we can deduce from that is that compassion doesn't work.
This isn't 1947 where the refugees are decent, intelligent Europeans down on their luck or fleeing Communism, it's 2015 and the refugees are low IQ African and Asian criminals who destroy everything they touch.
The issue of compassion goes out the window anyway as soon as a the brown people start flooding in, robbing, raping, murdering and taking over whole suburbs as their own.

Jay, I take it then your answer is a declaration of "war" on the brown people? It is one thing to declare closed boarders, it is altogether a different thing trying to enforce such a policy, given the state of play in the world as it exists today. You say a compassionate policy does not work, you point to examples to make your case. Then I say a fortress mentality will not work in the long term either. If you do not accept immigration as viable, then how do you physically stop people from moving from where they are, to where they want to be? Particular given those numbers are on the increase.

The 'end of compassion' is in doing what Labor PM Rudd did, create the ideal environment for the criminal gangs involved in people smuggling and resulting in thousands of deaths at sea.

Dear Robert Le Page,

On another thread I spoke of an Asian sensibility around capital punishment and this latest episode of the plight of the Rohingya refugees being turned back from Thailand and Malaysian shores is reflecting more of the same. When these countries were doing similar things to Vietnamese refugees Malcolm Fraser stepped up to the plate and showed what I like to think of as an Australian sensibility and took in literally tens of thousands of these poor wretches. They ended up contributing to this great country in many ways and were eternally grateful for the assistance we gave them.

There are those on this thread who are hell bent on Australia becoming like so many other Asian countries where compassion is a secondary concern. Thankfully, despite our right wing, dog whistle, slimy politicians and few rancid types on this thread, I truly believe we are far from seeing the 'end of compassion', at least where Australia is concerned.

One note, in the light of recent events the Gillard refugee swap deal with Malaysia that fell through would seem to have had some merit.

Conservative Hippie "I've answered your question, so its only fair I expect you will answer mine: Can you please provide the number of boat people refugees you would feel comfortable allowing into Australia over the next five years?"

I have no idea how many boat people to allow in.
Surely that would depend on how many were needing to find refugee status over the next 5 years, and I doubt anyone can say?

What I would hope is that Australia works closely with our neighboring countries and agree on our fair share of these poor people.
Australia has to participate in the World society/economy, as well as in our own country.
If we were to go it alone and 'close our borders', how long do you think it would take for other countries to slap sanctions on us, refuse to trade with us, or worse, declare war on us?

Abbott is an idiot for saying he won't condemn other close by countries for turning back the boats, because he believes they are following our lead and doing the right thing.
Is he therefore saying that our navy also turned back boatloads of starving, sick and dehydrated refugees to certain death on the open seas?

So...if we don't want to take them in as refugees, we just send them on their way to be killed?

To be dismissive of millions of people as being simply "low IQ African and Asian criminals who destroy everything they touch.", might sit well with some, and it certainly should win support from those that fear a loss of their "superior" lifestyle, such people are not only found in the developed world, they are in the third world as well. The belief in a massive sub-human underclass on the move plays into the hands of the extremists. By demonising millions as a danger to "our society" and "our way of life" will move some of the non-committed moderates to embrace as necessary extreme action to repel the hoards of sub-humans.
The inevitable long term outcome for all, given that kind of extremism, is the destruction of millions on both sides, including that very way of life that some seen as desperately needing to be preserved, no winners, only massive numbers of losers.
There is a growing refugee crises in the world, no one can deny that. To blame a few domestic politicians for the crises is negative, and short sighted, although they play their part. It is going to take more than compassion to solve the problem, it is going to take both commitment and sacrifice by many, alone with coordinated world action. No country can act alone and expect to simply satisfy their own self interest, all have to act together to achieve a lasting sustainable outcome for all. For some, certain actions will be seen as unpalatable, but there is no easy solution to what is a very serious world problem.

Paul,
But a sub human underclass is exactly what they are, the "Brown Undertow", they are the result of generations of dysgenic environmental conditions and inbreeding of physical and mental defects. Do you understand what happens to the brain of a malnourished child? Do you understand why Asians from well off families are tall, strong and intelligent while the sons of the poor are stunted, sick and retarded? Have you ever met a person from a rural area of China and seen the physical and mental differences between him and say, a middle class person from Shanghai? Using the words sub-human is appropriate if we're to have a definition of humanity at all.
Let's include an IQ test in the health checks for migrants, anyone who can't pass it in their own language and get a score of at least 100 is denied entry.
Paul you're of above average intelligence and have a breadth of real world experience so you know how difficult it can be to teach or explain things to people of even average intelligence, how are we supposed to integrate tens of thousands of men (and they are all men) who are by the standards of our society mentally handicapped?
What about all the sub 80 IQ people we already have living among us? Do they get special treatment? No, you see them in the housing commission areas and rural towns fending for themselves as best they can by committing crime, ripping each other off and collecting welfare.

Suseonline, "I have no idea how many boat people to allow in.
Surely that would depend on how many were needing to find refugee status over the next 5 years, and I doubt anyone can say?"

At least you have replied to 'that' question, that so many others here have avoided despite being asked repeatedly.

However, you will have an open border and an open chequebook. Worse still, you accept economic migrants as 'refugees'.

Who will pay and what reduction in standard of living are you volunteering Australians to have?

Big business should be fine with what your demand though. Because even unskilled, ignorant, unwilling-to-work bludgers can be used to drive down pay and conditions and justify government shirking its responsibilities where the vulnerable are concerned. -Which definitely includes Labor-Greens governments too! -Remember Ms Gillard and her treatment of age pensioners and single mothers.

Labor and the Greens have already flown kites on putting a capital gains tax on the residential home and the Greens push for death taxes.

Like many others I am well prepared to take family and moderate assets off-shore, as others have done and are doing.

BTW, why didn't any of those spruikers for open door immigration even take any of those buff younf economic migrants in themselves?

JOM, you are very ignorant indeed if you think skin colour has anything at all to do with intelligence. You are racist and offensive in the extreme.

Onthebeach, as I have already said, no one expects Australia to have an open door policy, so what are you on about?
I don't know what the answer to the growing refugee crisis in the world, but I do know that a closed door policy is not the answer.
We are just going round and round in circles on this subject...

Dear OnTheBeach,

<<However, you will have an open border and an open chequebook. Worse still, you accept economic migrants as 'refugees'.>>

An open border need not imply an open chequebook - it only follows from this silly idea as if landing on this continent is identical to joining the Australian society; and there is no need to make a distinction between economic migrants and refugees either - it only follows from signing and agreeing to abide by UN conventions.

Nobody had a right to close the borders in the first place, but nobody was ever required to accept those who enter as members of society or to treat them as humans: it's just a toxic combination of national arrogance on the one hand, then wanting it to look good on the other.

As for the fear of numbers, not many would arrive (unless sponsored by Australians for whatever reason) had they known in advance that no social benefits await them here, that in fact they would be treated more or less like animals with no civil rights and with real chances of starving to death if they are not fully able to take care of themselves.

Get a grip everyone.
The massive illegal migration movement is just getting underway.
Egypt has 45 Million to be pushed out over the next 10 years or less.
How many millions do you think we can handle ? 5 ? 10 ? 20 ?

Susie, Australia did NOT just shove the boats back out to sea.
They took them to near Indonesian waters and sent them back into harbours.
You compared that to just shoving them back out as the Indonesians,
Malaysians and Thais are doing with nowhere to go.

Australia's policy solved not just our problem but Indonesia's problem
as well. They do not come to Indonesia now as the business plan has been torn up.

If open borders became the policy, then maternity entitlements would
no longer be a problem, there would be none, likewise pensions and
the government would spend all the money it could raise putting up tents.
Surely the best thing those considering boarding the boats is to get
organised in their own countries to improve their own conditions.
In the case where it is an interracial problem, then perhaps they
should go back from whence they came. Not an easy solution of course
but they have to solve their own problems not transfer the problem to us.

Some people just do not seem to be able to get a grip on reality.

suse,
Yes I'm a racist and racism is the only rational approach to take on this issue and if I'm offending religious people such as yourself then my point is proven. Racism is a worldview which comes about when people are well informed about issues of race, anti Racism is born out of ignorance, superstition and primitive fears about a watchful and vengeful god whose eyes (the eyes of the world) are always upon us.
Skin colour, melanin and the genes which regulate it might be linked to intelligence or it might not, there's no evidence one way or another at this point. Physical appearance however is a good indicator of intelligence, stunted growth, deformities caused by vitamin deficiencies etc, and since all of the men on the boats in question are brown skinned we need to look at the colour of their skin, their physical state and decide whether they need to be tested for intelligence and other mental problems before being admitted to our society.
So we might look at these man and say, they are below average height for their race, their limbs and joints show signs of deformity, their skin is marked by childhhod disease, their eyesight is poor..lets make them sit an IQ test in their native tongue, if they fail they are deported, if they pass with a score of 100 their refugee claims may be assessed.
So Suse can you explain how Australia might benefit from admitting thousands of men with sub 80 IQ levels? How will people whose median intelligence is below the level commonly accepted as handicapped contribute to "progress" in your view? Furthermore how will authorities know if these thousands of men are dumb or smart if they don't test them and set a benchmark?

'Abbott is an idiot for saying he won't condemn other close by countries for turning back the boats, because he believes they are following our lead and doing the right thing.'

Yea fits your dirty little narrative Susie. The sisterhhood are full of compassion but the man who has spent many weeks in voluntary work is an ídiot and has no compassion. You need one of the highly paid sisterhood who sit on their bums in highly Government paid jobs have compassion don't you Susie. Just ask Triggs or Gillard.

Suseonline,

When pressed you say you do not favour 'Open Door' immigration. Yet you accept economic migrants as 'refugees'. How else could there be so many buff young men, male youths and children on the boats?

What has prevented those tireless well-to-do spruikers and apologists (and ferocious moral critics of the Australian people) such as Christine Milne, Bob Brown and Philip Adams from ever taking some of those buff young men into their own home to take care of them?

Philip Adams (et al),
http://tinyurl.com/moral-bullsher

Once again, who pays

No JOM, I am not religious at all.
One doesn't need to be religious to show compassion, just ask Runner.

Bazz, I think I have made my position crystal clear.
The day we ignore the problems of the rest of the world is the day we cease to be human.

And Labor were going to send women and children to Malaysia. What cruel monsters.

the reality is that the progressives have a long history of labelling anyone who does not agree with spending unlimited Government money on the world's ills as uncompassionate. I have no doubt that conservatives give more from their personal accounts to the underprivilged while progressives use the poor as a political tool often to disguise their motives. They bang on about how muchy they care for the INdigeneous and yet I know no other minister let alone PM who has used their annual leave to serve the people. Wherever the UN or progressives are serving you usually find a tax payer money trail. No doubt their is an occasional exception.

Suse,
So people who don't try to solve the world's problems are sub-human?
So humans in your view must be White Westerners and north Asians because we're the only ethno-racial groups who engage in altruism.
Your views and mine are the same, people who cannot or will not contribute to "progress" are lacking essential human qualities, this type of scientific racism puts us in the same league as the great minds of the 19th and 20th centuries.
The notion that there were superior and inferior types and traits has existed for all of human history, it's only in the last 50 years that it's been unfashionable to speak those thoughts aloud but science marches on regardless and the evidence of higher and lower forms of human life won't go away.

Dear onthebeach,

I usually refrain from addressing you for very good reasons but I do so now as a fellow human being who sees a disturbing pattern in your posts which seems not to have been addressed.

I recall a thread on Adam Goodes where so much of your commentary was markedly, and inappropriately for the topic, sexual in nature. At the time I advised you to find some professional help. I don't have a habit of reading many of your posts so it may have slipped my attention but I have read some of your posts here and 'it's back!'

“those buff young men and male youths”

“those buff younf (sic) economic migrants in themselves”

“so many buff young men”

“taking some of those buff young men into their own home to take care of them?”

Mate one doesn't need a psychology degree to see you have deep seated issues, certainly around members of the opposite sex. Perhaps those issues are innate, or possibly the result of a strict religious upbringing, or they could be the result of a messy divorce, I don't know, but I do know they need and deserve resolving.

Susie said;
Bazz, I think I have made my position crystal clear.
The day we ignore the problems of the rest of the world is the day we
cease to be human.

Sorry, but I do not see the connection to my comment on the returning
of boats to their departure place.

SteeleRedux if anyone here has a real problem it is you old chap.

Having such a high opinion of your self, with your strange ideas shows a deep misunderstanding of the facts of life.

I suppose this is bound to be a fact with anyone who has a lefty/green outlook on life, but when it becomes as profound as yours, help is needed. I suggest you seek it urgently.

It has not sunk in to most on this debate that this problem is insoluble.
The world population is rising quite steadily and resources are diminishing quite quickly, especially water.
The only true solution is to reduce the population.
I can hear the screams of protest about "culling", "eugenics" and from some "good thing too".
The proposition I have is none of those.
If we offered a free trip with citizenship into Australia for any woman who had already had two or more children providing she was willing to have a hysterectomy and also any married man who had two or more children and was willing to have a vasectomy that would slow down the flood.
Of course the present huge flow of migrants and various workers visa holders would have to be stopped.
It would also be made clear that any migrants or refugees would not be allowed to settle here unless they met these requirements i.e. they were now infertile.
This would stop deaths at sea.
The big corporations would scream at having their flow of cheap labour cut off but hard luck for them.
It would also help if we could persuade other countries to follow suit with this program.

I am afraid that Robert is right. The problem is unsolvable.
Water, food and energy decline is THE problem.

If you plot a graph from say 1850 to today and put on it population
and oil production, shock horror they coincide exactly. The lines lay
one on top of the other.
As oil production has peaked, and there are signs that decline (including tight oil etc)
is upon us, inevitably there will be a huge increase on boat people.
As oil production declines, so will population, delayed by malnutrition.
Egypt has already experienced this effect. It is the example that the
world will follow. Charity is delaying Egypt's population decline.

SteeleRedux,

LOL, that really is silly stuff.

Dear Hasbeen,

SteeleRedux works really hard at trying to see
the big picture and not getting stuck in ego.
He's a rarity on this forum.

Steele Redux, I too wondered about all the inappropriate talk from OTB about all these 'buff young men', because I havn't noticed any of them on the TV footage about these boat refugees? All I have seen are sick emaciated people.

Hasbeen is obviously ok with his mate's sleezy discussion about young men's bodies. That does surprise me a little.

In any case, I agree that for now this boat people disaster is too hard to solve.

Bazz,

Compartmentalised thinking is also a problem.

Many here who oppose (say) the development of dams and demand that young Australian couples NOT have children are nonetheless strident supporters of Open Door immigration and refuse to place any limits on it.

If it sounds as though they are cutting off their own noses to spite their faces they probably are. That is the way of the culturally cringing, self-loathing leftist elite and it will not change.

They don't even want any screening of prospective migrants with preference being given to the most suitable candidates. According to the international socialist 'Progressives' that would not be immigration authorities exercising due diligence and judgement, but 'discrimination'(!).

Say what? Exercising due diligence to identify and treat risks implies discrimination in judgement. -Not where the prevailing political correctness of the leftist 'Progressives' has changed the meaning of words though!

In Britain, the 'Progressives' and British Labour are busily trying to sweep under the carpet the sex trafficking of at least 1,400 children by Pakistani migrants who imported their toxic political system and culture. They are surprised apparently, but they should not have been, read here,

<There are 1.5 million street kids in Pakistan -- an estimated 90% of them have been sexually abused at some point in their lives.

Rape in Pakistan is so common, it’s barely taboo. Last week the Daily Mail interviewed a bus driver from Peshawar who says, after his shift is over, he likes to go into the slums and rape street kids. Sometimes he pays them a dollar. But often he doesn’t – he just joins in a big gang rape.>
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/08/pakistans-troubling-rape-problem

The 'Progressives' are so 'compassionate' that they repeat the same mistakes. Maybe it is all bunk too and they are driven more by an irrational hatred of their own society.

Follow-up post:

These two paragraphs by David Leyonhjelm[1] distinguish those who can contribute to an Enlightenment-based democracy such as Australia in contrast to a Fifth Column[2] who are called on to replace it with slavery:

“Australia neither needs nor wants to import illiberal values, whether from Sharia or any other value system. Indeed, we are far too accepting of those who come to Australia with its respect for liberty, only to seek to transform it into something like the illiberal, authoritarian country they left behind.”

and

“We would seek to confirm this with a citizenship test, not about historical trivia or tricky definitions, but liberal democratic values – values we share with lots of other liberal democracies. Our test would be outward-looking and our concept of citizenship cosmopolitan, exploring values such as women's rights (particularly suffrage), free speech, freedom to divorce, freedom of association, and freedom of religion – including the right to leave a religion or have no religion at all.”

[1] http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=17330
[2] http://www.yourdictionary.com/fifth-colum

Compassion is not a value that can profitably be debated, vulnerable as it is to emotional and usually self-righteous pee-ing contests [1].

The global refugee crisis can be solved only by those primarily responsible. This responsibility lies not with Western intervention (much as that contributes to the problem) but primarily with anti-human religion and pig-ignorant tribal savagery [2] that is choking the Mediterranean and the seas of our region with the dead bodies of desperate hordes trying to get away – in many cases seeking to transplant the original cause of their misery to the countries that give them refuge.

Third world raw materials and the European Enlightenment process are the mainstay of the liberty and relative prosperity in which the people of the West live. The heavy lifting in the West is based on those contributors and the science ushered in by the Enlightenment together with often backbreaking hard work. And with massive sacrifices in protecting the gains from aggression.

Whatever NUMBER of immigrants (no matter how they arrive, what must be paramount in protecting liberty in Australia is the QUALITY of those we accept. Quality is not defined by ancestry (the obsession of racist tribalists) [3]). The best definition I have seen of it appears in two paragraphs (inter alia) of a recent OLO article by David Leyonhjelm [4].

[1] E.g. scroll through this thread.
[2] Islam and ancestry-specific “cultures”.
[3] Those who class people including themselves by their ancestry. Spectemur agendo.
[4] So apt I’ll devote a follow-up post to it.

(Oops - the follow-up has already appeared)

Foxy I'm sorry sweetie, I'm afraid SteeleRedux could not see the big picture if it walked up & hit him on the head, All he would see is his misguided philosophy in pain, which he would try to inflict on the rest of Oz.

In fact, he is one of those so deep in himself he would not be able to figure out which way was up, while sitting on the bottom of a swimming pool, watching the bubbles rise.

He is beyond rational thought.

Dear Hasbeen,

I don't think you really mean what you're posting.

There are far too
many negative statements on this discussion currently
that seem to feed people's
existing hostility. That is not a good thing in any
discussion.

‘morning SteeleRedux,

I was wondering when “Tollenbeg Terror” would rise to the occasion and we would once again see the “Crawling Eye” of modern hypocrisy.

The launch of your presence from the “fog” was highlighted by this patronizing gem to OTB,

“I usually refrain from addressing you for very good reasons but I do so now as a fellow human being who sees a disturbing pattern in your posts which seems not to have been addressed”. Oh really? Don’t tell me Steelie, reflective angst, Yes?

Pardon me if I just take a moment to throw up!

So the crawling eye has now morphed into a human being?

Not content with aligning yourself with the feminist “Sisterhood” of Foxy, Suseonline and Madame Poirot, you needed to dump on the pragmatic centrists from your Ivory Tower with an astonishingly “pukeable” comment like that!

Well, welcome to the latest episode of “get down and dirty”.

I note your excitement at “those buff young men and male youths” as your “motive” for your entry into this debate, Mmm, yummy!

Pity you missed all the action as the sisterhood gets trashed by those tired of faux compassion, but hey, better late than never, even for the crawling eye.

You seem a tad confused? Is your progressive ideology so attractive that you “lean” towards feminism in the mornings and then get the hots for buff young men in the afternoons? Or does your schizophrenic outlook just go with the flow of the prevailing argument?

Political rhetoric sometimes backfires, mostly because it is vacuous and leaves a volatile mix of incendiary fuel and oxygen. But hey, you didn’t need those eyebrows anyway did you Steelie? LOL.

When the fog clears you will retreat to higher ground, as in the movie. In the meantime we await your esteemed slithering into our cowed presence.

Bye the way, do you get the internet up there or do you rely on our blog references to “those buff young men and male youths” to get you excited?

Just asking! He he he.

Oh Gawd - more pee-ing contest, now a distance challenge by Hasbeen to SteeleRedux. To win a round in the pee-ing contest drink a litre of water and hold it till you're busting. Meanwhile there's a major global issue into which it is worth putting genuine analytical thought.

Why can't you hear a Pterodactyl pee-ing?

Because the P is silent.

Sorry, I misspelt the movie title, it should read "Trollenberg Terror" for those who wish to look it up.

"In a small Swiss resort town, sisters Anne (Foxy), Evie ( Suseonline) and Sarah Pilgrim (Poirot) are worried by Anne's telepathic sense, which goes haywire. Reporter Philip Truscott (Paul1405) and U.N. worker Alan Brooks (Robert Le Page), who's in the area to investigate unusual radiation levels. The slithering eye (SteeleRedux) emerges from the mountain fog to decapitate those who fail to acknowledge PC perspectives and has a telepathic connection with "buff young males".

Suseonline needs a reminder of where we were at with the previous Labor government and their Greens sidekicks,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0MHRSFz6FM

Suseonline,
Those are not seagulls on the roofs of the tiled buildings they set fire to.

They certainly don't look like women and children,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xjyqh8mURk

Australians are never going to be stood over by international criminal gangs operating their profitable people smuggling and Australians are not going to relinquish control of their borders or bow to thugs who burn their taxpayer-funded accommodation and facilities to get their own way.

You have a very short memory of the Rudd and Gillard days. Gillard was in despair trying to cope with the mess left by Rudd's demolition of Howard's Pacific Solution and her Greens side-kicks were no help at all. Remember what callous Greens SHY said about those drowning at sea?

And now it's Spindoc. I don't agree with the approach of either Foxy, Suseonline or Poirot but at least they bring some feelings to the table. SteeleRedux's psychobabble about OTB doesn't bring in anything at all. Could we go one step further and enter the world of history-based reasoning and evaluation of an explosion of refugees hammering in the doors of the civilised (i.e. Enlightenment-based, non-theocratic, non-tribal) world including Australia? We need real policies, not just hate-fests like the LNP/ALP duopoly or emotion-fests like Sarah Hansen-Young who are all about what migration policy shouldn't be but not about what it should be (too hard?).

Sorry, the links again,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0MHRSFz6FM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xjyqh8mURk

Dear Spindoc,

Seeing as you're still into nursery tales.
Here's another one to add to your collection:

As soon as Wolf began to feel
That he would like a decent meal
He went and knocked on Grandma's door
When Grandma opened it, she saw
The sharp white teeth, the horrid grin
And Wolfie said, 'May I come in?'
Poor Grandmamma was terrified
"He's going to eat me up!" she cried

And she was absolutely right
He ate her up in one big bite
But Grandmamma was small and tough
And Wolfie wailed, "That's not enough!
I haven't yet begun to feel
That I have had a decent meal!"

He ran around the kitchen yelping
"I've got to have another helping!"
Then added with a frightful leer
"I'm therefore going to wait right here
Till Little Miss Red Riding Hood
Comes home from walking in the wood"

He quickly put on Grandma's clothes
(Of course he hadn't eaten those)
He dressed himself in coat and hat
He put on shoes and after that
He even brushed and curled his hair
Then sat himself in Grandma's chair

In came the little girl in red
She stopped. She stared. And then she said
"What great big ears you have, Grandma,"
"All the better to hear you with," the Wolf replied
"What great big eyes you have, Grandma,"
said Little Red Riding Hood
"All the better to see you with," the Wolf replied.

He sat there watching her and smiled
He thought I'm going to eat this child
Compared with her old Grandmamma
She's going to taste like caviar

Then Little Red Riding Hood said, "But Grandma
what a lovely great big furry coat you have on"

cont'd ...

cont'd ...

Dear Spindoc,

"What's wrong!" cried Wolf "Have you forgot
To tell me what BIG TEETH I've got?
Ah well, no matter what you say,
I'm going to eat you anyway"

The small girl smiles. One eyelid flickers
She whips a pistol from her knickers
She aims it at the creature's head
And bang bang bang, she shoots him dead
A few weeks later, in the wood
I came across Miss Riding Hood
But what a change! No cloak of red,
No silly hood upon her head
She said, "Hello, and do please note
My lovely furry WOLFSKIN COAT."

Dear Emperor Julian,

The following website might be of interest to you.
The Refugee Council of Australia has some very
interesting recommendations to solving the problem.

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/isub/2014-15_Intake%20sub.pdf

It covers Australia's Refugee and Humanitarian Program 2014-2015
and gives community views on current challenges and future
directions.

Compassion is not necessarily a virtue. It can be stupid, and so called compassion for illegals is stupid. They should be repelled. Who the hell do they think they are!

'morning Foxy,

Wow, another rewrite of feminist history? You forgot the one about Cinderella being a CIA agent! Lol.

I still prefer your role as Anne in the movie "Trollenberg Terror" and you're telepathic powers going "haywire" under the influence of the "slithering eye" (SteeleRedux).

It just seems so "you".

By the way, did you know that Batgirl actually worked for MI5?

And where is Steelie when you need him so badly? Enter Wondergirl. He he.

'A very good and gracious good morning to your royal eminence Emporer Julian,

What the hell is " history based reasoning"? Oh, I forgot, it's "Enlightenment-based, non-theocratic, non-tribal" reasoning?

Did your "rhetoric engine" get stuck in the groove? Or do you want to explain your gobbledegook?

Hello!

OTB, aren't we discussing the current boatloads of refugees off the coasts of other Asian countries in this thread?

Why are you bringing up all the 'buff young males' you obviously found so attractive on the roof of the detention centres? I don't care what the Gillard Govt did or didn't do, as I didn't vote for them. I only care about what is happening now on the open seas.

Spindoc, I am upset that you didn't have me playing the telepathic girl who spots the buff young men in your little scenario above.
Why does Foxy get that part? : )

See you all on another thread....I am bored with this one now.
Suse.

'morning Suse,

Sorry about the casting directors selections but I understand that the decision was based on the basis that "Feminism is the belief that both sexes may become equal by focusing solely on one of them".

Foxy got the part because she "feels" like a man whereas you "feel like man". Neither of you will fulfil your desires but God loves a tryer.

God knows feminists are trying! Lol

I don't believe for a minute that Oz has forgone compassion, not by a long shot. We still take in refugees who arrive through legitimate means, we help them with the necessities of life upon arrival.

After all we can't do all the heavy lifting, we're a country of about 21 or 22 million, we already have a very generous social security scheme ? Where on earth do we find the necessary additional millions of dollars sought, in order to help these refugees further ?

One question that puzzles me profoundly. What is the precise rationale, that causes so many people, from such wide diversities of ethnicities, who choose to promptly pack-up all their possessions and flee from their respective homelands ? What causes such an overwhelming level of pandemonium to simply pull-up stakes and leave one's home, friends and in some instances, family ? Leave (apparently) with no clear direction as to where one is headed, and what's wanted if and when they arrive ?

I accept there's many African Nations embroiled in civil conflict even wars, often related to ethnicity and religion. Anybody would wish to remove their families from such dysfunctional societies ? But is that the only reason I wonder ?

O sung,
The bigger question is why do so 99.9% of the people in the Third World simply stay put and make do with what they have? Right now there are people in South Sudan drinking in bars, throwing parties, going to the movies, gambling, watching soccer matches and concerts just like anywhere else yet a tiny minority of Sudanese are turning up on the shores of Europe with horror stories about life in their homeland.

Suse, some reading for you, it explains why you're an ignorant xenophile and who's kept you in that state:
http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2015/5/18/the-war-on-human-nature

o sung wu - Give money in an Asian country to a beggar he or she will go and tell the others, now you have lots of beggars coming to get something from you.

A lot of the welfare for lifers tell others what they got and now get for FREE from Australian taxpayers so the others come and expect the same, simple answer for lots not all.

One even turned up years ago with the xrays for medical surgery she needed asking when it will be done.

Look how many have returned to the country they supposedly fled from for holidays.

Under Labor we were taken for suckers and the gutless politicians just watched, over 50,000.

Dear Robert Le Page,

I do not think the problem is insolvable at all. Overpopulation is certainly an issue but one that is being addressed by education (particularly of women), improved health standards and a diminution of global conflict.

Most certainly the best solution lies in working to ensure countries do not become untenable for large numbers of their citizens. Foreign aid plays such an important role in this as does adequately funding agencies like the UN and particularly the UNHCR. Australia under the latest lot have sought to slash our contribution as a nation to such bodies. There will be times when speedy intervention will prevent such large movements of people. Our capacity and our willingness to assist has been dramatically diminished and needs to be returned to pre Abbott levels.

There are some who don't want to spend the necessary money and see the solution in instead hardening our hearts. I happen to think we are a far better nation than that.

Dear spindoc,

Very tortured but raised a wee chuckle. At least let me thank you for not resurrecting the Gordon Tallis quote you were so fond of a few years back.

Dear OTB,

Doubling down by going from buff young men to child sex trafficking and child rape in a thread about compassion was interesting but certainly in keeping with the premise.

Hi Steele,

My sentiments as well, those of the extreme right see a danger of uncontrolled mass migration and how it would negatively impact on their harmonious lifestyle. The solution they put forward is to create a siege mentality within, based on fear of those they perceive as unjustified interlopers, they see these people as socially destructive. The idea being to simply drive those who would trespass away, using military force if necessary. Australia has already used the military to achieve this end, deflecting the problem to places like Nauru and PNG, finding these countries easy to buy off. That in itself is a win for extremism.
The justification for negative action is two fold, one the overriding desire to maintain society as it is, and two the rationale that these people are unworthy and not genuine, even seen by some as animal like sub humans. You only have to read the posts above to realize there is little sympathy from many to the plight of these unfortunate people.
A positive solution to the problem of refugees is extremely hard to achieve, and would require a concerted effort by the whole world, attacking the root causes of displacement. The detractors will simply say, this is idealistic nonsense, and continue their present combatant attitude.

Paul,
The alternative proposal is to let these tens of thousands of men in without any screening and set them loose on society without supervision.
You can't expect normal people to give in to the demands of communists,xenophilic perverts and childless middle aged cat ladies simply because biased news reports and documentaries showing boatlaods of poverty stricken men are upsetting their delicate sensibilities.
I'm sure Suse and Robert le Page would love to have a young peanut butter coloured lodger each, they could bathe them, feed them and tuck them into bed at night to visit them in the wee hours when the urge becomes unbearable, like some stalking Christian Brother of old.

As usual this has developed into the usual stream of insults and aspersions instead of the serious debate it deserves.
So I will withdraw from this and wait for the continued breakdown of civilisation and hope that I have died before it reaches me.
Good luck with your petty squabbling and ad hominems, I hope you will remember this "conversation" when it is too late to do anything about it.

The previous Rudd Labor government was very casual about defending Australia's borders and to whom it gave citizenship, as Rudd pursued his 'Big Australia' policy, a scam to bring in migrants to swing marginal seats in cities.

It was very dangerous indeed for Rudd and later Gillard and her treacherous Greens sidekicks to demonstrate to neighbours and larger countries greedy for agricultural land, resources and currency that Australia has no bottle to defend its borders and it could easily be dictated to even by the international criminal gangs smuggling people.

Australia is known as a country with over 98% of its people living the soft life in cities and many dependent on government. It is a country awash with drugs that does not value its assets - a contemptible stance where Asians are concerned. Australian citizens are now seen as fat, foolish and judgmental towards Asians, without the core values and traditions that make them a recognisable people.

That is the inheritance of the 'Progressives' who would allow the criminal gangs and their legal counsel and advocates to browbeat authorities with emotional blackmail and threats if that doesn't work. What refugee has the equivalent of the cost of a first class airfare Sydney to London to spend with a criminal gang for a short boat trip with no papers? What refugee leaves his family behind and sets fire to his accommodation and facilities to get his own way?

These men and they are very largely young men, are opportunists who should be back in the own countries doing the hard yards to make improvements. -Although it does seem apparent that they would prefer to slack off on Centrelink while while holding fast to the toxic beliefs and values that they say they wanted to avoid.

Dear spindoc,

Cinderella,?

I guess you think you know this story
You don't. The real one's much more gory.
The phoney one, the one you know
Was cooked up years and years ago
And made to sound all soft and sappy
Just to keep the children happy

As for Batgirl and MI5?
That would really have been sublime
However she went to Ascot and of course
For once she backed the winning horse
Thereafter, every single day
The continued to make the bookies pay
She soon became a millionaire
By always getting her fair share
Which shows that gambling's not a sin
Provided that you always win.

OTB,
These men slack off on Centrelink and spend all their days in internet cafe's or on their phones grooming little white girls on social media. Go into one of the cafe's or hairdressers frequented by Afghans or Sri Lankans and look over their shoulder at the screen, if they're not watching porn they're on Facebook or Instagram looking at some young kid's profile.
Damn, if this forum switched to V Bulletin and we could upload photos I could show everyone how these men live and behave in the community because I could just walk round the corner and take photos of the flophouse where dozens of "refugees" hang out or walk up to Broadway and film them in their cafes. They come here to steal, defraud, rape and deal drugs because that's how they live in their own countries, it's just that the return on such activities is so much higher in Australia than it is in Asia. These men are the idlers, the urchins and the ne'er do wells of their home societies and they've discovered that White, middle class, left leaning Australians tend to turn a blind eye to things like drug peddling, pedophilia and rape as long as it's only perpetrated on "bogans", the White underclass.

Robert Le Page, as usual reason trumps phoney compassion driven by ulterior motives, we can give you practically endless, scientifically and morally sound arguments as to why importing unlimited numbers of men from Asia and Africa is a bad idea and all you can come up with is "muh feelings". Out group altruism and Xenophilia are not indicators of civilised behaviour or an enlightened mind, such attitudes are held by people who are disconnected from reality and have no understanding of the world outside their door.

'So I will withdraw from this and wait for the continued breakdown of civilisation and hope that I have died before it reaches me.'

Robert sums up the socialist/progressive attitude. They create huge generational problems and leave it for others to clean up the mess while still trying to take the high moral ground.

This problem is ultimately largely down to overpopulation issues, as SteeleRedux says, and resource issues, as Bazz says. The humanitarians on this issue don't seem to understand about the Malthusian trap. In Malthusian trap societies - virtually everyone before the 20th century - people "multiply beyond their means of subsistence", as Charles Darwin put it. A graph of living standards over time is a downward sloping curve, punctuated by occasional spikes where new crops or new technology have expanded the carrying capacity, or where some disaster has pruned back the population. The good times never last, though, because they just lead to more population growth. An Italian labourer in the 19th century had to work half again as long for bare subsistence as in the 15th after the Black Death ("the Golden Age of the worker"), despite 400 years of technological progress and despite the introduction of some amazingly productive crops from the New World.

http://www.paolomalanima.it/default_file/Articles/Wages_%20Productivity.pdf

Eventually the curve levels off (if there is no collapse due to environmental degradation or inadequate safety margins), and not just due to higher death rates. The market for hired labour becomes glutted and collapses, and there is so little land per person that not even slave labour can raise production enough to pay for itself. People then get serious about limiting their numbers (often by very brutal means before modern contraception). Needless to say, the poverty is a powerful incentive to emigrate, legally or otherwise, as witness the Bangladeshis on those boats.

Steele is correct that the global fertility rate has come down. But we are still growing at 70-80 million a year, and the global trend masks what is happening in some countries that are still in the trap or have only recently left it. Because such people are left with a pyramid-shaped age distribution, where most of the deaths are in the relatively tiny elderly generation at the tip, the population can go on growing for up to another 70 years, even if the young people aren't even having enough children to replace themselves.

(cont'd)

Foxy,

This I think goes a long way to settling the debate:

"An EU meeting of foreign and defence ministers in Brussels early this morning agreed the new mission EU Navfor Med is to be charged with identifying, intercepting, turning around and possibly destroying smugglers’ boats in the Mediterranean Sea.

The mission may, once approved by the United Nations, even take place while the vessels are still in Libyan waters. The EU said it wants to disrupt the traffickers’ “business model’’, which trades on profit before welfare by overcrowding thousands of asylum seekers on rubber dinghy’s or flimsy craft adrift each week."

Apparently the EU is beginning to realise that compassion is better focussed on saving lives.

(cont'd)

Many African and Near and Middle Eastern Islamic societies are still in the Malthusian trap, where people want very large families.

http://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2015/05/whats-west-central-africas-youthful-demographics-high-desired-family-size/

The population of Syria has more than quadrupled since 1960. The unrest there started, not with radical students, but with poor people who were being squeezed between a drought and very high food prices on the world market.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/food-scarcity-fanning-flames-war-terror-2032225303

Where there is no strong central government to stop them, people have traditionally dealt with overpopulation by trying to drive out or kill their neighbours to take their resources. This is what is responsible for the really big refugee flows. As Hasbeen has said, very often the only difference between the refugees and the oppressors is who lost. All the property that the (genuine) Hazara refugees could not carry with them now belongs to someone else. Societies fracture most easily along ethnic and sectarian lines, but people are ingenious about finding other excuses if these won't do.

These problems are really tough because we can't change people's attitudes. The only dysfunctional culture that you can hope to change is your own. Where there is a central government that could do something, we can put pressure on them - trade sanctions, denial of visas, seizure of overseas property of the elite, etc. Let the World Court decide if the Rohingyas are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh (as Myanmar claims) or an authentic local ethnic minority. Then come down on the responsible government.

Walking over our own disadvantaged fellow citizens to help the Rohingyas (when their Muslim brothers and their co-ethnics in Bangladesh won't) and then dealing with a huge flood of boat people is not a viable option - unless you want to see a party like Australia First elected. Nor is shielding people from the consequences of their own bad decisions. I recall reading that high Rohingya fertility rates are a factor in the unrest and persecutions in Myanmar.

In our own refugee intake, we should give priority to people who have worked for reform in their own countries.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Thank You for that.

Although I can't get around the fact that
how on earth can they destroy the boats.
Then what?
Where will they take the people?

Sorry, I have my doubts as this being the answer.

But, I guess we'll have to wait and see what
adjustments they can come up with that will
work.

Shadow, Foxy,
I appreciate genuine compassion and altruism when I encounter it because I've so often been it's beneficiary, Foxy in particular seems genuine and thoughtful. The problem is that nihilists, xenophiles and histrionic lunatics control the debate and the mainstream media, their response to anyone who so much as wishes to debate immigration policy or the refugee convention is "No platform for racists!".
Let's not even dignify the pro refugee movements by calling them "do gooders" or "Leftists", call them nihilsts, call them self hating nutcases because they have no genuine compassion in their hearts, only hatred, mindless violence and hysterical rage.
Whatever happens we can no longer trust any government to manage the borders and maritime boundaries properly, the responsibility has to be taken away from them and the only way to do that is give the required 12 months notice to the U.N that Australia will no longer honour the convention on refugees, then it's all over, Indonesia is saved from the pull factor along with Thailand,Malaysia and Myanmar.

G'day there JAY of MELBOURNE...

Indeed a very interesting question for sure ? Is it possible do you think that we Australians are being taken for a nation of mugs ? I do wonder if many of these Refugees who 'flee for their very lives', before doing so, jump on their computers for the purpose of establishing which country has the best, and easiest to access, welfare benefits ?

Welfare of a kind that would generally appeal to certain classes of émigré ? High on the list is obviously the most generous social security benefits; unlimited access to medical services; a full suite of criminal legislation that overwhelming favours the guilty; together with an absurdly commiserative judiciary; and last but not least ? A population and political system that are generally perceived as being the least shrewd in terms of being easily inveigle, with 'tall stories and true' ?

Again I ask, are we a nation of mugs do you think, JAY of MELBOURNE ?

Sorry Jay, but do you think is going to make this happen? "we can no longer trust any government to manage the borders and maritime boundaries properly, the responsibility has to be taken away from them and the only way to do that is give the required 12 months notice to the U.N that Australia will no longer honour the convention on refugees, then it's all over, Indonesia is saved from the pull factor along with Thailand, Malaysia and Myanmar."

Hi there PHILIP S...

What you say is undeniable correct I'm afraid, but do you believe we've learnt anything ? We've still got people like Ms HANSON-YOUNG constantly pillorying those of us who would wish to take a much harder line with certain types of immigrants and providing assistance to certain classes of Refugees.

A very worrying trend that I've been recently made aware from a former colleague, the incendiary mix of black ethnicity with Islam ? Some former Refugees from the Sudan and Somalia have become feral with absolutely no fear nor respect for police ? Yet the powers that be, still insist in trying to handle the problem along conciliatory lines, rather then taking a posture of real force as a potential consequence, if this pattern of behaviour were to prevail.

It's thought by those who (apparently) know, that amongst the Sudanese and Somalian Refugee communities, 'force' is respected, whereas the softer approach is invariably perceived as a weakness ? Another interesting aspect, when dealing with these groups, female police should NOT be deployed neither ?

Another curious element of multiculturalism ?

Cons' Hippie,
Well withdrawal from the convention will cost nothing, it's a peaceful means of resolving the situation and removing another overly politicised programme and no asylum seekers will be harmed in the process.

O'Sung,we're not a nation of mugs and it's only the bourgeois voters who see us that way, the immigrants, if indeed they hold such views wise up once they land here.
Watch this video, I like it a lot,this is what real opposition looks like and they're going straight to the source of the problem:
Multiculturalism comes to Saltsjöbaden
http://www.youtube.com/watch?t=375&v=sKW4BGMCB3o

Don't get me wrong JoM, I'm not opposed to your suggestion. I just don't think there is a politician in Australia with the balls to actually do it. And it would take the cooperation of the whole Parliament... I can't see the Greens or Labor telling the UN to shove it.

European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker warned that
Europe must do more than just react. It must
finally come up with a comprehensive plan that ensures
safety for those who deserve international protection.
"We must work on legal immigration if we close the doors,
migrants will break in through the windows,"

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tighter-borders-will-not-stop-refugees-deaths-20150421-1mpjm6.html

I thought I'd give this thread a wide berth - realising it would be swimming in odium.

Certainly it is.

Notwithstanding the comments from those posters who still retain their common humanity, you'd travel a long way to encounter quite so many vehemently insular and fearful little men, almost completely devoid of grace and charity.

One pic sums it up nicely.

http://40.media.tumblr.com/73ce9aca930154458fab75c629f6ff8f/tumblr_mlz0p642ou1rkwhero1_1280.jpg

Fox,

What about the economic migrants themselves and the countries they come from? Solutions must come from within.

So what do you say that they, the opportunists who would not take responsibility to improve life for their women and children but pay large sums to criminal gangs to take them where their they and their buddies are kept safe and comfy by others, SHOULD be doing back home instead of ducking off?

They are the young, able, clever men, all opportunists who should be putting the hard yards in back home to rid their countries of the toxic creeds, traditions, values and political systems that harms women and children and prevent progress.

Why should the western democracies be sacrificing their own volunteers and giving aid to advance their societies when they will not take responsibility and worse, take their totalitarian creeds to other countries to harms women and children again? See here, where the politically correct media refuse to even identify the origin of the serious offenders involved, using the generic 'Asian' to duck-shove and conceal the inevitable 'unforeseen'(sic) consequences of 'Progressive' open door policies that wrongly put 'diversity' before managing risks,

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vulnerable-schoolgirl-raped-least-60-5717785

<Vulnerable schoolgirl 'raped by at least 60 men after being preyed upon by Asian grooming gang'
18 MAY 2015

Eleven men are on trial at the Old Bailey accused of being part of sex gang based in Aylesbury, Bucks, who "brainwashed" the victims with alcohol, drugs and gifts

A schoolgirl was raped by at least 60 men by members of a horrific paedophile grooming gang - a court has heard.

A jury at the Old Bailey was told the girl were subjected to "horrific sexual assault on a massive scale" by a child sex gang in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire.

Eleven Asian men appeared before the court for the first day of trial today and face charges of rape, sexual assault, conspiracy to commit sexual assault, conspiracy to commit rape, conspiracy to facilitate child prostitution and drugging the girls in order to rape them.>

Poirot,

This is what the vehemently insular and fearful little men, almost completely devoid of grace and charity in Labor and the greens were partially responsible for:

http://rt.com/files/news/1f/d1/60/00/australia-refugee-2.jpg

‘morning Poirot,

You said <<I thought I'd give this thread a wide berth - realizing it would be swimming in odium>>.

Come on now Poirot, have you forgotten your basic chemistry?

Two parts of 0P2, dissolved in one part fairy liquid produces a volatile mix of nonsense (Ne2), Odium (Od/r), Vehement Denial (Vd -33.33% recurring) and the residual of the wide beam Berth displacement (Archimedes 2nd law), and “A Poirot dissolved soft warm platitudes” is equal to the inverse proportional displacement of a mass equal to but not greater than the rhetorical intellectual capacity of a feminist.

Therefore;

Odium.

Ne2 (1+ alpha t) = Vd divided by .33r X Poirot’s girth in cms squared, + I (intellect in 0.0001 of a degree) X the square root of M x (the M mass) of a stationary object between the ears.

(Alpha being the volume co-efficient of a natural state of inertia in a vacuum)

Don’t you just love maths?

(: or ^W^ for batty.

Hi there POIROT...

Your derogative comments apropos anyone who chooses to oppose your personal beliefs in this matter is a little disingenuous I would've thought ? Personally I believe Australia has done it's fair share of the heavy lifting concerning refugee arrivals. The current policy of terminating these unanticipated boat arrivals is both strategically correct and in my opinion humane, given the number of drowning's at sea !

Though it's been discussed ad nauseam, many of these boat arrivals, first made a conscience effort to engage in deceptive conduct in an attempt to impede the authorities from establishing their correct identity, country of origin, even their overall bona fides. Subsequently many have since been repatriated back to their country of origin. Those found to be genuine refugees, have been allowed to stay after appropriate enquiries have established their legitimacy.

I would have thought even the most ardent Socialist would've considered the safety of Australia, it's population and her interests, to be wholly central to this issue. And the government would be failing in their overall responsibilities by allowing 'anyone' into this country without first examining their claimed (refugee) bona fides ?

I accept POIROT that you have no truck with the present government, and that's your right. But when it comes to (any) government manoeuvre calculated to provide for the overall safety of this country and it's peoples, it MUST surely invalidate any personal political bias ?

I couldn't imagine anybody reading this, while 'seething' away to such an extent they became so warped of mind, so contorted with utter loathing, they sit before their computer, spewing and gushing out abhorrence and vituperation towards those who just happen to have an opposing view. Particularly on such a vital (apolitical) question of our very own security in the region. After all apart from the Kiwi's, we have no real friends in our region, we're simply isolated ?

So I'm sure you see my reasoning POIROT. I know you've got the intelligence to tease out the facts from the crap ? Certainly the POIROT that I know and respect !

don't worry Poirot's attacks increase as Abbott's popularity goes up. Not sure what the scientific name for this is.

G'day there Prof. SPINDOC...

Pray tell me what on earth are you saying ? I left school in 1956 having successfully passed my Intermediate Certificate, including Maths ?

According to a CNN report just in looks like Malaysia is going to assist in settling those aboard the boats. They have asked for help in doing so. My hope is that unlike the weeping, baying, and gnashing of teeth coming from certain posters on this thread the Australian government will offer generous support.

o sung wu,

"I couldn't imagine anybody reading this, while 'seething' away to such an extent they became so warped of mind, so contorted with utter loathing, they sit before their computer..."

Sorry to disappoint you, but I was far from "seething" when I wrote my short comment. After all, the majority of comments on this thread unfolded exactly as I surmised they would. Ergo - I was anything but "warped of mind" or emotion for that matter. As I mentioned, I avoided this thread for the very reason that I've read it all so many times before.

".....spewing and gushing out abhorrence and vituperation towards those who just happen to have an opposing view..."

Ugh?...excuse me if I have a laugh at that one - considering the spewing, gushing out of abhorrence and vituperation daubed up and down this thread from the usual subjects.

Seems it's all fine and dandy for you fellas to post "opposing views" like that one of runner's to Suse, which went:

"Yea fits your dirty little narrative Susie..."

Lovely stuff, I think you'll agree, o sung wu?

I'm sure you were quick out of the blocks to critique that little gem of seething, utter loathing, abhorrence and vituperation.

No?

Why am I not surprised.

SteeleRedux,

Right you are.

"South-East Asian migrant crisis: Malaysia, Indonesia to scrap policy of turning away asylum seeker boats"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-20/south-east-asia-nations-hold-crisis-meeting-over-migration/6482426

You wrote:

"....My hope is that unlike the weeping, baying, and gnashing of teeth coming from certain posters on this thread the Australian government will offer generous support."

Not gonna happen - not with this cretinous sadistic govt and their mute abetters in Opposition - who diminish us all.

spindoc,

Just noticed you composed a lengthy post to moi.

I haven't bothered to read it - one scan was enough to note that you were having one of your moments where you try to be very very clever - but, (unfortunately) you appear to have missed out on the wit gene.

Still. I suppose you might impress some around here - good luck with that : )

Back after a day off, taken by my computer.

Re Spindoc's queries: History-based reasoning means nutting things out on the basis of truth about both prior and current events.

The second query would be answerable if his was a correct quotation. Here's the context:

There are basically two kinds of country: Those TO which millions are seeking to flee and those FROM which millions are seeking to flee. The first kind are decent countries and the second kind are crap countries.

The first kind are often called the West but are also partly or wholly found in some non-Western countries like India. They share a culture (singular) - with national variants – consistent with the European Enlightenment which respects the freedom and autonomy of the individual. The decent countries are secular (freedom FROM religion, not just freedom FOR religion). Currently they are governed by elected governments.

The crap countries are mired in tribal savagery and multiple warring "cultures" (plural) and are often theocratic (usually Moslem) and brutally misogynistic as well as misanthropic. Power is seized and held at gunpoint.

The basic responsibility for the flood of refugees belongs to those who insist on making their countries crap, who visit racist (tribal) and religious oppression on themselves and their fellows. It does not lie with people smugglers, whose role is to provide a means of escape. In the West we can help refugees by giving up needless officious bullying (see proposals of the Refugee Council – link posted by Foxy) but it’s their countries’ fault, not ours, that they need refuge, and we must vigorously resist racially or religiously supremacist Fifth Columns. Not because such Fifth Columns are “different” but because they’re throwbacks and toxic to three centuries of hard-fought liberty and human rights. Nobody who respects human liberty and those who have worked and died for it will speak up for Fifth Column enemies.

PS: What’s this “Myanmar”? Burma is a nation with a proud history and armed thugs who rule it at gunpoint can’t change its name. Only the Burmese people can

'morning o sung Wu,

It was a pure spoof, nothing to do with real maths. I guess if you had really done maths you would have known this.

Poirot,

You sound like you are thrashing. It's nice to hear you explaining why you are not vituperant!

Keep working on it

Poirot,
Yeah we're fearful and insecure and if we White men on our "magic carpet ride through life" are in that state then things must be really bad wouldn't you say?
I have two teenage daughters, I do fear for their safety when we have a illegal, Chinese owned rooming house full of male Asylum seekers on the next street and yes it does impact me financially having to drive my kids everywhere because public transport is infested with brown skinned sex offenders.
Poirot I know bitter, hate fueled middle class women like you are happy to sacrifice working class girls as rape dolls and sex slaves to Asian predators but sooner or later it's going to come to your doorstep, these men lack the intelligence to discriminate between a middle class vagina and a working class one.

JoM,

"....Poirot I know bitter, hate fueled middle class women like you are happy to sacrifice working class girls as rape dolls and sex slaves to Asian predators but sooner or later it's going to come to your doorstep, these men lack the intelligence to discriminate between a middle class vagina and a working class one."

Ooh!...now there's a bit of first class "spewing and gushing out abhorrence and vituperation - contorted with utter loathing".

You should watch yourself, Jay, or you'll have o sung wu and spinny chastising you.

Although around here I suspect that it's only lefties who can be officially classified as displaying such vituperate behaviour.

Quote "Malaysia, Indonesia to scrap policy of turning away asylum seeker boats".

Any money says there will then be a overly zealous effort by both countries to have them on boats heading to Australia very quickly.

Philip S,

Agreed.

Especially now that Oz is seen as a complete @rse in SEAsia over its maudlin canonisation of two (ex-) drug trafficking criminals

and

Australia's previous unwillingness (Rudd especially) to protect its borders, and society, values and assets.

Few things lower Australia more in S E Asia than appearing to be a we--off, soft, fat society that does not recognise the value of its own culture, values, laws and assets, especially land. To many Asians, Australia only gives things away (eg money, patrol boats) because Australia does not value what it gives away. That is why many Asians say openly that Australians are 'dumb-cow' Skippies and worse. Bovine being a dreadful slur.

Excellent news.

Malaysia, Indonesia to scrap policy of turning away
asylum seeker boats responding to world pressure by
offering to take in asylum seeker's provided they
can be resettled or repatriated within a year by
the international community.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-20/south-east-asia-nations-hold-crisis-meeting-over-mirgation/6482426

Australia as a rich nation is expected to give more humanitarian
aid and not play politics at the expense of human misery.
Hopefully our foreign minister will be able to persuade
our PM to assist in a resettlement program so that desperate
people will no longer feel the need to resort to desperate
measures.

As European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker warned -
"Europe (and Australia) must do more than just react.
It m ust finally come up with a comprehensive plan that
ensures safety for those who deserve international
proetection. Juncker stated:

"We must work on legal immigration if we close the doors,
migrant will break in through the windows,"

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tighter-borders-will-not-stop-refugee-deaths-20150421-1mpjm6.html

Fox,

The needle (stylus) of your record-player is stuck in a groove and you are posting the same paragraphs and link over and over.

What do you say should be:

- the maximum number of 'asylum seekers' taken by Australia a year; and
- out of what maximum total number of immigrants?

Dear Poirot and SteeleRedux,

Thank You both for your contributions.
They are greatly appreciated.

I'm still trying to understand what it is that
makes so many people fear the "boats." No one
speaks about the overstayers arriving by plane.
I've come across the following website, which
I find is relevant.

http://theconversation.com/drowning-mercy-why-we-fear-the-boats-16394

otb,

I notice that you keep addressing posts to me.
That is a waste of your time.
I do not read them.

Fox,

Such simple questions, but always ducked by you, with a foul shot aimed at the questioner in lieu of a constructive reply.

Again, what do you say should be:

- the maximum number of 'asylum seekers' taken by Australia a year; and
- out of what maximum total number of immigrants?

I dunno POIROT, If you were to think about this issue more pragmatically without allowing your politically or personal bias to scuttle the argument, I'm positive you'll see the seriousness and urgency that we must closely protect our borders. Sure, you've probably labelled me a dope, and I'll admit when it comes to the intricacies and internal machinations of Party politics, I'm a dope ?

But on this issue, the need to introduce stringent measures to protect the people, the culture, and the way of life in this great Nation of ours is vital. Just as the thousands of miles of uninhabited coastline, needs appropriate coastal surveillance measures.

Between you and me, my information reveals, the AFP neither have the skills nor the wherewithal to adequately interdict illegal immigration. Moreover, the Abbott government hasn't the courage, or maybe the 'know how', to fully rollout the necessary protocols and legislation (if required) to bring to an end, this protracted departmental antipathy, jealousy, or isolationism that has hitherto been vigorously practised by each of our internal security agencies ?

It's my (unverifiable) understanding, ASIO, ASIS and ONA, generally have a reasonable climate of co-operation. It's the enforcement bodies that are the problem. State police neither trust or have sufficient confidence in the AFP. Customs and the AFP instead of working co-operatively, are guarded with their dissemination of Intel., therefore vital 'product' can simply go awry. Both have enjoyed, joint successes in the interdiction of illicit drugs. But with other operations, not so effectively I've heard ?

As a matter of interest, it was Gough WHITLAM who wished to create the 'Australia Police Force' by amalgamating the C'Wealth, NT, ACT Police Forces and the Bureau of Customs. He lost the election, therefore it didn't come to fruition.

It's my opinion POIROT, though importation of drugs is as serious as it gets, the priority should be adjusted to accommodate the burgeoning crime of 'radicalisation' of our young Islamic youth. All of them begin this process, while being influenced and personally orchestrated by certain disgruntled Imams, many of whom are here on visitors visa's.

Foxy Quote "Australia as a rich nation" I am not sure where you went to school but I would say Australia being Billions of dollars in debt would not come under that category.

That would be like saying if you have millions of dollars today but loose it and are now millions of dollars in debt you are a rich person.

We were rich in surplus until Dudd and Dillard came into the power.

It is easy to be generous with other peoples money.

Malaysia and Indonesia give the refugees nothing, how long do you think they will stay there before coming here?

Hi POIROT...

Your mocking attempts to ridicule my vocabulary has not entirely escaped me ? Specifically my use of the noun 'vituperation' ? You might recall you enquired why I used all 'upper-case' whenever I used a surname or similar, my explanation seemed to've satisfied you ?

Likewise, when a Brief is prepared, or alternatively, a 'Hand-up' Summary of Facts is forwarded to DPP, in order to convey (precisely) bad, insulting, foul cursing or blaspheming language, for the benefit of the judiciary, the noun 'vituperation' has now become acceptable to 'their learned Honour's'. Therefore it's now invariably become part of common policing parlance, generally contained within Court documents ?

o sung wu,

You read it wrong...

I wasn't attempting to mock your "vocabulary" (and I'll add that it's one of the more impressive vocabularies on this forum)

I was attempting to mock your hypocrisy - in that you went to great lengths to chide me over my short post with lines such as:

"I couldn't imagine anybody reading this, while 'seething' away to such an extent they became so warped of mind, so contorted with utter loathing, they sit before their computer, spewing and gushing out abhorrence and vituperation towards those who just happen to have an opposing view...."

All the while ignoring all the other posters on this thread who have far exceeded any rhetoric from me.

Thanks for the explanation..." ....in order to convey (precisely) bad, insulting, foul cursing or blaspheming language..."

You intimated that I was "... warped of mind, so contorted with utter loathing...spewing and gushing out abhorrence and vituperation..."

Can you point out where I was employing "...bad, insulting, foul cursing or blaspheming language"?

Any comment on the vituperation of others who slam people "who just happen to have an opposing view" on this thread -or is your criticism only reserved for moi?

Hi there POIROT...

That's my trouble with you POIROT...I can't READ YOU at all ? I'm not sure whether your 'threads' are designed to be 'tongue in cheek'; critical of the writer, or the substance attributed to that writer, or a combination of both ? Or on the other hand, none of the above ?

Similar to the titular architect of your sobriquet Mrs CHRISTIE, your 'threads' weave mysteriously, this way n' that, not unlike a young shrub swaying gently in a placid breeze, all the while attracting the unwary victim into a snare ! Still with many unanswered questions ?
Are you serious ? Is what you say, 'tongue in cheek', or are you in reality laughing at what's been said ? What exactly 'IS' your position POIROT...?

That's the conundrum that I find myself confronted with ?

My censure is NOT directed at you (precisely) POIROT, but at some of the language that you choose to employ ? Is it your intent to thoroughly castigate and criticise those of us, who are diametrically opposed to much of your political ideology ? Obviously you're academically gifted way beyond many of us who contribute to this Forum. Most certainly myself !

What confounds me completely, instead of dissecting the opposition's propositions, you (often) tend to merely deride them and their reasoning, almost an admission that you're too lethargic to even bother with their banal explanation(s) ? Rather than engaging them with an opposing argument which you're more than capable of espousing. Yet you confine your replies to that of a rapier wit and biting cynicism, leaving your opponents dazed and reeling on the ropes.

You, FOXY and DAVID F are amongst the few shining intellects on this Forum and OLO. Yet, all of you are very much from the Left ? What is it, that I'm missing ?

o sung wu,

"What confounds me completely, instead of dissecting the opposition's propositions, you (often) tend to merely deride them and their reasoning, almost an admission that you're too lethargic to even bother with their banal explanation(s) ? Rather than engaging them with an opposing argument which you're more than capable of espousing. Yet you confine your replies to that of a rapier wit and biting cynicism, leaving your opponents dazed and reeling on the ropes."

Think you've hit the nail on the head - definitely "lethargy" as I've been around here for a while and have gone over this subject time and time again, listened to all the arguments, put forward my own and debated opposing views, usually receiving a smattering of light abuse here and there..

Which means I probably shouldn't get onto these threads at all if I'm not prepared to get down into the mire in a more fulsome fashion. : )

Remember I did say that I avoided even clicking onto this thread because I knew I'd see red and toss a comment in. I suppose the other option is not to come here - especially if I find I can't be bothered debating things which I've debated any times over in the past.

But I assume you can see why I took you to task for your comment - as you don't seem to chide others with whom you are in agreement in the same manner.

Anyway, all in all you seem like a good bloke - so we'll leave it there shall we.

Dear o sung wu,

Re your confusion.

In some circumstances your fears are valid. There are only a certain number of people we can realistically accept in any one year before it starts having a negative impact on our way of life, our communities and our values. I'm not sure there are many who are advocating open slather. But that wasn't the language you used.

But could I ask you to reflect on your last post for a moment.

The discussion was centred around the plight of several thousand Rohingya refugees fleeing severe ethic violence in Bangladesh and Myanmar. They had been reduced to floating in the Indian ocean without adequate food or water after the captain and crew had deserted them and the Malaysian authorities had forced them back to sea.

Yet you chose to use terms like “interdict illegal immigration”, “It's the enforcement bodies that are the problem.”. You spoke of “stringent measures to protect the people, the culture, and the way of life in this great Nation” and of  ASIO, ASIS, ONA and the AFP.

While most of the world was caught up in the plight of these poor souls you saw them as a threat.

When our Prime Minister was asked if Australia was going to take any of these desperate people the words were “Nope! Nope! Nope!”. Little if any difference.

We should be stepping up to help. Agreeing to take let's say 10 to 20 percent of the Rohingya would not be a great burden, especially for a nation as wealthy as ours. We would be seen to be doing our bit, to be honouring our international commitments, being ordinary giving and generous Aussies, something we use to be well known for.

We take in nearly 200,000 new migrants every year, a growing proportion of those are business migrants, particularly from China who are buying citizenship. We take less than 20,000 refugees. I think that is patently unfair. I would be happy to see our normal migration levels drop by 50,000 to take in 20,000 more people in need.

I hope that helps.

'night to you POIROT...

I hear you, and no doubt you've heard all the arguments, for and against ad infinitum to a point where any reasonable person would indeed lapse into a state of lethargy ?

I again reiterate, I harbour enormous respect for the lovely trio, FOXY, yourself (POIROT) and SUSEONLINE. Without each of your individual input(s) that tends to occasion this splendid, steadying and moderating effect; uneducated louts like myself, would probably run riot throughout the entire Forum, unless or until I ended up being permanently suspended !

Take care POIROT.

O' Sung,
I'm yet to hear an actual argument in favour of allowing thousands of undocumented Asian men to enter Australia apart from "muh feelings" and "God is watching us".
Maybe our resident cat ladies and boy lovers can explain how admitting these men will make us safer, richer and better educated ?
How do my daughters benefit from having thousands of illiterate Asian Muslim men with no skills and no prospects roaming the streets and riding the trains all day?
It's estimated that 25% of Asian Muslim men are raped as children and aside from causing psychiatric illness straight off the bat child sexual abuse is the most significant factor in whether or not a person goes on to rape himself so how will Australians benefit from having thousands of these men, unemployable, unstable and sexually frustrated living among us?
At a time when many Asian nations including China are effectively banning Islam or cracking down on violent,criminal minorities like Rohingya why should the Australian government be going full steam ahead in aiding and abetting the spread of this insidious doctrine?

Dear o sung wu,

This is where it gets interesting and more than a little telling.

Jay of Melbourne has made no secret of his deep racism, his affinity with the actions and ideals of the Nazi party, and his denial of many details of the Holocaust.

He is the type of person who my father would have had little compunction placing a rather sizable hobnailed boot up his 'jacksy' if he came across him in any walk of life. As a champion boxer across a couple of divisions in the RAN he had little time for arguing the point when it came to Neo-Nazis. He firmly believed the war against Germany was right and just primarily because of his abhorrence of what it stood for.

Yet you seem to have a great affinity for JOM, agreeing with many of his positions, even applauding some of them.

I don't see the threats to my country coming from the likes of desperate starving refugees afloat in the Indian Ocean, nor do I really see it coming from the likes of JOM because he is nothing without the support of the likes of you. You represent a slice of Australia who have been made fearful by our media and our lowlife politicians. If some of the halfway decent folks like yourself who perhaps in the past would have had little time for the JOMs of this world are now starting to listen to their propaganda and ideology then maybe this country really does have a problem, one that may well lead us into responses that will change us as a nation forever.

It perhaps is why Poirot understandably has been driven to paint you all with a similar brush. While I acknowledge in your case there might be some delineation it certainly isn't a chasm.

STEELWREDUX...

My 'confusion' was not centred around the current Rohingya refugee crisis, it amounted to an entirely different matter.

I heard Tony ABBOTT this afternoon, clearly indicated that we as a nation, would NOT offer to resettle any of these people in this country. His position is entirely correct in my opinion. He further stated that material aid would be provided to help resettle these people. Again I agree, that's an entirely proper course of action in these circumstances.

A short time ago, the President of Gambia announced that he would resettle ALL those Rohingya refugees fleeing from Burma and Bangladesh, saying something to the effect'...it's our sacred duty to resettle these Islamic refugees...' or similar. If this is correct, mindful, Gambia is a very poor underdeveloped nation, massive amounts of Aid will be required.

Strategically and from a humanity position, it's far better for a group of Islamic refugees be resettled in a country that's predominately Muslim. It's more agreeable to the host populous, and more amenable for the refugees themselves.

I don't intend to (again) reiterate my clear opposition to an further Islamic immigration, be they originate from a legitimate refugee status, to ordinary immigration. It's been clearly demonstrated the difficulties that are now confronting Australian authorities with the mounting chaos and irresolution arising out of the whole Muslim debate - my views on this matter are absolutely intransigent, and are known to you STEELEREDUX.

It was just a few short months ago when you and I strenuously debated the merits and negatives associated with any further Islamic integration into our culture ? You'd agree, a series of regrettable events have now transpired and very quickly supplanted those discussions. To a point where no reasonable man would knowingly support further bulk intake(s) of Islamic refugees into this country ?

As I overheard a brief piece in a discussion the other night, "the bastards bite the hand that feeds them" ? I'm not entirely sure of that but still, it's an opinion ?

Excuse me, but I find it necessary to now vacate this computer for the evening, as I have a pretty decent headache coupled with sore eyes. It is my intention to speak again on the morrow provided that is, that I continue to remain in the vertical state. Good night.

Indonesia starting to show its true intentions.

Australia is obliged to resettle Rohingya refugees from Myanmar, Indonesia's foreign ministry says, despite Prime Minister Tony Abbott flatly refusing to consider the option.

From http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/rohingyas-migrants-indonesia-says-australia-obliged-resettle/6486590

Dear o sung wu,

I will leave this here for your morning perusal.

You wrote;

“You'd agree, a series of regrettable events have now transpired and very quickly supplanted those discussions.”

No I certainly would not agree. During one of the interminable discussions on OLO over this topic I pointed out the very horrific crimes some of the recent Scottish immigrants have perpetrated on innocent Australians. It was never addressed by any of the more shall we say strident on the forum. Unless you feel you can make a stronger case than I can perhaps we shall leave it as a given that we disagree on this point and forego a rehash.

I also recognise the intransigence of BOTH our relative positions, again hardly worth picking up the cudgels once more.

But the discussion is about compassion and about you getting defensive about people like Poirot engaging in a little stereotyping. You seemed to be genuinely confused as to why she would take the quite understandable stance she did.

Recognising you as certainly one of the less pugnacious on here it is worth looking at your responses during this thread.

The original post was about the crisis of “Migrants From Myanmar, Shunned by Malaysia, Are Spotted Adrift in Andaman Sea. They said that they had been on the boat for three months, and that the boat’s captain and crew had abandoned them six days ago.”

Your first post questioned why they might have chosen to flee but made no comment on the terror and suffering they were obviously enduring.

Your next post had you buddying up and deep in agreement with JOM and wondering “if many of these Refugees who 'flee for their very lives', before doing so, jump on their computers for the purpose of establishing which country has the best, and easiest to access, welfare benefits? “

Cont..

Cont..

You see I for one was wondering what ethnic violence would force these people to turn to such desperate measures but you seemed far more concerned they might be after 'our benefits'.

Your third post had you claiming victim status; “We've still got people like Ms HANSON-YOUNG constantly pillorying those of us who would wish to take a much harder line with certain types of immigrants and providing assistance to certain classes of Refugees.” and you had fired up JOM that he felt quite comfortable posting up inane videos about Swedish National Socialists. Yup that's right their version of Neo-Nazis.

This is when Poirot pops up and remarks “I thought I'd give this thread a wide berth - realising it would be swimming in odium.” and you took her to task over it.

There is an old adage about lying down with dogs and getting up with fleas. If you want to sit there itching and scratching and picking over the same old sores while a couple of thousand stranded and desperate refugees and being booted from island to island then perhaps you shouldn't be surprised if an unflattering appraisal is made.

For what it is worth I don't think you would normally have the likes of JOM as a bedfellow, perhaps it might be worth pondering that particular bro-mance.

Steele,
See this is exactly why I spin up the issue of the "Holocaust" every time it appears.
Your counter argument boils down to: "Don't listen to Jay, he has views I don't agree with on one issue and I can't debate him on this issue so if you're one of the good guys you shouldn't talk to him".
Calling someone a "Neo Nazi" is just weak, it's a cop out used by people who can't think for themselves.
The NSDAP had their reasons for treating Jews the way they did, the Burmese no doubt have serious concerns about allowing a troublesome Muslim group to settle and "calcify" on their soil.
Jewish Bolshevism and organised crime were a real threat to Europe in the 1930'sand all of the gruesome NS predictions about the consequences of a German defeat came true, the Burmese like everyone else on the planet with half a brain can forsee the consequences of allowing Muslims to settle among them.
In short some people and some groups of people are a menace to the societies in which they live, some people deserve to be persecuted and hounded out of a particular society and don't deserve to be admitted to another one of their own choosing.
I don't see many tears shed over the persecution and expulsion of the fanatical Calvinists and Puritans who were destabilising Europe 500 years ago, let the Rohingya drift and if it's their god's will that they survive their ordeal then so be it.

The federal government was given a very firm mandate by the electorate to stop the boats. It is going about the business of putting the international people smuggling gangs out of business, at least insofar as Australia is concerned.

Whereas the Greens have been quick to side with Indonesia, which is not a signatory to the UN Convention itself, but is telling others to do what it itself did not do.

The democratically elected Australian government's position is eminently reasonable,

<In South Korea, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop told Fairfax Media south-east Asian nations should abandon their reluctance to interfere in each other's internal affairs and tackle the issue of Myanmar's treatment of the Rohingyas.

She reiterated that Australia had "no plans" to take any of the Rohingyas beyond the current refugee intake.

Ms Bishop said the problem needed to be dealt with at its source, which stemmed from the denial of citizenship by Myanmar to the Rohingya minority.

Though she stressed Australia would not interfere, Ms Bishop said, "Myanmar is a member of ASEAN, and I would assume that this … would be something that ASEAN could have on its agenda as it's a regional issue affecting a number of ASEAN countries."> [SMH May 22, 2015]

As an exercise, perhaps the troublemaking leftists and Greens might also consult with a map. Because Burma is a hell of a lot further from Australia than they imagine and imply, and it is surrounded by countries who really ought to be sorting out their regional issues. By no means is Australia part of that region.

What next? Maybe some thousands lobbing on Australia's shores to claim their own State? They would have the support of the self-flagellating Leftist 'Progressives' aka the International Socialists, and the human headlines, the Greens Protest Party, especially the Watermelon faction.

The bottom line in this whole story is that there are several thousand people drifting around the ocean, on severely overloaded rickety old ships. The only people who were willing to help them were some poor Indonesian fisherman. A compassionate society would send an ocean liner and pick up the lot in a matter of a day or so.The international community was very prompt in its reaction to the earthquake in Nepal so why when we have a large number of people in peril on the sea are we happy to ignore the problem ! I can only see a basic lack of empathy by our government and some of the others in the region.

Aside from that I agree that massive pressure should be applied to Burma to threat their inhabitants fairly.

Hi there JAY of MELBOURNE...

My apologies for failing to answer your thread that you'd specifically directed to me in a timely manner ? A headache and sore eyes I'm afraid.

Your legitimate concerns over the dangers of having your precious daughters unnecessarily exposed to a large group of Rohingya refugees, if they happened to be resettled here; In my view represents no greater or lesser degree of risk, than perhaps any other Islamic ethnic group of refugees ?

It's entirely my contention, those from a Muslim background DO NOT assimilate alongside those with Christian or secular antecedents ! Jay, I'm very much a pragmatists, I've not an ounce of academic exposure to my name. I learn (only) from evidenced based experience.

Therefore everywhere you care to cast your eye around this world of ours, there is armed conflict, of one sort or another, involving Muslims ! In fact Muslims can't even get along with Muslims ! And yet there are those amongst us (some with good intentions, no doubt) who wish to import 'FURTHER' Islamic religious feuding, into our country ?

For what it's worth I can share this small fact with you too Jay, the authorities are barely able to adequately contain and accommodate, the burgeoning rise of Islamic unrest and insurrection in our major cities as it is. For this reason, governments must not be intimidated (by the ineffectual UN) into making their task even more difficult, by introducing further numbers of Islamic refugees for resettlement.

Therefore JAY of MELBOURNE, While I don't actually (specifically) agree with your premise, concerning a total prohibition on all Rohingya refugees per se. What is urgently needed is a Bill that should be ratified by parliament, and enacted upon ASAP, that reads inter alia, '...there will be no further Islamic refugees, permanently resettled into Australia...' !

I trust my explanation meets with your understanding there Jay ?

warmair - The empathy you want us to take would last a lifetime for thousands as they are unemployable and would be a burden on the taxpayers and the health system.

The earth quake is a one off cost, welfare for lifers are a lifetime cost.

Rightly so The Government are looking after Australians first.

Approx 1.3 million refugees in Myanmar alone only an idiot or a greenie or a country that gives refugees nothing not one cent would send Ocean Liners to pick them up.

You may not like reality or basic economics even compassion has a dollar limit.

These are early days and the world is just starting to see the effects of what is likely to become very large scale movements of migrants who prefer a better lifestyle and prospects to what they have now.

Big rewards for a lifetime justify big risks as some see it. Some are more than willing to exchange very large sums with organised crime to get in undetected, or at least be able to use emotional blackmail to get what they want.

Why has the definition of refugee been broadened? Who gains outside of the economic migrant? Secondary agendas?

However the fact remains, look at Burma on the map and tell me why Australia should be setting itself up to solve the deliberate social problems and over-population of other countries far away. Problems that those people and countries have manufactured themselves and should be responsible for solving.

While at home in Australia our own young working couples are putting off the children they want until late in life and then either don't have the children they want, while being forced into enormously expensive and risky medical interventions to assist their diminished or lost eggs?

Go volunteering your own money folks as you wish, but do not expect young Aussie workers to shoulder the burdens of welfare at home, foreign aid (sometimes to boost the UN career expectations of politicians) and an additional burden for life of more economic migrants on the Centrelink, housing and medical treatment queues.

Your compassion and their sacrifice, the sacrifice of our children and grandchildren who inherit the costs, both social and economic.

It is not a normal practice of mine to post links but this is a timely story of compassion and the impact it had on so many lives.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/jeon-62174-nguyen-captain.html

Common humanity. It appears some have it in good measure, others...

SteeleRedux - Heart warming story but it does not have parallels to the current situation.

Also how many on that boat would have done what they did if they were told they would be financially responsible for ALL expenses incurred by these people for the rest of there lives.

As stated before.
You may not like reality or basic economics even compassion has a dollar limit.

It is easy to be compassionate and charitable when someone else pays the costs you do not have to pay.

Threads like this should also be deliberating on the growing large scale movements of economic migrants.

It is possible that western liberal democracies as we know them will be fighting from the back foot to maintain their existing economic, social and political systems. The changes are already apparent and irreversible some say.

O sung wu, thanks for your thoughts but my questions were really directed at the pro Asylum posters, they never answer them though.
If Norway can't make it work, can't assimilate these thousands of hostile Muslim men using their Scandinavian model of ultra liberal "compassion" then a reasonable person would conclude that liberal compassion is not the answer to this problem.
Steele mentioned his Dad and his role in the "good war" and it important to keep the memory of that conflict alive for several reason, in the context of this discussion the most important consideration is the long term effects of trauma and PTSD upon people who've been in combat zones or severe civil disturbances.
My grandfather served in the Middle East and New Guinea, recently I was reminiscing with my Mum about all the old soldiers in our neighbourhood when I was kid, the general drunkeness, the domestic problems and old George up on the corner who'd on occasion run screaming down the street in his pyjamas, off his head with fear after another nightmare about New Guinea.
Mum said most everyone whose Dad served suffered growing up and the "progressives" cosistently hold up the 1950's as a cultural low point in our history. So my question to the pro asylum people is what do you hope to achieve by bringing in thousands of traumatised men from the Third World when you know exactly what happens when masses of traumatised men enter society at once? Bear in mind also that the returned servicemen all spoke the language, were mostly able to go back to work and had family and friends to return to, this is not the case with Asylum seekers.

On The Beach asked:

What do you say should be:
- the maximum number of 'asylum seekers' taken by Australia a year; and
- out of what maximum total number of immigrants?

The floors are awash with piddle from the pee-ing contests that have preceded and followed the asking of this question. Does anyone have any actual thoughts about the answer?

I have referred to the nature of decent countries and crap countries and the primary responsibility of the traditions of the crap countries for the refugee crisis. Since on sheer numbers we need accept only the best of the 50 million-plus wannabe immigrants we should be looking at whom we should accept.

First, we should REJECT anyone who is known to share toxic intentions and ideology - that which specifically rejects the rights of a humanity free of tyranny. That means Moslems, including Rohingya, who can't show willing to give Islam up – totally – and also excludes racist tribal savages. Second, we should DISCRIMINATE IN FAVOUR OF anyone who is known to have persistently opposed enemies of liberty including theocrats and fascists and racists. Other favourable attributes to be weighed against any negatives include fighting for the right to territorial self-determination.

We should also try to have room for passive victims of oppression imposed on the basis of who they are (e.g. genetics, gender, sexuality) provided they can show they won't seek to reinstate the oppression in Australia.

By focusing on quality we can have a positive outreach and at the same time build further an Australia founded on the Enlightenment and entitled to be accepted as realistically compassionate.

STEELEREDUX...

Wow, when you seek answers, you seek answers ! For a moment I thought I'd inadvertently stumbled into a 'likeness' of none other then the egregious Monsieur ROBESPIERRE, with his incessant inquisitorial style of enquiry ?

Anyway, I find it quite disappointing that you choose to call JAY of MELBOURNE a 'racist' ? How would you know, you don't know what's in his heart or mind ? From my angle, I see a family man who's justly apprehensive of the sort of country Australia seems to have become ? Like many adults, he is understandably alarmed, in fact uneasy when he witnesses these, not previously seen, Islamic (racial) lawlessness that are occurring with more frequency, in and about our larger cities ?

And because of this, you choose to call him a racist ? Why, and how would you know whether that gentleman is a racist ? Clearly, you don't ! And you wonder why others here choose to give you a serve ?

Originally you asked that I qualify my 'confusion' apropos the several 'memoranda' that I'd sent to POIROT ? And the extent that I tried to modify or reconcile my comments that were contained within that memoranda, probably quite unsuccessfully ? Be that as it may, it was important to me (personally), that she didn't take anything that I'd said, as any sort of sustained admonishment ?

The thing is STEELEREDUX, though POIROT and I are probably quite diametrically different, in our politically proclivities, our social ideology and even our religious beliefs, I have enormous respect for her, without any qualification ! Therefore the very thought that I may have upset her, either by a careless choice of words, or by some misunderstood intent, was worrying ?

Unlike M. ROBESPIERRE, I seek only one comment from you STEELEREDUX ?How do you account for the apparent 'unravelling', thus ending in violence, of what little harmony that may've existed in first world countries, who've magnanimously opened their doors to Muslim refugees ?

Those of you who are genuinely interested
in refugee resettlement could have simply
Googled the subject.

Anyway, here's a website that makes a few
suggestions:

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/how-to-make-our-asylum-seeker-policy-firm-but-fairer-20140323-35bo5.html

For a western society to function, for it to have "compassion" and "justice" the most basic and essential element is trust among it's citizens, high trust of your neighbours is a European racial trait which is absent among most other groups.
Multiculturalism has been shown in numerous studies to break down trust both between ethnic groups and within ethnic groups, people in multi racial communities are less likely to volunteer, give money to charity, to seek entertainment in their neighbourhood or talk to their neighbours.
The pro illegal immigrant posters use words like just and good and decent but all those qualities are further and further degraded the more diverse our society becomes.
How can anyone trust Muslims based solely on their reputation? How can anyone trust a person who's suicidal or mentally ill from PTSD, depression and anxiety caused by exposure to war and trauma? How can anyone trust someone with whom they have no common language, no common religion or common interests?
We have it on record from the people who invented the ideal we now know as multiculturalism that their goal was to destroy the dominant societies of Europe, to as Peter Hitchins put it "Rub the faces of the right in diversity". There is no question that multiculturalism was designed as a system to destroy host societies and the people who promote and enable it style themselves as an elite or caste above commoners and ignorant "Bogans".
We also have the issues of age and gender, with multiculturalism being the popular cause among middle aged White women, the trouble with women is that they rarely act for the common good and always follow their own agendas which are inevitably linked to self esteem and social social staus among other women. Women in 2015 are obsessed with signalling their social status to others and the internet is the perfect medium for them to do so, everything they post boils down to "This will make me look good in the eyes of the others, I'm part of the group as long as I write these words".

Dear o sung wu,

An interesting but not unexpected post from you. You do have a rather reliable modus operandi when you get cornered, deflection.

It is easy to spot. You tried to paint me as some kind of “Monsieur ROBESPIERRE” “seeking answers” when I did not ask a single question of you. Nothing. Zip. Indeed I was answering a question you put to Poirot and enquired nothing at all of you.

In fact let's make this perfectly clear. I really didn't expect a post from you the first time. If you wish to respond to what I am posting then fine but please do not feel obligated in any way. Your initial question was civilly put and I felt a reply was in order.

Next you asked “I find it quite disappointing that you choose to call JAY of MELBOURNE a 'racist' ? How would you know, you don't know what's in his heart or mind ?”

I don't know exactly how the NSW police force assesses evidence but in my mind if a bloke continually makes racist comments and then proceeds to repeatedly acknowledge and describe himself a racist then who am I to argue.

“Yes I'm a racist and racism is the only rational approach to take on this issue”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6855#208622

Indeed what gives you the right to question his commitment to racism? That was of course rhetorical.

What is really interesting is how you were able to ignore this rather unpleasant fact, to be blind to the obvious. The only viable conclusion is that your thinking in many ways mirrors his and the thought you might also be a racist, to your credit, was uncomfortable enough to be suppressed.

I'm happy to leave it there. Neither of us have changed our positions nor was that expected, the only thing that might have been achieved is a little more understanding of why some posters tar you with the same brush.

A convenient MO of 'tactical deflection', whenever I'm cornered eh ?

STEELEREDUX...as it would now appear that you've suggested that I too am a raciest as well as one who seeks to 'deflect' any and all assertions alleged by you ? I remain committed to be at least civil while you attempt to disparage and defame me in the process ?

You really can't help yourself can you ? Your feeble attempts to assert some form of intellectual superiority over me and anyone else that dares have the temerity to disagree with what you say, is breathtakingly frightening.

I'll not raise the awful 'N' word with you, as it unrelentingly cuts your deeply, sending you into a spiral of animated allegations, accusations, and mythical assertions of how flawed am I, together with my arguments. Now that you've apparently 'outed' me as a raciest too ? I'm at a loss whether I should thank you for your amazing almost spiritual insight, or become angry for insulting me ?

You see STEELEREDUX, though I've not got your intellectual adroitness, nor your writing abilities, I do manage ? However I recognise precisely, what you are ? And pretentiousness alone is wholly inadequate to describe your personality, again it's that highly inflammatory 'N' word ?

I realise now that deep down, you're a nasty individual STEELEREDUX, always keen to exercise that intellectual superiority of yours over others. While attempting to coerce them into some form of involuntary submission, of a kind that can only satisfy your peculiar needs ? A case of; '...you disagree with me at your peril...' ? That is precisely why you were endeavouring to subjugate JAY of MELBOURNE and his commentary, through me ! Talk of alienating tactics ? Side with me, or perish, so sayeth STEELEREDUX ?

In conclusion, I guess it's only good manners to again, thank you for permitting me to address further topics of interest to you. Given your rapidly expanding 'Fan' base, I should count myself fortunate indeed, that I've been given unfettered access to your omnipotence presence, all hail STEELEREDUX !

Dear o sung wu,

That was Deflection with a capital D.

There are actually three parts to your MO. The first I have outlined, the second is this shtick you love to pull, the so called intellectual superiority/inferiority platter. You even trotted it out earlier in this thread. I only managed a Year 12 pass on my second try and that is my highest bit of paper. Bet you did it first go. So what? Do we really need a pissing contest to see who is the least educated? It was already tiresome a year ago.

Plus it's complete bulldust. You have shown yourself more than capable of putting together well crafted and deep posts on this forum and certainly have the “intellectual adroitness” and “writing abilities” to match anyone here when you choose to employ them. We do think differently but that difference isn't intellectual it is about values.

Your third MO is pretty obvious and is kind of quirky which is fine.

Please note I did not call you a racist instead I used the term “the thought you might also be a racist”.

You took umbrage at me referring to JOM as a racist. From your 'angle' all you saw was “a family man who's justly apprehensive of the sort of country Australia seems to have become ?“ This is despite the fact that virtually everyone else here including the man in question recognises him as a racist.

From there it's a reasonable assumption that you have a blind spot for racists, even one as blatant and overt as JOM. If this is indeed the case then it follows you may well have difficulty recognising the affliction in yourself if it is indeed present.

If you were to say 'Steeleredux I just buddy up to JOM to piss you off' that would be a perfectly acceptable explanation, yet you have made no such admission.

So if you want to dummy spit and stay on your high horse, wrapped in high dudgeon, spitting out high-minded insults please feel free. But it does come off as rather disingenuous.

Steele,
It's a tactic we like to call bullet biting, "Yup, I'm a Fascist", "Yup, there's a patriarchy and it's great", it's what we post after that which is the "dangerous part".
When are you bourgeois men going to take control of your women?
The media only show pictures of little Rohingya kids to guilt trip all the old aunties, why don't you calm them down by showing them that no, actually about 94% of boat people are men, the little kiddies are just planted on the boats so that foreign sailors will feel compelled to rescue them.
You can annoy O'Sung and try to shame him all you want but you won't address the very real issues I raise in my posts, will you?

Just a quick question:

Given that roughly 2/3 of these boat people are not refugees seeking asylum, but Bangladeshis looking for better paid work (and thus illegal immigrants not protected by the UNHCR charter) What is the problem with just shipping them straight back?

Secondly, given that during the Rudd/Gillard induced illegal boat crisis of 2008 to 2013, Indonesia did not lift a finger to stop the illegal boats saying that it was Australia's problem, who enjoys a quiet chuckle when Indonesia has the hide to say that Aus has a responsibility for the boats landing in Indonesia?

It is clear that bias against refugees is so ingrained, in the minds of a number of people on this thread, that totally fail to see the difference between saving someone in peril on the high seas, and what to do about the refuge problem.

In the first instance it is of no consequence as to who or what were the reasons people got on the boats, compassion and morals dictate that the should be rescued from their immediate peril. This is at last beginning to happen, but no thanks to a mean and cruel spirited Australian government. I have a mental picture of Abbott standing in front of a table of food with his hand out preventing a staving women and child from eating saying “Nope, Nope,Nope”. Perhaps Abbott could when he has a spare moment reacquaint himself with the parable of the good Samaritan.

The refuge problem is difficult due to the huge numbers involved and is really a whole separate topic, but never should be hijacked by those who would blame the victim.

"It is clear that bias against refugees is so ingrained, in the minds of a number of people on this thread, that totally fail to see the difference between saving someone in peril on the high seas, and what to do about the refuge problem"

No that isn't what it is about at all. Unless you are saying that the Australian Navy should be steaming to the Bay of Bengal, roughly 9,000km one way as the crow flies to run a taxi service back to the Sydney and Melbourne Centrelink Offices so favoured by the earlier waves of single men (and the token women and children for the news and 'current affairs' cameras).

It is about criminal gangs, opportunists and countries in the region not sorting out the contributing causes, including putting the gangs involved in people smuggling out of business.

Australia has NO duty whatsoever to be the moral policeman and Christ-like saviour in far flung regions of the world.

Where and when were the Australian public ever consulted about this and immigration policies generally? Leave out the 'polls' that like advertisers' surveys always deliver the desired result.

Who is behind the slippery conflation of 'refugee' with economic migrant and for what reasons?

What consideration is being given to ways to deter and prevent the large flows and even bigger expected, tsunamis, of migrants world-wide?

What is known is that the federal government was elected on a promise to put people traffickers out of business. It is doing that.

The current government was not elected to keep
us in the dark and not tell us what they are
doing. They were not given a mandate to hide
things from the voting public .

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/04/yes-tony-abbott-has-stopped-the-boats-but-the-cost-is-catastrophic

What ever happened to this story? Did she visit or not? -

Jolie, a UN goodwill ambassador, was invited by the Pacific island nation's President Baron Waqa when they met at the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence Against Women in Conflict in London.

"The government of Nauru can confirm that Angelina Jolie has accepted an invitation by President Baron Waqa to visit our nation," a government spokeswoman told AFP.

"We believe this will be a wonderful opportunity to showcase the facilities for refugees on Nauru, which we believe are world-best practice."

onthebeach
Well thank you for proving my point. I will remember from now on, that when I see someone drowning at the beach, the standard procedure is first check to see if they are a pensioner, or on unemployment benefits, if so then just roll over and go back to sleep. Further if I see anyone offering to save them for cash I am to intervene and stop them from gaining an advantage from someone in trouble.

There is a lot of speculation in your article by Lenore Taylor, Foxy.

The one thing she has got right is the Abbott government delivered on its promise and stopped the boats.

Keeping the methodology secret, not running to the press with every boat encounter, and holding a firm line my not be what the open door immigration apologists like, but its working well and achieving the goal. Why should the government answer loaded questions from people like Lenore, just because she wants answers?

Lenore Taylor's headline "Yes, Tony Abbott has 'stopped the boats'. But the cost is catastrophic" is nothing more than lefty sensationalism.

Do you suppose Lenore would be happy to invite a couple of refugees to come live with her while they await processing? Or even you Foxy, why not put up your hand to take one into your place until he/she gets on their feet?

Good afternoon to you STEELEREDUX...

Impossible as it were to place you on my knee and teach you anything of benefit, given you lacked so much formal education, other than, 'values' ? Perhaps it's appropriate at this point, that we pause a moment, for the explicit purpose of complimenting you, for your extraordinary ability to gaze into the hearts and minds of others. Particularly your uncanny potential to reach, deep inside their souls to examine the precise measure of their 'value system' !

Ethicality, principles and morality, all just words describing some of the basic constituents of the noun 'values' ? Something that you claim is intrinsically embedded in your character, and in your opinion, totally absent from mine ?

Wasn't it you a moment ago who asserted that I had engaged in a 'dummy spit'; 'being on my high horse'; and I was 'swathed in my own indignity' or something similar. Mate,I've received less censure from some notable crooks, than I have from you ?

I hadn't realized what a flawed individual I am ? What then would you have me do, eh STEELEREDUX ? How should I go about addressing these obvious imperfections ? Or more correctly termed, a real 'aberration' in my character ? Perhaps I never had any values in the first place ? Your insight is astounding, given your lack of formal education ?

Being the altruistic humanitarian that you aver, pray tell me then ? How should someone who's so badly flawed and misguided as am I, one who enjoys the allegorical company of racists; how on earth do I modify my belief systems ? Including my contrary attitude towards others from differing cultures, cultures imbued with savagery towards their own women folk, who practice an entirely different religious expression ? Over to you STEELEREDUX, in that I might learn from your wise, and measured counsel ?

"Looking at these people, me and my friends cried because they
looked so hungry, so thin...How can we not help destitute
people like this? It would be a big sin."
Muchtar Ali,
Acehnese Fisherman.

Hear the words of this man of the sea, for they tell us much
about the simplest and most rational of human responses.
Mr Ali, who helped rescue more than 400 Rohingya asylum seekers
on a squalid boat in the Andamon Sea, speaks a truth that
transcends legalities and international politics. He has no
time for the hard-line and cynical responses uttered by
national leaders who might prefer to close their eyes to
boatloads of asylum seekers and desperate migrants washing
around on the high seas. He sees the need. He sees people
dying and Mr Ali and his fellow fishermen know intuitively that we
must respond charitably.

Now hear the words of Tony Abbott, a man who leads a nation,
"Nope, Nope, Nope."

The Prime Minister's wall of negativity says much about this
nation's failures but far more about his government's
appaling lack of compassion and its globally embarrassing
hypocrisy and moral bakruptcy. It encapsulates his government's
dispiriting response to asylum seekers: no acceptance of
asylum seekers in boats, no resettlement in Australia, and no
further debate will be had.

It is a facile and flawed strategy one that brooks no middle
ground that bears no nuances, no flexibility and which will
never be a "solution" to anything. Towing back boats to
Indonesian waters, as the Abbott government has done for more
than a year, might have saved lives in this immediate region -
but it should not represent the end of our responsibilities.

It does not stem the causes of mass migration. It does not
stop millions of people leaving countries where they are
being denied their fundamental human rights, where they are
murdered, raped, beaten and cowed, where they are denied any
say in the governance of their nation.

With his triple no, Mr Abbott has bastardised Australia's
humanitarian tradition ...

This was taken from The Age Editorial, Saturday, 23 May 2015.
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-editorial/nope-is-not-good-enough-mr-abbott-20150522-gh7hne.html

warmair,

No one here is saying that those Bangladeshis and Rohingyas should just be left to drown. It is what should happen after they are saved. The Bangladeshis are clearly economic migrants and can be sent straight home, even under the strictest interpretation of the Refugee Convention. The Rohingyas are being offered temporary asylum, and the time could be used to establish (maybe through the World Court) whether Myanmar or Bangladesh is responsible and then put international pressure on the responsible country if it won't take its people back or persecutes them after they have been sent back, even if this means loss of business opportunities for the transnational corporations.

Due to the numbers involved, allowing boat people to resettle in rich countries will just result in those countries being swamped. The only cure is for all countries without exception to get out of the Malthusian trap, bring their population into balance with their resources, support honest and competent leaders and the rule of law, look after their environment, and change customs and attitudes that have clearly become dysfunctional. Yet all we hear from the Left is our responsibility to be "compassionate" (show lack of compassion for our own disadvantaged people who would be competing with all those refugees for housing, public services, and help), never about the responsibility of those fit young men to fix up their own societies.

There is a huge literature on Malthusian trap societies and the poverty, conflict, environmental degradation, and refugee flows that they cause, mostly from archaeologists and economic historians, some of whom have written books for the general reader. See for example, Steven LeBlanc (Constant Battles), Lawrence Keeley (War Before Civilization), Gregory Clark (A Farewell to Alms), Peter Turchin (War and Peace and War), Azar Gat (War in Human Civilization), Paul Billings and Joanne Souza (Death from a Distance), David Montgomery (Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations), Jared Diamond (Collapse)...

Peter Turchin has an article on the Web explaining some of his thinking

http://aeon.co/magazine/society/peter-turchin-wealth-poverty/

Hi there ONTHEBEACH...

Your most recent commentary is 'spot on' ! You've articulated the entire issue precisely and correctly ! Therefore you must now ready yourself for the avalanche of criticism you'll receive from the 'usual suspects' ! Those who would have our entire country awash with all manner of dissident's and religious subversives.

Unfortunately the occasional poor souls who are legitimate refugees, and who really need genuine asylum, but are inextricably bundled up with the many 'pretenders', rendering their bona fides infinitely more difficult to establish, therefore increasing their agony of 'indecision' and waiting, exponentially.

On another note ONTHEBEACH, I believe if your were to quietly sit down with a few of the more moderates on this Forum; people like FOXY, POIROT SUSEONLINE, and PAUL1405, and show them the real evidence (not the stuff peddled by the left leaning media) material emanating from police, ASIO and ONA, I have no doubt, they would all harden their line on any further Islamic refugee intake. I don't mean rendering them without some real assistance, but notions of resettlement per se, would be out of the question ?

ONTHEBEACH, do you have an opinion on this particular question I wonder ? Appreciate hearing it, perhaps ?

Foxy, nope, compassion isn't rational, it's an emotional response and the pro illegal immigrant posters are engaging in social status signalling, which is a traditional pastime of the idle middle classes.
To us "Let them in" sounds just like "Let them eat cake".
Steele Redux is exemplar of that tradition, he's suggested that O Sung Wu is jeopardising his reputation with the "in crowd" because he's polite and respectful toward "racists" when they presnent an opinion or an argument.
Look at it this way, the violent Leftist thugs who go around bashing people and making bomb threats against events they don't want to go ahead are like the bouncers at the door to a nightclub, they decide who's in and who's out, if you're not dressed right, if you don't have the right attitude or the price of admittance they won't let you party with the in-crowd.
To actively display your brand of compassion is to submit to the demands of thugs and the arcane political correctness of Anarchists and Trotskyites because they're the gatekeepers and bouncers of an elite club, once inside you can be yourself but disrespect the rules of the Compassion Club and you get the bum's rush.

o sung wu,

Bless you for being one of the world's optimists. I am one too, it is always cup at least half full as opposed to half empty for me.

However I do not for a moment imagine that anyone is ever going to convince the leftists with a vested personal stake in disrespecting Australia and trashing our traditions, our cultural inheritance and our sovereign independence. They are going to be swinging from the taxpayer's teat and bucketing Aussies at the same time no matter what.

Here is the sort they follow and quote, Philip Adams. Unrelenting purveyors of cow dung and making a fine living out of it too - quite unlike most of the followers who cannot think for themselves, the 'Useful Idiots' of International Socialism,

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/phillip_adams_on_how_to_be_a_moral_bullsher/

The Rohingya boat people are 9000 miles away. Perhaps you also believe we should be taking some of the Africans off Italy.

Its exactly this point in time that Australia needs to stand firm and thankfully we have a government that is strong in its determination.

Abbott is absolutely right, offering to take even one of these people will signal a weakness in our current policy and the boats will start coming again over night.

Send them money, and keep them in their own region. Its up to Myanmar to find an appropriate and humane solution.

Michael Gordon, political editor of
The Age sums things up rather well when
he tells us that our Prime Minister could have
(instead of saying "Nope, Nope, Nope") signalled
Australia's willingness to explore ALL of the issues,
from the immediate challenge of rescuing
those who face death at sea to addressing
the reasons WHY people fled their homelands.
Instead his only message was for the domestic political
audience.

Rather than encourage other countries to ape Australia's
punitive approach - it is time to talk seriously about a
regional framework that reconciles treating people humanely
with putting smugglers and traffickers out of business.

Angus Houston and his panel presented a report to the
government making a list of recommendations. It's a pity
that these recommendations were not heeded. However, it's not
too late.

Divergence
“No one here is saying that those Bangladeshis and Rohingyas should just be left to drown. It is what should happen after they are saved.”

This is just my point they were left to drift around the ocean for up to three months. The neighbouring countries all took on the Australia policy and simply pushed them back out to sea.

Our immigration policies and how many refuges we are prepared to take is a separate issue, and I have no problem with the flow being planned and controlled. The reality is the population of Australia is now highly diverse. I spent the last week in hospital (Pleurisy) the staff of the hospital made the united nations look like a monoculture. The doctor who performed the draining of the lungs was a Muslim originating from the middle east. The overnight doctor was a Tamil and the nursing staff was from every country you can imagine. If any thinks that we can can go back to the way things were 30 or 40 years ago they have lost the plot

Hi there ROBERT lePAGE...

If what has been reported is true, surely the respective Navies from either Malaysia or Indonesia, whoever is closest to these poor buggers, surely they could board them, and land them in the closest Muslim Country, as a demonstration of Islamic humanity ?

After all, Australia is a considerable distance from the Andaman Sea, and both Nations have adjacent coastlines in the Southern Andaman ? Relating to subsistence for these people, Australia has already indicated they will provide material Aid ?

Comments attributed to some Indonesian politician of no account, claiming we (Oz) should do much more to resettle these people, well he'd not really have a clue ? Moreover, Indonesia doesn't hold Australia in a high regard anyway, other than when we're inclined to open-up our treasury, in order to provide a manifestly corrupt Indonesia government, with more Aid ?

Nevertheless ROBERT lePAGE, I agree with you, if these poor folk are starving and dying at sea, it's indeed a human calamity of dire proportions !

Smugglers and traffickers are not the problem. They are only the facilitators who make it possible to flee. Pollies who seek to target the unfortunate refugees but don't want to disclose their motives use "destroying the smugglers' business model" as code for a war against the weak, not against the smugglers. The pressure to flee Crapsville is the problem. This problem has little to do with Malthusian claptrap about overpopulating and nothing at all to do with race. The problem is tribal "cultures" and resurgent Islam which together make the crap countries so crappy and deadly as to be unlivable. So they flee in their millions.

Along with this colossal exodus travel chancers with motives separate from the wish to get away. They want the material benefits of civilised countries unlike their own, have contributed nothing culturally or materially to them, and in some cases seek to drag the civilised countries down to the same sort of life that prevails in the countries they are fleeing from.

So we in the West have several goals. One is to lend a hand to people who are desperate. One is to filter out the chancers who are all take and no give. One is to regulate the intake numbers so not to throw an impossible weight on our own resources. Framing the situation so that only one of these three objectives counts leads only to pee-ing contests. We have to walk and chew gum and steer around obstructions at the same time.

Warmair, 30 or 40 years ago you still would have encountered Asian doctors and nurses, I lived in a small country town 30 years ago and we had one Indian doctor, a Jewish doctor from England and one from Hong Kong.
What we didn't have 30 years ago were dozens of Asian brothels in every suburb or Asian slums like Docklands and Point Cook.
We also didn't have to worry about Chinese international students dealing methamphetamine at our children's schools to cover their gambling debts the way we do now.
Your opinions of Asians are more overtly "racist" than mine, bordering on White supremacist because you strip them and their governments of all human agency when you accuse them of copying Australian border protection policies.

Dear Jay,

<<Chinese international students dealing methamphetamine at our children's schools to cover their gambling debts>>

Why would "white" children purchase those methamphetamines?

Have they not been taught by their parents to reject such offers?
Or have they been disrespecting their parents and the 5th commandment: "Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee"?

It's only when the body is corrupt that maggots come and eat it.

warmair,

What you regard as a triumph for diversity, ie., the large proportion of medical staff from overseas working in Australian hospitals, is actually:

- a calamity for Australia, where deserving Aussie medical science graduates cannot get their placements in teaching hospitals to complete their training and become doctors. Because hospitals cooperate with universities and reserve places for the lucrative industry training international students who duly get citizenship as part of the bargain; and,

- a calamity too for the undeveloped countries whose doctors and other medical staff are poached by Australia and are not available to provide much needed medical services in their home (ie the losing) countries.

One would imagine that most people by now would be awake up to the very short-sighted federal government policies by both sides of government that do not value Australia's best and brightest. It has been that way for many years now, all rhetoric about investment in education and training youth, but the reality is otherwise.

Then dupes come along to claim the deficiencies as a benefit, a dividend in 'diversity'! Next, there will be a department of diversity and the easily-led will lap it all up, all the while wondering why Australian youth so not have jobs and nor do their parents.

The standards in Australian universities are reported to be slipping because the income from international students is so lucrative that universities lower their standards for them. Then the federal government gives them citizenship. That is diversity in action.

I see an interesting phenomenon here,

Since I pointed out that the vast majority of these boat people were not refugees as defined in the Charter, but economic migrants, and someone else pointed out that this is taking place 4000+ miles from our borders, I have seen the bleeding hearts try to re define these economic migrants as refugees.

As probably a 1000 or more have already lost their lives, it is clear that the human trafficking that robs the poor and kills thousands needs not to be encouraged but stopped.

Shadow Minister,
On the BBC yesterday they were interviewing the people released from the jungle camps in Thailand and this story goes so much deeper than people fleeing "persecution". The people caught up in this are all economic migrants, the way the system works is that they pay a middleman to introduce them to the smugglers, the smugglers are then supposed to transport them to a "better life". What's been happening however is that the smuggling gangs have been detaining the migrants in camps out in the wilderness and holding them to ransom, raping and murdering them. When the Thai Police raided those camps and rescued the captives it closed off one smuggling route but the smugglers, the middlemen and the district officials on their payroll were not apprehended and their illegal operations are largely unaffected.
The report included commentary from other experts, the UNHCR, people involved in trans national policing etc and the conclusion was that this human trafficking (ie slavery) business model is so deeply embedded in the Third World cultures that it will never be eradicated, every smuggler or corrupt official who is removed from the trade is immediately replaced by a new "up and comer".
The criminal gangs aren't one entity like the "Mafia" or even what you'd describe as a Hydra with many heads, it's a culture all on it's own and the players are involved in all manner of illegal activity, drug dealing, gun running, prostitution, gambling, supply of illegal labour and these bait and switch "refugee" scams. Many of us have been to Asia and seen how poor people live but the smugglers and gangsters and just the general Asian mindset of selfishness and lack of regard for others are responsible for this so called "persecution".

Yuyutsu, grow up, is that the best you can do, racial slurs and casting aspersions? Of course it's the fault always lies with the child taking the drug, not the drug dealers...I mean really, that shows the mentality of the Left.

Three obligations – omitting ANY is ducking an issue vital to a decent Australia.

Rescue the desperate (running for their lives)
Protect Australia from spongers, shunners[1] and Fifth Columnists
Regulate numbers according to intake capacity

[1] People who shun integration for ethnic solidarity

Anyone claim a case for ducking any of these three?

If not, what's to argue about?

Emperor Julian,

Do you seriously expect us to believe that the quadrupling of Syria's population since 1960 (when they were self-sufficient in food) has absolutely nothing to do with the unrest that has led to their present predicament and the resulting refugee flows? That it is all just "Malthusian claptrap".

The situation is similar in Egypt, where the population has tripled over the same period. Again, they were self-sufficient in food in 1960. As the population grew, the government used the revenue from oil exports to subsidize cheap food for the consumer. Now the oil is mostly gone, and the situation is being propped up by massive foreign aid. The first Arab Spring protestors there were calling for bread and freedom, but bread came first. See

http://www.resilience.org/stories/2011-02-10/egypts-warning-are-you-listening

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/01/protesting_on_an_empty_stomach.html

High fertility rates are far from the only problem in such countries, your "crap societies", but refusing to address them will obviously make every other cause a lost cause in the end. Do the math. Trying to solve their problems by taking people in is like trying to bail out the sea with a sieve.

Hi there ONTHEBEACH...

Thanks for that link concerning statements attributed to Philip ADAMS, now an elderly gentleman, even further to the 'left' as he approaches his inevitable retirement !

A funny thing though, years ago in the city, I was making enquiries concerning several counts of 'larceny as a servant', and I had occasion to speak with none other, than our Mr ADAMS who I should add wasn't in any way, remotely connected with the crime ?

Anyway, we spoke for nearly 20 - 25 minutes, and I found him to be a very nice, personable sort of bloke, in fact quite different to how you'd perceive him to be, having only heard him on ABC Radio ? He was intensely polite, most co-operative, and I was left with the impression, he was one pretty intelligent sort of bloke, without possessing any air of superiority about him ?

Thanks again ONTHEBEACH.

onthebeach,

When I first arrived in Australia some 43 years ago. The population was primarily of European extraction, and at least one in 3 of the population was born overseas including me. The only difference we have today, is that instead of taking migrants of basically white Europeans extraction, we now take people from any part of the globe provided the meet the current criteria.

The fact is that since the end of the 2nd world war we have embarked on a massive immigrant program. The reason Australia took this course is almost certainly due the fear of being overrun by far more populous nations to our north. Bear in mind Australia was on the brink of being invaded by the Japanese during the 2nd world war. Australia now has a very diverse population, and it is far too late complain about it, the horse has bolted.

Warmair,
The migration programme didn't start until 1949, four years after the defeat of Japan and just at the beginning of the attempted Communist takeover of Asia, so no, populate or perish was just a slogan.
What's more even if a threat from the north were to eventuate only a unified majority European society with the backing of the U.S.A could have withstood it, the domino theory in contrast to populate or perish was a realistic prospect.
The mild resistance against the European migrant was based in ignorance and for the most part unfounded, by the 1980's those tensions, such as they were had eased and multiculturalism was working.
The far more widespread and organised resistance to Asian and particularly Asian and Mid Eastern Muslim immigration is not rooted in ignorance or fear of the unknown, these people are a known quantity and have been for generations. Due to the hostility and aggression of second and third generation Muslims the relationship between Muslim and White Australians has gone from non existent until the late 1990's to overtly hostile since then, to the extent that we have Muslims swearing allegiance to organisations and now an Islamic state which has declared war on Australians.
The widespread fear and distrust of Muslims comes from experience and a clear perception of their ideals, customs and the long term group strategies upon which they operate.

The supporters of illegal immigration just need to get over the fact that they were duped once again by the anti Australian elements of the media into thinking that there were boatloads of little kids floating on the Andaman sea, bereft and abandoned by the world.
The reality is completely different and the revelations grow worse every day:
Mass graves of Rohingya, Bangladeshi migrants in Malaysia's forests: report.
http://www.theage.com.au/world/mass-graves-of-rohingya-bangladeshi-migrants-in-malaysias-forests-report-20150524-gh8exe.html
The bleeding hearts just need to realise that what they call "compassion" is really gullibility and their emotions are too easily manipulated by activist journalists, activist lawyers and political operators who use people to further their own agendas and feather their own nests.

warmair,

You didn't address any of the points raised in my post of Saturday, 23 May 2015 10:04:18 PM concerning your hospital example. Since you chose to avoid the issues raised I will leave it there.

The 'populate or perish' policy is past history, long ago. I sincerely hope it is not what is driving immigration policy.

It is much more likely that both sides of government are trapped on the wheel like the proverbial hamster - it simply cannot stop. Both sides of government rely on growth and there has to be more and more population. On the other hand it makes up for lack of planning and (lets face it) lack of ideas. However, growth cannot continue forever.

Immigration is also seen as a way of garnering more votes, particularly in some of those marginal metropolitan seats.

Very wise comment, OTB

The economist Leith van Onselen agrees with you

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/05/population-ponzi-choking-us/

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/03/7-30-report-big-australia/

You bring in more and more people and then employ them building housing and providing services for more and more people. All such Ponzi schemes come to a bad end. The government is already unable to keep up with infrastructure and public services, and government spending per person is actually falling

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/budget-2015-federal-spending-on-social-services-per-person-to-fall-20150515-gh2i36.html

Nevertheless, it has to be pointed out that the refugee/humanitarian component is very small compared to the total intake. I would be happy to take 10,000 more refugees, provided that they were properly screened, to get 50,000 cut from the total migrant intake, such as by reducing the number of 457 visas that are handed out every year.

Three political theories masquerade as science and are promulgated with a religious fervour that detests dissent, labelling it “denialism”. All prime red herrings deflecting attention from measures that can actually solve major problems.

1. Eugenics – too many other people are getting increasingly feeble-minded, need a cull.
2. Malthusianism – too many other people alive, need a cull.
3. AGW – other people’s living standards too high, need a hair shirt.

Let science speak – actual hard yards of careful study of evidence and open debate – about Malthusianism and its “Neo” variant: For a quick example see http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/world-population-forecast-to-peak-before-2100-664281.html.

Here is an interesting scenario, Australia has been drawn into a war by the US because of agreements we have with them.

Now the draft is reintroduced I would put money on most of the 2nd generation Asian, middle Eastern and the welfare for lifers who have been here and taken Australian citizenship would be "nowhere to be found" it would be left up to true Australians.

We could debate what is a true Australian in this scenario but I am sure you know what I mean.

Dear Jay,

<<Of course it's the fault always lies with the child taking the drug, not the drug dealers>>

Not the children - the parents!

My parents told me when I was very little never to accept sweets from strangers, that it could be a drug which is a horrible thing that would make me addicted and unable to come off it ever. I always obeyed them and never went anywhere near those things.

Now as society allows, if not even encourages, the family to break down, particularly but not exclusively because they want everyone to be employed so they can heat up the economy and get more taxes, children are neglected and instead are indoctrinated by the state to become more involved in the economy themselves, both as consumers and as producers. The government doesn't want children to respect their parents because it wants them to respect itself instead.

Regardless, a good parent would never bring a child to the world if they know that they are unable to educate them properly, including because the state is hostile to their wholesome education.

Dear Philip,

I'm sure if you were to do some
research into the ancestry of the men and women
who currently are members of our Australian Defence
Forces you just may be very surprised. Making
sweeping statements about people all too easily
leads onto the questionable practice of stereotyping.
Not a good idea

Divergence,

Thank you and I agree with the points made in your post.

Emperor Julian,

I don't disagree with anything in the article that you linked to. High fertility rates are not a problem in most of the world, although some countries can still expect quite a lot of population growth from demographic momentum. (Fast population growth in the past leaves them with a pyramid-shaped age distribution, with most of the deaths in the relatively tiny elderly generation at the tip, so births can still outnumber deaths for up to 70 years, even if the fertility rate is low.)

Nevertheless, fertility rates have remained stubbornly high in certain countries, mainly in Africa and the Islamic world. As shown by the link in my first post, this is mostly because people want very large families. The growth has continued, even while people find it harder to afford the necessities of life, so Malthusian trap is a fair description. The UN recently had to increase its medium population projection for this reason. Population growth in these countries doesn't have to be a big problem for the rest of the world, apart from humanitarian concerns and concerns about extinctions due to habitat loss and overhunting, if people from such countries are resolutely kept out. Talk of instituting culls is hysterical nonsense. The Syrians are culling themselves, as happened earlier in Rwanda.

Overpopulation in its very small geographic area can end when the population at risk learns to respect women as equals, not as breeding stock. That is a proper objective in itself, not just a long term lament about numbers that freezes real action or a short term policy (as in China and - briefly - Indira Gandhi's India) or a racist massacre as in Rwanda but a response that promotes human rights, like combating Islam and tribalism and misogyny. Malthusian outfits like SPA raise population numbers as a diversion from tackling real problems vulnerable to real policies (like tackling misogynous ideologies aimed against women's rights as human beings) while remaining stubbornly coy about stating how they would effectively tackle population pressure in real time. For that reason I postulate culls as an unspoken agenda.

Google Thom Hartmann and download and read his latest book on the crash of 2016 for an insight into the existential menace to civilisation (it's not runaway breeding) and how inspired leadership has marshalled grassroots common decency to thwart the class responsible for the menace for the next four generations.

Emperor Julian,

Your comments on Sustainable Population Australia (SPA) are libellous. Here is a link to their policies, which are primarily concerned with very high government sponsored population growth in Australia:

http://www.population.org.au/about

There is absolutely no suggestion of any sort of coercion, let alone a cull. This is from the FAQ

"How do we lower the birth rate?

There are plenty of non-coercive things that could be done. Experience in the third world shows three things are vital: Access to and information about contraceptives. The ability of women to decide their own future, including the number of children. High health levels and low death rates of those children."

So far as global efforts are concerned, SPA advocates more and better targeted foreign aid and advocates taking more refugees in the context of a reduced overall immigration program.

This is what Thom Hartmann actually has to say about overpopulation

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2009/08/thom-discusses-population-control-marc-morano-11-august-200

Unfortunately the URL http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2009/08/thom-discusses-population-control-marc-morano-11-august-200 posted by Divergence leads to "Page Not Found". I haven't yet finished reading Hartmann's book and will no doubt get to what he says about population in a day or two. SPA's policies are not a cull in Australia - merely a door locked against entry, and Moslems and other racists and fascists or just the sea will finish the refugees off wherever they are trapped. To their eternal discredit the Swiss disposed of a lot of Jews that way during the war. A simple measure in Australia, not involving a cull either outsourced or otherwise, would be a baby bonus for the first child, none for the second, and an increasing baby tax for subsequent children to offset their socio-economic cost. But none of these social engineering mechanisms will do anything to confront the looming existential threat of what Hartmann has called the Great Forgetting and the Economic Royalists.

Meanwhile we require "now" policies not "fullness of time" policies to discharge as far as we can our responsibilities to people fleeing for their lives, and to the protection of our own country from spongers and Fifth Columnists. As for coping with increased numbers we could start by immediately ceasing tariff-free international trade (a weapon of Mr Greed to lower wages and living conditions in Australia) and concentrating on building public transport infrastructure and a restored state housing strategy. To fund this we could opt out of refugee-generating Yank colonial wars and massive weapons purchases from the Yank military-industrial complex. For a start. And we could tax the major predators who plunder the nation’s wealth.

Dear o sung wu,

Apologies for the tardy reply, a weekend of 4WDing culminated in me misjudging a very steep and very muddy hill and coming backwards down those suckers is usually something I avoid with a passion. Oh well, lesson reinforced.

You wrote;

“your extraordinary ability to gaze into the hearts and minds of others.”

Really it was nothing. I wasn't the only person here who adjudged JOM to be a racist. It would have been pretty clear to the vast majority who have spent time on this forum. In that you were one the very few who failed to see it does not make the rest of us extraordinary.

“I hadn't realized what a flawed individual I am ? What then would you have me do, eh STEELEREDUX ? How should I go about addressing these obvious imperfections ? Or more correctly termed, a real 'aberration' in my character ? Perhaps I never had any values in the first place ?“

Projection? All I asserted was that we had 'different values' making no assessment of the merits of either, you proceeded to take an extremely large dump on yourself. And it's becoming a trend.

Your compensatory manoeuvre is to use the label 'narcissist'; “Why is it you feel this unfettered urge or mania to engage in this absurd practice of belittling other contributors on this Forum ? From your obvious symptomatology you seem to suffer from another form of (yet undiagnosed) narcissistic psychosis.”

You should ease up on yourself.

Back to the topic. You've had an attitude toward those poor unfortunate people which was akin to someone driving past a car accident with the dead and injured lying around and thinking 'Geez, that's going to raise my rego insurance'.

I do note however, even if it was after 16 odd posts, you've acknowledged;

“Nevertheless ROBERT lePAGE, I agree with you, if these poor folk are starving and dying at sea, it's indeed a human calamity of dire proportions !”

There might be hope for you yet.

Emperor Julian,

Here is the link to the Tom Hartmann article

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2009/08/thom-discusses-population-control-marc-morano-11-august-2009

Where is your evidence that the people in SPA are either racist or fascist? Point to some real evidence or admit that you lied. In their policies they reject selection of migrants based on race. Because the non-refugee, non-humanitarian component of our immigration is so large, they actually say that we could decrease the overall intake while taking more refugees.

Australia's fertility rate is slightly below replacement level and has been since 1976, although there is still a bit of growth from the demographic momentum that I discussed earlier. There is less and less of this sort of growth every year as we move to a stable age structure. About 60% of our population growth is from immigration. About a third of the remaining 40% due to natural increase is due to births to migrant mothers. With zero net immigration, our population growth rate would be about a quarter of what we have now and getting less every year. Refusing to talk about immigration is refusing to address the main issue, although the baby bonus is a bad idea for a lot of reasons.

According to the UNHCR as of 2013, there were 16.7 million refugees worldwide plus 33.3 million internally displaced people who could become refugees by crossing an international border. Then of course, there are all the illegal immigrants who stand to gain by posing as refugees if it will get them into a rich country, and they are often very difficult or impossible to weed out if we are taking boat people. How many do you want us to take? What do we do when that number is exceeded? The population growth back in their home countries, overwhelmingly the Malthusian trap countries we discussed earlier, will ensure that there are plenty more in the future.

In response to Divergence.

Thom Hartmann has come a long way in the seven years since 2009. Back then he seems to have been floundering about in the areas of AGW and population, and in that link he was arguing with someone who sought policies a i m e d a t p o p u l a t i o n – in particular to i n c r e a s e it. A crazy aim and an easy target. Now he has brilliantly tackled the real issues in a historical setting. The march of the predators. The Economic Royalists. And the fading memories and ahistoric mass education that open the way to them. He lays out the history and invites readers to take account of what it shows. Even back in 2009 he homed in on the relationship between population and justice to women which is patchy at best and denied at worst in societies ruled by predatory Economic Royalists.

There is no evidence that the SPA is either racist or fascist. That is why I have never suggested they are. SPA has a population objective (I call it a fixation) – to support policies that limit or reduce it and oppose policies which increase it whether that is the aim of those policies or merely a consequence. Australian population numbers are front and centre to their approach to all other problems. This includes the refugee problem. Fixation on population numbers colours their response to acceptance of refugees as it does to many other issues. Refugees not given sanctuary are left to the tender mercies of Moslems and racists and related fascists in their countries of origin and tribal savages around the detention centres in Nauru and New Guinea. The outcome is an outsourced cull.

The plight of refugees (real ones) is a pressing issue in its own right, not a mere part of a population numbers policy,

Good afternoon to you STEELEREDUX...

I thought for a moment you'd deserted my last thread in some sort of huff, for an imagined rebuff I'd unwittingly occasioned upon your tender sensibilities ? All the while you were navigating an impossibly steep incline in your 4wd ! For what it's worth unless a route upon which I choose to travel, has at the very least, 4cm of cured bituminous material, I'd take a train or stay at home ?

I don't believe for a moment any normal human being would fail to render immediate aid to save the life of someone found adrift at sea. That doesn't mean those people shouldn't be immediately repatriated to their homeland, and if that's impossible, safely conveyed to the nearest refugee centre to ensure their continued security needs are met.

It appears fashionable, by a brethren from the 'Left' to suggest these sad individuals should be immediately evacuated to a developed nation. A nation with a very generous welfare system. In so doing, it removes any further fiscal imposition, and the need of prolonged sanctuary, from the morally corrupt United Nations ? Surely you must see that STEELEREDUX ?

I was wondering too, perhaps there's a moral example for your most recent 4wd adventure ? Whereas your judgement momentarily deserted you, in your attempt to negotiate an incline, far too steep for your vehicle, thus it's traction went awry, causing you to inextricably 'backslide' down that slippery slope ? Perhaps that unfortunate experience illustrates the fundamental flaw in your reasoning, that I have this anomalous need to immoderately 'dump' (criticise ?) upon myself ?

Do you think for a moment, it's just possible that I was gently guiding your synopsis, entirely in another direction, whereupon you might just stumble upon another conclusion altogether ? A little something for you to muse upon at your leisure ?

Hope your experience caused you no physical bother too !

Dear o sung wu,

More than happy bunging around Outback desert tracks, once spending a very enjoyable 6 months doing just that. But mud is not my favourite surface especially the clay ridden stuff I was in Sunday. Having a play a week before a lot of these tracks are closed for Winter wasn't the smartest thing to do but hey, life is definitely too short. Plus the young nephew had a ball, even getting the chance to help strip down the left front to clear some pretty wedged in debris.

Being precariously stuck near the top of a slope and the only way out is down the way you came is pretty hairy. Took my time before going for it, even had just enough mobile signal to check on some tips from a favourite 4WD forum. This was the sage wisdom I found on the first link;

“Just try to steer for the ruts while your sphincter tries to suck the seat off its mounts.”

Pretty well exactly how it went.

You postulated the following;

“Perhaps that unfortunate experience illustrates the fundamental flaw in your reasoning, that I have this anomalous need to immoderately 'dump' (criticise ?) upon myself ? Do you think for a moment, it's just possible that I was gently guiding your synopsis, entirely in another direction, whereupon you might just stumble upon another conclusion altogether ? A little something for you to muse upon at your leisure ?”

No I didn't because you seem to do it so often, but then I'm happy to be proved wrong.

What I do know is that you have a degree of leadership with your cohorts on this forum and when you become more measured on topics it has a flow on effect through the ranks. While none of them have expressed any sympathy for the plight of those people who were so desperately marooned the fact you now have will inevitably serve to temper the bombast and rhetoric. So I do acknowledge that kind of 'gentle guiding' in 'another direction' and enjoy it when I see it.

G'day to you STEELEREDUX...

I wasn't aware you're a 'bush basher' ? I was 'required' to undertake the 'light' 4WD course at work, and promptly flunked it. Our driver trainers are very much dedicated expert drivers at what they teach. Some are M/C instructors, others 'pursuit' driver trainers, while others, instruct on heavy vehicles, 4WD etc. etc. Our main facility was/is located at St Ives, whether it's still there, I don't know ?

My 4WD course was actually conducted at Holsworthy Army base, where the Army have their own purpose built facilities, to accommodate all manner of vehicular training. It was our own personnel who taught us, we merely used their facilities ? My problem was, amongst everything else to do with these damn 4WD's, was descending in 'low range', down these impossibly steep tracks, that even a demented mountain goat wouldn't wish to negotiate ! Needless to say, after several 'remedials' I was (reluctantly) granted a police licence to 'operate' a (light) 4WD police vehicles. Why say 'operate', surely they mean 'drive', the damn thing ! Typical 'copperese', a spade is spade; "...or a shaped metal device, calculated to relocate, small quantities of miscellaneous material, to another foreordained area..." ? And to think I spent over 32 years in that job !

The operative word is 'seem' ? Notwithstanding you're '...happy to be proved wrong...' ? We shall see eh ?

Not entirely on topic, well within the periphery nevertheless - all of us can now watch most of world slowly destroy itself, as a direct consequence of the evil influences, of revolutionary Islam. Yet even now there are those, essentially from the 'Left' including yourself STEELEREDUX, who still wish to bring even more Islamic refugees into this country, many of them under the pretence of being legitimate asylum seekers ?

Surely now, as a thinking man, you can see the many blunders, and the disastrous consequences of bringing so many of these people into our unwary country ? And the fatal errors arising out of the pathetic 'screening' protocols, perpetrated by all of Australia's responsible monitoring agencies.

Many people are dying at sea due to 'people smugglers'. These criminals, obviously pretty callous and brutal are being paid I believe thousands$$ to smuggle immigrants to better off countries. Not unlike the Mexican border, I think they are called 'jackals'. Who also make $$$ by smuggling. Border protection and security there is massive and controlled by both sides.
Its very difficult when the border is thousands of kilometers of open ocean. There are obviously no controls from the smuggler's bases so the journey cannot be stopped. Our and other countries really cannot be condemned for most of the tragedies that occur at sea. The smugglers, having now obtained thousands of dollars somehow manage to abandon them and return to shore, obviously not caring whether they live or die. When deaths result due to 'starving,sickness and dehydration' it is a huge tragedy to most of the civilized world.
Due to such corruption in these societies, and large numbers of people in positions of power benefiting financially from the smuggling rings, plus a clear lack of care for their own people, smuggling is not policed but rather, protected.
These country's leaders, politicians, police and military are aware that we have a firmer policy on illegal immigrants. Are aware that their people are being abandoned at sea. They are majorly responsible for the situations occurring and need to take responsibility. Stop the corruption by firstly getting rid of the smuggling rings. Protect your own borders and educate and discourage illegal immigration

It stuck me hearing about the tragedy in North Carolina that the language used by the gunman was similar to that being used of our own threads, most notably by our resident racist Jay of Melbourne.

"Poirot I know bitter, hate fueled middle class women like you are happy to sacrifice working class girls as rape dolls and sex slaves to Asian predators but sooner or later it's going to come to your doorstep, these men lack the intelligence to discriminate between a middle class vagina and a working class one."
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 20 May 2015 7:34:33 PM

“When the son of her friend pleaded with the shooter to stop, Johnson said the gunman replied: "'No, you've raped our women, and you are taking over the country ... I have to do what I have to do.' And he shot the young man."”
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

There are a number of people who continue to run a similar line on OLO.

They need to be always called out for what they are.