Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

"I think that the past decade has shown that an orderly refugee intake is far better than the shambles of boat ferrying (and drowning) queue jumpers and economic migrants."

What?

Are you serious?

Dutton has just overseen the highest number of protection visa applications ever. They are just not coming by boats anymore. The people smugglers are just as active and economic refugees make up a far higher percentage of applications than those desperate enough to get aboard a boat.
http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2018/12/09/record-number-asylum-seekers-peter-dutton/

Orderly refugee intake my arse.

Dear Paul,

You asked about "AUSSISM?"

We read the word a lot - " ëgalitarian"when you read about
Australians and Australian values. We would expect that
the values of our country would reflect the values of
influential people, after all they are people who would
have influenced those values. If we were doing
influential people in British history you would have kings
and queens, but you won't find them on our list.

You'd find people like Joan Sutherland, Peter Allen,
Kerry Packer, Gina Rinehart, Cathy Freeman, Don
Bradman, Ian Thorpe, Chopper Read, Julian Assange,
Weary Dunlop, Fred Hollows, and the list goes on.
You'd find a wide mix of people.

So how can we possibly describe from such a wide mix
as to what makes them Aussies?

Peter Costello writing in his Memoirs said -
"Öutside 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."

He went on to point out that "Australia is part of the
New World, the world of immigrants, not part of the
Old World or the places they embark from.
This is why we are suspicious of inherited titles and
privileges. Nobody can afford to be too precious about
position and entitlements in this country because we all
know that position and entitlements are comparatively new."

Also our immigration experience is a broad one.
Originally it was Anglo-Celtic but after the war our
immigrants have grown considerably in numbers and type.
And all have made successful contributions to Australian
life.

"Aussism" therefore is hard to define. Easy-going would be
my description. Maybe I'm wrong.

Ben Pobjie has written a book, "Aussie, Aussie, Aussie,
Questionable Histories of Great Australians,"published in
2017. The book celebrates the Australians who made
Australia great as well as the ones who stopped Australia
from being great. It's a laugh out loud read and worth
getting hold of. We just may learn more about "Aussism"
from it.

Regarding the assertion on this thread that Australia "breaks international law", with its refugee policy, I note that this 'opinion' was ripped from an SBS report involving activist academics and busy bodies, and the first paragraphs were reproduced word for word.

What the poster overlooked is that the report itself was more opinion than fact.

What is not understood is that the treaties in the outdated Refugee Convention 1951 are not all incorporated into Australian domestic law; and calling it "legally binding" overlooks the fact that there is "no body that monitors compliance"; and the United Nations cannot enforce the convention. Neither is there any formal mechanism for the filing of complaints.

There is currently no standing body of international law enforcement officers, nor is there strong political support for creating such a body.

Further, what was missed in ripping the report was that claims that Australia was contravening international "law" were somewhat spoiled by an admission that for any assault on our sovereign rights to protect our borders would necessarily entail certain sections of the Migration Act, and human rights treaties would need to be incorporated into domestic law.

How dumb would that be, when we have a successful immigration and border protection policy that is the envy of ordinary Europeans at constant risk because of their politicians' lunacy! And no matter what the Fifth Column fruit cakes want, there is no body to enforce farcical 'international law'. How stupid to undo our success in maintaining the integrity of our sovereignty!

I have had a passing glance at this topic and I have not felt the need to comment as I have nothing to offer that has not already been said, and nothing of any real or serious controversy to analyse or criticise.
Then seeing the name and comments of a politician being mentioned, (Peter Costello) and knowing how they are ALL totally inept and lacking in anything worth hearing, I read the part referencing his memoirs that began with the words,'Outside Australia's indigenous people, we are all migrants or descendants of migrants'.
Now unless I have mis-read or mis-understood the message conveyed by those few words, he is wrong.
So unless these people he is referring to morphed from some form of early life on Australian soil or from a biblical reference point of view, direct descendants of Adam and Eve, (it's possible) then it is absolutely not true that they are not also immigrants.
At best they might be classified as the 'earliest known or recorded immigrants'.
But that is it, so I wish people would stop spreading mis-information and lies for the purpose of trying to make their point or try to speak in PC terms.
The true statement should read, 'anyone who came from another country irrespective of when, are immigrants.
Those pushing any other broom other than that are either knowingly arrogant or innocently stupid.
Don't believe me?
Look it up, and please for God's sake stop trying to push this 'their land' mantra, it's wearing thin and quite frankly not only is it a lie, people are well and truly fed up with the whole thing to the point where they are losing ground on the issue of 'our land'.
I can understand average Joe not knowing, or caring about this little fact, but a once high ranking politician?
It just confirms my opinion about these morons in govt, ALL of them.

(it's possible) then it is absolutely not true that they are not also immigrants.
ALTRAV,
It would be so in the gimme, gimme bandwagon mentality of the perpetual bleaters of victimhood & the self-loathers of Academia !

SR,

You are being disingenuous again. As per a previous thread, the difference between the boat and plane arrivals is that illegal boat arrivals generally destroy their documentation and rehearse their sob stories making it very difficult to verify their real status whereas plane arrivals need not only correct documentation, but legitimate visas before they can fly to Aus resulting in the vast majority of plane arrivals being deported. This is why many "refugees" were flying to Indonesia to get on a far more expensive boat.

As for the myth being propagated that Australia is breaking any laws, I would like anyone to point out exactly one law that Australia is breaking.