Parley Posted March 22, 2014 Author Share Posted March 22, 2014 Actually I was referring to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slean Wolfhead Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Actually I was referring to you. yeah, you're not that sharp are you really, mate? If you get any slower you'll fall over your own feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 22, 2014 Author Share Posted March 22, 2014 Good comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadas Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Nice diversion into the missing plane..... Now can we get back on topic, or is it still too painful for those who argue any one who arrived by boat is a genuine refuge Damn ABC.......why did they have to pick this story to report both sides of the story..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Nice diversion into the missing plane..... Now can we get back on topic, or is it still too painful for those who argue any one who arrived by boat is a genuine refuge Damn ABC.......why did they have to pick this story to report both sides of the story..... Aren't about 90% of them assessed to be genuine asylum-seekers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 If you SAY you are a refugee, then you MUST be a refugee! I'm surprised that more Pommies don't come here, claiming to be suffering persecution. It MIGHT just work! If you are desperate to find a better life, then pursue every avenue, just like the bloke on the ABC doco. Didn't he try to come here as a migrant, get turned down, so make his way to Indonesia to buy passage on a boat? Then when he was thwarted a second time, start bad mouthing Australia, and also make allegations to 911? Just the sort of person we want more of in Australia. Not unlike those ones who riot in the camps. 'If you don't let us in, we're going to destroy the place.' (Masters of PR!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Geez the monsoon season is bad this year. As noted boats are being turned away hence impossible to land. Another was indeed turned around in the last week I heard. The true number we'll never know though obviously reduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 If you SAY you are a refugee, then you MUST be a refugee! I'm surprised that more Pommies don't come here, claiming to be suffering persecution. It MIGHT just work! If you are desperate to find a better life, then pursue every avenue, just like the bloke on the ABC doco. Didn't he try to come here as a migrant, get turned down, so make his way to Indonesia to buy passage on a boat? Then when he was thwarted a second time, start bad mouthing Australia, and also make allegations to 911? Just the sort of person we want more of in Australia. Not unlike those ones who riot in the camps. 'If you don't let us in, we're going to destroy the place.' (Masters of PR!) It's been explained countless times that their is a procedure in place as directed by UNHCR. As for Manus Island I wonder how it didn't explode before. Abbott is trying to get himself untangled from that one. Set up for failure as are most things when put in place for political expediency. I certainly wouldn't be blowing kisses to Aussie sailors either after being locked up in airless, dank quarters for what was it four days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Aren't about 90% of them assessed to be genuine asylum-seekers? They are under UNHCR law. Abbott recent rant in PNG with most being illegal sounds to be pre empting findings by the judge to me. In a court of law that would be called contempt of court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Nice diversion into the missing plane..... Now can we get back on topic, or is it still too painful for those who argue any one who arrived by boat is a genuine refuge Damn ABC.......why did they have to pick this story to report both sides of the story..... Don't need a diversion as Abbott is using both matters as diversions of his own. The matter has been thrashed out and those who arrived by air and boat have been found to be refugees. The pain must be in the fact that you are in denial of what has been found to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 It's been explained countless times that their is a procedure in place as directed by UNHCR. As for Manus Island I wonder how it didn't explode before. Abbott is trying to get himself untangled from that one. Set up for failure as are most things when put in place for political expediency. I certainly wouldn't be blowing kisses to Aussie sailors either after being locked up in airless, dank quarters for what was it four days. I hope that 'fact' is given plenty of publicity. It does not even matter whether it is true or not, as long as potential illegals THINK that it is true! No rescue by the Australian Navy, instead put into a lifeboat and towed back to Indonesia. No immediate entry to Australia, instead you are sent to a nasty camp in another country. It would certainly put me off spending any money trying to get here illegally! Apart from the ratbags on "March to March" (why no protest about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, either?), most Australians like what Abbott is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I hope that 'fact' is given plenty of publicity. It does not even matter whether it is true or not, as long as potential illegals THINK that it is true! No rescue by the Australian Navy, instead put into a lifeboat and towed back to Indonesia. No immediate entry to Australia, instead you are sent to a nasty camp in another country. It would certainly put me off spending any money trying to get here illegally! Apart from the ratbags on "March to March" (why no protest about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, either?), most Australians like what Abbott is doing. Be one of the herd as you obviously wish. Nothing ratbags about citizens voicing their opinion. Even if that opinion differs from your tainted views on the world. And no there is no need for brutality of men, women and children to get a point over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadas Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Don't need a diversion as Abbott is using both matters as diversions of his own. The matter has been thrashed out and those who arrived by air and boat have been found to be refugees. The pain must be in the fact that you are in denial of what has been found to be true. Squealing hysterically doesn't make the story go away. There's been little reporting of the 'asylum seeker arrivals' so focusing on a genuine disaster is hardly creating a diversion. As it has be acknowledged many times in this thread, genuine refugees exist and take risks to come here. But, many have also argued, that not everyone who arrives by boat is a genuine refugee, a point you have continued to deride. This ABC article blows a hole through that argument. People come here and pretend to be refugees....it happens, and the government is entitled to manage these arrivals in the way it feels appropriate, especially when backed by a majority electorate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Squealing hysterically doesn't make the story go away. There's been little reporting of the 'asylum seeker arrivals' so focusing on a genuine disaster is hardly creating a diversion. As it has be acknowledged many times in this thread, genuine refugees exist and take risks to come here. But, many have also argued, that not everyone who arrives by boat is a genuine refugee, a point you have continued to deride. This ABC article blows a hole through that argument. People come here and pretend to be refugees....it happens, and the government is entitled to manage these arrivals in the way it feels appropriate, especially when backed by a majority electorate. The ABC story did no such thing. Please make an attempt to use correct information to prove a particular point. The vast majority have been shown to be refugees under the terms of UNHCR. That is how Australia decides on shore who is and isn't as well as those selected in overseas camps. In fact breaches of UNHCR law has been likely made in the return of Tamil asylum seekers to Sri Lanka. Many were not given the proper process in the haste of government to return. I continue to deride the point that asylum seekers are not illegal until proven to be and of course should be removed when the process in place has determined this to be the case. Again please do not say something that you claim I say which is clearly not true. A nation must abide by the laws it enters into or all agreements are potentially not worth the paper they are written on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 If you SAY you are a refugee, then you MUST be a refugee! I'm surprised that more Pommies don't come here, claiming to be suffering persecution. It MIGHT just work! If you are desperate to find a better life, then pursue every avenue, just like the bloke on the ABC doco. Didn't he try to come here as a migrant, get turned down, so make his way to Indonesia to buy passage on a boat? Then when he was thwarted a second time, start bad mouthing Australia, and also make allegations to 911? Just the sort of person we want more of in Australia. Not unlike those ones who riot in the camps. 'If you don't let us in, we're going to destroy the place.' (Masters of PR!) But they are subjected to assessment by Australian Immigration aren't they, to determine whether they're legit or not?. I can't imagine that that assessment is going to be a walk in the park, particularly as Australia appears to be starting from the position that these people are dangerous criminals until proven otherwise. Surely you'd have to be legit to have any chance to get past some pretty sceptical Immigration staff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 As noted boats are being turned away hence impossible to land. Another was indeed turned around in the last week I heard. The true number we'll never know though obviously reduced. Funny I never heard that. You can roll this line out though whenever you like in total denial that they have in fact stopped. Over 3 months now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I hope that 'fact' is given plenty of publicity. It does not even matter whether it is true or not, as long as potential illegals THINK that it is true! No rescue by the Australian Navy, instead put into a lifeboat and towed back to Indonesia. No immediate entry to Australia, instead you are sent to a nasty camp in another country. It would certainly put me off spending any money trying to get here illegally! Apart from the ratbags on "March to March" (why no protest about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, either?), most Australians like what Abbott is doing. That'll be March in March Dave, where around about 100,000 people (estimates vary) demonstrated against the policies of the current government. Just exercising their rights of free assembly and free speech and all that. I believe it was largely peaceable, despite Andrew Bolt's attempts to portray the marchers as "barbarians!" Mind you, the media coverage of the event was a bit patchy. The Sydney Morning Herald seemed to have forgotten that it was on altogether, apart from a brief reference to Billy Bragg playing some gigs in Melbourne! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I was surprised the SMH ignored it,.as they usually trumpet that sort of event. Maybe they thought it was a right wing demo!? 100 000 in a country in a,country of 23 million? Why should a democratically elected govt.change its policies because a few thousand demonstrate? Go against the wishes of the silent majority, who expressed.their opinions through the ballot box? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I was surprised the SMH ignored it,.as they usually trumpet that sort of event. Maybe they thought it was a right wing demo!? 100 000 in a country in a,country of 23 million? Why should a democratically elected govt.change its policies because a few thousand demonstrate? Go against the wishes of the silent majority, who expressed.their opinions through the ballot box? I doubt that anybody who marched believes for a second that this government will pay any heed to their concerns. As you say, this government is carrying out the policies that the vast majority of Australians seem to want. It's always reassuring though to know that there are discordant voices out there who don't share the majority view and want to try and keep our politicians honest by reminding them that the electorate doesn't all think the same way. I believe the good Mr Bolt himself lauded a similar 'March of No Confidence' against the Gillard government in 2011, although I don't recall him dubbing those protesters "barbarians." I can't think why!:smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Funny I never heard that.You can roll this line out though whenever you like in total denial that they have in fact stopped. Over 3 months now. I can't help how unaware of events you chose to keep yourself. To be fair though running a policy of strict secrecy you may easily miss such information. Three months nothing. If a boat is unable to land and towed back insight of land hardly likely any will penetrate the blockade. Policy remains in tatters with off shore processing. No further talk on Cambodia coming to the rescue. Even Australia wouldn't pay the bribes no doubt demanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I was surprised the SMH ignored it,.as they usually trumpet that sort of event. Maybe they thought it was a right wing demo!? 100 000 in a country in a,country of 23 million? Why should a democratically elected govt.change its policies because a few thousand demonstrate? Go against the wishes of the silent majority, who expressed.their opinions through the ballot box? Or how about going with the policy the present policy free, slogan ranting Cons brainwashed the masses with. Far more the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Be one of the herd as you obviously wish. Nothing ratbags about citizens voicing their opinion. Even if that opinion differs from your tainted views on the world. And no there is no need for brutality of men, women and children to get a point over. But the whole point of living in a democracy is that citizens CAN voice their opinions - writing letters to the paper, contributing to a forum like this one, taking part in peaceful demonstrations, and voting in elections to choose a government. Tony Abbott won a free and fair election, and he formed a government. Why would he want to change his policies just because a noisy minority take part in demonstrations. If he DID change his policies as a result of 'March in March', that would actually be UNdemocratic, because he is going against the wishes of the majority. I did a bit of research using the Austrlalian Parliament website and found some interesting facts, eg. that Australia is only one of about twenty countries that actively participate in refugee resettlement programmes, and is in fact responsible for the third biggest number of refugee resettlements. Doing 'our bit' may not be a big enough 'bit' for you, but it seems OK to people like me, who are not opposed to refugees as such, just object to people who appear to be trying to jump the queue. And just because an illegal immigrant is subsequently found to be a genuine refugee does not mean that it is right for them to try to come here any way they can. You may as well say that anybody who is hungry has the right to break into a shop and take some food. In terms of refugee resettlement, only about 20 nations worldwide currently participate in UNHCR resettlement programs and accept quotas of refugees on an annual basis. Australia is one of the countries formally participating and for many years the Government has allocated around 13 000 available places through the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s Humanitarian Program. In 2011, Australia accepted the third largest number of refugees for resettlement in the world (9200) after the USA (51 500) and Canada (12 900) under the UNHCR resettlement program.[21] Australia’s contribution is set to increase further with the Government’s announcement that the Humanitarian Program will be increased to 20 000 places in 2012–13.[22] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 But the whole point of living in a democracy is that citizens CAN voice their opinions - writing letters to the paper, contributing to a forum like this one, taking part in peaceful demonstrations, and voting in elections to choose a government. Tony Abbott won a free and fair election, and he formed a government. Why would he want to change his policies just because a noisy minority take part in demonstrations. If he DID change his policies as a result of 'March in March', that would actually be UNdemocratic, because he is going against the wishes of the majority. I did a bit of research using the Austrlalian Parliament website and found some interesting facts, eg. that Australia is only one of about twenty countries that actively participate in refugee resettlement programmes, and is in fact responsible for the third biggest number of refugee resettlements. Doing 'our bit' may not be a big enough 'bit' for you, but it seems OK to people like me, who are not opposed to refugees as such, just object to people who appear to be trying to jump the queue. And just because an illegal immigrant is subsequently found to be a genuine refugee does not mean that it is right for them to try to come here any way they can. You may as well say that anybody who is hungry has the right to break into a shop and take some food. In terms of refugee resettlement, only about 20 nations worldwide currently participate in UNHCR resettlement programs and accept quotas of refugees on an annual basis. Australia is one of the countries formally participating and for many years the Government has allocated around 13 000 available places through the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s Humanitarian Program. In 2011, Australia accepted the third largest number of refugees for resettlement in the world (9200) after the USA (51 500) and Canada (12 900) under the UNHCR resettlement program.[21]Australia’s contribution is set to increase further with the Government’s announcement that the Humanitarian Program will be increased to 20 000 places in 2012–13.[22] It all depends on what you consider a free and fair election. The recent SA election, although I favour the result, as a wall to wall conservative rule in federal and state is not good for democracy, I can concur with those that consider it not a democratic process when a party rules with a minority of public support. Your research I'm afraid is flawed. Australia has reduced under the Cons the number downwards to the 13, 500 mark as it was previously prior to the ALP raising the figure. The ALP would have raised it further towards 27,000 if re elected. A more appropriate figure taking into consideration Australia's rather large immigration program. It has been explained to the point of exhaustion that while Australia is third in the official intake, with some 5,600 of those being refugees, as family members complete the total, brought in at a later stage. Overall Australia is well down the list. We used to get some 200,000 a year at one time when in Germany. There they just present as that country doesn't have an official policy like Australia but means little in the realm of things. Instead of reading out of date university publications you could do worse that keeping informed from posts like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 Apparently in South Australia something like 90000 more people put Liberal as their first preference compared to Labor. So very hard done by it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 Flag i don't think ive ever seen you write one complimentary post about Australia in all your rantings. Why did you come here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.