MARYROSE02 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 All I can find in that is two comments; that he set out for Australia seeking to further his studies here, and that he was a well educated refugee. Accepting that people read reports according to their own views in different ways, I take from the fact it is not a direct verbatim quote that the first part could have easily been part of a longer comment (perhaps as I said above indicating that he would not be a burden on the state if accepted), and the second part indicates that he was seeking 'refuge' from something a little worse than a job shortage. I don't think 'refugee' would be the word used for someone looking for a job. Migrant maybe. Refugee points to something a little more serious and that word is a direct quote. Papers are very careful about what they print and how they print it sometimes, and can very subtly guide their readers to form a certain opinion. Hence it's important to always look at not only the words they use, but how they use them. Monsoon season, remember! What happened during 'monsoon season' under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd? Did the boats stop then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 Monsoon season, remember! You really are in denial aren't you ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 I always thought denial was a river in Africa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Okay I get it if the truth doesn't suit your argument just pretend the media are lying. The media suites its own agenda. Just as different flavoured media outlets will put a different spin on the same story, making it sound rather different. Best get it from experience from those that have been/are on the ground . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diane Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Okay I get it if the truth doesn't suit your argument just pretend the media are lying. I didn't say they were lying - in fact, they are very careful NOT to lie. As I say, read HOW they write things, not just what they write. You really are in denial aren't you ? I'm not the one resorting to personal attacks when I'm unable to counter a reasonable argument! Edited March 5, 2014 by Diane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I always thought denial was a river in Africa. Your geography as your politics are not among your stronger points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Bottom line the current policies are working.The camps and refusal to settle illegal boat arrivals in Australia are acting as the deterrent they are designed to be. The boats have finally stopped. None have reached Australia for around 75 days now. The odd one that still tries gets turned back. Eventually it becomes a non issue as no ne arrivals mean the camps will empty over time as the residents get processed and resettled in the region or go home. No more drownings too. Which is exactly why the Australian people voted for Tony Abbott at the last election. Not because they are all racist, but because they want to live in a country that has control over its own borders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 If the brother in law had said he was being persecuted and had to flee for his life they would have reported that. But he didn't he said he left because he couldn't get a job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I didn't say they were lying - in fact, they are very careful NOT to lie. As I say, read HOW they write things, not just what they write. It's the spin they put on things and the unquestioning consumers. Advertisers know full well. As do politicians, car salesmen and mortgage lenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diane Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Which is exactly why the Australian people voted for Tony Abbott at the last election. Not because they are all racist, but because they want to live in a country that has control over its own borders. ...or because they hated Kevin Rudd....or because they had been influenced by a very well orchestrated and very clever media campaign... or because they exploited a deplorable loophole in the voting system in this country that enabled them to vote more than once.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diane Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If the brother in law had said he was being persecuted and had to flee for his life they would have reported that.But he didn't he said he left because he couldn't get a job. Once more because I really ought to get on with some work. Where does it say that his brother in law said that? It doesn't. There is a full stop after what the b-in-l said. Then a new sentence. You are making an assumption. That is what you are being primed to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 It is pretty clear, but I can see you prefer to believe a media lie. Sigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 Your geography as your politics are not among your stronger points. Okay, enlighten me. Not in Africa. Really. Europe ? Australia ? Antarctica ? Please educate me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Once more because I really ought to get on with some work. Where does it say that his brother in law said that? It doesn't. There is a full stop after what the b-in-l said. Then a new sentence. You are making an assumption. That is what you are being primed to do. The reffo bashers will seek out any snippet of press cutting in order to prove their faulty mindset, not wanting to appear too radical in instances, almost appearing to wanting to engage in a logical argument. Don't be fooled they are of one agenda and are not open too reason. Demonise the asylum seekers at every turn is the sordid name of their little game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Okay, enlighten me. Not in Africa.Really. Europe ? Australia ? Antarctica ? Please educate me. There wouldn't be enough lifetimes nor the desire. I'm afraid you'll just have to remain fumbling in the dark. If you come across a light switch though, please do turn on. Instructions can follow is so deemed required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If the brother in law had said he was being persecuted and had to flee for his life they would have reported that.But he didn't he said he left because he couldn't get a job. There is such a thing as being taken out of context as well. Done all the time in the media world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 At least I know which continent the longest river in the world is in. So I back my education against yours. Anyway I am tired of this bickering for the time being. Let me know if you find any evidence at all that the poor man who died was in fact fleeing persecution. I won't hold my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diane Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 At least I know which continent the longest river in the world is in.So I back my education against yours. Anyway I am tired of this bickering for the time being. Let me know if you find any evidence at all that the poor man who died was in fact fleeing persecution. I won't hold my breath. Let us know if you find any evidence that he wasn't! That's genuine, stand-up-in-a-court-of-law type evidence, not assumption. Thanks. Oh and have a listen to this in the meantime - I might even be tempted to vote for this guy if I lived in WA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 I've shown you mine. Now show me yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 At least I know which continent the longest river in the world is in.So I back my education against yours. Anyway I am tired of this bickering for the time being. Let me know if you find any evidence at all that the poor man who died was in fact fleeing persecution. I won't hold my breath. Believe me I would love to come against you in a question/answer scenario. Let alone a debate. Anyway the person in question never was given the opportunity to state his case so can an assumption be made? It is obvious the deceased would have hoped for his career to take off in Australia. And so? What an asset he would likely have been. Iran for your information has a very high number of educated unemployed. These being educated and out of frustration with the system in Iran, being very conservative to the point of medieval as well as harsh towards dissenters and any opposition has bred a nation of radicals wanting change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I've shown you mine.Now show me yours. Better of staying with the facts. It was not determined if the deceased was or wasn't a genuine refugee. He was never given the opportunity to plead his case under UNHCR rulings. He was in detention indefinitely having committed no crime, under the "care of the Australian Government", and murdered in the process. Rather more apt considerations than what some Australian newspaper comment by way of a third person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Yesterday there were a couple of items in the news, one concerning an Afghan refugee who has been jailed for molesting young girls in a swimming pool, and the other about an immigrant from Lebanon who came here on a student visa and has married a 12 yo girl, (with her father's approval.) Both cases involve people who come from countries with different values to our own. They don't even consider they have committed any crime. I know Australians commit plenty of horrible crimes too. You've only got to look at the reports in those commisions of inquiry into abuse in children's homes. But those people whose mantra is 'LET THEM ALL IN' seem to care nothing for how we help people to adapt to our way of life, and where we find the resources. They will probably just condemn us as racists for not showing sufficient understanding for the lifestyles of people from other cultures! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon4017 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 It was not determined if the deceased was or wasn't a genuine refugee. He was never given the opportunity to plead his case under UNHCR rulings. Surely by claiming asylum he's already "pleaded his case". That his case hadn't yet been assessed is another issue. What would be interesting is to compare his initial statements against those of his family. Did he enter and claim to be seeking "economic asylum". (Can you even claim such a thing?) Or did he provide a story relating to more tangible persecution? In my life, I've met 3 relevant cases. The first was an Iraqi student at the same uni. His official stay was nearly up, and he was considering whether to go back, since the Gulf War I was about to kick off. He was worried about what effect his claim might have on the rest of his family in Iraq. If he went back then he was almost certain to be absorbed into Saddam Husseins regime. Not tortured or anything, but he would end up in the same crowd and potentially suffer the same fate. I'm not sure what he did in the end. The next group were a bunch of Ecuadorians in the UK, all men in their twenties. At first they claimed they fled Ecuador because of "the situation". They were very reluctant to elaborate on this. They were great guys, and eager to fit in. But it soon became clear that they faced no real danger back home, and they were in the UK primarily to learn English and get jobs, which several of them managed to do. One even went back to Ecuador to visit. The next pair were a couple of Turkish guys living in Bern, Switzerland. I met them because we all studies German together. They were unabashed "economic refugees", just playing the system until they got PR. The teacher (herself a Turkish national) was ashamed of them. Again, they weren't bad guys, but they had a scripted story to offer the officials if ever questioned. They saw nothing wrong with what they were doing. Os course, someone being murdered in a camp is bad, but I wonder how many refugees are either a)murdered, or b) die through inadequate conditions in other refugee camps in other parts of the world. The kind of people who flee imminent danger with nothing into a neighbouring state. And who languish there for years. I think these people deserve our help. And I get the uncomfortable feeling that cases like the last 2 I mentioned, and the Iranian architect, are undermining the free worlds' support for the asylum system in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bibbs Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 ...or because they hated Kevin Rudd....or because they had been influenced by a very well orchestrated and very clever media campaign... or because they exploited a deplorable loophole in the voting system in this country that enabled them to vote more than once.... or because they agreed with Abbott's policies, didn't pay attention to any of the media, and only voted once. He won on his manifesto, he's now acting on that. You don't like it? Tough. Put the toys back in the pram and you'll get another say in a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ptp113 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 or because they agreed with Abbott's policies, didn't pay attention to any of the media, and only voted once. He won on his manifesto, he's now acting on that. You don't like it? Tough. Put the toys back in the pram and you'll get another say in a few years. Some voted up to 15 times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.