was unsure where to put it, here or "rudd under pressure"
think he is feeling the heat ??? ;)



Quote:

HINDU extremists burned effigies of Kevin Rudd and shouted angry slogans outside the Australian High Commission in New Delhi yesterday as fury over a series of attacks on Indian students in Melbourne reached dangerous new heights. Amid growing concern in Canberra that the issue was damaging relations between the two countries, the Prime Minister sought to reassure India that Australia was not a racist nation. However, a new flashpoint emerged, with accusations by Indian students in Melbourne that Victorian police used excessive force to break up a rally calling for action over racial violence. In New Delhi, about 100 members of the Bharatiya Janata Party's youth wing yesterday staged protests outside Australia's high commission before meeting briefly with Canberra's top envoy to India, John McCarthy. Members of the BJP's hardline Hindu political ally, the Shiv Sena, also burned an effigy of Mr Rudd and reportedly staged protests outside a visa office in Mumbai.......

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25573550-601,00.html

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 9:02am:

was unsure where to put it, here or "rudd under pressure" think he is feeling the heat ??? ;)

Do you think this is on the head of one politician?

They're not burning Rudd's effigy, they're burning an effigy of the Australian representing those of us who give a wink and a nod to violent racial intolerance, that produce members of a police force who call the victims of these crimes soft targets because they are decent, non-aggressive, law-abiding guests... Like somehow its the victims' fault.

Is it white people beating the Indians up? I wonder.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 9:37am:

... soft targets because they are decent, non-aggressive, law-abiding guests... Like somehow its the victims' fault.

So if Police tells law-abiding guests to leave intersection and they don't, only points toward 2 possibilities:

They are law-abiding guests on their terms
They do not understand English

Happy wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 10:22am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 9:37am: ... soft targets because they are decent, non-aggressive, law-abiding guests... Like somehow its the victims' fault. So if Police tells law-abiding guests to leave intersection and they don't, only points toward 2 possibilities: They are law-abiding guests on their terms They do not understand English

It might be clearer to you, Happy, if you were in a hospital bed with a broken jaw (because you were in a train speaking your first language into an iphone), when you heard that your family and friends had staged a sit-in at an intersection because they had just been told by law enforcement officers that maybe you provoked your own attack... not through aggression, but that you were alone and had the cheek to look and act foreign.

Guess what Helian?
Ordinary Australians get attacked for flippant reasons every day of the year.
It just so happens that there are more Indians in this country now than at any other time in history - 99% of them being rich back in their homeland. It only stands to reason that there will also be more incidents ocurring which involve them.

Do you think they'd stop coming here because of bad advertising?
No way, they come here for the money and they do very well.
Not only do they do very well, but they rort our system.
I know for a fact that some Indians pay shonky agents about $10K for a non-existent education course (cooking or some bs). They then work here (as a working student), "donate" money to political parties, and send money home.

If fearful Indians parents send their little princes and princesses (a lot of them are) to other western countries that want their business, then great. Maybe then young Australians might be able to afford entrance to a university.

Amadd wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2009 at 9:52am:

Guess what Helian? Ordinary Australians get attacked for flippant reasons every day of the year. It just so happens that there are more Indians in this country now than at any other time in history - 99% of them being rich back in their homeland. It only stands to reason that there will also be more incidents ocurring which involve them. Do you think they'd stop coming here because of bad advertising? No way, they come here for the money and they do very well. Not only do they do very well, but they rort our system. I know for a fact that some Indians pay shonky agents about $10K for a non-existent education course (cooking or some bs). They then work here (as a working student), "donate" money to political parties, and send money home. If fearful Indians parents send their little princes and princesses (a lot of them are) to other western countries that want their business, then great. Maybe then young Australians might be able to afford entrance to a university.

Well, if they're all rich back home, why do they need to rort the system?

But you know nothing of the sort. You heard a story that some mate told you about someone he'd heard of who 'knew for a fact' Indians pay shonky agents for fake courses... If you really knew that for a fact, you'd have dobbed them in and be gabbing on here about what you'd done.

Quote:

Well, if they're all rich back home, why do they need to rort the system?

In case you hadn't noticed, our dollar is worth far more than the rupee. They make far more in western countries than they can at home.


Quote:

But you know nothing of the sort. You heard a story that some mate told you about someone he'd heard of who 'knew for a fact' Indians pay shonky agents for fake courses...

Fair enough, I have no concrete proof - I haven't bothered to look for harder evidence.

I've worked with so-called Indian students, and after a while through general conversation, you find out  that they're not going to school.
They need to be enrolled as a student to be able to work here unless they have a specific work visa.
Later I found out from reliable sources that political parties get generous donations from them or their families, and the so-called courses they're enrolled in don't even exist.
But of course there are still many genuine students paying a high premium for advantage over Australian students.


Quote:

If you really knew that for a fact, you'd have dobbed them in and be gabbing on here about what you'd done.

If I had bonafide proof I wouldn't do anything with it.
I've done my tour of duty as a good samaritan and I'd never go through that crap again. They put you through hell.
If I saw a murder outside my front door, I'd close the door and turn up the TV.

Quote:

But you know nothing of the sort. You heard a story that some mate told you about someone he'd heard of who 'knew for a fact' Indians pay shonky agents for fake courses...

Yet last year there was a TV expose on this very thing.  It also involved other Asian groups as well.

Having vetted many job applications in the past I can tell you first hand that many Filipinos for example try to pass off false certificates and even submit certificates etc that don't belong to them.

Amadd wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2009 at 11:19am:

… I've done my tour of duty as a good samaritan and I'd never go through that crap again. They put you through hell. If I saw a murder outside my front door, I'd close the door and turn up the TV.

It is so hard to report crime and retain reasonable safety in Australia that it is not funny.

Crims and accused persons have many rights, effectively discouraging reporting even a little crime.

Happy wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2009 at 12:10pm:

Amadd wrote on Jun 3rd, 2009 at 11:19am: … I've done my tour of duty as a good samaritan and I'd never go through that crap again. They put you through hell. If I saw a murder outside my front door, I'd close the door and turn up the TV. It is so hard to report crime and retain reasonable safety in Australia that it is not funny. Crims and accused persons have many rights, effectively discouraging reporting even a little crime.

There's always an anonymous call.. from a phone box out in Shitdeep Suburbia.

Quote:

There's always an anonymous call.. from a phone box out in Shitdeep Suburbia.

I suppose so, but even if I knew at the time that there was something shonky going on, I still doubt if I would've bothered ringing crimestoppers about it. Unless of course they really p!ssed me off for some reason.


Quote:

was unsure where to put it, here or "rudd under pressure" think he is feeling the heat ???  ;)

;D ;D ;D

Amadd wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2009 at 1:08pm:

Quote: There's always an anonymous call.. from a phone box out in Shitdeep Suburbia. I suppose so, but even if I knew at the time that there was something shonky going on, I still doubt if I would've bothered ringing crimestoppers about it. Unless of course they really p!ssed me off for some reason.

And you expect so much of immigrants and guests.

Amadd wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2009 at 1:08pm:

Quote: There's always an anonymous call.. from a phone box out in Shitdeep Suburbia. I suppose so, but even if I knew at the time that there was something shonky going on, I still doubt if I would've bothered ringing crimestoppers about it. Unless of course they really p!ssed me off for some reason. …

As a side note, this alone lowers the crime statistics without Police lifting a finger.

Happy wrote on Jun 4^th, 2009 at 12:14pm:

Amadd wrote on Jun 3rd, 2009 at 1:08pm: Quote: There's always an anonymous call.. from a phone box out in Shitdeep Suburbia. I suppose so, but even if I knew at the time that there was something shonky going on, I still doubt if I would've bothered ringing crimestoppers about it. Unless of course they really p!ssed me off for some reason. … As a side note, this alone lowers the crime statistics without Police lifting a finger.

How would that significantly be the case if a call to crimestoppers cannot be associated with a report of a crime by the victims?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2009 at 12:24pm:

Happy wrote on Jun 4th, 2009 at 12:14pm: As a side note, this alone lowers the crime statistics without Police lifting a finger. How would that significantly be the case if a call to crimestoppers cannot be associated with a report of a crime by the victims?

I think it can be looked at this way:
Once crime is reported crime is recorded and enters magic land of statistics.

What happens after are different statistics:
Crime solving
Conviction of offender.

Without that initial call, crime does not exist.

Happy wrote on Jun 4^th, 2009 at 1:13pm:

I think it can be looked at this way: Once crime is reported crime is recorded and enters magic land of statistics. What happens after are different statistics: Crime solving Conviction of offender. Without that initial call, crime does not exist.

The initial report is usually from the victim of the crime, not the subsequent calls to crimestoppers.

I remember an old Wizard of Id comic strip from the '70's.

The king is going around the kingdom in his coach, telling the people he is raisng their taxes.
Sir Rodney rides up and tells the king that "They are planning to burn you in effigy"

The king yells out to the coach driver, "Make sure we steer clear of EFFIGY". ;D

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2009 at 9:20pm:

The initial report is usually from the victim of the crime, not the subsequent calls to crimestoppers.

OK, what happens if crime is not reported?

Does crime exist or not?