The bleeding heart community are up in arms because our border patrol people didn't get there in time to save these peoples' lives.
I must be missing something.
It's our fault if these intending invaders climb on a worm-eaten hulk and set off on a trip to welfare paradise?
We are supposed to set aside resources sufficient to be on guard 24/7 over hundreds of thousands of square kms of ocean just in case they don't make it.
Get real!
Pay the man money to get here illegally, it's your lookout!

bogarde73 wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 2:59pm:

The bleeding heart community are up in arms because our border patrol people didn't get there in time to save these peoples' lives. I must be missing something. It's our fault if these intending invaders climb on a worm-eaten hulk and set off on a trip to welfare paradise? We are supposed to set aside resources sufficient to be on guard 24/7 over hundreds of thousands of square kms of ocean just in case they don't make it. Get real! Pay the man money to get here illegally, it's your lookout!

Didn't you know that is the sole purpose of the RAAF and Navy maritime surveillance budget is for just that reason.

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

Chasing ambulances again?

When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people.
We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos

Quote:

link=1370840380/3#3 http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/right.gifdate=1370843127]When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people. We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos

Must be something in the water where you're from.
We don't tow sinking boats...  we plug 'em up then tow them.
lots of solutions to that problem...  brain in gear b4 mouth eh.

We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war.

The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people.

Karnal wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people.

I vote that we do what the Iraqi police force is doing with suspects and kill them by drilling holes in their heads.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people. We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos

Like the bodies were washing up on our northern shores when Howard had them towed back?
I don't think it went like that at the time eh.
I do believe the boats stopped coming when the country shoppers realised they were doing their dough only to end up back in Indonesia.
As they will when Abbott repeats the exercise.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:07pm: We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people. I vote that we do what the Iraqi police force is doing with suspects and kill them by drilling holes in their heads.

First sensible you have said in years crow.

Illegal stopper.

---

The boat went down 65 nautical miles north of Christmas Island. That's Indonesian waters isn't it.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people. We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos

Less people died when the LIBs were towing boats back compared to what's happening under Labor

You you got nothing

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 3:45pm: When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people. We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos Less people died when the LIBs were towing boats back compared to what's happening under Labor You you got nothing

I don't think so. The current scenario is a farken mess. A canoe rocked up today seeking asylum. Soon people will be rocking up on rubber tubes. Stupid people!!!!

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 3:45pm: When Abbott starts towing sinking boats back out the sea we're going to have to get used to dead bodies washing up on our northern shores so now is as good a time as any to start ignoring the pleas of drowning people. We ignored the ships of Jewish refugees in the 30's and 40's so it shouldn't be hard to ignore these reffos Less people died when the LIBs were towing boats back compared to what's happening under Labor You you got nothing

We now get in a week or less the same number of people Howard glad arrive in the entire time of the Pacific Solution. By any standard, no matter how low you want to set the bar, Labor's policy for dealing with these illegal immigrants has been a total, utter failure and a farcical embarrassment to not only Gillard and her incompetent government but also to this country, upon which people smugglers look at and laugh while counting the millions of dollars they make while running rings around our dumba$$ Immigration Minister. Forty thousand and counting since 2007 = EPIC FAILURE by Labor!!!!!!

Karnal wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people.

Totally wrong. Under maritime law, we are obligated to provide any assistance necessary to anyone requesting it in our territorial waters and those in international waters. As for treating them as enemy combatants, that's simply ludicrous. They are unarmed and have not attacked either Australia or our interests and so we cannot treat them as anything other than people in need of our assistance.

I see the photos of these "desperate" boat people are of well dressed Sri Lankan families with kids.

What sort of fricken father puts his children on a leaky boat to ride the Indian Ocean?

Sri Lanka is a safe country. They are economic migrants.
Nothing more.

If you take in this sob story, more fool you.

Sorry to be pedantic but they are coming in boats full ... not boat fuls.  ;)  Pickering had an article recently about just how these "asylum seekers" get here, what the procedure is and how much it costs.  How much truth is in it who knows, but it is most interesting.

http://pickeringpost.com/article/one-mans-boat-trip-to-oz/1483

"illegals"    ;D


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eyOg94szRe8/Tg0a88lK27I/AAAAAAAAA9Q/_A3bb8pBnQs/s400/social_talkback-radio.jpg

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 6:55pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:07pm: We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people. Totally wrong. Under maritime law, we are obligated to provide any assistance necessary to anyone requesting it in our territorial waters and those in international waters. As for treating them as enemy combatants, that's simply ludicrous. They are unarmed and have not attacked either Australia or our interests and so we cannot treat them as anything other than people in need of our assistance.

Leftard alert. Looks like we have another JuLiar worshipper ready to let these people invade us and take control of our country.

So typical of the leftard apeasers.

We are at war against these illegal invaders. They are guilty of coming to Australia without a visa, and as such have declared a state of war against our people and our country.

I believe our stance should be the doctrine of pre-emptive defence.. We must strike first to prevent future atrocities and visa breeches by these people. Otherwise they will continue to penetrate our borders and take over our once proud culture.

Still, I wouldn’t expect the JuLiar followers to agree. That’s why Mr Abbott will be the next leader of this country, thank you very.much.

STOP THE BOATS.

Karnal wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 7:51pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 6:55pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:07pm: We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people. Totally wrong. Under maritime law, we are obligated to provide any assistance necessary to anyone requesting it in our territorial waters and those in international waters. As for treating them as enemy combatants, that's simply ludicrous. They are unarmed and have not attacked either Australia or our interests and so we cannot treat them as anything other than people in need of our assistance. Leftard alert. Looks like we have another JuLiar worshipper ready to let these people invade us and take control of our country. So typical of the leftard apeasers. We are at war against these illegal invaders. They are guilty of coming to Australia without a visa, and as such have declared a state of war against our people and our country. I believe our stance should be the doctrine of pre-emptive defence.. We must strike first to prevent future atrocities and visa breeches by these people. Otherwise they will continue to penetrate our borders and take over our once proud culture. Still, I wouldn’t expect the JuLiar followers to agree. That’s why Mr Abbott will be the next leader of this country, thank you very.much. STOP THE BOATS.

Be sarcastic as much as you want but there will be more hundreds more dead before it's halted. Many children too.

Big Dave wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 8:22pm:

... there will be more hundreds more dead before it's halted. Many children too.

Yes, and under a Liberal Government.

What will you say then?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 8:22pm: ... there will be more hundreds more dead before it's halted. Many children too. Yes, and under a Liberal Government. What will you say then?

I agree. A change in government will be the first step but this mess is going to take alot of fixing. It was fixed and now it's not.

Appeasing, vaccilating, lisping, leftard. This problem will not be fixed without a war against.illegals.

WE DECIDE WHO COMES TO THIS COUNTRY AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THEY COME.

We?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 8:22pm: ... there will be more hundreds more dead before it's halted. Many children too. Yes, and under a Liberal Government. What will you say then?

I'll laugh my f#ckin arse off  ;D

Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! But it's a good damned blood bath. The sharks are out there feeding on the corpses of little children. If you were any sorts of human beings you'd want the whole tragedy stopped. You do-gooders are so full of contradictions.

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:33am:

Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! But it's a good damned blood bath. The sharks are out there feeding on the corpses of little children. If you were any sorts of human beings you'd want the whole tragedy stopped. You do-gooders are so full of contradictions.

At least they're not full of the same brown, smelly stuff that righties are full of.

Kat wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:20am:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! But it's a good damned blood bath. The sharks are out there feeding on the corpses of little children. If you were any sorts of human beings you'd want the whole tragedy stopped. You do-gooders are so full of contradictions. At least they're not full of the same brown, smelly stuff that righties are full of.

You are delusional.
How many more must die because of do gooder left wing policies.

Sorry to be pedantic but they are coming in boats full ... not boat fuls.

So I coined a new word for our living language, isn't that worth a gold star or something?

Finally, and to maintain the rage, let me just make this prophetic statement:
Better bodies in the sea than blood on the streets.

bogarde73 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 10:52am:

Sorry to be pedantic but they are coming in boats full ... not boat fuls. So I coined a new word for our living language, isn't that worth a gold star or something? Finally, and to maintain the rage, let me just make this prophetic statement: Better bodies in the sea than blood on the streets.

"illegals"    ;D

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/05/10/theater/10talkback-one/10talkback-one-blog480.jpg

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:33am:

Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats.

you know, gregpec, your semantic line on this is becoming really boring.
Face the facts. The vast majority of Australians regard them as illegals.

bogarde73 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 12:01pm:

you know, gregpec, your semantic line on this is becoming really boring. Face the facts. The vast majority of Australians regard them as illegals.

"illegals"   ;D


http://www.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Media/images/080620-TalkBack-8547a949-c2fc-4996-aa7f-074fca49863c.jpg

Karnal wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 11:57am:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats.

Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't.

Kat wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:20am:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! But it's a good damned blood bath. The sharks are out there feeding on the corpses of little children. If you were any sorts of human beings you'd want the whole tragedy stopped. You do-gooders are so full of contradictions. At least they're not full of the same brown, smelly stuff that righties are full of.

Go and wiggle in the sand in your little pixie world Kat.

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 12:08pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't.

Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 12:29pm:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves.

Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon?

Well we have & its done bugger all

Oh we haven't towed any boats back?
I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO.
Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele?
Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise?

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html


Quote:

THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say.

Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon?
I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia?

Don't bother I already know.

Germany, I understand, does not accept refugee applications or arrivals, without requisite documentation. Seems reasonable.
Why isn't this government putting pressure on the foreign governments to put a stop to illegal emigration? You can't leave Australia without requisite documentation.

they should all be permanently billeted at sarah hansen youngs house. 

horny bitch ;)

i hear they like to sew lips together,  they can start on sarah,

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 1:36pm:

Germany, I understand, does not accept refugee applications or arrivals, without requisite documentation. Seems reasonable. Why isn't this government putting pressure on the foreign governments to put a stop to illegal emigration? You can't leave Australia without requisite documentation.

Asylum seeking isn't "illegal emigration".

Two different things.

Doesn't matter. They should have papers. Otherwise it's illegal.
Why doesn't the Labor Govt address this issue with the governments of the countries where these people are from.
Get some courage.

If they are deliberately destroying their documents then yes, it is illegal immigration.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:11pm:

Doesn't matter. They should have papers. Otherwise it's illegal.

Incorrect.

If they are claiming asylum, it's not illegal.

ian wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:12pm:

If they are deliberately destroying their documents then yes, it is illegal immigration.

Incorrect.

However, feel free to provide a link to the Act, and particular section of that Act, which you think deems it "illegal immigration".

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:15pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:11pm: Doesn't matter. They should have papers. Otherwise it's illegal. Incorrect. If they are claiming asylum, it's not illegal.

It must be illegal to cram too many people on unseaworthy vessels.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 12:52pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know.

Still can't face raw, hard facts, eh? Simply reinstating offshore processing was never going to work and Abbott has consistently said as much. Labor needs to reintroduce the full suite of policies put in place by Howard, including offshore processing and TPVs. TPVs were extremely effective because they did not lead to permanent residence status and did not allow those who held this visa to take a holiday back home and then return to Australia to continue their claim for asylum. once you left, you could not return. Gillard has refused and must accept the blame for the resulting 40,000 people who have arrived on more than 500 boats since Labor won office. Gillard must also accept that it is her policies that are encouraging people to risk their lives and in some cases, die at sea. You simply can't run away from the truth - the Pacific Solution worked, Rudd made a colossal mistake in dismantling that policy and Gillard has succeeded only in making matters far worse under her Prime Ministership.

Shouldn't be any problem at all making it illegal to come to this country without papers, asylum-seeking or not.
Germany has no problem with it apparently. Why does the Labor Party?
All of my forebears were immigrants to this country, some of them seeking asylum from the economic, political and religious tyranny of the British Government. They still had to have papers to get here though. And they got them.

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:15pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:11pm: Doesn't matter. They should have papers. Otherwise it's illegal. Incorrect. If they are claiming asylum, it's not illegal. It must be illegal to cram too many people on unseaworthy vessels.

You could be correct.  Seems quite unsafe to me.

However, that doesn't make the people on the boats "illegal immigrants": they remain legal asylum seekers.

People have a legal right to claim asylum no matter what their method of transport is, how they paid for it, how much money they have (or don't have), how much documentation they have (or don't have), or how many criminal convictions they have.

They may not ultimately be granted refugee status, however, they can still legally make a claim for asylum and have that claim assessed.

Not illegal, but unlawful...

::)

;D

and they should make that application in their home countries to the nearest Australian embassy on consulate. Not by getting on a boat without documentation and landing in Australia illegally.
If it isn't illegal already it should be made so.
And if it takes a change of government to get that simple thing achieved, then change the government.

FriYAY wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:44pm:

Not illegal, but unlawful... ::) ;D

"unlawful non-citizens", that's correct. 

Not 'unlawful immigrants', or 'unlawful asylum seekers' (there's actually no such thing as an 'unlawful asylum seeker, and asylum seekers aren't actually immigrants at the time of claiming asylum).

This explains it quite well:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/AsylumFacts

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:50pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:44pm: Not illegal, but unlawful... ::) ;D "unlawful non-citizens", that's correct.  Not 'unlawful immigrants', or 'unlawful asylum seekers' (there's actually no such thing as an 'unlawful asylum seeker, and asylum seekers aren't actually immigrants at the time of claiming asylum). This explains it quite well: http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/AsylumFacts

;D ;D ;D


It's not illegal but it dam should be.

;)

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:45pm:

and they should make that application in their home countries to the nearest Australian embassy on consulate. Not by getting on a boat without documentation and landing in Australia illegally. If it isn't illegal already it should be made so. And if it takes a change of government to get that simple thing achieved, then change the government.

Judging by that post, it appears that you don't quite understand what an asylum seeker (and refugee) is.

Making an application in their home country is not always possible.

"An asylum seeker is a person who has fled their own country and applied for protection as a refugee."

"According to the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by its 1967 Protocol (the Refugee Convention), a refugee is a person who is outside their own country and is unable or unwilling to return due to a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their:

race
religion
nationality
membership of a particular social group or
political opinion."

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/asylum-seekers-and-refugees

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:45pm:

and they should make that application in their home countries to the nearest Australian embassy on consulate. Not by getting on a boat without documentation and landing in Australia illegally. If it isn't illegal already it should be made so. And if it takes a change of government to get that simple thing achieved, then change the government.

It is unfortunately not that simple.

I wish Australia could draw its total intake from those in refugee camps, but our international legal obligations dictate otherwise.   

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:52pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know. Still can't face raw, hard facts, eh? Simply reinstating offshore processing was never going to work and Abbott has consistently said as much. Labor needs to reintroduce the full suite of policies put in place by Howard, including offshore processing and TPVs. TPVs were extremely effective because they did not lead to permanent residence status and did not allow those who held this visa to take a holiday back home and then return to Australia to continue their claim for asylum. once you left, you could not return. Gillard has refused and must accept the blame for the resulting 40,000 people who have arrived on more than 500 boats since Labor won office. Gillard must also accept that it is her policies that are encouraging people to risk their lives and in some cases, die at sea. You simply can't run away from the truth - the Pacific Solution worked, Rudd made a colossal mistake in dismantling that policy and Gillard has succeeded only in making matters far worse under her Prime Ministership.

Yawn, you've ignored the fact I addressed everyone of Abbott's "Suite" of policies.

The Pacific Solution worked in its time, whilst Iraq was still at war, whilst the Tamils were still at war, granted the on going weeping sore of Afghanistan hasn't changed. But given 2 of the 3 largest groups of reffo's has.
Do you think it would still be working?

I'm smacking over you simpletons, Do you really believe all will be as it was in 2005 by electing Abbott, the world has changed & continues to do so.
It will NEVER be 2005 again & in 2016 when the debt level is as big or bigger than now are you still going to try the Its Gillards fault, of course you will or you'll sight debt to GDP pointing out how small a % it is compared to other western economies( without even blinking), because it a football game to you idiots.
bugger the country, my team should always win regardless.

Tony wont stop the boats
He won't tow them back
He may well introduce TPV's again seeing that the only thing he actually has control of, but will you ring your hands for the drowned women & children post Sept, no of course not, you'll revert back to "it's their fault".

Oh, the United Nations?
Ok, then change the government (that will happen), get rid of Labor, and change the law... if it needs to be. That will probably happen too.
Germany, I understand, accepts no applications of any type without papers.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:07pm:

Oh, the United Nations? Ok, then change the government (that will happen), get rid of Labor, and change the law... if it needs to be. That will probably happen too. Germany, I understand, accepts no applications of any type without papers.

The Libs aren't going to change it.

Quote of the thread, from aquascoot:
i hear they like to sew lips together,  they can start on sarah,

Whatever they do, they must stop this muslim invasion for that's quite simply what it is.
95% of the illegal arrivals are muslim, about 40,000 of the potential disruptives. When family reunion is granted that will be doubled or tripled.
Heed the words of Enoch Powell: "blood in the streets"

I think it is largely a scam.
How many applications have been made at Australian embassies or consuls in these countries?

The Labor Party hasn't changed it, probably want to bolster their voter base.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:17pm:

I think it is largely a scam. How many applications have been made at Australian embassies or consuls in these countries?

::)

You are confusing 'asylum seeking' with normal 'immigration'.

"It is often too dangerous for refugees to apply for a passport or exit visa or approach an Australian Embassy for a visa, as such actions could put their lives, and the lives of their families, at risk."

http://www.refugeeweek.org.au/resources/2012_RW_ResourceKit_Ch4.pdf

what, 40,000 of them can't make applications?
rubbish.

no, I'm not confusing anything... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple.
If the Australian Government wants to do something about that... see to it in the originating countries... and bring the actions of those governments to the attention of the United Nations if need be... and then follow through with action or sanctions in respect of those governments.
There you are ... a fine fabian socialist globalist solution.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:31pm:

what, 40,000 of them can't make applications?

Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world.



shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:31pm:

... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple.

That's quite simply incorrect.

It will be made correct.
politically correct. If not by your lot, then an alternative government.

This country needs less attitudes like your's.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:22pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:52pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know. Still can't face raw, hard facts, eh? Simply reinstating offshore processing was never going to work and Abbott has consistently said as much. Labor needs to reintroduce the full suite of policies put in place by Howard, including offshore processing and TPVs. TPVs were extremely effective because they did not lead to permanent residence status and did not allow those who held this visa to take a holiday back home and then return to Australia to continue their claim for asylum. once you left, you could not return. Gillard has refused and must accept the blame for the resulting 40,000 people who have arrived on more than 500 boats since Labor won office. Gillard must also accept that it is her policies that are encouraging people to risk their lives and in some cases, die at sea. You simply can't run away from the truth - the Pacific Solution worked, Rudd made a colossal mistake in dismantling that policy and Gillard has succeeded only in making matters far worse under her Prime Ministership. Yawn, you've ignored the fact I addressed everyone of Abbott's "Suite" of policies. The Pacific Solution worked in its time, whilst Iraq was still at war, whilst the Tamils were still at war, granted the on going weeping sore of Afghanistan hasn't changed. But given 2 of the 3 largest groups of reffo's has. Do you think it would still be working? I'm smacking over you simpletons, Do you really believe all will be as it was in 2005 by electing Abbott, the world has changed & continues to do so. It will NEVER be 2005 again & in 2016 when the debt level is as big or bigger than now are you still going to try the Its Gillards fault, of course you will or you'll sight debt to GDP pointing out how small a % it is compared to other western economies( without even blinking), because it a football game to you idiots. bugger the country, my team should always win regardless. Tony wont stop the boats He won't tow them back He may well introduce TPV's again seeing that the only thing he actually has control of, but will you ring your hands for the drowned women & children post Sept, no of course not, you'll revert back to "it's their fault".

Excuse me, most of us here want Mr Abbott to SHOOT the boats. These people have invaded our country illegally. We are thereby permitted to treat this act as a state of war. The navy should act immediately.

Well, after Mr Abbott gets in. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. It's a tried and true formula. JuLiar encourages boats. Mr Abbott frightens them off.

JuLiar and Mr Abbott are like sirens and sea monsters, luring or propelling these people to their doom.

STOP THE BOATS.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:35pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect.

whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;)

out with the undemocratic fabian globalists

Shampain, do you have a specific link re the refugee application situation in Germany???????

I've found and read a couple of documents, neither of which stipulates no papers, no acceptance of application on arrival....

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:35pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect.

How would you know whether it is correct?

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;)

It won't change when the Libs get in.

Asylum seekers will still be able to seek asylum in Australia without a passport or visa.

Not sure why you thought otherwise   :-/

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:48pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:45pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;) It won't change when the Libs get in. Asylum seekers will still be able to seek asylum in Australia without a passport or visa. Not sure why you thought otherwise   :-/

You're assuming Mr Abbott won't take Australia out of the UN.

Typical.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:47pm:

out with the undemocratic fabian globalists

yes, indeed,  that is exactly what morns like gillard are co are.  the australian people wouldnt really know what a fabian or a globalist is, but they can smell sh*t and they know somethings not right.  'gut instinct"  gregory,  you cant fight it.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct?

I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958.

oh greggy,  you are wrong on this one.
temporary protection visas old chap

Karnal wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:48pm: aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:45pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;) It won't change when the Libs get in. Asylum seekers will still be able to seek asylum in Australia without a passport or visa. Not sure why you thought otherwise   :-/ You're assuming Mr Abbott won't take Australia out of the UN.

Yes.

Funny that.

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:50pm:

oh greggy,  you are wrong on this one. temporary protection visas old chap

No.

Everything I've said in this thread is 100% correct.

Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary though, if you think you can.

You'll excuse me for not holding my breath while waiting though.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:51pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:48pm: aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:45pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;) It won't change when the Libs get in. Asylum seekers will still be able to seek asylum in Australia without a passport or visa. Not sure why you thought otherwise   :-/ You're assuming Mr Abbott won't take Australia out of the UN. Yes. Funny that.

UN  pffft, couldnt even design a nice christmas card,  little blue helmets and white tanks.  i am quaking in my boots.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:51pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:48pm: aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:45pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. whilst you are technically correct gregory, the australian people live in a democracy and they will respond to technocrats, such as yourself, come september 14.  so, those who agree with you, will have the benefit of being 'technically correct' as they are evicted forcefully from power.  hollow "technical' victory old chap.  western sydney and the other over run suburbs are waiting to deal with your 'technicalities" in the polling booth ;) ;) ;) ;) It won't change when the Libs get in. Asylum seekers will still be able to seek asylum in Australia without a passport or visa. Not sure why you thought otherwise   :-/ You're assuming Mr Abbott won't take Australia out of the UN. Yes. Funny that.

Or that he won't invade Indonesia. Typical.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:50pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:47pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct? I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958.

Out of date when Mr Abbott gets in. He'll tear them up.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:50pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:47pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct? I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958.

... so then you'll be in a position, of course, from your academic reading, to tell us how many people have actually applied for asylum in their originating countries?

What, if anything, is this blinkered middle-class government actually doing in these countries to make its immigration processes available to people who are seeking asylum? Are they actually at the coal-face, or sitting in air-conditioned offices?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 3:53pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:50pm: oh greggy,  you are wrong on this one. temporary protection visas old chap No. Everything I've said in this thread is 100% correct. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary though, if you think you can. You'll excuse me for not holding my breath while waiting though.

Arrogant socialist bureaucrat by the sound of it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 2:38pm:

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:15pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 2:11pm: Doesn't matter. They should have papers. Otherwise it's illegal. Incorrect. If they are claiming asylum, it's not illegal. It must be illegal to cram too many people on unseaworthy vessels. You could be correct.  Seems quite unsafe to me. However, that doesn't make the people on the boats "illegal immigrants": they remain legal asylum seekers. People have a legal right to claim asylum no matter what their method of transport is, how they paid for it, how much money they have (or don't have), how much documentation they have (or don't have), or how many criminal convictions they have. They may not ultimately be granted refugee status, however, they can still legally make a claim for asylum and have that claim assessed.

What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status.

Don't they and people-smugglers get Australian citizenship? If not an Order of Australia.

I wonder who they vote for. No gongs for guessing correctly.

Get a bit of spine and tell these tin-pot governments to lay off people (if that is actually the issue), or we cut foreign aid... as well as take them to the international human rights agencies. And keep on their backs. Do it.

Start with the Australian High Commission in Colombo.
Google it, it's right there.

So, we have an expensive embassy in Sri Lanka, and apparently thousands of people *don't* go there, and get on boats instead.
What are the key performances indicators for Australian Embassies??

Better still, set up an Australian Institute of Skills Training in these places and train local people up for jobs here that there aren't enough people to fill, and give them priority to immigrate to Australia... with something to contribute.

And it can be paid for by tripling company tax for Australian companies who offshore Australian jobs, at greatly increased profit due to slave wages in other countries but continue to sell their products in Australia at premium price, while the country loses income tax and at the same time has to pay for welfare benefits for those who have lost their jobs.

This is the sort of thing a true Labor Government should be doing. Not a dink government.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 4:23pm:

Don't they and people-smugglers get Australian citizenship? If not an Order of Australia. I wonder who they vote for. No gongs for guessing correctly. Get a bit of spine and tell these tin-pot governments to lay off people (if that is actually the issue), or we cut foreign aid... as well as take them to the international human rights agencies. And keep on their backs. Do it. Start with the Australian High Commission in Colombo.

We have. The Sri Lankan government have done their best and made it a crime to leave Sri Lanka without an exit visa.

Thus, when Sri Lankans are returned to Sri Lanka they go to jail. And many of them are illegally tortured in jail.

So by making it a crime to leave Sri Lanka and come to Australia without a visa, the Sri Lankan government have created their own reason for Sri Lankans to legitimately claim asylum: if Sri Lankan people are returned, they will be jailed and, in many instances, tortured.

What to do?

The Australian Embassy officials could actually start thinking outside the square and go and see people who claim they need to apply for asylum. It involves leaving the office.
Australia needs to get pro-active about this issue and address the problem at its source, not on the oceans.
It is making the Australian government look like dim wits. And if the government can't see that, they maybe they are.

Sometimes you just have to put the boot in when it comes to intransigent governments. It gets you more respect as well. We are not a tin-pot country, and the government needs to stop behaving like it is one.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:33pm:

The Australian Embassy officials could actually start thinking outside the square and go and see people who claim they need to apply for asylum. Australia needs to get pro-active about this issue and address the problem at its source, not on the oceans. It is making the Australian government look like dim wits. And if the government can't see that, they maybe they are.

The only reason that the current Australian government looks like dimwits is because they are dimwits being lead by the biggest dimwit in their party and her 2IC is almost as much of a dimwit as her (if not more).

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 4:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:50pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:47pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct? I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958. ... so then you'll be in a position, of course, from your academic reading, to tell us how many people have actually applied for asylum in their originating countries?

Please read this, and some other material on the subject, before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

"According to the definition in the UN Refugee Convention, refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin. This means that you cannot apply for refugee status if you are inside your own country. In order to be recognised as a refugee, you must leave your country and apply for refugee status onshore in another country. A person experiencing persecution who wished to seek protection in Australia could not, for example, apply for refugee status through the UNHCR office or the Australian consulate or embassy in their own country. They would have to travel to Australia and seek protection after arriving here."

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/myth-long.php#channels

::)

Like I said, you are an arrogant fabian socialist, with a typical rudeness to people who don't agree with your particular view of politics.
Australia needs less people with your globalist attitude, and more who give Australia and Australians priority.

Gregorypeckerhead is just going down the lawyers route ... ie. thats a technicality so up yer arse I win ( nothing to do with right or wrong ) , just like if someone ever commited a criminal act against him or someone near and dear to him and some smart front bottom lawyer came along and got them off on a technicality he'd be fine with that too ... yeah right  ;D

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:33pm:

The Australian Embassy officials could actually start thinking outside the square and go and see people who claim they need to apply for asylum. It involves leaving the office. Australia needs to get pro-active about this issue and address the problem at its source, not on the oceans.

http://2muchgaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Homer-Facepalm.jpg


"Applying for protection onshore is not a means of bypassing the “proper channel” of applying for protection. In fact, applying onshore is the standard procedure for seeking protection. According to the definition in the UN Refugee Convention, refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin. This means that you cannot apply for refugee status if you are inside your own country. In order to be recognised as a refugee, you must leave your country and apply for refugee status onshore in another country. A person experiencing persecution who wished to seek protection in Australia could not, for example, apply for refugee status through the UNHCR office or the Australian consulate or embassy in their own country. They would have to travel to Australia and seek protection after arriving here."

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/myth-long.php#channels

then make an application to immigrate to Australia, dick.
Think outside the square.

Another boats gone down Geggery. Are you starting to think all of us rednecks that have been banging on about this for a long time are right.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:50pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:47pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct? I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958. ... so then you'll be in a position, of course, from your academic reading, to tell us how many people have actually applied for asylum in their originating countries? Please read this, and some other material on the subject, before you make an even bigger fool of yourself. "According to the definition in the UN Refugee Convention, refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin. This means that you cannot apply for refugee status if you are inside your own country. In order to be recognised as a refugee, you must leave your country and apply for refugee status onshore in another country. A person experiencing persecution who wished to seek protection in Australia could not, for example, apply for refugee status through the UNHCR office or the Australian consulate or embassy in their own country. They would have to travel to Australia and seek protection after arriving here." http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/myth-long.php#channels ::)

Quite wrong in one section. Whilst it is true that one cannot apply for refugee status in his own country (asylum is a different story), you do not need to travel to Australia to claim refugee status. If from Burma, for example, one could apply for refugee status in Thailand. There would be no requirement for a person seeking refugee status to travel to Australia.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:47pm:

then make an application to immigrate to Australia, dick.

http://ozhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/double_facepalm.jpg

"A refugee is someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence. A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. Most likely, they cannot return home or are afraid to do so. War and ethnic, tribal and religious violence are leading causes of refugees fleeing their countries."

http://www.unrefugees.org/site/c.lfIQKSOwFqG/b.4950731/


Please read the information at this link:

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Immigrant_vs_Refugee

I'm not presenting my "opinion", as you say: I'm merely giving you the facts.  I'm actually trying to help you understand.

::)

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 12:52pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know.

The Coalition has never and will never tow any smugglers boats into an Indonesian port.
But towing them to just outside the 20 km line between what is Indonesian waters and International waters is where the boats was released before, and will be released again.
And of course the smugglers boats will have enough fuel on board to make a 20 km journey north, but no further.
And Indonesian permission is not required to do this whatsoever.
What are they going to do, fuel them up and send them back?

.

I don't need your arrogant patronisation. You are missing the point entirely.
How many people has the Australian Embassy in Sri Lanka spoken to concerning immigration to Australia, as a ratio to boat departures.
It is people with your inability to think laterally that is actually stuffing this country up.
I really wish you people would emigrant somewhere to a socialist paradise where everyone works in the public service. You have a much more internationalist attitude than an Australian-focussed one.
That's the problem all over with the "Australian" Labor party. Too many lawyers, not enough people who actually can get the job done.

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:49pm:

Another boats gone down Geggery. Are you starting to think all of us rednecks that have been banging on about this for a long time are right.

Right about what, exactly?

There you are, there's the telephone number of  the Australian High Commission in Sri Lanka.
Ask them... you should be on the same wavelength:

•+94-11- 246 3200 (general enquiries)
•+94-11- 246 3270 (visas, migration and citizenship enquires)

I just thought you were a bit of a supporter.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

I don't need your arrogant patronisation. You are missing the point entirely. How many people has the Australian Embassy in Sri Lanka spoken to concerning immigration to Australia, as a ratio to boat departures. It is people with your inability to think laterally that is actually stuffing this country up. I really wish you people would emigrant somewhere to a socialist paradise where everyone works in the public service. You have a much more internationalist attitude than an Australian-focussed one. That's the problem all over with the "Australian" Labor party. Too many lawyers, not enough people who actually can get the job done.

Please read this information and stop making a fool of yourself:

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Immigrant_vs_Refugee

http://www.unrefugees.org/site/c.lfIQKSOwFqG/b.4950731/

Big Dave wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

I just thought you were a bit of a supporter.

Supporter of a policy that sees innocent people drowning?

Not me.

It is tragic that these people die trying to reach Australia.....Countries like Indonesia and Malaysia should be encouraged to sign the refugee convention and let these people work and earn a living.....At the moment money and resources are being wasted to imprison cheap labour???

::) ::) ::)

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:50pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:40pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:50pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:47pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:35pm: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: what, 40,000 of them can't make applications? Correct.  You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on around the world. shampain socialist wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 3:31pm: ... if you don't have papers, you can't come here. Simple. That's quite simply incorrect. How would you know whether it is correct? I've read the 1951 UN Refugees Convention and the Australian Migration Act 1958. ... so then you'll be in a position, of course, from your academic reading, to tell us how many people have actually applied for asylum in their originating countries? Please read this, and some other material on the subject, before you make an even bigger fool of yourself. "According to the definition in the UN Refugee Convention, refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin. This means that you cannot apply for refugee status if you are inside your own country. In order to be recognised as a refugee, you must leave your country and apply for refugee status onshore in another country. A person experiencing persecution who wished to seek protection in Australia could not, for example, apply for refugee status through the UNHCR office or the Australian consulate or embassy in their own country. They would have to travel to Australia and seek protection after arriving here." http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/myth-long.php#channels ::) Quite wrong in one section. Whilst it is true that one cannot apply for refugee status in his own country (asylum is a different story), you do not need to travel to Australia to claim refugee status. If from Burma, for example, one could apply for refugee status in Thailand. There would be no requirement for a person seeking refugee status to travel to Australia.

Just as I thought. Greg's got nothing!

ian wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 4:16pm:

What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status.

GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared?

ian wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 6:25pm:

ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:16pm: What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status. GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared?

If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers.

If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers.

Nothing to be scared of Ian.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 5:52pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:52pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know. The Coalition has never and will never tow any smugglers boats into an Indonesian port. But towing them to just outside the 20 km line between what is Indonesian waters and International waters is where the boats was released before, and will be released again. And of course the smugglers boats will have enough fuel on board to make a 20 km journey north, but no further. And Indonesian permission is not required to do this whatsoever. What are they going to do, fuel them up and send them back?

that sounds like a plan,  and send up a few navy mine layers  ;) ;)

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:25pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:16pm: What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status. GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared? If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers. If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers. Nothing to be scared of Ian.

greg, youre just like gillard,  you bang on and on and on, but no one is listening mate. the electorate have stopped listening. sticking up for the country shoppers is political poison,  no one is going to do it.  illegal or not, there is no votes in being soft on crime (or non crime as you will no doubt, point out)

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:28pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:27pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:25pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:16pm: What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status. GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared? If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers. If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers. Nothing to be scared of Ian. greg, youre just like gillard,  you bang on and on and on, but no one is listening mate. the electorate have stopped listening. sticking up for the country shoppers is political poison,  no one is going to do it.  illegal or not, there is no votes in being soft on crime (or non crime as you will no doubt, point out)

I was asked a question, and I answered it.

Not sure what you're going on about there.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:25pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:16pm: What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status. GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared? If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers. If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers. Nothing to be scared of Ian.

Incorrect. The crew on these boats are not classed as asylum seekers but criminals and are prosecuted to the full extent of Australian law. They currently get about 5 years in prison for crewing the boats. So, the crew are criminals and engaging in a criminal enterprise., there can be no doubt about that. What do we call people who willingly take part in a criminal enterprise as these alleged asylum seekers are doing? If as you say, these alleged asylum seekers are doing nothing illegal, then why arent you calling for the crews on these boats to also be granted protection from prosecution and to be granted residency?

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:28pm:

... there is no votes in being soft on crime

Agreed.

I don't advocate "being soft on crime".

Seems the opposite to me, you are arguing that criminals should not be prosecuted.

ian wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:33pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:27pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 6:25pm: ian wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 4:16pm: What about the crew on these boats, whats your opinion on their status. GP, you didnt answer my question. are you scared? If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers. If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers. Nothing to be scared of Ian. Incorrect. The crew on these boats are not classed as asylum seekers but criminals and are prosecuted to the full extent of Australian law. They currently get about 5 years in prison for crewing the boats. So, the crew are criminals and engaging in a criminal enterprise., there can be no doubt about that. What do we call people who willingly take part in a criminal enterprise as these alleged asylum seekers are doing? If as you say, these alleged asylum seekers are doing nothing illegal, then why arent you calling for the crews on these boats to also be granted protection from prosecution and to be granted residency?

You need to read my posts more carefully.

I didn't say they were definitely asylum seekers.

I said:

"If they ask for asylum, they are legal asylum seekers.

"If they don't, then they are not asylum seekers."

If they are not seeking asylum, and they are people smuggling, then they are indeed criminals.

People smuggling is a crime.  Seeking asylum is not.

Nothing to be scared of Ian.

ian wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:37pm:

Seems the opposite to me, you are arguing that criminals should not be prosecuted.

That's a complete lie.

I've never said any such thing, in any thread, ever.

Don't resort to lies Ian.

Let's just stick to the facts.

OK.

The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house.....

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:24pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:52pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:52pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:29pm: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 12:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 11:57am: Big Dave wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 5:33am: Isn't funny how deep down you do-gooders on here want Australia to be the salvation of the world. You won't say it but you all believe that if they make it here you can stay. COME ON EVERYBODY. COME TO GOOD OLD AUS AND WE CAN SING AND DANCE AND WIGGLE IN THE SAND WITH NO CLOTHES ON, WEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! Exactly. Only Mr Abbott can stop the boats. Well Labor can't. No they can but they won't. Dead right, Gillard could have stopped the boats years ago, but has chosen instead to attack Abbott in a vain attempt to score some political points at the expense of the illegal immigrants themselves. Would that be by "Simply Picking up the Phone to Naru" teaspoon? Well we have & its done bugger all Oh we haven't towed any boats back? I'll bet you $50 right now that by 2016 if Abbott's PM the sum total of returned boats is ZERO. Did you listen to the Indonesian ambassador the other day or was that filtered out of your news prism of 2GB & the Tele? Here's a link, bit hard to tow back when Indo doesn't recognize them, sure they'll take the boats & crew but what about the reffo's? The whole smacking purpose of the expensive & dangerous exercise? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/indonesia-rejects-abbott-tow-back-boats-vow-20120705-21k82.html Quote: THE Indonesian government has confirmed that it would not accept the towing back of asylum seeker boats to its shores, sources say. Or is it TPV's we need to introduce teaspoon? I've shown you numerous times before their introduction only changed asylum seekers from men to Women & children complete with figures & graphs from the ABS, are you stupid or have dementia? Don't bother I already know. The Coalition has never and will never tow any smugglers boats into an Indonesian port. But towing them to just outside the 20 km line between what is Indonesian waters and International waters is where the boats was released before, and will be released again. And of course the smugglers boats will have enough fuel on board to make a 20 km journey north, but no further. And Indonesian permission is not required to do this whatsoever. What are they going to do, fuel them up and send them back? that sounds like a plan,  and send up a few navy mine layers  ;) ;)

Why, modern mines aren't effective against wooden hulls.
And Abbott does not need to start a war with Indonesia to stop smugglers.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house.....

No, that's a totally inaccurate assessment.

Thank you for your valuable input though.

We're all so pleased that you came.

"And Abbott does not need to start a war with Indonesia to stop smugglers."
   
Ditch the UN Convention and Protocol???????

Several more boatloads of unwanteds turn up to Australia and instead of working out and concentrating on how we can make it harder for them to get in and how we can stop them at their departure point, you focus on the terminology asylum seeker v illegal immigrant.

Sorry my analogy is spot on.

You're adding nothing to the actual issue, which is how do we stop them?

Asylum seeker or illegal migrant - they are still fking turning up with their families wanting to be let in aren't they!

The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes.

It does nothing to benefit Australia.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:00pm:

Asylum seeker or illegal migrant - they are still fking turning up with their families wanting to be let in aren't they!

Yes.

However, asylum seekers are welcome (and have a legal right to come), illegal immigrants are not (and do not have a legal right).


There is a big difference.

Calling them illegal immigrants starts off the whole debate on the wrong foot (and will lead to the wrong solutions).

Your failure to recognise that fact is quite alarming.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:01pm:

The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia.

I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:44pm: The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house..... No, that's a totally inaccurate assessment. Thank you for your valuable input though. We're all so pleased that you came.

i am.  his point makes sense.  yours are justy whiney, sooky, legal talk.
if you spoke to the australian people like that (say they gave you chris bowens job) you'd last 5 minutes.

These ppl fly into Indo on false passprts and documents, so they are criminals, unless flying on fake paperwork is legal, last I heard it was not legal, so these ppl are infact criminals

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:01pm:

The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia.

i wouldnt even give them the waste of ink involved in signing our removal.
i'd just ignore the daft tossers.  what are they going to do. organize a coalition of the willing to bomb darwin,  smack them.  they are a bunch of jetsetting, 6 star hotel layabouts and whineys.  who gives a smack what the UN think.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:07pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:01pm: The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia. I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't.

you should provide one house free to illegals (oh sorry) assylum seekers  ;) ;)

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:14pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:07pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:01pm: The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia. I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't. you should provide one house free to illegals (oh sorry) assylum seekers  ;) ;)

There's no need to: I gladly pay my taxes, and the Government in turn provides the asylum seekers with accommodation.

Just the same as you pay your taxes and the government provides accommodation for the sick, elderly, and prisoners etc.

It's all good.

woof woof wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:11pm:

These ppl fly into Indo on false passprts and documents, so they are criminals, unless flying on fake paperwork is legal, last I heard it was not legal, so these ppl are infact criminals

1.  Any evidence to support the false passports and documents claim?

2.  Even if it were true, it still doesn't make them "illegal immigrants" if they claim asylum.

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:53pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:44pm: The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house..... No, that's a totally inaccurate assessment. Thank you for your valuable input though. We're all so pleased that you came. i am.  his point makes sense.  yours are justy whiney, sooky, legal talk. if you spoke to the australian people like that (say they gave you chris bowens job) you'd last 5 minutes.

The "Australian people" I speak to have the intelligence to recognise simple facts when they hear them.

Moreover, I wouldn't want to spend 5 minutes with the "Australian people" you speak to.

I think knuckles draws his livelihood from defending and representing boat ppl??

maybe he knows his gravy train is coming to an end in September??

woof woof wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:

I think knuckles draws his livelihood from defending and representing boat ppl?? maybe he knows his gravy train is coming to an end in September??

Not at all.

I'd like to see the boats stop immediately.

Unfortunately though, they'll keep coming long after September.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 9:03pm:

woof woof wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 9:00pm: I think knuckles draws his livelihood from defending and representing boat ppl?? maybe he knows his gravy train is coming to an end in September?? Not at all. I'd like to see the boats stop immediately. Unfortunately though, they'll keep coming long after September.

Sad but true . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 6:00am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 9:03pm: woof woof wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 9:00pm: I think knuckles draws his livelihood from defending and representing boat ppl?? maybe he knows his gravy train is coming to an end in September?? Not at all. I'd like to see the boats stop immediately. Unfortunately though, they'll keep coming long after September. Sad but true . . . SOB

"The flood of asylum-seeker boats travelling to Australia will continue under a Coalition government, according to a former senior official in the Immigration Department who says Tony Abbott's plan to turn back boats and reintroduce temporary protection visas will not stop the dangerous journeys."

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-plan-to-stop-boats-wont-work-20130610-2o092.html

Alinta wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

"And Abbott does not need to start a war with Indonesia to stop smugglers."     Ditch the UN Convention and Protocol???????

I would support that move.

don't waste time with people like peccary. They are ruining this country.
Just vote them into oblivion. When they come to their senses, maybe they'll get a look in again. I doubt it though.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 10:18am:

don't waste time with people like peccary. They are ruining this country. Just vote them into oblivion. When they come to their senses, maybe they'll get a look in again. I doubt it though.

Presenting you with the facts is "ruining this country" now, is it?

What a peculiar view.

Would you care to elaborate and tell us all how I'm "ruining this country"?

Remembering that I've stated:

- The current system isn't working
- The ALP stuffed up
- I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow

So, how exactly am I harming this country?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:07pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:01pm: The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia. I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't.

Two cardboard boxes - not much of a wager from you.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 10:23am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:07pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:01pm: The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia. I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't. Two cardboard boxes - not much of a wager from you.

I'll bet anything you like.

He won't do it.  Simple.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 10:28am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:23am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:07pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:01pm: The first thing Abbott should do is remove Australia from the UN Convention yes. It does nothing to benefit Australia. I'll bet you both my houses that he doesn't. Two cardboard boxes - not much of a wager from you. I'll bet anything you like. He won't do it.  Simple.

He won't do it

but he's too stupid to realise that there's a lot more people seeking asylum in 2013 than in the Howard era.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:18am: don't waste time with people like peccary. They are ruining this country. Just vote them into oblivion. When they come to their senses, maybe they'll get a look in again. I doubt it though. Presenting you with the facts is "ruining this country" now, is it? What a peculiar view. Would you care to elaborate and tell us all how I'm "ruining this country"? Remembering that I've stated: - The current system isn't working - The ALP stuffed up - I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow So, how exactly am I harming this country?

If you don't know how that sort of attitude is doing harm, then there isn't any hope for you. There are millions of people in this country with that sort of inherited thinking from their families. That's why this country is in the state that it is.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 11:33am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:21am: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:18am: don't waste time with people like peccary. They are ruining this country. Just vote them into oblivion. When they come to their senses, maybe they'll get a look in again. I doubt it though. Presenting you with the facts is "ruining this country" now, is it? What a peculiar view. Would you care to elaborate and tell us all how I'm "ruining this country"? Remembering that I've stated: - The current system isn't working - The ALP stuffed up - I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow So, how exactly am I harming this country? If you don't know how that sort of attitude is doing harm, then there isn't any hope for you. There are millions of people in this country with that sort of inherited thinking from their families. That's why this country is in the state that it is.

WTF?   :o

Did you read my post?

I said:

- The current system isn't working
- The ALP stuffed up
- I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow

So, please explain how "that sort of attitude is doing harm".

Be specific: don't hide behind "If you don't know ... then there isn't any hope for you".

To recap, in case you missed it:

- The current system isn't working
- The ALP stuffed up
- I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow

Over to you ...

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11^th, 2013 at 8:54pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:09pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:53pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:44pm: The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house..... No, that's a totally inaccurate assessment. Thank you for your valuable input though. We're all so pleased that you came. i am.  his point makes sense.  yours are justy whiney, sooky, legal talk. if you spoke to the australian people like that (say they gave you chris bowens job) you'd last 5 minutes. The "Australian people" I speak to have the intelligence to recognise simple facts when they hear them. Moreover, I wouldn't want to spend 5 minutes with the "Australian people" you speak to.

dont become a political advisor then, stick to the chattering classes. the australian people i speak of, probably run at about 75%.

why do you think both gillard and abbott talk tough on boats, why the malaysian solution, naru and manus island?  because the australian people want these boats stopped .  god bless democracy.  god bless septemeber 14  ;) ;)

aquascoot wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 8:09pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:53pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 11th, 2013 at 7:44pm: The building is on fire and rather than address the fire, greg would rather discuss whether its correctly termed an apartment or a house..... No, that's a totally inaccurate assessment. Thank you for your valuable input though. We're all so pleased that you came. i am.  his point makes sense.  yours are justy whiney, sooky, legal talk. if you spoke to the australian people like that (say they gave you chris bowens job) you'd last 5 minutes. The "Australian people" I speak to have the intelligence to recognise simple facts when they hear them. Moreover, I wouldn't want to spend 5 minutes with the "Australian people" you speak to. dont become a political advisor then, stick to the chattering classes. the australian people i speak of, probably run at about 75%. why do you think both gillard and abbott talk tough on boats, why the malaysian solution, naru and manus island?  because the australian people want these boats stopped .  god bless democracy.  god bless septemeber 14  ;) ;)

You just don't read the posts, do you?

"I'd like to see the boats stop immediately."

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1370840380/129#129

Talking tough on boat people resonates with the Australian people greg, whether you like this fact or not.

If it didn't, then both major parties wouldn't do it.

The everyday Aussie is sick of boat people coming to the country. All the polling tells you this.

Pull Factor Adjustment

1) Immediate detention for minimum 2 years on any asylum application
2) No right of family to join at any time, rather they would undergo same lengthy process
3) No right to become permanent resident at any time
4) Forcible repatriation following determination of safe status of applicant's country
5) Food stamps and not cash welfare
6) Settlement areas for asylum seekers rather than they choose where to live


That will stop your boats.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 11:33am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:21am: shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 10:18am: don't waste time with people like peccary. They are ruining this country. Just vote them into oblivion. When they come to their senses, maybe they'll get a look in again. I doubt it though. Presenting you with the facts is "ruining this country" now, is it? What a peculiar view. Would you care to elaborate and tell us all how I'm "ruining this country"? Remembering that I've stated: - The current system isn't working - The ALP stuffed up - I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow So, how exactly am I harming this country? If you don't know how that sort of attitude is doing harm, then there isn't any hope for you. There are millions of people in this country with that sort of inherited thinking from their families. That's why this country is in the state that it is.

I don't think knowledge, or lack of knowledge, of the Migration Act governs public attitude.

I do think such knowledge, how it translates into govt policy and its relationship with UN Refugee Convention and Protocols is useful in debate about what needs to change, how it may be implemented and the resulting international implications.

As I feel favourable towards Australia's withdrawal from UN Convention and Protocols, I wish there was more information available for my educative purposes. Why should we? Why not?

Put the Imigration processing Facility on the island of Bali Indonesia, Then do the processing and bring them in legal. That way Australia makes the money and more Australians will have Jobs.

Why are we so stupid as Australians, that we don't realize that these imigrants could be a benifit to us.

And be able to better our lives.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 12:03pm:

Talking tough on boat people resonates with the Australian people greg, whether you like this fact or not. If it didn't, then both major parties wouldn't do it. The everyday Aussie is sick of boat people coming to the country. All the polling tells you this.

You don't read the posts, do you?

"I'd like to see the boats stop immediately."  (greggerypeccary)

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1370840380/129#129

warrigal wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 12:31pm:

Put the Imigration processing Facility on the island of Bali Indonesia, Then do the processing and bring them in legal.

The way they come in now is not illegal.

Seeking asylum on a boat without a passport or visa is not illegal.

What part of that don't you understand?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 12:49pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:03pm: Talking tough on boat people resonates with the Australian people greg, whether you like this fact or not. If it didn't, then both major parties wouldn't do it. The everyday Aussie is sick of boat people coming to the country. All the polling tells you this. You don't read the posts, do you? "I'd like to see the boats stop immediately."  (greggerypeccary) http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1370840380/129#129

Your views on how Gregg????

Alinta wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:49pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:03pm: Talking tough on boat people resonates with the Australian people greg, whether you like this fact or not. If it didn't, then both major parties wouldn't do it. The everyday Aussie is sick of boat people coming to the country. All the polling tells you this. You don't read the posts, do you? "I'd like to see the boats stop immediately."  (greggerypeccary) http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1370840380/129#129 Your views on how Gregg????

I concur with Brendan O'Connor:

"A three word slogan will not stop the global problem of people using desperate measures to seek asylum. There is no quick fix to stop asylum seekers traveling to Australia by boat."

There's plenty of quick fixes.

STOP THE BOATS

One quick fix is to vote out Labor Party from government, and along with it some of the views exemplified by peccary.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

One quick fix is to vote out Labor Party from government, and along with it some of the views exemplified by peccary.

1. The boats will not stop if a Liberal government is formed.

2. Which of my views?  Please be specific.  You keep avoiding that question.

Karnal wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 3:20pm:

STOP THE BOATS

Boats made from biscuits!!

I'm not avoiding it. Trying to explain your attitudes to you is like talking to a brick wall. Everyone else can see it... except you. So that's not my problem. It's your's. Think about it.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:12pm:

I'm not avoiding it.

Yes, you most certainly are.

Here are my views, once again (posted at least twice before by me):

- The current system isn't working
- The ALP stuffed up
- I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow

Now, which ones bother you?

Over to you ...

The very sensible people here have posted repeatedly the measures that should be taken to address this issue. On just about every occasion you have dissed these views, apparently to me, on the basis of your political allegiances to the Labor Party. That is a biased view, and to simply keep simplistically restated some points you have made, is merely obfuscation, in my view. But your strategy is quite what is to be expected from labor fanatics.

so, just to be absolutely clear, it isn't the points that you choose to make the agenda that I have an issue with... it's your attitude.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:19pm:

... on the basis of your political allegiances to the Labor Party.

Just one more time, as you obviously didn't read it before:

- The current system isn't working
- The ALP stuffed up
- I'd like to see the boats stop tomorrow

I have no "political allegiances to the Labor Party".

You do understand that 'ALP' stands for Australian Labor Party?  Yes?

And you do understand that the 'current system' is run by a Labor Government?  Yes?

::)

.... and all the suggestions made here before, that you don't accept, will in fact work, and will no doubt be implemented by the next government. The one-dimensional view exemplified by yourself, that is also apparent in the present government is a loser.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:32pm:

.... and all the suggestions made here before, that you don't accept, will in fact work, and will no doubt be implemented by the next government.

"all the suggestions ... will in fact work"  Really?

Name a few then, and explain to us exactly how they will work.  Dates and boat numbers will add to your credibility here.

Or, just name one.

What will the next government do that will stop the boats?

This should be good ...

It is good. Go back and read them all. Again, if you didn't before.

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:37pm:

It is good. Go back and read them all. Again, if you didn't before.

Now, how did we all know that you would come back with that reply.

What will the next government do that will stop the boats?

When will they stop? 

How many people will die under the next government before they stop?

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

One quick fix is to vote out Labor Party from government ...

And how exactly will that fix the problem?

Which policy, implemented by the next government, will work as a "quick fix"?

All of your questions have been answered in previous posts. Why can't you get that??

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

All of your questions have been answered in previous posts. Why can't you get that??

No.

You're running scared now.

Which policy, implemented by the next government, will work as a "quick fix"?

shampain socialist wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

One quick fix is to vote out Labor Party from government ...

And how exactly will that fix the problem?

Don't run away now: answer the question.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

warrigal wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:31pm: Put the Imigration processing Facility on the island of Bali Indonesia, Then do the processing and bring them in legal. The way they come in now is not illegal. Seeking asylum on a boat without a passport or visa is not illegal. What part of that don't you understand?

Make them legal by collecting them from Asia and taking them to Bali for imigration processing and aplications for tourist or work visas. etc

The only reason they pay to get on a boat from Asia is because they don't have access or the money to apply to the Australian Imigrantion system.

Thus doing it Legal.

Make it legal from the detension and imigration centres.

Set up Imigration offices in the major cities in Asia and provde Jobs to Australians at them.

warrigal wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 8:05am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:51pm: warrigal wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:31pm: Put the Imigration processing Facility on the island of Bali Indonesia, Then do the processing and bring them in legal. The way they come in now is not illegal. Seeking asylum on a boat without a passport or visa is not illegal. What part of that don't you understand? Make them legal by collecting them from Asia and taking them to Bali for imigration processing and aplications for tourist or work visas. etc The only reason they pay to get on a boat from Asia is because they don't have access or the money to apply to the Australian Imigrantion system. Thus doing it Legal. Make it legal from the detension and imigration centres. Set up Imigration offices in the major cities in Asia and provde Jobs to Australians at them.

Seeking asylum, in a boat is legal.

You are confusing 'asylum seeking' with ordinary immigration.

Not the same thing.

is people smuggling legal?
Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal?

Grendel wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal?

People smuggling is a crime.

Paying for transport on a people smuggler's boat is not a criminal offence.

And, the method of transport, and how that transport is paid for, has absolutely no bearing on one's legal right to claim asylum.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 11:54am:

Grendel wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:50am: is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal? People smuggling is a crime. Paying for transport on a people smuggler's boat is not a criminal offence. And, the method of transport, and how that transport is paid for, has absolutely no bearing on one's legal right to claim asylum.

So aiding and abetting, financing a crime or financially backing a criminal enterprise isn't a crime

;D

Grendel wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 11:59am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:54am: Grendel wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:50am: is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal? People smuggling is a crime. Paying for transport on a people smuggler's boat is not a criminal offence. And, the method of transport, and how that transport is paid for, has absolutely no bearing on one's legal right to claim asylum. So aiding and abetting, financing a crime or financially backing a criminal enterprise isn't a crime ;D

Can you read?

"Paying for transport on a people smuggler's boat is not a criminal offence."

If you think it is, all you have to do is show us the relative piece of Australian legislation.  i.e. the Act and the particular section of that Act.

Let us know how you go.

And, just in case you missed it:

" ... the method of transport, and how that transport is paid for, has absolutely no bearing on one's legal right to claim asylum."

I hope that's cleared things up for you.

;D ;D ;D

not much in the legal sphere are you

Grendel wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 12:31pm:

not much in the legal sphere are you

You're making a fool of yourself now, by deliberately avoiding the question (which is all you ever do on this forum).

Which section, of which Australian Act, says that paying for transport on a people smuggler's boat is a criminal offence?

Don't run away: just answer the question, if you want to retain any credibility at all.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 10:33am:

warrigal wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 8:05am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:51pm: warrigal wrote on Jun 12th, 2013 at 12:31pm: Put the Imigration processing Facility on the island of Bali Indonesia, Then do the processing and bring them in legal. The way they come in now is not illegal. Seeking asylum on a boat without a passport or visa is not illegal. What part of that don't you understand? Make them legal by collecting them from Asia and taking them to Bali for imigration processing and aplications for tourist or work visas. etc The only reason they pay to get on a boat from Asia is because they don't have access or the money to apply to the Australian Imigrantion system. Thus doing it Legal. Make it legal from the detension and imigration centres. Set up Imigration offices in the major cities in Asia and provde Jobs to Australians at them. Seeking asylum, in a boat is legal. You are confusing 'asylum seeking' with ordinary immigration. Not the same thing.

Whats the difference?

Wouldn't it be easier for them too just to report to a Australian imigration office in Jakarta and make application for asylum, rather then climb on a risky boat for the Journey, then Australia picks them up and asks are you claiming assylum.

There on boats because there is no access to legal immigration on their arrival to the Asian counties they commute though.

Put the imigration offices in Indonesia.

Simple solution, then every one is legal and there are no Boats being picked up by the Australian navy.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:07pm: We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people. I vote that we do what the Iraqi police force is doing with suspects and kill them by drilling holes in their heads.

Need a smacking big drill for your thick skull  ;D

Grendel wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal?

Good question, Grendel. Are there any travel agents who can answer this one?

warrigal wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:

Whats the difference?

"An Immigrant is an individual who leaves one’s country to settle in another, whereas refugees are defined as persons, who move out of one’s country due to restriction or danger to their lives."

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Immigrant_vs_Refugee

"People often assume there is no difference between immigrants and refugees, but the difference is important for economic, social and legal reasons."

http://www.iptv.org/iowapathways/mypath.cfm?ounid=ob_000203



warrigal wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:

Simple solution, then every one is legal and there are no Boats being picked up by the Australian navy.

Every one is legal now.

Seeking asylum, on a boat, with no passport or visa, is perfectly legal.

Interesting article in The Australian today about the publics view on boat ppl.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/doctors-police-warn-prime-minister-julia-gillard-of-asylum-time-bomb/story-e6frg6n6-1226662780447

Knuckles do you understand why the very vast majority of fair thinking aussies hate the boat ppl??

Do you have a clue??

Karnal wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:29pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:50am: is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal? Good question, Grendel. Are there any travel agents who can answer this one?

I don't care so much for these boats as I do for asylum seekers who travel with Virgin.  They simply have no class. 

Socrates wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:05pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:11pm: Karnal wrote on Jun 10th, 2013 at 4:07pm: We have no responsibility to these people whatsoever. They’re invaders. This means they are legally enemy combatants and prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention says we can do what we like with these people. I vote that we do what the Iraqi police force is doing with suspects and kill them by drilling holes in their heads. Need a smacking big drill for your thick skull  ;D

Excuse me, we're talking about tinted third worlders here, not white Australians.

Kindly keep your abuse to yourself. I don't find it at all humourous.

you can bang on all you want but it wont change the fact most everyone hates boat ppl.

its why labor is trending at 30% and come next poll I bet they go under 30%

woof woof wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Interesting article in The Australian today about the publics view on boat ppl. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/doctors-police-warn-prime-minister-julia-gillard-of-asylum-time-bomb/story-e6frg6n6-1226662780447 Knuckles do you understand why the very vast majority of fair thinking aussies hate the boat ppl?? Do you have a clue??

I do, Woof Woof. It's because they're backward third worlders, and coloured.

No one had any problem with Matty's return.

Isn't that what the assylum seekers are doing, they don't plan to go back to their country, therefore they are imigrants.

Why would they.

Quote:
Every one is legal now.

Seeking asylum, on a boat, with no passport or visa, is perfectly legal.

I am pretty shaw if you have no passport and visa they are illegal,

but the point is they could be legal, coming via Jakata Imigration office.

Take the proffessors hat off Greg and talk to the forum normally.

woof woof wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Interesting article in The Australian today about the publics view on boat ppl. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/doctors-police-warn-prime-minister-julia-gillard-of-asylum-time-bomb/story-e6frg6n6-1226662780447 Knuckles do you understand why the very vast majority of fair thinking aussies hate the boat ppl?? Do you have a clue??

Do you understand that I have repeatedly said that I wish the boats would stop immediately?

Do you have a clue?

Do you also understand that hating someone doesn't change the law?

You can hate them all you like, however, seeking asylum in a boat, without a passport or visa is perfectly legal.

You need to understand the facts, and stop being so emotive.

so knuckles how many should we take, you don't seem to mind them turning up???? you defend them till your blue in the face which tells me you support what they do?

warrigal wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:57pm:

I am pretty shaw if you have no passport and visa there are illegal,

I am 100% certain that you are wrong: it is not illegal to seek asylum, in a boat, without a passport or visa.

There is no such thing as an illegal asylum seeker.  Never has been in any country ever, and never will be.

You just don't seem to understand exactly what an asylum seeker is.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 2:29pm: Grendel wrote on Jun 13th, 2013 at 11:50am: is people smuggling legal? Is procuring the "services" of people smugglers legal? Good question, Grendel. Are there any travel agents who can answer this one? I don't care so much for these boats as I do for asylum seekers who travel with Virgin.  They simply have no class.

That's true, Alevine. Lynn, for example, always flies Qantas - when she's not travelling via ocean liner.

I don't know what she does now that they do this awful sharing arrangement with Emirates. Fancy a lady like Lynn being dropped off in Dubai. How could she even find a reliable porter amongst all that chaos?

No, it simply won't do. Lynn will need someone to meet her at the airport. A decent travel agent should be able to get her past all those towel-headed touts and pickpockets and into a rickshaw.

Lynn is most loyal. It's one of her finer qualities.

woof woof wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 3:02pm:

so knuckles how many should we take, you don't seem to mind them turning up???? you defend them till your blue in the face which tells me you support what they do?

Do you have some sort of reading problem?

This is what I just said:

"Do you understand that I have repeatedly said that I wish the boats would stop immediately?"

From that sentence, you get "you don't seem to mind them turning up".

Seriously?  Is English not your first language?

Read it one more time, so it sinks in:

"I wish the boats would stop immediately!"

It's like talking to a brick wall with some of you people   ::)

woof woof wrote on Jun 13^th, 2013 at 3:02pm:

so knuckles how many should we take, you don't seem to mind them turning up???? you defend them till your blue in the face which tells me you support what they do?

I blame the leftards, Woof Woof. Fancy defending these people.

If these people didn't want us invading their countries they should have put up more of a fight.
Crikey..you didn't see a mass exodus of reffos leaving Germany after the second world war
How about Eastern Europe..no asylum seekers sought our help as the Russians swept through
How about the Vietnamese..zero reffos after we invaded them  :D
Crikey the leftards are delusional  :D

Esmail is a 22yo Iranian man. His family of four is considered middle class. His father, who works as an engineer for an Iranian oil company, decided to move his family to Australia but first Esmail had to get there using the services of an Indonesian people smuggler. This is how Esmail did it.

Esmail’s father had located a phone number in Kabul, Afghanistan. He was told to transfer $US10,000 to an Indonesian bank account and, once received, Esmail was to go by bus to Kabul where he would be met by a Pakistani man who would arrange for his passport and ID.

The cost of the ID would be $US3,000 and Esmail would need another $US4,000 for air fares and $US500 for his own expenses. He must take only a minimum of belongings.
All was arranged.

Esmail was met at the Kabul bus terminal and was taken by car with four other men to Jalalabad, close to the Pakistan border.

There, in a dirty office and along with the other men, Esmail was photographed, given a different birthdate (he didn’t understand why until later, but for now he would be 19). His new ID details were sent to Peshawar in Pakistan.

Esmail was then told that he must wait in Jalalabad until his passport was processed.

Ten days later the Pakistani man bundled Esmail and 14 other men of different nationalities into a van and drove over the border to Islamabad in Pakistan where Esmail gave the Pakistani $US4,000 for his airfare.

All the men were left at a staging point while the Pakistani man went to purchase the airfares. Soon the men were being driven to Islamabad airport and they were talking excitedly about the boat trip.

At the airport they were all given their new passports and air tickets and were told they would be landing in Bangkok, Thailand, where they would wait two hours in a transit lounge before flying to Jakarta where they would be met by an Indonesian man. All went as planned.

The first thing the Indonesian man did was collect all the passports. They were told they would be leaving without any ID. (Esmail understood the passports were sent back to the Pakistani forgers for reprocessing using different photographs.)

No-one complained as they were now completely at the mercy of the smugglers.

From Jakarta they were driven south for around four hours to a small coastal town and parked at another staging point where they were told some of them would be leaving the next day. Esmail was one of those who departed in the morning.

The sea trip was uneventful. The cramped boat stank of fumes and the toilets became blocked after a few hours. Fifty or more people, mostly men, took turns at cooking rice and bits of chicken soaked in salty water, much of which finished up overboard as half the occupants were seasick.

Esmail lost count of the days but the boat was soon being escorted to Christmas Island where he was interviewed for two hours and sent to a detention area.

A week later he was flown to Darwin where he was again interviewed, issued with a bridging visa, and flown to Melbourne.

Esmail is now on the Gold Coast, Queensland, sharing a flat with four bridging visa holders. None of the other four works. He now has permanent residency and is studying English at school. He does not wish to work and intends to go to Griffith University next year.

He says he has no interest in Islam but  attends a local mosque (only to improve his English he explains). He has applied to have his family accepted under a family reunion provision but believes this may take years, if at all.

Now, I can’t say everything Esmail told me is true but one thing is certain, the level of sophistication in people smuggling has grown exponentially since Rudd dismantled our borders.

The route that Esmail took is just one of the many well-oiled ways for an illegal immigrant to get to Australia.

The pre-Abbott rush with the inevitable loss of life is set to continue and, interestingly, it appears that these passports are not chucked overboard as we have been told, but are returned to Pakistan for recycling.

I wonder if our insulated Canberra politicians understand what is really happening out there.

http://pickeringpost.com/article/one-mans-boat-trip-to-oz/1483

So basically they recycle the passports