its my birthday in half an hour

While there is war, repression, political corruption, state sponsered murder, torture, rape, malitia, corrupt warlords, murder and repression in the name of religion and political idealism there will be refugees fleeing their homelands seeking asylum.
Look at the places refugees from all over the globe have come from over the last several centuries and you will see no one goes through the horrors of being a refugee and seeking asylum just because they are looking for a "Sea Change"
All non genuine refugees are sent back to where they came from, this is true under this and previous govts.

Quote:




Aside from Alexaner Downer's "Final Solution" incorporating the island and government of Nauru

Any arrivals from this point were either forced to return from where they had fled, or face life imprisonment in a Howard Government funded "facility" on the island nation (at a far greater expense than previous arrangements)

Most chose life imprisonment - in a safe place

Processing was ONLY allowed to resume on a change of government
At such time, 98% of those in permanent incarceration were found to have been genuine refugees all along

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 12^th, 2010 at 9:13am:



No, not true at all.
But I do believe your champagne is 98% alcohol by volume, which would explain such an inebriated comment.

If you truely believe that the majority of the refugees risking their lives by seeking asylum in other countries are nothing more than middle class leeches seeking a sea change then I suggest you take the time out to talk to a few of them.
The vast majority of the present refugees are from minority groups within Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, and I doubt anyone can ignore the reports of  govt sponsered mass murder and torture from within both those countries.
The USA govt has said the Sri Lankan govt is directly responsible for the muder and abuse of Tamil civillians and is guilty of covering up war crimes.
The anti refugee lobby seems to think these people are fresh from sipping lattes in the south of France and then decided to pop over to Australia for a change of lifestyle.

adelcrow wrote on Dec 12^th, 2010 at 9:36am:



Apart from the heart wrenching emotionalism, what is your point?  Are you aware that Australia can`t take enough genuine refugees to make anything but a token gesture?  Spare us the emotional hype & deal with the facts.

As I have said before, my personal experience with people who came to Australia as refugees since the 2nd world war has been a positive one.
These people have lost everything and risked life and limb to escape war and barbaric regimes and many such as the Vietnamese, Iragis and Afghans have been from wars we have been directly involved in.
Overwhelmingly these refugees who come here start again from scratch and are hard workers, savers, achievers, builders of homes  and new vibrant communities, they hold great pride in educating their children so they can achieve, they bring new ideas and are always grateful to this country and its people for taking them in and giving them safety and a new start.
Modern Australia was built by refugees and for a long time these people have been welcomed by a bipartisan Australia until Howard and the Liberal Party decided to use them as tools in their dog whistle politics.
Unfortunatley the present generation that grew up in Howards era of political manipulation are more narrow minded and guided by fear and hatred than any generation before them.
As Ive said, my personal experiences and the Australia I grew up in bears no resemblance to the present irrational, fear driven vision this  generation believes so strongly in.

Southerly headwinds test Abbott
December 12, 2010

Despite the positives, there is a dark side to Baillieu's triumph for Abbott. There is an emerging view within Liberal ranks that Abbott's aggressive and Sydney-centric style - with its emphasis on boat arrivals - has little appeal for many Victorian Liberals.

One reader put the Abbott problem to me like this: ''Petro Georgiou (former member for Kooyong) is much more in synch with the Victorian electorate than Abbott, who is seen as socially conservative, environmentally indifferent, ideologically vacuous and cynically oportunistic.''

The concern, which is not confined to Victorian federal MPs, is that far from demonstrating Abbott's effectiveness, the Victorian election result actually highlights his failings.

A destabilising internal Liberal Party memo is being circulated raising questions about how almost 250,000 Victorians changed their votes from Labor to Liberal in the three months between the August 21 federal election and the November 27 state election. The Liberal analysis contends that state-specific factors alone cannot explain the huge difference in voting between the elections. The subtext is that Abbott was partly to blame; that more Victorians would have voted for him in August if he had done a better job.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/southerly-headwinds-test-abbott...


Interesting rumblings ?