Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chappy

Latest Asylum Seeker Policy

Recommended Posts

I was going to resurrect one of the recent threads that turned into an Asylum Seeker debate, but they were all election related, so here is a new one.

 

Tony has put his promised policy of towing back boats into action. As expected, the response from asylum seekers is to deliberately sink their boat as soon as they are spotted by Australian authorities.

Rather than let this act of blackmail force us to take them in (as has happened before) this time the asylum seekers are given a new boat and plonked back into Indonesian waters with only enough fuel to go north.

 

Now the asylum seekers are crying that we 'tricked' them

Much like we were tricked every time asylum seekers deliberately sank their boats.

Or every time they threw away their identification papers as proven by this first hand account.

 

Upon nearing Christmas Island a crew member used a satellite phone to call Australian authorities for help before passengers destroyed passports and identity documents and threw mobile phones overboard.

 

 

So what is more cruel? Leaving them in detention centres for years because our system cannot process them fast enough or using their own tricks against them?

As Morrison said, it seems the Greens won't be happy until we have a totally open borders policy.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

copypasta

 

I think it's fantastic for sending a clear message to the people smugglers. Eventually these refugees are going to be so pissed off they'll try arguing with the media against Australia, but more importantly, you'd think they would track down the smugglers and 'ask' for their money back. Further more if you add that with the Aus Governments advertising to other countries, it would have to decrease the numbers trying to come via boat.

 

 

On the other side of things, it can be disastrous for our international relations with Indonesia.

Granted, it's revealing the truth about how much Indonesia cares about Indonesian smugglers and they're 'efforts'.

Indonesia is however a powerful force and could potentially strangle imports/exports to Asia.

 

 

 

 

Also, i do believe Aus should increase the amount of refugees we take on.

Not by "opening up our borders", but by offering NGO's the opportunity to go to war torn countries, establish a centre to process "true refugees" and put them on a plane.

That way they can concentrate on families severely affected, or people with skills that Aus needs.

 

Look at all the boat people arriving. Yes they're are women and children, but the majority are young-middle aged men. I'm sorry, but from what i've seen there's already too many sausages compared to sandwiches in Australia.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't any increase of refugee intake come from the UN and be applied across the board?

Or should Australia just increase its intake ahead of other countries? If so, why?

 

I also think people over estimate the diplomatic impact of this policy. Even if it does damage relations, Australia needs to start showing some balls with Indonesia. They have openly allowed people smugglers to do their trade and only provided half assed responses to create the illusion they give a shit.

We would not need to tow the boats back if Indonesia gave half a shit about stopping them from leaving (like they are supposed to).

Edited by Chappy
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't any increase of refugee intake come from the UN and be applied across the board?

Or should Australia just increase its intake ahead of other countries? If so, why?

 

Yes and Yes!

Unbiased Studies should be conducted to show how many true refugees in the world and how many want to live in another country.

 

We shouldn't just increase our intake because all that will do is encourage more people to try to enter illegally.

 

I really don't have the perfect answer as it would take a room full of much smarter people than me to come up with a fair and reasonable unbiased direction.

 

I also think people over estimate the diplomatic impact of this policy. Even if it does damage relations, Australia needs to start showing some balls with Indonesia. They have openly allowed people smugglers to do their trade and only provided half assed responses to give the illusion they give a shit.

We would not need to tow the boats back if Indonesia gave half a shit about stopping them from leaving (like they are supposed to).

 

Agreed 100%

Indonesia are just trying to complain loudly because it's now showing that they're doing squat to stop smugglers from operating.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and Yes!

Unbiased Studies should be conducted to show how many true refugees in the world and how many want to live in another country.

 

We shouldn't just increase our intake because all that will do is encourage more people to try to enter illegally.

 

I really don't have the perfect answer as it would take a room full of much smarter people than me to come up with a fair and reasonable unbiased direction.

 

I thought the refugee intake standards were based on the numbers of refugees in the world?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so tired of boat people arriving and sinking their ships, 'refugees' protesting in detention centers and faggots trying to defend everything the boaties/refugees do. Now I have no doubt in my mind I'd get equally sick of being holed up in a detention center for years, but ffs, the people there are supposed to be "refugees", meaning they're running for their life. Having read about and spoken to people who have exposure to what goes on in some of the countries these people hail from, I'd take 3-4 years on Christmas Island any day. Not only would I leave with my life and limbs in tact, but there's a chance I might get to start a new life in a better country.

 

I remember having a conversation with an older woman once (think she was Serbian, could be Croation or Bosnian... honestly, I've forgotten most of the details and her English was hard to follow) and she was talking about some of the things that happened in her home country with regard to ethnic cleansing. In one instance, the military rounded up a bunch of people, took them to a metal smelting facility, and one-by-one just tossed them into the smelting crucibles. Talking with an Iranian colleague, she was telling me about how frequently and for so little an infringement the Iranian authorities would execute people.

 

Now if I were fleeing circumstances like that, I think I could handle 3 years of detention with food, water, beds and no torture. The problem is that it seems many of the people on Christmas Island aren't refugees in the truest sense of the term. They're just economic migrants.

 

EDIT: Given my opinions lack compassion and are often offensive to the bleeding-heart types, I should at this point mention that I'm not trying to upset anyone, so don't take it to heart NS peeps.

Edited by pmod
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

genuine asylum seekers should always be taken in I worry about kents without papers that could be anyone dangerous, ive spoken to african guys who had to wait a long time going about it the right way, the greens are causing allot of problems not just with boat people but with trying to stop back burning etc obviously allot of people need to vote more carefully next election to stop them getting too much power

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and Yes!

Unbiased Studies should be conducted to show how many true refugees in the world and how many want to live in another country.

 

We shouldn't just increase our intake because all that will do is encourage more people to try to enter illegally.

 

I really don't have the perfect answer as it would take a room full of much smarter people than me to come up with a fair and reasonable unbiased direction.

 

I thought the refugee intake standards were based on the numbers of refugees in the world?

 

I don't think so, although it's hard to tell with so many propaganda statements out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so tired of boat people arriving and sinking their ships, 'refugees' protesting in detention centers and faggots trying to defend everything the boaties/refugees do. Now I have no doubt in my mind I'd get equally sick of being holed up in a detention center for years, but ffs, the people there are supposed to be "refugees", meaning they're running for their life. Having read about and spoken to people who have exposure to what goes on in some of the countries these people hail from, I'd take 3-4 years on Christmas Island any day. Not only would I leave with my life and limbs in tact, but there's a chance I might get to start a new life in a better country.

 

I remember having a conversation with an older woman once (think she was Serbian, could be Croation or Bosnian... honestly, I've forgotten most of the details and her English was hard to follow) and she was talking about some of the things that happened in her home country with regard to ethnic cleansing. In one instance, the military rounded up a bunch of people, took them to a metal smelting facility, and one-by-one just tossed them into the smelting crucibles. Talking with an Iranian colleague, she was telling me about how frequently and for so little an infringement the Iranian authorities would execute people.

 

Now if I were fleeing circumstances like that, I think I could handle 3 years of detention with food, water, beds and no torture. The problem is that it seems many of the people on Christmas Island aren't refugees in the truest sense of the term. They're just economic migrants.

 

EDIT: Given my opinions lack compassion and are often offensive to the bleeding-heart types, I should at this point mention that I'm not trying to upset anyone, so don't take it to heart NS peeps.

 

some good examples there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it pisses me off to see economic migrants getting into Australia with bullshit.

It pisses me off even more knowing there are genuine refugees who are not getting in as a result.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so tired of boat people arriving and sinking their ships, 'refugees' protesting in detention centers and faggots trying to defend everything the boaties/refugees do. Now I have no doubt in my mind I'd get equally sick of being holed up in a detention center for years, but ffs, the people there are supposed to be "refugees", meaning they're running for their life. Having read about and spoken to people who have exposure to what goes on in some of the countries these people hail from, I'd take 3-4 years on Christmas Island any day. Not only would I leave with my life and limbs in tact, but there's a chance I might get to start a new life in a better country.

 

I remember having a conversation with an older woman once (think she was Serbian, could be Croation or Bosnian... honestly, I've forgotten most of the details and her English was hard to follow) and she was talking about some of the things that happened in her home country with regard to ethnic cleansing. In one instance, the military rounded up a bunch of people, took them to a metal smelting facility, and one-by-one just tossed them into the smelting crucibles. Talking with an Iranian colleague, she was telling me about how frequently and for so little an infringement the Iranian authorities would execute people.

 

Now if I were fleeing circumstances like that, I think I could handle 3 years of detention with food, water, beds and no torture. The problem is that it seems many of the people on Christmas Island aren't refugees in the truest sense of the term. They're just economic migrants.

 

EDIT: Given my opinions lack compassion and are often offensive to the bleeding-heart types, I should at this point mention that I'm not trying to upset anyone, so don't take it to heart NS peeps.

 

It's not a lack of compassion good sir, it's common sense and prudent policy on your part. I concur with your sentiments and also echo the suggestion that no legitimate refugee should be refused. However, the govt needs to better implement integration initiatives. The same goes for any immigration. That way a zero tolerance approach can be applied for failure to abide by commonwealth law by sending the turds that break it back to wherever they came from. This should apply especially to welfare frauds. And the next time I hear some clown trying to defend, for example, a sudanese gang bashing, by claiming 'cultural differences', I'm likey to punch them in the face, and use the same excuse. Not sure if it will work as a law abiding, fully employed, tax paying non degenerate Australian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here here being a victim of a sudanese gang bashing and it taking awhile to not get over wanting to kill everyone of them I saw I think its important to only let good skilled immigrants in and leave them on a short no tolerance policy, but in saying that we judge the parents coming in how do we know the kids aren't going to be little shits because mum and dad are working there arse of and are bored

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally an article that focuses on the reality of the diplomatic situation instead of just encouraging the constant grumpy attitude from ungrateful Indonesian politicians.

 

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/indonesia-when-were-sorry-its-not-enough-when-were-generous-we-need-to-try-harder/story-fni0cwl5-1226806143020

 

Indonesia - when we're sorry, it's not enough. When we're generous, we need to try harder

 

See if there's a pattern here: Hundreds, if not thousands of Indonesian-flagged boats, leaving Indonesian ports, crewed by Indonesians, breaking Indonesian and Australian laws have been wilfully engaged in people smuggling for years.

 

Apologies? No. Instead we get a lecture. "Australia must do more," says the Indonesian leadership. So we donate aircraft and navy patrol boats to help fix the problem. It turns out they're not good enough for the task - but they can be deployed elsewhere to deal with things more important to Indonesia

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to say this is a topic where I have to admit not being particularly compassionate... I have no issue with immigration and do believe in assisting genuine refugees however f*** the ones coming by boat without papers.

 

Now I don't know exact statistics but have heard statistically most illegal arrivals come by air, and that doesn't even really bother me.Why? Because to enter Australia though our airports they need a passport and such an identity check will show if they are degenerate scumbags/criminals (to use the 'correct' term'). Coming by boat they either don't have these or burn them before arrival which is hardly trust worthy. Factor in that direct flight to Australia is cheaper than what people smugglers charge them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't any increase of refugee intake come from the UN and be applied across the board?

Or should Australia just increase its intake ahead of other countries? If so, why?

 

I also think people over estimate the diplomatic impact of this policy. Even if it does damage relations, Australia needs to start showing some balls with Indonesia. They have openly allowed people smugglers to do their trade and only provided half assed responses to create the illusion they give a shit.

We would not need to tow the boats back if Indonesia gave half a shit about stopping them from leaving (like they are supposed to).

This x 1million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/un-representatives-criticise-abbott-governments-boat-towback-policy-20140423-zqxz1.html

 

4 Months without an arrival, even longer without any deaths at sea.

The number of people registering as an asylum seeker in Jakarta has dropped from 100 per day to 100 per week.

The percentage of applicants who fail to show up for their second assessment has dropped from 50% to 2%, which means the few that do get to Indonesia are not jumping on boats.

 

Despite all of this screaming success, the UN still has a cry about our current policy.

It is worth noting that the UN had a cry about our last policy too, and it makes me wonder if they have been happy about anything Australia has done with refugees in the past.

I have also not seen any viable alternatives come out of the UN on this matter ever.

 

I am sure the greens will have a cry about how Australia is a 'laughing stock' which makes me wonder if they are more concerned about their own image than the lives of Asylum Seekers.

 

Overall this is another piss weak response from the UN only serving to erode their already laughable credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this mean Sarah Hansen-Young will now shuffle back to under the bridge from which she emerged?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not, she is going to cry that this policy is inhumane and illegal.

Then the moment somebody asks her for another option that will not result in the economical destruction of this country she will turn into a deer in headlights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or mention that this is not how they do it on Sea Patrol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't see that there's anything to dislike with the policy. Seems to get the job done, and appears to have provided some benefit to the other countries involved without any cost for them. The problem with the Greens is that they're extremists with regard to their view, so they will never be satisfied. Hopefully they'll disappear from the political scene at some stage, although there are enough morons in Australia that I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Does this mean Sarah Hansen-Young will now shuffle back to under the bridge from which she emerged?

 

More like shuffle back into the Liquor Land to grab another sack of Goon, but I digress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this mean Sarah Hansen-Young will now shuffle back to under the bridge from which she emerged?

 

No. That bitch bred herself into politics.. Was the student president at adelaide uni, when they were using the compulsory union fees to pay to bus protestors from all around the country to the baxter detention centre. You'll never see her leave the limelight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.smh.com.a...0423-zqxz1.html

 

4 Months without an arrival, even longer without any deaths at sea.

The number of people registering as an asylum seeker in Jakarta has dropped from 100 per day to 100 per week.

The percentage of applicants who fail to show up for their second assessment has dropped from 50% to 2%, which means the few that do get to Indonesia are not jumping on boats.

 

Despite all of this screaming success, the UN still has a cry about our current policy.

It is worth noting that the UN had a cry about our last policy too, and it makes me wonder if they have been happy about anything Australia has done with refugees in the past.

I have also not seen any viable alternatives come out of the UN on this matter ever.

 

I am sure the greens will have a cry about how Australia is a 'laughing stock' which makes me wonder if they are more concerned about their own image than the lives of Asylum Seekers.

 

Overall this is another piss weak response from the UN only serving to erode their already laughable credibility.

 

I was having this discussion with a workmate the other day, I hadn't personally heard anything in the news regarding arrivals and this just goes to show the method works.

 

Anyone who can sit there and say the method is cruel is just retarded; They use blackmail against our government to get into the "promised" land, So why not through them a curveball and send them packing? I do remember the Government ad's on TV basically telling the Australian public to "pass on" the message that Asylum Seekers will not be accepted here, And anyone caught will be charged.

 

I'm all for this, And all for keeping it going. Australia needs to stand the f**k up for a change and stop letting other countries/minorities walk all over them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×