Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cooper

Boat people dont want help from Indonesians

Recommended Posts

well... Taxi driving is a high risk job that probably doesn't pay well... Pushing trolleys wouldn't pay well. Hrm... Abatoir work is dangerous and probably doesn't pay well. There'd be a whole heap more jobs that we wouldn't want to do so i think the illegal aliens fill the hole quite well.

Edited by TheApothecary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well... Taxi driving is a high risk job that probably doesn't pay well... Pushing trolleys wouldn't pay well. Hrm... Abatoir work is dangerous and probably doesn't pay well. There'd be a whole heap more jobs that we wouldn't want to do so i think the illegal aliens fill the hole quite well.

 

Again, the problem is that these people WILL NOT do those jobs, they don't bother getting any job.

 

And i just saw this article:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/ships-ignored-survivors-pleas-20120831-2551a.html

 

I hope this article is shown to those f**kwits who hijacked the cargo vessel, this is 100% on their heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very negative topic.

 

I may or may not have giggled because that video would have been about a group of raging mohammeds. Only going to cause more problems. /queue islam topic.

Edited by TheApothecary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the video is pretty pointless, just some incoherent babbling from a survivor.

 

The most interesting bit on that article is the claims from some survivors that a number of shipping vessels passed them and refused to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the video is pretty pointless, just some incoherent babbling from a survivor.

 

The most interesting bit on that article is the claims from some survivors that a number of shipping vessels passed them and refused to help.

 

Can't blame them. I don't pick up hitchhikers for the same reasons.

 

People will immediately say that there's a difference, such that leaving refugees in the water could easily equate to their death, whereas a hitchhiker can wait longer and just sleep under a tree. But that goes both ways. If they board a vessel, hijack it and throw the crew overboard, the crew are as good as dead. One or two people is one thing, but 20+ is just encouraging danger. Not to mention the kind of people that make this journey will stop at nothing to get where they want; already they're threatening to commit suicide unless they're demands are met.

Unless I could let them on indivdually and thoroughly bind their hands, then tie them up somewhere or lock them in a holding facility, I wouldn't let them in either. Why risk your crew's life?

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow...

plenty of haters here

 

so...has anyone watched the go back to where you came from episode? or your just feeding off the negative media?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow...

plenty of haters here

 

so...has anyone watched the go back to where you came from episode? or your just feeding off the negative media?

You complain about "negative media" and you provide another media source as a suitable alternative...... genius.

 

I am feeding off reality and facts like the link in my sig......

 

Go Back To Where You Came From is typical greenie propaganda trying to rely on emotional hysteria as a means of diverting the topic from the real issue.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow...

plenty of haters here

 

so...has anyone watched the go back to where you came from episode? or your just feeding off the negative media?

 

Haven't watched either. I get my information from investigative research, studies of history, having lived next door to refugees, viewing first-hand the damage done to England courtesy of their open-immigration policy, and living in a suburb with a high population of overtly ethnic immigrants.

My parents immigrated here legally, so I don't have an issue with immigrants per se. There are however lines that must be drawn to ensure productivity and maintain a rich culture, and restricting boat people for which background checks are sometimes impossible, are part of that.

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The part that annoys me the most is that, these people/refugees/asylum seekers have traveled through at least 3 to 4 countries already. EG: If you came from Iraq you had to go through Iran onto to Pakistan though India, across the Bay of Bengal, through the Andaman Sea (could bypass it but will take longer) and that will just get you to either Singapore or Malaysia. Shit I worked with a refugee from Iran, the guy was a musician and he harbored a friend of his another musician who had worked on anti-government protests. (graffiti, music, posters and the such) They both ended up being caught, his friend was executed and he was imprisoned for 3 years.

 

After he was released he left Iran and his family for Pakistan by trekking across the mountains with other people fleeing the government. He then waited Two Years in a Pakistani refugee camp hoping for asylum and ended up coming to Australia. After that he worked his arse off to bring his family to Australia, which he succeeded in doing. In all, from when he left to when he reunited with his family in Australia it was 5 years. I have massive amounts of respect for this man and what he went through.

 

So when I see people trying to cut in front of others such as him by hitting up boats through Indonesia or in general act like pirates and refusing to get off a vessel because they don't like the destination. Well as far as I'm concerned, one across the bow, the second below the waterline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wow... plenty of haters here so...has anyone watched the go back to where you came from episode? or your just feeding off the negative media?
You complain about "negative media" and you provide another media source as a suitable alternative...... genius. I am feeding off reality and facts like the link in my sig...... Go Back To Where You Came From is typical greenie propaganda trying to rely on emotional hysteria as a means of diverting the topic from the real issue.

 

THANK YOU!!!

 

I'm so sick of everyone having a bat about that show... I believe people should make their own informed opinions on topics, that Go Back Where To You Came From s*** is nothing more than f**king hippy propaganda falsely labelled as journalism... and yet so many people refer to it as though its the frikken encyclopaedia of how we should think.

SBS has some great shows, but I hate them for flogging that crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day,everyone is entitled to their own opinion and that's perfectly fine. While i may not agree with a lot of your views, and think some of them are blatantly racist and harsh, i still respect them and can see the angle where you are coming from. It is not an easy situation, hence why it draws such intense debate and discussion amongst us and the general public. I just urge people to make their own informed opinions about the topic and not be completely influenced by the negatively skewed perspective that the mainstream media likes to play on. There are more than enough facts out there for people to make up their own opinions. I'm sure chappy has a few sources since he seems to have a strong opinion on the topic as do many of us.

 

Here are some basic facts that might debunk a lot of myths that like to go around.

  • First of all, refugees are not illegal immigrants. It has never been illegal in Australia to arrive on shore without a visa seeking asylum. In fact it’s one of the rights within the UN’s declarations on refugees which Australia helped to write.

  • When an asylum seeker arrives in Australia, they do not get any Centrelink benefits. While their status is being processed, and if they meet certain criteria, they can be eligible for financial support from the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme, administered through the Red Cross. This amount is 89% of the basic Centrelink allowance. This means approximately $405.84 per fortnight – over $260 less than a pensioner.

  • Once an asylum seeker is recognised as a genuine refugee, after a long and highly scrutinized process, they are given permanent residency and are then entitled to the same Centrelink, schooling and health benefits as anyone else. No more, no less.

  • The normal Centrelink welfare payment is $456 per fortnight, for a refugee with permanent residency and an Australian-born person. A pensioner in Australia receives $671.90. Over $200 more each fortnight. Even with family/parenting benefits, a refugee’s benefits would still be less than a pensioner’s income.

  • For an asylum seeker to qualify for any payment under the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme, they must have lodged an application for a visa 6 months before, not be in detention, and not get any other payment or benefit.

  • To get a permanent residence as a refugee, the person has to prove they are a genuine refugee fleeing persecution, go through character, security and medical tests, and sign an Australian Values Statement.

  • ‘Boat people’ are asylum seekers. Refugees are asylum seekers who have been approved and given a visa. None of them are ‘illegal immigrants’.

Source: http://www.kochie.co...rs-in-australia - he has further sources down the bottom of the page

 

“Australia is being swamped by asylum seekers.”

 

Compared to other refugee-hosting countries, Australia receives a very small number of asylum applications. In 2010, Australia received 8,250 onshore asylum applications, just 2.2 per cent of the 358,840 applications received across 44 industrialised nations.

 

In the five years to December 2010, 9,630 asylum seekers have arrived in Australia by boat. Over the same period, over 6,000 people arrived by boat in Malta, a country of 420,000 people (compared to Australia’s 22.3 million); and at least 185,000 people arrived by boat in Yemen, a developing country with a GDP per capita of just over US$1,200 (compared to Australia’s GDP per capita of over US$54,000). Statistics on boat arrivals to Yemen are unavailable for 2010; however, even excluding 2010 arrivals, the number of people arriving by boat in Yemen over the past five years was almost 20 times the number arriving in Australia.

 

“Australia takes more than its fair share of refugees.”

 

The overwhelming majority of the world’s refugees are situated in the developing world in countries neighbouring their own. In 2009, of the 10.4 million refugees under the mandate of UNHCR, 8.3 million or 80 per cent were hosted by developing countries. Only 17 per cent of the refugees under UNHCR’s mandate live outside their region of origin.

At the end of 2009, Pakistan was hosting over 1.7 million refugees and asylum seekers. Syria and Iran each hosted more than a million refugees and asylum seekers. Germany was the only developed nation to host in excess of half a million refugees. At over 590,000, Germany’s refugee population dwarfed Australia’s total of around 22,500.

Refugees hosted, 2009

Rank

Country

Total

1

Pakistan

1,740,711

2

Iran

1,070,488

3

Syria

1,054,466

4

Germany

593,799

5

Jordan

450,756

6

Kenya

358,928

7

Chad

338,495

8

China

300,989

9

USA

275,461

10

UK

269,363

47

Australia

22,548

 

Source: http://www.refugeeco....php#deterrence

 

As i say, do your own research and make your own opinion up. I know a lot of these facts don't relate directly to some of the things being discussed but i have simply put them in to help clear up some of the myths

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow...

plenty of haters here

 

so...has anyone watched the go back to where you came from episode? or your just feeding off the negative media?

You complain about "negative media" and you provide another media source as a suitable alternative...... genius.

:lol: was laughing at the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vozdra, your facts are addressing issues that are not being discussed in this thread.

 

Australia is not being swamped by asylum seekers, but Australian waters are being littered with their bodies.

 

As previously stated, go and have your opinion, but until you can think of a better way to stop these people dying in the water (without encouraging more to come) then your stance on the matter has no credibility.

 

Temporary protection visas were some of the best ideas ever used by immigration. Sure we need to protect them from their dangerous home but as soon as it is safe they can go the hell back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're selling pig farms to chinese people, which takes away the jobs from the workers there currently and then they're going to not pay tax, them not paying tax means the people who do pay tax have to pay MORE to make up for it.

 

At the same time, could you go to China/Japan with money, buy land and do whatever you wanted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vozdra, your facts are addressing issues that are not being discussed in this thread.

 

Australia is not being swamped by asylum seekers, but Australian waters are being littered with their bodies.

 

As previously stated, go and have your opinion, but until you can think of a better way to stop these people dying in the water (without encouraging more to come) then your stance on the matter has no credibility.

 

Temporary protection visas were some of the best ideas ever used by immigration. Sure we need to protect them from their dangerous home but as soon as it is safe they can go the hell back.

 

I know a lot of these facts don't relate directly to some of the things being discussed but i have simply put them in to help clear up some of the myths

 

I tend to side with these views.

 

“Tough border protection policies will stop people smugglers and prevent asylum seekers from making risky journeys.”

 

Refugee flows are primarily affected by war, unrest, violence and human rights abuses. Most people do not wish to leave their homes, families, friends and everything they know and hold dear. They do so as a last resort, to escape persecution and find safety and security for themselves and their families.

For many refugees, this search for protection does not end once they have escaped from their country of origin. In the Asia-Pacific region, most countries in the region are not signatories to the UN Refugee Convention and lack a legal and administrative framework for addressing refugee protection issues. In these countries, refugees and asylum seekers are generally treated in the same way as illegal migrants. They are typically unable to work legally, own or rent property, access health care or send their children to school. They frequently face violence (including torture and sexual and gender based violence), harassment, exploitation and abuse and are at risk of being detained and forcibly returned to their country of origin. These conditions frequently drive asylum seekers and refugees to seek protection elsewhere in the hopes of finding genuine safety and effective protection.

Everyone agrees that we should stop people smuggling ventures which exploit asylum seekers and place them in danger. No one wishes to see asylum seekers board unreliable vessels and make risky journeys to Australia. However, penalising desperate and vulnerable people – who have committed no crime and are in need of protection and assistance – is not the answer. Policies which inflict serious harm on asylum seekers or deliberately impede access to effective protection are not acceptable ways of addressing the problem. Policies based on deterrence also fail to address the root cause of the problem, as they do nothing to resolve the conditions which force refugees to flee their homes and undertake risky journeys in the first place. A more humane, sustainable and constructive approach would be to work with other countries in the region to address protection issues in refugee-producing countries and improve standards of refugee protection in countries of asylum.

“If we want to establish an orderly asylum process, we must discourage irregular movement.”

 

The idea that there is, or can be, an entirely orderly process for seeking asylum ignores the reality that forced displacement is anything but orderly. Refugees are fleeing persecution, violence and human rights violations, often against a backdrop of conflict and insecurity, and in most cases are being persecuted by their own government. In circumstances such as these, it is both naïve and unreasonable to expect that refugee flows will be orderly, or that refugees will always be able to obtain travel documents or arrange travel through authorised channels.

There are measures we can take to reduce the likelihood of asylum seekers undertaking risky journeys in the search for protection. Promoting better standards of refugee protection throughout the Asia-Pacific, for example, would enable refugees to find safety closer to home, precluding the need for them to travel further afield. However, it is impractical and fundamentally unrealistic to base refugee policies on the expectation that flight from persecution can be shaped into a “neat and tidy” phenomenon.

 

Just because their country might be safe from conflict or persecution, does not necessarily mean that it is suitable for living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i cane beleiv teh stats ur usin Gooby.

 

1. The countries that top your stats are adjoined to Afghanistan. Of course they're going to get hit with more refugees than other places by 2009.

 

pakimap_small.jpg

 

2. Many would use Pakistan and similar as a stepping-stone to get into other places like the UK. The UK seems easy for Pakistanis to migrate to (given the huge number there), and with the UK as part of the European Union, they could later enter other European countries they might prefer. http://en.wikipedia..../European_Union

 

3. Laws in the countries that top the list are severe (Pakistan in particular being an Islamic country) and many return to their home country. Pakistan in particular offers fewer rights to the refugees and uses them as cheap labour, which isn't bad for their economy. In contrast, the retards in Australian government financially support them for years. http://pakobserver.n...s.asp?id=150353

 

4. Using Pakistan as an example, refugees cause problems there too. http://www.ipsnews.n...-in-pakistan-2/

 

But many Pakistanis, from government officials to local business owners, are frustrated about bearing the weight of a refugee population that has encroached upon the local business sector and is allegedly responsible for a major surge in crime rates.

 

5. Australia is one of the geographically remote places on Earth; an Island in a bigass sea. Of course we will get fewer migrants.

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because their country might be safe from conflict or persecution, does not necessarily mean that it is suitable for living.

 

Of course! how could i be so stupid??

 

Let's evacuate these dangerous countries immediately and ship the entire population to Australia.

These places are not fit for human habitation afterall.....

 

 

:edit:

Or in a less sarcastic fashion:

If these countries are not safe for one person, why would they be safe for anybody?

And if it is our job to determine which countries are safe for people to live in and re-locate those who are not safe, why do these countries still have people in them?

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because their country might be safe from conflict or persecution, does not necessarily mean that it is suitable for living.

 

If these countries are not safe for one person, why would they be safe for anybody?

 

Well, for one, they could be an ethnic minority fleeing persecution i.e. Hazara people from Afghanistan. There are countless reasons

 

And if it is our job to determine which countries are safe for people to live in and re-locate those who are not safe, why do these countries still have people in them?

 

Once again, there are numerous reasons. Would you like me to start giving you examples?

 

I just think it's such a shame that we harbor so much anxiety towards these people. Particularly in the modern day where Islamophobia is so prevalent. before Muslims it was Asians, before Asians it was Italians, before Italians it was Jews, before Jews it was Irish, there's always been a scapegoat for white anxiety. (I'm not necessarily saying these are your views Chappy, just how i perceive the modern day Australian trend)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because their country might be safe from conflict or persecution, does not necessarily mean that it is suitable for living.

 

If these countries are not safe for one person, why would they be safe for anybody?

 

Well, for one, they could be an ethnic minority fleeing persecution i.e. Hazara people from Afghanistan. There are countless reasons

 

And if it is our job to determine which countries are safe for people to live in and re-locate those who are not safe, why do these countries still have people in them?

 

Once again, there are numerous reasons. Would you like me to start giving you examples?

 

I just think it's such a shame that we harbor so much anxiety towards these people. Particularly in the modern day where Islamophobia is so prevalent. before Muslims it was Asians, before Asians it was Italians, before Italians it was Jews, before Jews it was Irish, there's always been a scapegoat for white anxiety. (I'm not necessarily saying these are your views Chappy, just how i perceive the modern day Australian trend)

 

What a sweeping generalisation, i think you will find that most people could not care what race or religion the boat people are, in fact if you read most news articles it is rarely state where the boats are coming from (apart from a general direction).

 

You haven't come up with one possible solution (that i can see).

 

In the end i would love if we could help everybody that needed it, but as the statistics prove, we simply cannot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And see the problem i have is these topics always get diverted into the tangent of 'white anxiety' when the real issue has nothing to do with that.

You can keep peddling the emotional high ground of "dats wasis!" but it does nothing to help the issue at hand.

 

Additionally, while you complain about "white anxiety", you seem to be actively promoting white guilt.

 

If we were able to stop the flood of fake refugees from flowing in we would have plenty of resources to identify and process the genuine ones.

The people smugglers have cottoned onto the best ways of forcing Australia to take anybody in, and as a result we do not have the man power available to properly identify people.

 

Yes there may be some minority groups who are in danger of being hurt in their home country, but once that danger has passed the responsibility should end there.

The current crop of refugees have conclusively demonstrated that they cannot function in western society without causing a huge drain on the system.

We cant take them off the dole and force them to work because they would wind up on the street.

We can't put them through classes aimed at helping them assimilate because they do not want to.

 

What do you do with people who refuse to adapt and work? Send them back is my solution.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we were able to stop the flood of fake refugees from flowing in we would have plenty of resources to identify and process the genuine ones.

 

I've addressed this a few times in previous posts, have a read.

 

Yes there may be some minority groups who are in danger of being hurt in their home country, but once that danger has passed the responsibility should end there.

The current crop of refugees have conclusively demonstrated that they cannot function in western society without causing a huge drain on the system.

We cant take them off the dole and force them to work because they would wind up on the street.

We can't put them through classes aimed at helping them assimilate because they do not want to.

 

What do you do with people who refuse to adapt and work? Send them back is my solution.

 

A lot of generalisations being made, not to mention personal opinion.

 

I'm not denying that some will find in difficult to adapt, however, i think we can find better solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we were able to stop the flood of fake refugees from flowing in we would have plenty of resources to identify and process the genuine ones.

 

I've addressed this a few times in previous posts, have a read.

 

Let's go through that 'explanation' shall we?

 

 

“Australia is being swamped by asylum seekers.”

 

Compared to other refugee-hosting countries, Australia receives a very small number of asylum applications. In 2010, Australia received 8,250 onshore asylum applications, just 2.2 per cent of the 358,840 applications received across 44 industrialised nations.

 

In the five years to December 2010, 9,630 asylum seekers have arrived in Australia by boat. Over the same period, over 6,000 people arrived by boat in Malta, a country of 420,000 people (compared to Australia’s 22.3 million); and at least 185,000 people arrived by boat in Yemen, a developing country with a GDP per capita of just over US$1,200 (compared to Australia’s GDP per capita of over US$54,000). Statistics on boat arrivals to Yemen are unavailable for 2010; however, even excluding 2010 arrivals, the number of people arriving by boat in Yemen over the past five years was almost 20 times the number arriving in Australia.

 

Of the examples given in this misinformation, again aimed at diverting away from the facts, i wonder if these countries give out free welfare cheques?

I also wonder if they have set up colossal government departments to process and identify these arrivals?

 

I am going to bet the answer to both questions is "no", therefore you might as well compare Australia to an apple. We take in far more refugees than an apple, therefore we are great.

 

Australia actually tries to put some effort into confirming that arrivals are in fact genuine refugees and not merely economic refugees. The resources required to do this are huge and because of Labor relaxing our boat people policy resources are stretched so far now that they can no longer function effectively.

 

Yes there may be some minority groups who are in danger of being hurt in their home country, but once that danger has passed the responsibility should end there.

The current crop of refugees have conclusively demonstrated that they cannot function in western society without causing a huge drain on the system.

We cant take them off the dole and force them to work because they would wind up on the street.

We can't put them through classes aimed at helping them assimilate because they do not want to.

 

What do you do with people who refuse to adapt and work? Send them back is my solution.

 

A lot of generalisations being made, not to mention personal opinion.

 

I'm not denying that some will find in difficult to adapt, however, i think we can find better solutions.

 

I am not making any such generalisations, unlike you i base my statements on credible sources of information rather than a hippy website aimed at warping public opinion.

I have a link to my source of info in my signature, have a read.

The stats produced by the dept of immigration show that they do not want to integrate, regardless of your opinion that is a FACT.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's go through that 'explanation' shall we?

 

Ok.

 

They are not 'fake refugees' as you like to call them. You think they decide to risk their lives for a thrill?? Maybe they got bored of playing their playstation and decided they'd go with a 100 other people, and risk their lives on a rubber ducky to Australia because they had nothing better to do.

 

  • First of all, refugees are not illegal immigrants. It has never been illegal in Australia to arrive on shore without a visa seeking asylum. In fact it’s one of the rights within the UN’s declarations on refugees which Australia helped to write.
  • Once an asylum seeker is recognised as a genuine refugee, after a long and highly scrutinized process, they are given permanent residency and are then entitled to the same Centrelink, schooling and health benefits as anyone else. No more, no less.
  • To get a permanent residence as a refugee, the person has to prove they are a genuine refugee fleeing persecution, go through character, security and medical tests, and sign an Australian Values Statement.

 

I am not making any such generalisations, unlike you i base my statements on credible sources of information rather than a hippy website aimed at warping public opinion.

I have a link to my source of info in my signature, have a read.

 

No, of course not. You aren't making any generalisations at all.

 

Yes, all the facts i post that you don't agree with are from a 'hippy website aimed at warping public opinion'... Oh the irony!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not 'fake refugees' as you like to call them. You think they decide to risk their lives for a thrill?? Maybe they got bored of playing their playstation and decided they'd go with a 100 other people, and risk their lives on a rubber ducky to Australia because they had nothing better to do.

 

Again with the emotional bullshit.

Simply climbing onto a boat (which you shelled out tens of thousands for a ticket) and sailing into Australian waters does not make you a refugee. There is a whole qualification process applied to these people to verify their claims.

Nobody is saying they do it for fun, we are simply saying they are doing because they want to come here and do not want to go through the proper avenues of visa application.

These people have more than enough money for a plane ticket yet they choose a boat because it is so much harder to send them back.

 

 

No, of course not. You aren't making any generalisations at all.

When i say that 60% of them do not want to assimilate, no i am not making generalisations, i am making an observation of hard data which shows 85% of refugee households being in receipt of welfare and 60% of all refugees still living off the dole 5 years after arriving.

If you don't get off your ass and start contributing after 5 f**king years, its because you don't want to.

 

Yes, all the facts i post that you don't agree with are from a 'hippy website aimed at warping public opinion'... Oh the irony!

 

When they are cherry picked for maximum sympathy they sure are!

 

We can make uneven comparisons of other countries with vastly different social and economical arrangements to ours not to mention their geographical location. Or we can take a look at our own country over time and compare apples with apples.

Under Howard our refugee initiatives were sufficient and functional. We also had far less boat arrivals.

Under Labor those same resources can no longer cope.

It does not take a genius to see that something is wrong.

 

Your idea of a "flood" is more arrivals than other countries.

My idea of a "flood" is more arrivals than our resources can handle.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again with the emotional bullshit.

Simply climbing onto a boat (which you shelled out tens of thousands for a ticket) and sailing into Australian waters does not make you a refugee. There is a whole qualification process applied to these people to verify their claims.

Nobody is saying they do it for fun, we are simply saying they are doing because they want to come here and do not want to go through the proper avenues of visa application.

These people have more than enough money for a plane ticket yet they choose a boat because it is so much harder to send them back.

 

Once again, read through previous points i have made. These people can not get visas, hence why they come by boat! They aren't able to follow proper avenues! It doesn't make them any less of a refugee.

 

When i say that 60% of them do not want to assimilate, no i am not making generalisations, i am making an observation of hard data which shows 85% of refugee households being in receipt of welfare and 60% of all refugees still living off the dole 5 years after arriving.

If you don't get off your ass and start contributing after 5 f**king years, its because you don't want to.

 

It's unfortunate, however i would rather give it to these people that have risked their lives rather than the dole bludgers that were born here, raised, educated, have every opportunity in the world to get off their arse and make something of themselves, but they would rather leech of the system.

 

I'm not saying either is right, but rather pointing out how selective you are of people leeching of government welfare.

 

When they are cherry picked for maximum sympathy they sure are!

 

Yeh, and yours aren't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, read through previous points i have made. These people can not get visas, hence why they come by boat! They aren't able to follow proper avenues! It doesn't make them any less of a refugee.

 

There is nothing a genuine refugee can achieve on a boat that they could not achieve on a plane. It's that simple.

 

It's unfortunate, however i would rather give it to these people that have risked their lives rather than the dole bludgers that were born here, raised, educated, have every opportunity in the world to get off their arse and make something of themselves, but they would rather leech of the system.

 

I'm not saying either is right, but rather pointing out how selective you are of people leeching of government welfare.

Since when is sticking to the topic at hand classed as selective?

I have not mentioned Australian dole bludgers because they are irrelevant.

 

Great idea though, reward them for risking their lives at sea, costing us billions in rescue missions. Then they call their families and encourage them to do the same for the same reward. Then when their boat sinks and their family winds up becoming fish food, Australia gets the blame.

25950766.jpg

 

 

 

When they are cherry picked for maximum sympathy they sure are!

 

Yeh, and yours aren't.

 

In one case you have uneven comparisons being made to vastly different countries completely ignoring the different needs of each country and the different ramifications that arise from allowing a refugee into the country.

 

On the other hand you have a statistic that is what it is, people on the dole are people on the dole there is no other way of looking at it.

Make all the excuses you want to make but there is no imaginable excuse a person can have for living off the dole for 5 years. 1 more year and you could have completed a f**king law degree.

I don't care what you went through in your life, if after 5 years you have still not gotten off your ass and helped yourself then nature should have done something about you a long time ago.

 

If you can't see the difference there is something wrong with you.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they are cherry picked for maximum sympathy they sure are!

Yeh, and yours aren't.

 

Some things don't get raised because they're either irrelevant, or fail to meet a point of equivalence.

 

Take for instance the local dole bludger thing. At some point their immediate family have contributed labour or tax to this country, purchased goods, rented property, or otherwise been involved in the economy. Visa-applicant residents must work to gain residency. Add to that the competence in English (no language assistance needed), cultural understanding, fewer family members being imported here, etc. The cost and social impact is far lower.

 

It fails to meet the requirements of a reasonable comparison, hence it wasn't raised.

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not 'fake refugees'

 

http://www.smh.com.a...0903-259r7.html

 

"The rejection rate for Sri Lankan asylum seekers is extremely high," the two Coalition frontbenchers said, adding that the "vast majority" proved to be economic migrants and that there was a higher incidence of negative security assessments by ASIO.
Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again with the emotional bullshit.

Simply climbing onto a boat (which you shelled out tens of thousands for a ticket) and sailing into Australian waters does not make you a refugee. There is a whole qualification process applied to these people to verify their claims.

Nobody is saying they do it for fun, we are simply saying they are doing because they want to come here and do not want to go through the proper avenues of visa application.

These people have more than enough money for a plane ticket yet they choose a boat because it is so much harder to send them back.

 

Once again, read through previous points i have made. These people can not get visas, hence why they come by boat! They aren't able to follow proper avenues! It doesn't make them any less of a refugee.

Really, that's the stupidest reply to a post you've achieved so far.

Your shooting down your own argument, if they were genuine... They are protected by asylum seeker status.

 

So tell us again why they resort to boats?

Would it possibly be because they are expecting something that they do not deserve? Maybe it's also because they wanna tug on heart strings to try immigrate since they're not eligible via the proper channels.

 

My second opinion is also why this very thread started.

Edited by brent47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, read through previous points i have made. These people can not get visas, hence why they come by boat! They aren't able to follow proper avenues! It doesn't make them any less of a refugee.

so they aren't able to come legally due to other's being deemed more suitable, so they just come here illegally and expect to jump ahead of all those who are much more suitable. yeh cool, let em all in.

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  

×