Colin Yai

That's a discussion I am not going to get into, but you opinion is not without merit and I am sure would be echoed by many.

The only reason I am interested in this article is because true refugees need the full protection of the international community. The criteria for being a refugee is pretty stringent....I am not talking about discriminatory practices, but about persecution. Returning them can means death or years in imprisonment. Most refugees who flee persecution are quite happy with their resettlement country and take pains to assimilate. Generally, they are grateful people.

Other groups who leave for a variety of misguided reasons are a whole different kettle of fish. Many are poorly educated, their motivation in going to a new country is primarily financial and other than poverty, their homeland remains a beacon of all that is good in life. Also, many of them do not leave voluntarily, but are forced to go by the family....and I doubt the ones thrown in the boat are the most cherished child to begin with.

Fair enough Scott, but are you saying that Multiculturalism in Europe has been a success story? and they fully appreciate there better standard of living provided by the Infidel? , lets not play silly games cos we both know its been an Abject failure ,when one protests against Radical Islam in Europe one runs a grave risk of physical violence or even worse.

Trompelmonde , are you implying that third generation born white Rhodesian,s were not Africans so therefore had no social status?

Basically Scott I would think as well as calling them Economic Migrants one could accurately call them "defectors" from the Stone age "system" that prevails in their respective Country's , maybe just maybe they have seen what the outside"infidel" world has to offer , odd thing is though when many arrive at "the promised land" they enthuse the quality,s of Allah and want Sharia law imposed in their new homeland!

If the black farmers produced tobacco they won't be able to sell it to anyone, due to sanctions. How do you show up at a place and in 200years own all the land while still a minute minority. Question first how the white farmers acquired th land then you can question the land reforms. It's only because they the white farmers refused any government organized reforms the authorities turned a blind eye to the veterans mob approach.

I could almost buy your 'African nationalist' argument save for the fact that Mugabe presided over the deaths of more black opponents to his regime than he did white farmers, no doubt as the latter saw the writing on the wall and left. As for sanctions, did that include Russia and China? I'm sure those two would have no qualms in accepting food exports from the former bread basket of Africa. Alas, it is no longer bread basket, but basket case instead.

P.S O/T But I would appreciate your thoughts on Nigeria on the recent thread about the Easter church bombings.

Quite correct Dan, very early in Mugabe's "tenure" his North Korean trained troops " The Fifth brigade" committed genocide under his orders and massacred an estimated 60,000 Ndeleble Civilian tribesmen, there is much information to be had on this subject in the public domain .

Why Australia?? Let me think for a microsecond. Because the government is a soft cock bunch of labor wannabees, being supported in a minority government by the bleeding heart, chardonnay socialist, and way to the left wing wanke_r Greens.

It's only one of the reasons why the Liberals will sweep to power next year with a similar majority to the recent Queensland elections, 78 LNP seats to 7 Labor and a couple of independents, NO Greens. At least the Libs are listening to what the voters are saying, whereas labor is doing what they think best for themselves, bringing in people who will largely be on social security benefits, and therefore labor voters. Labor has never been able to manage money.

Scott said, "It's the roll of the dice with the economic migrants. Many of them think that if they can spin a good, sad story, countries will let them in. Most, including Australia, will not.

I believe most of them headed toward Australia end up in detention on Christmas Island. ".

Not true Scott. Very few are refused, and we even have some who are such a security risk that NO country will take them, and we're stuck, keeping them for the rest of their miserable lives. The lunatic Greens want them all released into the community, and to take more than we already are, and experience has shown that crime rates among these groups are significantly higher than others.

Well written Corsair ,of course you must realize that to many this will be construed as "extremist ranting" as today speaking the truth as it really is often offends , obviously you are a fair dinkum Aussie , I am in almost daily contact with 3 others who hold the exact same view as yourself in every detail.

By the way, I doubt very, very few, if any, are refugees.

In Other words Scott they are lying to achieve a better standard of living (economic migrants)

As I have observed before this has the makings of a Sudan style civil war but on a much larger scale. I don't envy the authorities trying to sort this one out, but no doubt even deaths in the millions will hardly register a blip with the western press.

The Persecution of Christians in Nigeria is very well documented with Thousands of Christians murdered and hundreds of Churches burned to the Ground ,it would appear that it is of little interest to the outside world ,of course Nigeria is not unique in this respect as Christians are being murdered and their places of worship desecrated in many Muslim Countrys ,with Islam there is no " half way" you are either with them or against them , IMHO this word "multiculturalism" is just a myth ,but mouthed by many of the left wing PC brigade who avoid reality like the plague,

The reason that people are screened for refugee status is to determine whether or not they are in need of protection from persecution. Those that are not found to be refugees will ultimately be repatriated.

Do you think that reaching Australia is the gravy train? It's not. It's years of being locked up in a detention center, being screened and probably rejected as a genuine refugee, and probably returned to your home country.

Thailand, for example, is not a signatory to the UN protocols on Refugees. Thailand does not grant refugee status to people and seldom resettles people. A lot of refugees transit the country.

The situation in Indonesia is similar, I believe. If there are any refugees on the boat, they may never get a chance to voice their claim. In Australia, they would.

So in essence Scott what you are saying is that the Afghans who paid a reported 5,000 US to risk their lives on a rotting hulk ,(some sink during the journey) to be Imprisoned for years in a detention center (that,s if they don't burn it down) whilst they are being processed to probably have their refugee status turned down and probably returned to the Country from whence they came , yeah it sound's about right

I feel the only fair way is for the UN to process all claims for resettlement. THe individuals (or families ) should then be randomly allocated to an asylum country which should have the right of refusal. If refused the next random country..

THis should ensure that only those in a degree of danger and not just economic refugees get asylum. IE..the seekers do not select the country but still have safe refuge.

That,s the problem they are not fleeing from "oppression" and claiming "Asylum " in any random Country but specifying Australia and are quite prepared to pay mega bucks" (for them) to get there, maybe they can get a refund from the people smugglers!

All the Asylum seekers have been removed from the tanker.

Read here

http://www.heraldsun...x-1226323117350

Every single one of them Male, I guess females have no need to escape persecution in their sharia controlled utopias.

"But some of us have paid $5000 to go to Australia. We don't want to be in Indonesia."

Tis also high time human traffickers were treated the same as drug dealers, follow the money trail and you are on the right track for solving the problem.

The Guy Said it himself they are not seeking Asylum in any ANY Country, they just want to reach Australia!!.

I know this may sound callous, but perhaps Australia should opt not to resettle refugees or it's relatively low population would result in enormous financial strain being put on it's taxpayers, which in turn may lead to knock on public order problems. All it takes is one bad apple and you have a financial disaster. To give a UK example, according to a group known as the taxpayers alliance radical cleric Abu Hamza has so far cost Britain 2.75 million pounds in wellfare payments, council housing, NHS and prison bills.

Aside from this there 'should' be a clear principle in the E.U where asylum seekers are processed in the first E.U Country they enter, instead of being allowed to make a bee line for the Country with the most generous social provision. Australia has some trade links to ASEAN and I don't see why similar agreements can't be entered into with neighboring Countries Granted this would still no doubt cost Australia money, but if the expectation of being able to choose where to apply for asylum was removed then this might separate the persecuted from the economic migrants.

Far from being Callous Dan its the simple truth ,which more and more cannot be either written or spoken due to "Political correctness" or fear of being branded an "extremist", millions think the same as me but Ain't the guts to air their opinions in public.

Getting refugee status in Australia is not an easy affair. They hardly have an open door policy.

The point is to provide protection for genuine refugees, who are fleeing for reasons mentioned under the Geneva convention protocols. Those who are economic migrants can be returned to their country of origin once they are determined not to be genuine refugees.

Many so called"asylum seekers" travel through two or more Country's before risking life and limb to get to the "gravy train" of the UK social security system , Australia according to my many Aussie mates here tell me its just the same there , if they are so persecuted in their own Countrys why not claim asylum at their first port of entry? .

I don't think that Indonesia is a resettlement country.

I haven't kept up on the in's and out's of the refugee situation, but some countries do not accept refugees for resettlement.

According to the article ,The Police did not refuse them permission to disembark ,it was they themselves who refused ,I would have thought if it was Against Indonesian policy to accept them they would have been refused entry and simply told to "move on".

It's a tough call for the people living in Afghanistan and to a lesser extent Iran. As the Western military withdrawal continues, there is likely to be an increase in people seeking a new place to live.

It's a bit of a Catch 22 for everyone involved.

But they still set their sights on Australia. If their lives were truly in great danger I wonder why they don't settle for Indonesia?

I'll take a wild guess ,maybe its cos they do not have the equivalent of Australia's Centrelink (social security) in Indonesia !!.

The whole Southern insurgency thing is complex and beyond meaningfull, superficial commentary here, but use of it for making silly little political points in the above article is noted. Everything from shouting out in bold heading the 'fugitive' terminology,hoping to project felonious innuendo onto a political adversary, and using 1/3 of the article to reverentially quote a political leader with truly culpable baggage that would be congruent with the 'fugitive' moniker, demonstrates subtle intent perhaps not noticeable to many.

Fact - He is indeed a known fugitive from the Thai Justice System

Fact - He is a known liar

What else need be said?

umm, He or his proxy keeps winning elections?

And that's the elephant in the corner of the room which just will not go away. Sooner or later everyone is going to have to accept that.

Having a well financed political machine that wins elections, but by hook or crook,

is not the same as abiding by the laws of the land, being a moral person,

and working for ALL the people interests, rather than only your own cliques.

Boss Tweed ran Tammany Hall as his political fiefdom and won elections for decades,

but no one can maintain he was moral, law abiding or good for New York's populace.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Tammany_Hall

Winning elections is not the sole benchmark of political office.

Nor is winning a high profile trial by jury ,it all depends of how much dough you have to spend on high flying lawyers , IMHO OJ Simpson being found innocent on the murder rap proved that!!.

As well as the internet monitoring there is also this one. Seems to be quite a batch of this sort of thing.

http://www.guardian....ilence-in-court

and this is even worse

http://www.naturalne...emote_kill.html

I cannot think of any Country in Europe that should be considered "rogue" who would want to kill or even control"'non compliant slaves" maybe you could mention one as you appear to agree (THIS IS EVEN WORSE) with the latter link ,as I seem to be at a loss, maybe they was referring to the "hard line" middle Eastern Islamic Countrys or even North Korea !! , Personally writing I think its a total crock ofschit

Whitney Houston's (49) death, while a sad thing, was the direct result of very unwise life choices yet it dominated the news.

Charlie Sheen is 45 and his story is all over the news because he is a substance abuser, an adulterer, sexually promiscuous and obnoxious.

Lindsay Lohan is 24 and her story was all over the news because she is a celebrity drug addict and thief.

Amy Winehouse’s (28) story was all over the papers and rammed up our noses (pun intended) as she was a singer, a ‘celebrity’ and a substance abuser.

Something as frivolous as the talentless Kim Kardashian's (31) wedding [and short-lived marriage] was shoved down our throats.

While the following:

Justin Allen 23

Justus Bartett 27

Zachary Fisher 24

Christopher Goeke 23

Matthew Johnson 21

Brandon King 23

Brett Linley 29

Jesse Reed 26

Dave Santos 21

Sheldon Tate 27

Matthew Weikert 29...

are all British Royal Marines who recently gave their lives. There is no media for them; scarcely even a mention of their names.

It is now the period of the 30^th anniversary of the Falklands War in which not only did 258 everyday people (3 civilians and 255 military) give their lives but also increasingly survivors of that conflict, and many more before and since, are increasingly suffering the after effects of same.

Lest we forget.

Quite correct, the debt we owe our Servicemen and women in not only Both World wars ,but all who have fallen in Conflicts in the service of my Country can never ever be repaid ,many are unsung hero's who died so we could be free from tyranny , and as you very rightly put it "Lest we forget"

Netanyhu said........ If the Palistinians lay down their arms today , there will be peace !

If Israel lays down her arms today, there will be no more Israel.

Says it all does'nt it !

Doesn't quite say it all. Perhaps worth bearing in mind that the Presidents of France and The USA were caught on camera recently agreeing with each other that based on their dealings with Mr Netanyahu, he was a bare faced liar!

Do you send money the poor Palestine's or just hate Jews and buy beer to drink

I seem to remember from my School days, Thousands of years ago A Jew said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" or in Laymans lingo to the 2 respective Presidents , Don't be such frigging Hypocrites

It is the folks with Paranoid Personality Disorder that should seek treatment

Then again could be projection.....

The concept of psychological projection was developed by Dr. Sigmund Freud, Dr. Freud believed that people used psychological projection to reduce their own stress or feelings of guilt, thus protecting themselves psychologically.

Always funny to watch when one due to religious beliefs claims to hold high moral and religious standards, yet what they talk about and their actions indicate the opposite. Basically religious preoccupation syndrome and grandiosity.....ugly to watch no matter what the religion of the inflicted is.

Listening to some Educated old sage is quite OK, as you can believe it or completely disregard them,indeed many "educated people" used to say the Earth was flat did'nt they?, but when you disbelieve what your own Eyes have actually seen and your ears have heard , and refute them both out of hand ,then you are in the tragic state of self denial ,a very foolish if not dangerous state of mind,cos in my opinion someones theory's always come a very poor second to indisputable facts

Maybe there would be an end to this never ending problem if all Muslims did not "encroach" on "Infidel soil", unfortunately this is never ever going to happen when a Muslim with a wife and 5 kids who have never paid a penny into the "system" can live rent free in a house worth half a million quid, whilst collecting 300 quid a week in social security benefits , whilst our OAP's who have paid into the system all their lives have to struggle through on their pitiful state "allowance" ,and when people such as myself and thousands like me point this out we are branded as xenophobes and extremists by the left wing PC brigade , so sad ,so sad ,and has Pamela Geller writes, "truth is the new hate speech" .

Ain't that the truth, and we can't even deport the ones with ties to terrorism due to our friends running the central Eurabian rights for terrorists court. I hope at least his house is more wired for sound than celebrity big brother.

http://www.france24....-justice-qatada

A radical cleric once described as "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe" was freed from a British prison to live under virtual house arrest on Monday after a court ruled that his detention without trial was unlawful.

It's curious why a devout muslim like Qatada would want to live in a 'land of infidels' in the first place. I mean all those women in short skirts running around town, all those pigs slopping around in the country and the British sense of humour can be irreverent to say the least! Surely not the ideal place for a devout muslim to bring up his kids, is it?

That may be true ,FOR NOW!, but its changing!, do you honestly think the Europe of 50 years ago is the same as it is today!, Look at the UK, Norway, Sweden, France,Denmark, etc ,all inexorably creeping one way ,towards Islam! ,forgive me for writing this but anyone disputing this simple fact, I suggest they seek urgent psychological treatment ,the time for a wake up call is long overdue, maybe the security services are awakening to the irrefutable truth ,the result being the title of this thread., many in the West complain about "lack of freedom", IMHO there is nothing more oppressive than "Saudi Arabian style" Sharia law !.

Surely the most insulting part of all this is that the Brits themselves

have to cough up the £2 billion for this surveillance and they haven't even been asked

if they would like their tax pounds to be spent this way

Revealed, snoopers charter will cost YOU £2bn: Huge price of plan to let state spy on websites, emails and texts

http://www.dailymail...st-YOU-2bn.html

Maybe if they had the "Snoopers Charter" some while back the "London transport" bombings could have been spotted and averted ,or do you put a price on National security which saves massive loss of life and limb ,plus the pain of loved ones of the dead and injured and the terror which was quite evident after the "event",

What family man, who is putting more than sufficient food on the table, has his own comfortable home, and has children in a real school, is going to give that up for a violent, radical viewpoint of Islam that has him blowing himself, and other families, up?

Osama Bin Laden was educated, wealthy, had several families, many children and gave it all up to slaughter innocent men, women and children that he considered "infidels."

True enough, but his stated reason was infidels on Islamic soil. Remove the infidel encroachment, meaning no westerners in Islamic lands, (and sans the oil, there'd be no westerners, per se), and you remove the reason for Jihad. Plus there are always going to be a few whackos, in any culture or religion.

Maybe there would be an end to this never ending problem if all Muslims did not "encroach" on "Infidel soil", unfortunately this is never ever going to happen when a Muslim with a wife and 5 kids who have never paid a penny into the "system" can live rent free in a house worth half a million quid, whilst collecting 300 quid a week in social security benefits , whilst our OAP's who have paid into the system all their lives have to struggle through on their pitiful state "allowance" ,and when people such as myself and thousands like me point this out we are branded as xenophobes and extremists by the left wing PC brigade , so sad ,so sad ,and has Pamela Geller writes, "truth is the new hate speech" .

I'm sure that many countries have "quietly" been doing the same, for years. A necesary evil in this age of terrorist.

Why not just spell it out (cos its true) Islamic terrorist

There's tons of information out there that sheds light on just what this terrorism scare is all about, for anyone that really wants to educate themselves to the truth. But back to these internet censorship bills that keep popping up in western countries now. Governments the world over are quite shaken at the populist uprisings in the Middle East. Because of the internet, people from all walks of life having access to all the news and information has given the more oppressed peoples a clearer understanding of what they are missing, and have a right to, in their lives. And they're standing up and demanding it, as they should. The people in charge of countries do not like this at all! So in democracies, they are trying to legalize the government's right to censor, control or totally shut down anyone's internet that they feel is a "threat", and usually without due process of law, and without very specific and clear delineation of what poses a "threat". Whether it's simply sending emails without government snoops reading your personal life's details, or your right to peruse porn, or simply going on a blog and state your opinion, if you don't stand up and let your voice and vote be counted against government control, censorship, and snooping on the internet, you will lose your internet freedoms.

Personally writing Thaimat ,and of course no slight on your views whatsoever, I prefer to call it Islamic Terrorism ,because at the end of the day Radical Islam is the modern day Scourge to a "civilized " society ,whether it can be curtailed within the perimeters of a Democratic ideal of freedom of speech and Information is in my view doomed to failure ,what the Answer to this is totally beyond my comprehension, as it would appear that poison can be fed to the outside world under the freedom of information from person to person and to one Country to another.

The major financiers of Muslim terrorism is the Saudi royal family,

Unless you have something to substantiate this type of remark, I would suggest that you exercise care in what you post.

http://articles.lati...tion/na-terror2

http://www.weeklysta...lem_592744.html

http://articles.cnn....ups?_s=PM:WORLD

http://middleeast.ab...m-financing.htm

http://www.usnews.co...15/15terror.htm

http://www.gao.gov/n...tems/d09883.pdf

ABC News's MARK COLVIN: The United States Secretary of State has named Saudi Arabia as the world's most significant source of funds for Sunni terrorists.

In a diplomatic cable secretary also released by WikiLeaks, Hillary Clinton names Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan and Qatar as terrorism's major bankers.

In their wide-ranging précis of the leaked cables, New York Times reporters Scott Shane and Andrew Lehren mention in passing a key detail from one of the diplomatic dispatches: “Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda.”

The report also states, however, that Saudi Arabia ‘was a place where Al Qaeda raised money directly from individuals and through charities’ and indicates that ‘charities with significant Saudi government sponsorship’ may have diverted funding to Al Qaeda. U.S. officials remain concerned that Saudis continue to fund Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.”

The Saudi Government is the Saudi Royal family, and vice verse, is it not? The money in Saudi Arabia is controlled in whole by the Saudi Royal Family, is it not? So if S.A is the major source of terrorist funding for Islamic militant groups, as the US government believes it is, don't you think it is ridiculous to think anything other than that the money is coming from the people who have the all the money, control all the money?

Hey Thaimat ,just done another search on Google "Wikileaks , Saudi Arabia the major financier of Islamic terrorism" there is a welter of Information enclosed to substantiate your opinion, an opinion BTW I have held for the past 5 years or so.