simple1

If the UNHCR goes to Tony and says it is illegal, I hope he invites them to resettle the entire 17 million or so illegal would be immigrants in their own towns.

Does anyone take the UN seriously anymore? Ban Ki Moon is just a joke running round the world wringing his hands at the latest outbreak of violence.

Posts removed to enable reply.

Off topic. UNHCR has already stated Oz asylum / refugee policy does not comply. However, the previous Oz Immi Minister made it clear during Parliamentry Question Time that as a matter of policy Oz is no longer bound to the UN Convention for Refugees, only Oz border control / Immi legislation.

Abbott is being disingenuous as Indonesia, under pressure, co-operated with his turn back the boats policy. There is not a functioning government in Libya, the main country for embarkation, with whom to collaborate / negotiate to provide safe passage for returnees

That's irrelevant. If they simply towed back the boats they intercept, leave only enough fuel to make it back to shore and cast them off just outside the Libyan sea border, the boats would stop coming as soon as the word got out. it's worked for Australia.

Rescuing them is only encouraging them to keep coming.

BTW, a recent boat came from Egypt, and that has a functioning government.

The west is under no obligation to take millions of people that come from countries that have overbred themselves into basket cases.

There would be a difference if they were fleeing foreign invasion or natural disaster, but they are not. They are trying to escape the consequences of their out of control breeding. When interviewed on tv they always say they are looking for work. Somehow, with Australia, the prospect of not being in a western country with cushy welfare and the right to bring their families over as well seems to be a disincentive.

If the Eurozone won't tow them back, then they should send them to a big camp in the Sahara. I'm sure Algeria would rent Europe a big bit of desert to use. Under refugee treaty arrangements, countries only have to keep them safe from persecution or starvation, not give them citizenship.

Beg to differ. It is not irrelevant for the Indo govt to accept the boats turned around by the Oz govt, no way Oz would have done so without Indo collaboration. Probably the main contribution to stop the boats was the refusal to process any who reached Oz territory & instead ship them to offshore processing centres, then refusing entry to Oz, even those assessed as genuine refugees. There is no offshore processing centres or safe return available to those departing from Syria.

In today's news military action is being proposed to destroy shipping used by the people smugglers; no idea of the numbers of people in the current smuggling pipeline, tough luck I suppose with the very real threat of death.

Think you will find the majority of economic refugees come from countries with dictatorships in one form or another whose rulers, aside from political / religious oppression, are basically kleptomaniacs so no monies flowing to the general population. As far as I know birth rates are not a real issue as Muslim birth rates are declining.

A very recent Pew Reseach report claims from 2010 - 2050 globally Muslim birth rate will be 3.1, in comparison Christians will be 2.7.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

You have misread my post. I was referring to LIBYA, not Australia re turning the boats around.

Of course the offshore placement has worked for Oz. Corrupt Indo officials were a key component of the trafficking from Indonesia.

If people don't like their governments, do something about it, don't just run away and expect another country to sort out your problem.

2010 - 2050 globally Muslim birth rate will be 3.1, in comparison Christians will be 2.7.

So that's still too many. It should be 1 per family, like the Chinese. There is already 3 billion too many people on the planet.

All these problems are driven by human overpopulation. There was no trafficking problem in the 50s.

There was a number of issues with human trafficking in the 1950s, just didn't really impact Western countries e.g.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplementary_Convention_on_the_Abolition_of_Slavery

Don't believe too many liked the Syrian regime and look what happened when they tried to sort out the problem with now an estimated 6+ million internally displaced plus over 3 million refugees; same circumstance applies to many African countries. What's the current death count in the Congo; 6+ million?

Sounds like the Canadian guy did not have First Class insurance.

It appears though that such considerations as realpolitik don't influence the Germans, even with their large ethnic Turkish population.

Posts removed to enable reply.

Security concerns were assessed in Germany, but pushing ahead with the intent to make a formal recognition this summer - all good. Guess that Turkey needs to be careful how far they push their agenda with Germany as it is Turkey's largest investor and trade partner.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/germany-close-to-recognizing-armenian-massacres-as-genocide-1429872387

Sensational Head-line grabbing news item.

headline says "...Migrants not to come to Netherlands", but the story then goes on to say that it's "boat migrants".

Best way to tackle the asylum seeker quandary is to form an international organization. Set quotas for each country to accept certain amount (minimum) of asylum seekers based on the country's capabilities (how they are doing economically).

Simply put, the asylum-seeker issue is currently way too Politicized.

UNHCR has this role & negotiates with governments to accept quotas for asylum seekers / refugees. Believe the current UNHCR vetted refugees resettled is less than 100k p.a. with an estimated 10 million refugees at risk by UNHCR. The 10 million excludes internally displaced refugees that is also in the millions. You can do the numbers for how long refugees will have to wait for resettlement through official channels if peace is not acheived in the conflict zones.

http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4a16b1676.html

I wonder how this guy got two Kalashnikov (AK) guns into France. Those things are com-block (Russian) design used by Russia and allies, many ME and African countries and China. To be of any use he'd also need a lot of ammo which is also com-block. The guns are low quality and not real powerful or accurate, but up close they have a lot of firepower. (Up to 200 meters, m/l.)

I think that this type of thing will cause W. European police to begin to have comparable weapons. Someone will have to be available to take guys like this out.

It is claimed that often the Islamists obtain their weapons from criminal smuggling gangs. Specially trained European police forces do have military assault weapons.

Dancing on their graves already. Not unexpected from you lot.

In your opinion do you believe Thailand will re-commence excutions for those sentenced to death after the review of the moratorium this year?

The tragedy of the asylum seekers is in part a consequence of Indonesia's bloody-minded refusal to block entry to their country those they know will be seeking an opportunity to travel to Australia by boat. The tragic scam is orchestrated and controlled by corrupt officials and the military and vast fortunes have been made from the misery of these people.

A sick country.

Indo had agreed to try and block Iranians from entering their country for onward travel to Oz by boat. The Oz govt was in the process of negotiating to block other country nationals travelling via Indo, but due to popularist domestic political pressure went down the path of the PNG Solution and all the suffering that causes. No denying the consequences of corruption in Indo for controlling people smugglers, but no different from numerous other countries, including Thailand.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-18/indonesia-to-change-visa-requirements-for-iranians/4829434

I always find it interesting that those arriving in the thousands by air (often on falsely obtained visas) & then claiming asylum are very rarely vilified.

I'm looking forward to the intemperate hissy fit from Erdogan's government, same as we witnessed recently when the Pope called the Armenian genocide for what it was. Turkish officials even managed to insult Argentina in the ensuing fallout.

Incidentally President Obama went back on yet another promise when he declined to designate the Armenian genocide as such.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/22/barack-obama-will-not-label-1915-massacre-of-armenians-a-genocide

Realpolitik

Yes indeed realpolitik to deny the systematic rape murder and torture leading to the deaths of over a million Armenians. Some bodies were burned to a crisp to discover any gold they may have swallowed. Others were crucified. Some had molten butter poured into their wounds. Some babies were thrown in the air onto Turkish bayonets in front of their mothers. Some had horse shoes nailed to their feet and were forced to march through the streets.

This was the fruit of the last Caliphate, very convenient to deny it if you have no intention of crushing the new Caliphate. And all the while Erdogan the Islamist accuses Israel of genocide in Gaza with obscene hyperbolic rhetoric, which is parroted by ignorant leftist jackasses, who probably couldn't even point to Armenia on a map.

Yes indeed realpolitik in all its glory.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5790/ignoring_the_armenian_genocide_by_the_last_islamic_caliphate

When has Obama ever denied the killings, he actually used the words “one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century”. Why has no other US Administration officially used the word 'genocide' to describe what happened in Armenia during WW1? Indeed I have read three other presidential candidates have in the pass promised to officially describe the killings as genocide, but upon obtaining office never did so.

The Guardian article you linked to provides a number of considerations for the Administration not to use the word 'genocide' that pragmatically results in Realpolitik.

This is a good deal for helping refugees ...

These are refugees from Nauru. They will be given free housing in a Villa type structure far better than many Cambodians get or they would get anywhere else in the world.

They will receive free medical, they will receive citizenship which make them eligible to get free education, transport and many other benefits. They will be offered jobs.

This was documented on Aljazeera or Channel news asia a couple of nights ago.

Anyone who thinks this is not a good idea doesn't know the facts and doesn't know what they are talking about. A refugee and family can have all this or go back to where they came from ... ? what would you do .. ?

it's the human rights advocates who just want to make trouble and don't realize the facts.

Stop the damn boats !!!!

Those positively vetted as genuine refugees taking up the offer will get up to four years assistance to resettle after that they're on their own. There is no guarantee of jobs or citizenship. So far it is claimed six people have accepted the package. To apply further pressure Dutton is reported as saying in the future their there will be less incentives. But you're correct, much better than being stuck on Naura for possibly decades waiting to get resettled by UNHCR.

Are these people who have been screened and determined to be genuine refugees? Will they have the chance at Cambodia citizenship? A passport or travel documents?

Only those who have been assessed as genuine refugees are being offered an opportunity to relocate to Cambodia. The Oz govt has claimed that in the future they would have a path to Cambo citizenship. To date not one refugee in Cambodia has ever been given permanent residence status which is the first step to citizenship.

Much of the Oz government activities regarding asylum seekers / refugees are now treated as an operational matter & subject to attempts at secrecy e.g. the recent transfer of Vietnamese refugees intercepted at sea and returned to Vietnam. As far as I know the Oz govt has not clarified the travel document status / policy for transferees to Cambodia.

I'm looking forward to the intemperate hissy fit from Erdogan's government, same as we witnessed recently when the Pope called the Armenian genocide for what it was. Turkish officials even managed to insult Argentina in the ensuing fallout.

Incidentally President Obama went back on yet another promise when he declined to designate the Armenian genocide as such.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/22/barack-obama-will-not-label-1915-massacre-of-armenians-a-genocide

Realpolitik

Abbott is being disingenuous as Indonesia, under pressure, co-operated with his turn back the boats policy. There is not a functioning government in Libya, the main country for embarkation, with whom to collaborate / negotiate to provide safe passage for returnees

That's irrelevant. If they simply towed back the boats they intercept, leave only enough fuel to make it back to shore and cast them off just outside the Libyan sea border, the boats would stop coming as soon as the word got out. it's worked for Australia.

Rescuing them is only encouraging them to keep coming.

BTW, a recent boat came from Egypt, and that has a functioning government.

The west is under no obligation to take millions of people that come from countries that have overbred themselves into basket cases.

There would be a difference if they were fleeing foreign invasion or natural disaster, but they are not. They are trying to escape the consequences of their out of control breeding. When interviewed on tv they always say they are looking for work. Somehow, with Australia, the prospect of not being in a western country with cushy welfare and the right to bring their families over as well seems to be a disincentive.

If the Eurozone won't tow them back, then they should send them to a big camp in the Sahara. I'm sure Algeria would rent Europe a big bit of desert to use. Under refugee treaty arrangements, countries only have to keep them safe from persecution or starvation, not give them citizenship.

Beg to differ. It is not irrelevant for the Indo govt to accept the boats turned around by the Oz govt, no way Oz would have done so without Indo collaboration. Probably the main contribution to stop the boats was the refusal to process any who reached Oz territory & instead ship them to offshore processing centres, then refusing entry to Oz, even those assessed as genuine refugees. There is no offshore processing centres or safe return available to those departing from Syria.

In today's news military action is being proposed to destroy shipping used by the people smugglers; no idea of the numbers of people in the current smuggling pipeline, tough luck I suppose with the very real threat of death.

Think you will find the majority of economic refugees come from countries with dictatorships in one form or another whose rulers, aside from political / religious oppression, are basically kleptomaniacs so no monies flowing to the general population. As far as I know birth rates are not a real issue as Muslim birth rates are declining.

A very recent Pew Reseach report claims from 2010 - 2050 globally Muslim birth rate will be 3.1, in comparison Christians will be 2.7.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

One state has to start and it's time to call a mule not a horse and a f...up is a f..up; this political correctness pussyfooting around the hot cake does not help to solve the mounting piles of problems (note to self = inform Bruxelles and the European Union).

I am not German but it is also time to put the history, albeit forever visible, to rest. The Germans have been beaten for their genocide which started some 80 years ago as and lasted ten horrible years. This inferiority has been misused over and over and over by others for generations ever since. It's time to look forward, to avoid such Turkish, German and Cambodian genocide incidences for good in the future. Bravo; what Gauck did took guts and Turkey has to grow up to reality.

If Turkey orders all their ambassadors back for consultations - fine with the rest of the planet. They then can start discussing how life goes on in the 21st century and why, for example, their (excellent) national airline offers booze in every variation internationally whereas on domestic flights there is no booze available due to their Islamic beliefs and religion.

in fact Germany is not the leader in it's official recognition. To date 24 governments have used the term 'genocide' to recognise the massacre of the Armenians,.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide_recognition

She lied on blog about having cancer and then curing herself with Quinoa? Big deal. It's not like she lied about the reasons for going to war. Yeah, she's an idiot and a charlatan, but hardly more of an idiot than the standard idiocy exemplified day in and day out by people lying about their accomplishments.

She was in the process of having a book published on her lifestyle 'cure'. The unnecessary suffering & death she could have caused by publishing misinformation is unknown. However, IMO her attempt to publish for profit was not idiocy, but criminal

official cancer cure in many countries:

cut it away, poison your body to almost death or radiation

success rate : about 2% survival after 5 years

and it will cost you an arm & a legg sick like a dog

who are the real scammers? this is MEGA BUSINESS for pharma, hospitals, etc... budget for prevention, not even 1% of the marketing budget of pushing pill ads on TV !

I assume you're referring to brain cancer, if so across all brain cancers, the five year survival rate in Australia is 22%.

http://www.cancer.org.au/about-cancer/types-of-cancer/brain-cancer.html

I am in the process of recovering from major surgery and follow up treatment for a cancer that is the second most common for men in Oz. The specialists have access to extensive database / statistics of survival for the various stages. Without intervention my survival rate would would have been approx 1 / 2 years, with medical intervention approx 10 / 15 years.

The person in the OP had lied continuously after being challenged on a number of occassions. From my POV ahe should be charged for fraud and criminal damage.

Abbott is being disingenuous as Indonesia, under pressure, co-operated with his turn back the boats policy. There is not a functioning government in Libya, the main country for embarkation, with whom to collaborate / negotiate to provide safe passage for returnees

Anyone could fake a good economy by running deficits and trying to spend out of it. Under Obama the US debt will have doubled, adding more debt to the US than all of the other presidents combined for well over 200 years.

The US national debt was about 10 tril when Obama took office and today it is over 18 tril. The guy still has about 20 more months to conduct his train wreck.

Let's get real here.

Bush and previous administrations own about 16 trillion of the debt.

Bush left 10 trillion debt + interest + 2 wars + a jobs/housing/financial crisis.

Let's allocate about 10% of the debt to Obama to be fair.

I believe figures for Obama Administration are as of 12/2014.

Barack Obama: Added $6.167 trillion, a 53% increase to the $11.657 trillion debt level attributable to President Bush at the end of his last budget, FY 2009.

George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase to the $5.8 trillion debt level at the end of Clinton's last budget, FY 2001.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

Have you seen The Sun Newspaper Katie column, it's causing waves underground, nobody in the public eye will endorse her, Katie called them cockroaches.

And the PC government...

"Katie Hopkins and The Sun editor David Dinsmore reported to police for incitement to racial hatred following migrant boat column."

"We are in the process of writing formally to the International Criminal Court to petition for an investigation into these comments under the provisions of incitement to commit crimes against humanity."

LINK

Thanks for the link. Do you seriously propose that it is OK to describe these boat people as non humans? Similar language was & is used by those promoting genocidal ideology, including ISIS and members of the extreme far right; please reconsider...

Fact: Australia used to have a "whites only" immigration policy.

I wonder whether a "NO MUSLIMS" immigration policy would be good for us?

Before some deeply offended politically correct nutcase attacks me for being a racist consider this:

- No Jew, no Israeli or even no Australian with an Israeli stamped visa passport is allowed into Saudi Arabia!

- No Muslim is allowed to buy a property and reside in Japan!

- BTW my question about "no Muslims" is born by the fact that THE NAMES of the above 'British' and 'Australian' boys are a closely guarded state secret everywhere round the World. Why?

- What are our politicians hiding from us?

The reason the British boy hasn't been named is because there are reporting restrictions in place in the UK that prevent revealing the identity of any person under the age of 18 involved in a legal case.

"The principal exception to the open justice principle relates to youth court proceedings, which by statute are not open to the public. Section 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (CYPA 1933) places an automatic restriction on reporting that identifies or is likely to identify any person under the age of 18 who is concerned in youth court proceedings as a victim, witness or defendant."

"Additionally, there is a discretionary power under section 39 CYPA 1933 to restrict reporting the identity of victims, witnesses and defendants under the age of 18 who appear in magistrates' courts and the Crown Court."

"Any decision to lift reporting restrictions must be necessary, proportionate and there must be a pressing social need for it"

But if you want to think its a "closely guarded state secret" and that the politicians are hiding something from us then be my guest.

In addition those charged with offences in Australia have been named

Have you seen The Sun Newspaper Katie column, it's causing waves underground, nobody in the public eye will endorse her, Katie called them cockroaches.

'Cockroaches' was the description used by Hutus of Tutsis during their campaign of genocide in Rwanda. Similar descriptions (non humans) have been used to justify other acts of genocide e.g. the Nazis. The writer of the column is an ignoramus and should be fired.

Feed them, then take them back to Libya.

But if Libya refuses to take them?

A part of the problem is that Libya no longer has a functioning national government

A hijab doesn't cover the face. I don't see how that can be seen as a security issue.

If this is a state run school (in a Muslim majority area, nonetheless) there's no reason they shouldn't be able to wear a hijab. The fact that the school is on temple grounds is a non-issue, I see muslims wearing hijabs selling food etc. in markets on temple grounds all the time.

If they want to live in a certain country, then they obey that countrys laws or get out.

Try living in a Muslim country and don't obey their laws and see what happens.

The OP is about Thai Muslim citizens as was the poster to whom you replied. BTW perhaps you did not read the quote in the OP.

"However, according to Sod Daengied, director-general of the Religion Department, there are no regulations obliging Buddhist temples to prohibit people from other religions, regardless of what they are wearing, from entering their facilities"

In addition you & others may like to comprehend institutional support for law abiding Thai Muslim citizens, the vast majority, by reading the content from a Thai government website at the URL below.

http://www.thaiembassy.org/riyadh/en/organize

You'd think that we would have finally learned to stay out of other country's affairs, but NO! The US should just stay out of this and let SA and Iran work things out.

Leaving matters to a proxy war between KSA & Iran, don't think so. Making an assumptive statement US involvement is to protect a globally strategic sea trade route that would be threatened if an Iranian proxy government gained power in Yemen.

Post removed to enable reply.

For a starter permitting IS and other Islamic terror groups' sympathisers to travel to join these groups is a form of 'hugging' as it is in effect endorsing their wishes to commit murder and extreme cruelty, often against non Muslims.

I have read that the UK has handed down a life sentence for an in country recruiter for ISIS, would be a good law enforcement policy for other countries to have similar legislation. It has been documented that implementing the death sentence (e.g. USA) is more costly to the tax payer that life in prison.

All Imams identified as promogating Wahhabi / Salafi ideology returned to their native countries. Those who incite / preach terrorism to serve a sentence, up to life, if someone acts on their ideology - this applies irrespective of religious or political identity. Dependent on the security assessment prior to release to wear a tracking device to enforce home detention that would be reviewed say once a year as well as forbidding access to social media / internet whilst in home detention. I am not a subject matter expert on law enforcement, but you get the drift...

Have to say posters comments such as injecting people with Ebola, spraying Muslims with pigs blood, nuke 'em etc etc are IMO absurd.

As a form of hugging, call it what you like. They can go and hug and indulge in manlove Thursday's with IS. To leave the relative safety of the US, UK etc to join with their IS brethren is their wish, their desire, their calling. Why would anyone wish to stand in their way. Surely that constitutes a breach of their HUMAN RIGHTS, that they are very quick to jump on whenever they are not happy about something.

Please provide a link to this life sentence ? Never heard of it. I will provide you with this link, and many others like from across the EU, it would be foolish to believe that the same thing was not happening across the whole of the Western world, including the USA.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/students-hand-out-isis-recruitment-4043705

I am not convinced that the argument is clear cut in the cost of incarceration VS the death penalty. I believe that the annual cost of incarceration in the US is around $35,000 annually. You can buy a shed load of bullets with $35,000 annually. Furthermore, it is gross stupidity incarcerating Islamic Terrorists in the prison system. It is counterproductive. Here is just one report from 2012. I can produce many more.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9298578/Prisoners-under-pressure-to-convert-to-Muslim-gang.html

'' I am not a subject matter expert on law enforcement, but you get the drift...''

Obviously you are not. For someone who supposedly reads about the UK. This statement proves it.

'' All Imams identified as promogating Wahhabi / Salafi ideology returned to their native countries. Those who incite / preach terrorism to serve a sentence, up to life, if someone acts on their ideology - this applies irrespective of religious or political identity. Dependent on the security assessment prior to release to wear a tracking device to enforce home detention that would be reviewed say once a year as well as forbidding access to social media / internet whilst in home detention. ''

If you knew anything, you would know how ridiculous that statement really is.

2 words should explain all

ABU HAMZA

Looks like I made an error, must have read about UK national Samiun Rahman who has been arrested in Bangladesh and is now facing a life sentence as a recruiter for ISIS.

I am a Londoner by birth and upbringing, but haven't lived in the UK for 30 years & only occassionally follow UK media. I understand more aggressive legislation approaches will take time to be enacted due to political disputes balancing human rights and protection of society in general. e.g. what is the staus of the matter below from a 2014 article?

The UK government is currently examining ways to boost its fight against extremism. Home secretary Theresa May is considering legislation to target those who spread incendiary views, but not classed as terrorists because they do not engage in violence.

As an example, in Australia people who if they return and are convicted of fighting with a terror group face 25 years in jail. Think it's 10 years jail time just for visiting proscribed areas in Syria / Iraq.