Indonesia rescues 120 asylum seekers who refuse to disembark

[Scott]

Resettlement options depend a great deal on a number of factors. I don't know Australia's policy on this issue Countries of first-asylum, where the UNHCR does the screening, then puts forth the case of the refugee to various resettlement countries, with certain criteria in mind.

First, they try not to internationalize families, so if a refugee has immediate family in a country, they are first presented to that country.

Most gov'ts let the UNHCR know the number of refugees they will consider for resettlement and other factors.

Countries that accept resettlement, such as the US, Canada and Australia, I think they are stuck with those who make it to their shores. However, the UNHCR does not do the screening, the country itself does and it can use different criteria than the UN. In theory, the UN could be informed of a problematic situation and request resettlement elsewhere.

[Colin Yai]

Resettlement options depend a great deal on a number of factors. I don't know Australia's policy on this issue Countries of first-asylum, where the UNHCR does the screening, then puts forth the case of the refugee to various resettlement countries, with certain criteria in mind.

First, they try not to internationalize families, so if a refugee has immediate family in a country, they are first presented to that country.

Most gov'ts let the UNHCR know the number of refugees they will consider for resettlement and other factors.

Countries that accept resettlement, such as the US, Canada and Australia, I think they are stuck with those who make it to their shores. However, the UNHCR does not do the screening, the country itself does and it can use different criteria than the UN. In theory, the UN could be informed of a problematic situation and request resettlement elsewhere.

Again fair enough Scott but my question is as yet unanswered ,its quite simple , in your opinion is Multiculturalism between the different cultures a success or as I imply a dismal failure not just in Europe but in Ozz were it is deeply resented (on both sides), at present their are over a thousand mosques in the UK that are protected by our laws, but still it is not enough , concessions are viewed as a weakness and a signal to demand even more ,like putting flyers in certain towns in the UK saying that this is a sharia law area!!

[F4UCorsair]

Most of the 'refugees' who arrived post the communist takeover in Vietnam from 1975 onwards were not ethnic Vietnamese, but Chinese Vietnamese, i.e., Chinese born in Vietnam, some who had been there for generations, i.e., economic refugees, not unlike the Indians in Fiji although they didn't arrive as refugees.

The Vietnamese/Chinese from Vietnam have largely been fine people to have in Australia, enterprising, and expressing a real desire to be part of the Australian community, and I count some of them among my friends. I'm not sure about 'refugees' from the middle east, the recent arrivals, though. They make representations to all levels of government to close public pools so veiled women can have a swim, remove our national anthem from our schools, demand special foods in school tuck shops without the option of 'normal' food for others, government assistance to locate halal butchers in all suburbs so they will feel more at home 'integrating', government subsidies for low/no interest home loans because that's what they had back 'home', and on it goes.

Scott, let me clarify. The Greens leader wants no offshore processing or detention centres on the mainland. On arrival these people should be released into the community is the Greens' view. Very few of those arrivals are sent back, frequently because our authorities buy the line that they fear persecution, often because they can't be adequately identified as from a particular country, because they have no documents, and often identification is difficult because many are multi lingual, and look similar. It's difficult to tell whether someone is from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. On a recent fiasco where a group refused to disembark a navy vessel, the spokesman was found to be an Indian freeloader, and wanted criminal in India, who thought he'd come along for the ride!!

There's a reason they come by leaky boats, arranged through dodgey operators in Indonesia, paying a lot more than they would for an airfare, and that is they wouldn't be granted a visa if they applied in their own, or another, country, so couldn't board a flight. But after 'processing' and pressure from minority groups here, most are approved for resettlement in Australia, the very same people who wouldn't be granted a visa!! The government won't tell the voters that. These are the people who destroy their documents before arrival. They no doubt had them because they would never have been able to do the overland route to Indonesia without them. I don't think any other countries are nearly as benevolent when it comes to admitting people without the required documentation to prove identity.

There's no doubt that the boat people/refugee issue has become a political football here, because less than 10% of all 'illegal arrivals' come by boat. The others arrive by air, with a visa, and just overstay and then apply for asylum. But.....at least their characters were such that they could be granted a visa.

Those who arrive by air are very much on their own, living in the community, with very few, if any, government benefits, and there's the problem. Those who come by boat are damned expensive to keep in detention centres, more than a prisoner, and the figure mentioned there is $200,000+ pa per prisoner, and that figure doesn't include burning detention centres and wanton destruction of facilities. The cost of running a centre on Christmas Island is enormous, nothing is grown or made there and it's all flown in. The thinking voters of this country are sick to death of paying for these people, and when they are granted asylum, the leap on the gravy train, and hang on for dear life.

A terrorist was jailed here a couple of years back. He'd been in Australia for 18 years, had 8 kids, and NEVER worked, the cost to the social security system was estimated to be well over $1 Million, and that didn't include the trial in which he had legal representation paid for by the taxpayer. Now he's in the slammer for 20+ years at $200K+ a year, so that's another $4 million before indexation, and there are four or five in the group!!

I know this is off topic but just occasionally I need to let off a bit of steam over this, and hopefully I've made the situation re mandatory detention a little clearer in so doing.

There's currently a boat with a dozen plus ethnic Chinese in Darwin (the Chinese have been great immigrants, incidentally, and I'm married to one, fourth generation Australian) Falun Goong members fleeing persecution, and they want to go to New Zealand because NZ doesn't have mandatory detention. Both Australian and NZ authorities are telling them not to go further, too dangerous at this time of the year, and they've said they're prepared to stay in Australia but don't want to be detained. What's going on here? Who's in charge??

I do understand that it may be viewed as 'extremist ranting' Colin, but that's the way it is.

Let me say that multiculturalism is one of the great successes in this country, before 'these people' started arriving, but we have never screened those who come here adequately, and never has that been truer than right now.

I liked John Howard's line (former Liberal Prime Minister), "we will decide who comes to this country and under what terms." The boats dried to a trickle under his leadership, just one in the year before the benefactors of labor's generosity, the social security recipients, threw the Libs out, and subsequently the soft cock labor government sold out to the greens to retain power, and now the Prime Minister is beholden to the Greens, a party that holds only 10 seats in both houses of parliament.

Edited April 11, 2012 by F4UCorsair

[Scott]

ColinYai: I can't answer your question about multiculturalism. In some places it seems to work better than in other places.

I'm not for the mistreatment of any group of people, but those who do not enter a country legally and who cannot meet a test of Refugee status, should be returned to their own country reasonably quickly. It's not in anyone's interest to prolong their fate and it doesn't help to give false hope to those waiting for the next boat.

[Steely Dan]

I have a friend who works in the U.S who is involved with settling Karen refugees from Laos and Myanmar. He tells me that from experience each group has it's own unique problems, in the case of the hill tribes it tends to be drink driving, swapping food stamps for alcohol, gambling food stamps and domestic violence. However the next generation is closer to being culturally American than they are to their hill tribe parents. I suspect this is down to the fact that a lot were genuine refugees who crucially had no strong ideology fighting against them assimilating. We should not beat around the bush here, some groups have more of a chance being settled in a society than others depending on a variety of religious, cultural and ideological factors - we would be well advised taking this into account when deciding how to help even genuine refugees. I do agree with Scott, we do have a duty to help genuine refugees, but this should be handled on a worldwide level and not left to some Countries to make a disproportionate effort.

[F4UCorsair]

It's a fact that some people are just too different to ever integrate successfully.

[maidu]

Muslim refugees don't want to go to Muslim countries. They'd rather go to heathen countries like Australia, UK, US, Canada, because heathen countries treat them better and are more tolerant of immigrants and have better social security.

I just watched a video about Belgium, where Moslems are multiplying and getting more outspoken week by week. Belgium will probably be the first Muslim country in central Europe. Some of the groups making the most headway there are shooting for full tilt Sharia law, along with chopping off hands (for theft) and killing women for adultery. They've openly stated that Muhammed didn't give a hoot for democracy (no mention of it in the Q'ran). Part of the reason: Europeans and Australians and Americans have such tolerant and accepting policies, and assume the best in immigrants. First Belgium, then Holland, then France, then Scandinavia, then UK, then Germany .......Europe is slowly and steadily become Muslimized, and it won't be moderate Muslims who prevail. Religious fanaticism is gaining ground, day by day.

Wake up Australia, unless you want Sharia law in 20 years.

Edited April 11, 2012 by maidu

[yogi100]

Muslim refugees don't want to go to Muslim countries. They'd rather go to heathen countries like Australia, UK, US, Canada, because heathen countries treat them better and are more tolerant of immigrants and have better social security.

I just watched a video about Belgium, where Moslems are multiplying and getting more outspoken week by week. Belgium will probably be the first Muslim country in central Europe. Some of the groups making the most headway there are shooting for full tilt Sharia law, along with chopping off hands (for theft) and killing women for adultery. They've openly stated that Muhammed didn't give a hoot for democracy (no mention of it in the Q'ran). Part of the reason: Europeans and Australians and Americans have such tolerant and accepting policies, and assume the best in immigrants. First Belgium, then Holland, then France, then Scandinavia, then UK, then Germany .......Europe is slowly and steadily become Muslimized, and it won't be moderate Muslims who prevail. Religious fanaticism is gaining ground, day by day.

Wake up Australia, unless you want Sharia law in 20 years.

It's only the Australian people who can prevent this. You've already allowed your authorities to jail someone who objected to what is happening and the UK's legal system spent millions trying to jail the leader of the British National Party but at least the jury saw through the wool the government tries to pull over the public's eyes and quickly found him not guilty. It's a shame the British electorate lack the sense that jury possessed.

[maidu]

Whites first came to Australia because it was a big land mass with a relatively small population. In today's world, there are no big land masses with low populations, except Antarctica and possibly Siberia and northern Canada. With global warming, perhaps those areas will become less frigid and more habitable by us hairless monkeys.

To make a long story short: there are already too many people on the planet for its carrying capacity. Refugees, or whatever you want to call them, will increase in gravity, year by year. Best things we can do:

>>> Have less children.

>>> Tell the Pope to go stuff a rag in his mouth.

>>> Enable women everywhere to access free contraceptives.

>>> Compel deadbeat dads to provide for their abandonned women and kids. Back it up with fines and jail time. Castration for 3rd offenses. (Thailand has no laws which compel deadbeat dads to take any responsibility for their inseminating escapades). Nearly every hill tribe woman I know (I know dozens) has had at least one child from date rape by the time she reaches 18. Guess what % of the swinging dicks are taking responsibility - that's right, nearly zero.

>>> Free surgical tube tying for anyone who chooses.

[F4UCorsair]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

[trompelemonde]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

[maidu]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Good point. My suggestion to 'have less children' applies in a general sense - for the moderate health of the planet. You're right that Muslims are popping out kiddies like rabbits, and that can't help but result in Muslim majorities in most European countries. And wherever you get Muslim majorities, radicals rule, because radicals force moderates to at least tolerate radicalism - under pain of bodily harm. It's happening in every Middle Eastern country, and in Indonesia, and it will happen in Europe and perhaps also in Australia, further along the time scale.

The meek shall not inherit the earth, but instead those who can cow their neighbors the most convincingly, will inherit it. Look at any Middle Eastern country, and you'll see how convincingly radicals and extremists can take over.

[maidu]

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

The Europe of Teutonic knights is long gone. Today's Europe is run by overly-tolerant (and asleep-at-the- wheel) bureaucrats. It's a rather cushy destination for contemporary Muslims. The Austrians defeated the marauding Turks many years ago in chivalrous and bloody campaigns. Today, Muslims are taking over territory by just moving quietly en masse - (and having many more babies than) the tolerant folks who were once dominant in those regions.

I'm a tolerant person and member of California Green Party. I've resided in 12 different countries before I was 21, but the clincher (for me) is the insidious harm (and disdain for democracy) that radical religion can inflict upon people who are less fanatic than they. If it wasn't for that, I wouldn't give a hoot about what sorts of people wound up dominating in Europe (and Australia and elsewhere) in the near future.

[Colin Yai]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

Are you implying that Muslims are persecuted in Europe with no rights whatsoever? , can you supply proof that they are?. personally I think Europe is bending over backwards to accommodate them , in the UK alone there are over 1,000 mosques which are protected by law, so unlike Christian Churches in some Muslim Countrys which risk being burned to the ground as indeed many are with Christian worshipers murdered ,it is they themselves who choose not to integrate into Western society ,but instead expect the West to Integrate into theirs ,personally and with respect I find your post laughable to the extreme Edited April 12, 2012 by Colin Yai

[trompelemonde]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

Are you implying that Muslims are persecuted in Europe with no rights whatsoever? , can you supply proof that they are?. personally I think Europe is bending over backwards to accommodate them , in the UK alone there are over 1,000 mosques which are protected by law, so unlike Christian Churches in some Muslim Countrys which risk being burned to the ground as indeed many are with Christian worshipers murdered ,it is they themselves who choose not to integrate into Western society ,but instead expect the West to Integrate into theirs ,personally and with respect I find your post laughable to the extreme

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

[Steely Dan]

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

It's ironic that you cite the Jews as an example of past intolerance considering that 70% of the racist attacks on Jews in Europe are committed by Muslims. Indeed the intolerance seems to be a one way street with MP's who take views unpopular with some Muslims being threatened or attacked. Then we have the fact that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain, I don't know the percentage in Australia but Sharia law makes all non-Muslims second class citizens and calls directly for violence against gays. Perhaps some introspection is required before whining about the lack of tolerance shown by Countries kind enough to make their health and benefits systems available to immigrants.

[trompelemonde]

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

It's ironic that you cite the Jews as an example of past intolerance considering that 70% of the racist attacks on Jews in Europe are committed by Muslims. Indeed the intolerance seems to be a one way street with MP's who take views unpopular with some Muslims being threatened or attacked. Then we have the fact that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain, I don't know the percentage in Australia but Sharia law makes all non-Muslims second class citizens and calls directly for violence against gays. Perhaps some introspection is required before whining about the lack of tolerance shown by Countries kind enough to make their health and benefits systems available to immigrants.

And likewise I suggest that you exercise some introspection and restraint yourself with your made up and mis-quoted stats - "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain" the actual result the poll was actually "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for British Muslims" - there is quite a difference.

Don't call me a "whinger" either - if you want to discuss something cut the name calling

[Thaddeus]

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

It's ironic that you cite the Jews as an example of past intolerance considering that 70% of the racist attacks on Jews in Europe are committed by Muslims. Indeed the intolerance seems to be a one way street with MP's who take views unpopular with some Muslims being threatened or attacked. Then we have the fact that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain, I don't know the percentage in Australia but Sharia law makes all non-Muslims second class citizens and calls directly for violence against gays. Perhaps some introspection is required before whining about the lack of tolerance shown by Countries kind enough to make their health and benefits systems available to immigrants.

And likewise I suggest that you exercise some introspection and restraint yourself with your made up and mis-quoted stats - "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain" the actual result the poll was actually "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for British Muslims"

I hope they get it, they may think about leaving then.

[maidu]

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

It's ironic that you cite the Jews as an example of past intolerance considering that 70% of the racist attacks on Jews in Europe are committed by Muslims. Indeed the intolerance seems to be a one way street with MP's who take views unpopular with some Muslims being threatened or attacked. Then we have the fact that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain, I don't know the percentage in Australia but Sharia law makes all non-Muslims second class citizens and calls directly for violence against gays. Perhaps some introspection is required before whining about the lack of tolerance shown by Countries kind enough to make their health and benefits systems available to immigrants.

And likewise I suggest that you exercise some introspection and restraint yourself with your made up and mis-quoted stats - "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain" the actual result the poll was actually "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for British Muslims" - there is quite a difference.

Shaving hairs. The trend remains: Whenever there are radical Muslims in an area (as there are in every Muslim enclave throughout Europe), then those radicals will force the moderates to accept their archaic and harmful edicts.

We've seen how they do it; by intimidation, shouting, hitting, bombing, gang rape (by religious police), etc. That's the one-way-street European countries are headed - because of their wishy-washy tolerance of immigrants. A flood starts with a trickle. Australia too, appears to be headed down that rocky road.

Edited April 13, 2012 by maidu

[Colin Yai]

No I am not at all. Europe has not exactly been the most tolerant place in even its most recent history. Take the Jews as an example, they have been kicked out of every European country at one time or another, forced to convert or killed en-masse.Same as many other groups who have been a little bit 'different' from the mainstream, even other Christians.

BTW = I deplore the desecration of any place of religious worship wherever it is located and the killing of anyone in the name of religion.

It's ironic that you cite the Jews as an example of past intolerance considering that 70% of the racist attacks on Jews in Europe are committed by Muslims. Indeed the intolerance seems to be a one way street with MP's who take views unpopular with some Muslims being threatened or attacked. Then we have the fact that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain, I don't know the percentage in Australia but Sharia law makes all non-Muslims second class citizens and calls directly for violence against gays. Perhaps some introspection is required before whining about the lack of tolerance shown by Countries kind enough to make their health and benefits systems available to immigrants.

And likewise I suggest that you exercise some introspection and restraint yourself with your made up and mis-quoted stats - "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain" the actual result the poll was actually "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for British Muslims" - there is quite a difference.

Shaving hairs. The trend remains: Whenever there are radical Muslims in an area (as there are in every Muslim enclave throughout Europe), then those radicals will force the moderates to accept their archaic and harmful edicts.

We've seen how they do it; by intimidation, shouting, hitting, bombing, gang rape (by religious police), etc. That's the one-way-street European countries are headed - because of their wishy-washy tolerance of immigrants. A flood starts with a trickle. Australia too, appears to be headed down that rocky road.

I really wish your musings on this subject are without foundation ,however much to my dismay I found myself nodding my head in agreement to every word you wrote ,what others may think I could not give "a monkeys", maybe its quite OK to lie to others ,but when you start to lie to yourself for the sake of "Political correctness" then I would suggest you have a real problem ,and I, just like yourself simply refuse to go down this"rocky road".

[Steely Dan]

And likewise I suggest that you exercise some introspection and restraint yourself with your made up and mis-quoted stats - "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for Britain" the actual result the poll was actually "40% of British Muslims want Sharia law for British Muslims" - there is quite a difference.

Don't call me a "whinger" either - if you want to discuss something cut the name calling

Please carefully re-read what I wrote. Introspection was a suggestion for the Muslim community, not yourself, unless you are part of it. As for Sharia law, unlike Jewish law it does apply to non-Muslims as well as sundry Christians jailed for blasphemy can attest to. Sharia, like it or not, is viewed by many Muslims as Gods law, which explains why they view it as having universal jurisdiction, as 'Sharia controlled Zone' notices in areas of high Muslim population attest to.

[Exsexyman]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

Of course he can't prove it. The average birthrate for Muslims in Europe was 2.2 in 2010. Studies estimate it will fall to 2.0 by 2030. Whilst there is undoubtably a problem with multiculturism, it doesn't help when people come out with such hysterical scaremongering nonsense like 8-10 being the average birthrate. This is partly being fuelled by so called 'experts' on youtube like the failed comedien Pat Condell, who is laughably held up by some as a guru on these matters. He makes a very good living, he knows his audience and what they want to hear, and just panders to their prejudices. Sadly they lap it up.

[Colin Yai]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

Of course he can't prove it. The average birthrate for Muslims in Europe was 2.2 in 2010. Studies estimate it will fall to 2.0 by 2030. Whilst there is undoubtably a problem with multiculturism, it doesn't help when people come out with such hysterical scaremongering nonsense like 8-10 being the average birthrate. This is partly being fuelled by so called 'experts' on youtube like the failed comedien Pat Condell, who is laughably held up by some as a guru on these matters. He makes a very good living, he knows his audience and what they want to hear, and just panders to their prejudices. Sadly they lap it up.

Who do you "lap up" George Galloway?

[Exsexyman]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

Can you prove to me that Muslim women in the countries you mention have a birth rate of 8-10?

Given the history of Europe and its attitude to other cultures and religions, if I was a Muslim I would want to get the hell out of there.

Of course he can't prove it. The average birthrate for Muslims in Europe was 2.2 in 2010. Studies estimate it will fall to 2.0 by 2030. Whilst there is undoubtably a problem with multiculturism, it doesn't help when people come out with such hysterical scaremongering nonsense like 8-10 being the average birthrate. This is partly being fuelled by so called 'experts' on youtube like the failed comedien Pat Condell, who is laughably held up by some as a guru on these matters. He makes a very good living, he knows his audience and what they want to hear, and just panders to their prejudices. Sadly they lap it up.

Who do you "lap up" George Galloway?

Lack of content duly noted.

[chooka]

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?

True as indonesia is a muslim country and Australia a Christian country. Christmas has already been cancelled in schools so as not to offend boat people and the australian way of life is being strpped away so as not to offend and to conform with muslims. Australians are doing it very hard and thier taxes are being increased all the time to support these people who refuse to intergrate into the christian country, instead they are lobbying for things such as sharia law, If they pass through a number of other countries especially muslims countries then they are not seeking asylum but just demanding a right of entry and citizenship through the back door. Europe is in a total mess at the moment and Australia is going to be flushed away as well. I have absolutely no problems with people immigrating to Australia just do it through the legal channels and don't sneak in then start waving the anti discrimination and it is your human right card to turn up and be supported for life.

[chooka]

maidu, having less children is an admirable thing to do, but countries like Germany, France, Australia, UK, US, etc., have birthrates (per couple) of less that 2, but Muslims in those countries have birth rates of 8-10 per couple. It's not difficult to see where it's going, and it will only get worse.

In Australia there is a little thing called the baby bonus, the government pays people including asylum seekers and welfare receiptatants money to spit out kids. Kids that join the welfare line thus increasing poverty and crime.

[thaibeachlovers]

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.

You are absolutely correct.

There was a recent example of people trying to get to NZ because NZ doesn't intern refugees like Australia. Now that it's got to the point of so called refugees dictating which country they wish to go to, it's time for the circus to stop. This could be simply accomplished by building a camp in the middle of the desert in Australia, sending ALL illegal immigrants there without processing, and sending them back "home" when they ask, because they realise that there is no gravy train to be had. It protects real refugees from harm, and disincentivises economic migrants.

More than time for the PC BS to stop.

[thaibeachlovers]

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?

True as indonesia is a muslim country and Australia a Christian country. Christmas has already been cancelled in schools so as not to offend boat people and the australian way of life is being strpped away so as not to offend and to conform with muslims. Australians are doing it very hard and thier taxes are being increased all the time to support these people who refuse to intergrate into the christian country, instead they are lobbying for things such as sharia law, If they pass through a number of other countries especially muslims countries then they are not seeking asylum but just demanding a right of entry and citizenship through the back door. Europe is in a total mess at the moment and Australia is going to be flushed away as well. I have absolutely no problems with people immigrating to Australia just do it through the legal channels and don't sneak in then start waving the anti discrimination and it is your human right card to turn up and be supported for life.

All the PC tossers that currently run the west are too afraid to admit it, but Enoch was right!

[bigbamboo]

They were shark food if they sank. Same if they get sent back to origin. Darn their bad luck to breakdown and get "rescued" by fellow Muslims, they were hoping for the Great Satan.

Harsh.... but true!

[thaibeachlovers]

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? .

Obviously because they believe that the ultimate destination will be a "better" place to live. The way to prevent more from travelling to the UK or Australia would therefore be to make them an even more unwelcoming destination than the intermediate countries. eg, why do illegals want to get from France to the UK? I can only surmise that it is because France is doing something right!