Australia vows no change in asylum policy after Somali woman sets herself on fire

[snoop1130]

Australia vows no change in asylum policy after Somali woman sets herself on fire

AUSTRALIA -- Australia has vowed no change to its refugee policy after a Somali woman seeking asylum set fire to herself in protest over her detention on the Pacific island of Nauru.

The 21-year old is said to be in a critical condition.

It is the latest immolation by a refugee in Australian custody. Last week, a 23 year-old Iranian man died after setting himself alight.

Australia’s Immigration Minister
Peter Dutton acknowledged there had been a rise in cases of self-harm but blamed refugee advoctates for inciting such acts.

“It is of grave concern that this person would resort to such an extreme act of self-harm. I have previously expressed my frustration and anger frankly at advocates and others who are in contact with those in regional processing centres and who are encouraging some of these people to behave in a certain way, believing that that pressure exerted on the Australian Government will see a change in our policy in relation to our border protection measures,” Dutton said.

The detention centre on Nauru where the Somali woman was being held is one of several off-shore camps operated by Australia.

Human rights groups have strongly criticised Australia’s asylum policies.

Last week Papua New Guinea closed an Australian operated camp on its Island of Manus, after a Supreme Court ruling declared the facility unlawful.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-05-03

[nausea]

Well I suppose they do have a no ransom policy.

[JetsetBkk]

Tough country. Tough politicians. Right decision.

[baboon]

Blackmail. Pure and simple blackmail. It is beyond unfortunate that this woman for whatever reason felt the need to resort to such extreme a measure, but no way should any government cave in to acts like this. It will be better in the long run for everyone.

[Thaiwine]

As soon as Australia changes it's current polices the tide of refugees will match Europe's.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Thaiwine

[up2u2]

Unfortunately not much hope for these poor people. The majority of Australians feel treating them so cruelly is the right thing to do.

[shirtless]

Would these countries help Australians if the shoe was on the other foot, i think not.

[bristolgeoff]

if the uk and Europe had this policy about this issue.they would not be as much trouble as they have now

[RuamRudy]

Would these countries help Australians if the shoe was on the other foot, i think not.

Would these individuals help Australians if the shoe was on the other foot, I think probably yes.

[OMGImInPattaya]

Sounds right.. national policy shouldn't be affected by anecdotes.

[Kiwiken]

I am no fan of Australia's racist Policies. But I do understand their tough stance on these people.Always they are described as Refugees where in fact they are just queue jumpers. 1000's apply and after thorough vetting to verify their stories are selected and allowed into Australia. If Australia accepts these queue jumpers what will stem the flow? Personally I would load them on plans and dump them back at their starting off point. If you are unwilling to follow process do not expect to be accepted.

[bt2017]

Why does the Aus. Govt. think that asylum seekers locked up on a tiny Island in the middle of nowhere for years on end with absolutely no future insight are not eventually going to react in horrific ways as they have been over many years when even children have sewn their lips together in frustration.

Australians seem to forget that they were involved in an illegal war in Iraq and also war in Afghanistan they then vilified people of that region for wanting to escape for a better life and especially those who did'nt or could'nt join the queue where do you find the queue in a war zone?

What a wonderful idea the then Abbott Govt. had of paying Cambodia some 40-50 million dollars to take any refugees who volunteered to go there they got five takers but I believe four have already left what a great solution.

This whole revolting debacle started way back with the Tampa issue because John Howard was behind in the polls and needed a diversion it has since become a very nasty political football and will continue until a politician with foresight and guts decides to treat these people humanely as New Zealand does!!

Recently Australia was thinking about taking 50 Syrian refugees NZ said no problems they are welcome here but wait the Aus.Govt.said in a few years they'll be eligible for NZ citizenship which means they'll then have access to Australia paranoid or what!!!!!

And Australia criticizes other countries over human rights issues C'MON!!!

[Galactus]

i afraid, all refugees start to follow the case and burn themselves if Australia bows on such tactics.

so although it sounds heartless, it is right decision from Australia.

Still, Australia needs to improve the conditions of the refugees a big deal according to reports. Even less developed and poorer countries like Turkey does a better job with 4 million migrants.

[Roadman]

Why does the Aus. Govt. think that asylum seekers locked up on a tiny Island in the middle of nowhere for years on end with absolutely no future insight are not eventually going to react in horrific ways as they have been over many years when even children have sewn their lips together in frustration.

Australians seem to forget that they were involved in an illegal war in Iraq and also war in Afghanistan they then vilified people of that region for wanting to escape for a better life and especially those who did'nt or could'nt join the queue where do you find the queue in a war zone?

What a wonderful idea the then Abbott Govt. had of paying Cambodia some 40-50 million dollars to take any refugees who volunteered to go there they got five takers but I believe four have already left what a great solution.

This whole revolting debacle started way back with the Tampa issue because John Howard was behind in the polls and needed a diversion it has since become a very nasty political football and will continue until a politician with foresight and guts decides to treat these people humanely as New Zealand does!!

Recently Australia was thinking about taking 50 Syrian refugees NZ said no problems they are welcome here but wait the Aus.Govt.said in a few years they'll be eligible for NZ citizenship which means they'll then have access to Australia paranoid or what!!!!!

And Australia criticizes other countries over human rights issues C'MON!!!

Just to set you correct. That is the New Zealand government that has made that offer. If a referendum was held in NZ going on the general consensus I see on boards and hear in everyday life the majority would be agreeing with the Australian government and its stance over these illegal refugees. I agree with Kiwiken above and his stance...let these in and then it will become an open passage for more.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Roadman

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed. Please take note of this rule:

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

[up2u2]

Sounds right.. national policy shouldn't be affected by anecdotes.

People become so desperate and hopeless they burn themselves to death is described as an 'anecdote'?

[BB24]

Glad to see more agree than disagree with Aus policy on illegal immigrants.

They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country. Refugees do not travel half way around the world past many 'safe' countries and get on a boat to Australia from Indonesia for any reason other than to take advantage of Aust's very friendly social welfare resources and benefits.

AND - none of the left-wing human rights bleeding hearts ever mentioned or complained about the 100s of men women and children that drowned under the previous Aust Govt 'open door' policy. No - but they sure complain that illegal immigrants are being treated so badly. They are awful human beings who use the suffering of others to pursue their own ideological beliefs.

Sad to see anyone resort to self-harm as protest - but no reason to change policy.

[simple1]

Glad to see more agree than disagree with Aus policy on illegal immigrants.

They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country. Refugees do not travel half way around the world past many 'safe' countries and get on a boat to Australia from Indonesia for any reason other than to take advantage of Aust's very friendly social welfare resources and benefits.

AND - none of the left-wing human rights bleeding hearts ever mentioned or complained about the 100s of men women and children that drowned under the previous Aust Govt 'open door' policy. No - but they sure complain that illegal immigrants are being treated so badly. They are awful human beings who use the suffering of others to pursue their own ideological beliefs.

Sad to see anyone resort to self-harm as protest - but no reason to change policy.

"They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country"

Care to confirm the nearest country to Australia legally defined as 'safe' for asylum seekers.

Perhaps of more relevance more that 50% of the asylum seekers detained on Nauru and Manus Island have been vetted as genuine refugees, a percentage higher than those who legally arrive by air & claim asylum. Those designated as economic refugees are in a very tough position as many of their home countries will not permit admission for them.Taking the refugee issue to a higher level, currently there are only twenty countries offering resettlement with roughly 120k places available p.a; based upon current numbers it would take about 170 years to complete the resettlement process.

You may like to read some info on these matters at...

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/fact-sheets/myths-about-refugees/quick-mythbuster/

[up2u2]

An excellent link simple1. Thanks for that.

[Yahooka]

Good Australia.Their military do in fact STOP the migrants before arriving...............In Europe we`re deploying our military to escort them in !!

[BB24]

Glad to see more agree than disagree with Aus policy on illegal immigrants.

They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country. Refugees do not travel half way around the world past many 'safe' countries and get on a boat to Australia from Indonesia for any reason other than to take advantage of Aust's very friendly social welfare resources and benefits.

AND - none of the left-wing human rights bleeding hearts ever mentioned or complained about the 100s of men women and children that drowned under the previous Aust Govt 'open door' policy. No - but they sure complain that illegal immigrants are being treated so badly. They are awful human beings who use the suffering of others to pursue their own ideological beliefs.

Sad to see anyone resort to self-harm as protest - but no reason to change policy.

"They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country"

Care to confirm the nearest country to Australia legally defined as 'safe' for asylum seekers.

Perhaps of more relevance more that 50% of the asylum seekers detained on Nauru and Manus Island have been vetted as genuine refugees, a percentage higher than those who legally arrive by air & claim asylum. Those designated as economic refugees are in a very tough position as many of their home countries will not permit admission for them.Taking the refugee issue to a higher level, currently there are only twenty countries offering resettlement with roughly 120k places available p.a; based upon current numbers it would take about 170 years to complete the resettlement process.

You may like to read some info on these matters at...

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/fact-sheets/myths-about-refugees/quick-mythbuster/

Read the link you suggested written by The Refugee Council - basically a load of Khrapp. Let me summarise what the Khrapp says for you: "anyone that arrives in Australia can legally claim asylum as a refugee. and until they are proven not to have a valid claim, then they are legally a refugee." This is the basis that the bleeding heart pro-refugee advocates who work for The Refugee Council use to justify their own existence. Technically they are correct, but the reality is that most asylum seekers are not refugees - they paid people to get them to Australia.

Here is more reality: There are many people claiming asylum that are NOT refugees. They are merely seeking a better life for themselves (and children) and they are leaving their own countries for that reason only. Yes there are real refugees (I have a close friend who was one), but most of them do not have the money/resources to pay a smuggler to get them out. Genuine refugees leave their country because of imminent death from persecution (Jews in Germany) - that is what the UN Charters on Refugees was created for (1951 and 1967). It is being used/abused nowadays as a means for poor people in poor countries to get a quick ticket to a better life in another 1st world country.

If you think I am harsh, then you need to talk to Mustafa whose family left Iraq by walking for over a month (and 2 died on the way) and they then waited in a UN camp in Iran for 7 years before getting approved to live in Australia. The two elder Brothers (Mustafa was one) came first and the other brothers and their wives/sisters and nieces/nephews came a year later. The few stories they tell me (wont talk much and never to women) made me cry. Don't give me any khrapp about real refugees - you obviously don't know any.

There are over 145 countries who are parties to the UN Convention on Refugees and Asylum Seekers. This picture shows them all - please note that most are much closer to the source of most 'illegal immigrants' than Australia - but they do not offer the same 'benefits' or 'opportunities' to them as Australia does.

What is also worth noting is that after the EU stupidly allowed a Muslim country to become part of it (Turkey) and then annoyed Greece who opened its borders, that they have now become the preferred destination for 'illegal immigrants' from both Arabia and Africa - because of their generous social welfare support.

Good luck to UK is all I can say - they better vote themselves out of the EU or in 20 years time they will be an economic basket case (much worse than now). Thank goodness Howard stood up to all the do-gooders in the first place, and that the people of Australia voted for the boats to be stopped (again).

Australia has a population of 22milion. I would estimate that over 200million people in the world would choose to live in Australia tomorrow if offered the opportunity (and support) to do that. And that is probably very low as there are over 2billion in the third world. Where would they all go? How would we pay for them? Clearly impossible !! So we allow about 200K a year to move to Australia - with about 20,000 as refugees. And nearly every time an illegal immigrant is determined to be a refugee (most are) and given one of those 20K spots, someone else who is waiting (fairly/legally) has to wait longer. 7 pharrkin years in a hell hole in Iran (one sister raped) - spare me your bleeding heart khrapp mate.

END OF .....................................................

[arjunadawn]

Blackmail. Pure and simple blackmail. It is beyond unfortunate that this woman for whatever reason felt the need to resort to such extreme a measure, but no way should any government cave in to acts like this. It will be better in the long run for everyone.

Great post; it should be posted twice.

Edit: The 'refugee' 'migrant' issue must be viewed in a global context. Its agenda, 100%. While favor should still not be granted based solely on demands and blackmail, numerous of these people are as much victims as the populations pressured to take them. They are the hammer that is being hammered. The problem will not be solved until people realize an open borders world is being inflicted on countries.

Example from a world leader:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/kerry-slams-trumps-wall-tells-grads-to-prepare-for-borderless-world/article/2590596

Edited May 8, 2016 by arjunadawn

[simple1]

Glad to see more agree than disagree with Aus policy on illegal immigrants.

They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country. Refugees do not travel half way around the world past many 'safe' countries and get on a boat to Australia from Indonesia for any reason other than to take advantage of Aust's very friendly social welfare resources and benefits.

AND - none of the left-wing human rights bleeding hearts ever mentioned or complained about the 100s of men women and children that drowned under the previous Aust Govt 'open door' policy. No - but they sure complain that illegal immigrants are being treated so badly. They are awful human beings who use the suffering of others to pursue their own ideological beliefs.

Sad to see anyone resort to self-harm as protest - but no reason to change policy.

"They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country"

Care to confirm the nearest country to Australia legally defined as 'safe' for asylum seekers.

Perhaps of more relevance more that 50% of the asylum seekers detained on Nauru and Manus Island have been vetted as genuine refugees, a percentage higher than those who legally arrive by air & claim asylum. Those designated as economic refugees are in a very tough position as many of their home countries will not permit admission for them.Taking the refugee issue to a higher level, currently there are only twenty countries offering resettlement with roughly 120k places available p.a; based upon current numbers it would take about 170 years to complete the resettlement process.

You may like to read some info on these matters at...

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/fact-sheets/myths-about-refugees/quick-mythbuster/

Read the link you suggested written by The Refugee Council - basically a load of Khrapp. Let me summarise what the Khrapp says for you: "anyone that arrives in Australia can legally claim asylum as a refugee. and until they are proven not to have a valid claim, then they are legally a refugee." This is the basis that the bleeding heart pro-refugee advocates who work for The Refugee Council use to justify their own existence. Technically they are correct, but the reality is that most asylum seekers are not refugees - they paid people to get them to Australia.

Here is more reality: There are many people claiming asylum that are NOT refugees. They are merely seeking a better life for themselves (and children) and they are leaving their own countries for that reason only. Yes there are real refugees (I have a close friend who was one), but most of them do not have the money/resources to pay a smuggler to get them out. Genuine refugees leave their country because of imminent death from persecution (Jews in Germany) - that is what the UN Charters on Refugees was created for (1951 and 1967). It is being used/abused nowadays as a means for poor people in poor countries to get a quick ticket to a better life in another 1st world country.

If you think I am harsh, then you need to talk to Mustafa whose family left Iraq by walking for over a month (and 2 died on the way) and they then waited in a UN camp in Iran for 7 years before getting approved to live in Australia. The two elder Brothers (Mustafa was one) came first and the other brothers and their wives/sisters and nieces/nephews came a year later. The few stories they tell me (wont talk much and never to women) made me cry. Don't give me any khrapp about real refugees - you obviously don't know any.

There are over 145 countries who are parties to the UN Convention on Refugees and Asylum Seekers. This picture shows them all - please note that most are much closer to the source of most 'illegal immigrants' than Australia - but they do not offer the same 'benefits' or 'opportunities' to them as Australia does.

What is also worth noting is that after the EU stupidly allowed a Muslim country to become part of it (Turkey) and then annoyed Greece who opened its borders, that they have now become the preferred destination for 'illegal immigrants' from both Arabia and Africa - because of their generous social welfare support.

Good luck to UK is all I can say - they better vote themselves out of the EU or in 20 years time they will be an economic basket case (much worse than now). Thank goodness Howard stood up to all the do-gooders in the first place, and that the people of Australia voted for the boats to be stopped (again).

Australia has a population of 22milion. I would estimate that over 200million people in the world would choose to live in Australia tomorrow if offered the opportunity (and support) to do that. And that is probably very low as there are over 2billion in the third world. Where would they all go? How would we pay for them? Clearly impossible !! So we allow about 200K a year to move to Australia - with about 20,000 as refugees. And nearly every time an illegal immigrant is determined to be a refugee (most are) and given one of those 20K spots, someone else who is waiting (fairly/legally) has to wait longer. 7 pharrkin years in a hell hole in Iran (one sister raped) - spare me your bleeding heart khrapp mate.

END OF .....................................................

Turkey is not a member of the EU, you have also made a number of other incorrect comments - so please spare me your BS. BTW a friend of mine was a Federally appointed Judge on the Refugee Review Tribunal (rule on asylum seeker appeals) for a number of years, I can assure you they are not a 'bleeding heart' organisation.

[up2u2]

Papua High Court finds Naru detention centre illegal and orders it closed. Quite extraordinary when a corrupt country like Papua gives Australia a lesson in Human Rights. Very embarrassing.

Also Save The Children workers were found to be not guilty of allegations they incited refugees to self harm and awarded compensation. Morrison (now Treasurer) who removed Save The Children Staff from Naru refused to apologise.

Interesting how the current Immigration Minister Dutton is playing exactly the same card:

"Australia’s Immigration Minister
Peter Dutton acknowledged there had been a rise in cases of self-harm but blamed refugee advoctates for inciting such acts."

Anyone who speaks out and objects to people including children being indefinitely imprisoned, raped, sexually assaulted, beaten to death, people burning themselves to death are described as 'bleeding hearts' and told these cruelties are all for a good cause. There are people around the world who commit the most egregious acts of violence and cruelty. Their excuse for committing these crimes against humanity is justified and for a good cause. Manus and Naru demonstrates that Australia is now no different from these globally hated despotic groups and Nations.

It will now be unacceptable for ANY Australian to lecture anyone or ANY Nation on human rights violations. When you commit Human Rights violations you can no longer lecture others for doing the same for whatever reason. From now on Human Rights violations are now justified.

[Kiwiken]

Papua High Court finds Naru detention centre illegal and orders it closed. Quite extraordinary when a corrupt country like Papua gives Australia a lesson in Human Rights. Very embarrassing.

Also Save The Children workers were found to be not guilty of allegations they incited refugees to self harm and awarded compensation. Morrison (now Treasurer) who removed Save The Children Staff from Naru refused to apologise.

Interesting how the current Immigration Minister Dutton is playing exactly the same card:

"Australia’s Immigration Minister

Peter Dutton acknowledged there had been a rise in cases of self-harm but blamed refugee advoctates for inciting such acts."

Anyone who speaks out and objects to people including children being indefinitely imprisoned, raped, sexually assaulted, beaten to death, people burning themselves to death are described as 'bleeding hearts' and told these cruelties are all for a good cause. There are people around the world who commit the most egregious acts of violence and cruelty. Their excuse for committing these crimes against humanity is justified and for a good cause. Manus and Naru demonstrates that Australia is now no different from these globally hated despotic groups and Nations.

It will now be unacceptable for ANY Australian to lecture anyone or ANY Nation on human rights violations. When you commit Human Rights violations you can no longer lecture others for doing the same for whatever reason. From now on Human Rights violations are now justified.

I may not agree with facts and figures. But I know if Australia changed its policy that the boats would flood in. And then there would really be a crisis. In the refugee camps around the World there are many who go through the slow process of apply , vetting and possible acceptance into Australia. If you let these that had money and paid to come on a boat , Jumping the queue then the genuine ones in the camps will rot there add infinitum. Or would you have Australia take them as well. Do you know the geography of Australia. Its lack of water, Yes it only has 22 million plus but in places this strains the water supply. To allow rapid growth by immigration and refugee influx may cause more harm. Slow trickle is better. My Country NZ places for 750 refugee per annum , maybe could double that but like Australia we have problems too. Yes we have land and only 4.5 m people but we have housing crisis caused by too many people Auckland and lost houses Christchurch from earthquake 2010. If We or Australia reversed policy the adverse effect on each other could be catastrophic.I am sorry for the hardship these people now have. But had they waited in the queue maybe they would be settled already.

[BB24]

Glad to see more agree than disagree with Aus policy on illegal immigrants.

They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country. Refugees do not travel half way around the world past many 'safe' countries and get on a boat to Australia from Indonesia for any reason other than to take advantage of Aust's very friendly social welfare resources and benefits.

AND - none of the left-wing human rights bleeding hearts ever mentioned or complained about the 100s of men women and children that drowned under the previous Aust Govt 'open door' policy. No - but they sure complain that illegal immigrants are being treated so badly. They are awful human beings who use the suffering of others to pursue their own ideological beliefs.

Sad to see anyone resort to self-harm as protest - but no reason to change policy.

"They are NOT refugees - refugees escape to the nearest safe country"

Care to confirm the nearest country to Australia legally defined as 'safe' for asylum seekers.

Perhaps of more relevance more that 50% of the asylum seekers detained on Nauru and Manus Island have been vetted as genuine refugees, a percentage higher than those who legally arrive by air & claim asylum. Those designated as economic refugees are in a very tough position as many of their home countries will not permit admission for them.Taking the refugee issue to a higher level, currently there are only twenty countries offering resettlement with roughly 120k places available p.a; based upon current numbers it would take about 170 years to complete the resettlement process.

You may like to read some info on these matters at...

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/fact-sheets/myths-about-refugees/quick-mythbuster/

Read the link you suggested written by The Refugee Council - basically a load of Khrapp. Let me summarise what the Khrapp says for you: "anyone that arrives in Australia can legally claim asylum as a refugee. and until they are proven not to have a valid claim, then they are legally a refugee." This is the basis that the bleeding heart pro-refugee advocates who work for The Refugee Council use to justify their own existence. Technically they are correct, but the reality is that most asylum seekers are not refugees - they paid people to get them to Australia.

Here is more reality: There are many people claiming asylum that are NOT refugees. They are merely seeking a better life for themselves (and children) and they are leaving their own countries for that reason only. Yes there are real refugees (I have a close friend who was one), but most of them do not have the money/resources to pay a smuggler to get them out. Genuine refugees leave their country because of imminent death from persecution (Jews in Germany) - that is what the UN Charters on Refugees was created for (1951 and 1967). It is being used/abused nowadays as a means for poor people in poor countries to get a quick ticket to a better life in another 1st world country.

If you think I am harsh, then you need to talk to Mustafa whose family left Iraq by walking for over a month (and 2 died on the way) and they then waited in a UN camp in Iran for 7 years before getting approved to live in Australia. The two elder Brothers (Mustafa was one) came first and the other brothers and their wives/sisters and nieces/nephews came a year later. The few stories they tell me (wont talk much and never to women) made me cry. Don't give me any khrapp about real refugees - you obviously don't know any.

There are over 145 countries who are parties to the UN Convention on Refugees and Asylum Seekers. This picture shows them all - please note that most are much closer to the source of most 'illegal immigrants' than Australia - but they do not offer the same 'benefits' or 'opportunities' to them as Australia does.

What is also worth noting is that after the EU stupidly allowed a Muslim country to become part of it (Turkey) and then annoyed Greece who opened its borders, that they have now become the preferred destination for 'illegal immigrants' from both Arabia and Africa - because of their generous social welfare support.

Good luck to UK is all I can say - they better vote themselves out of the EU or in 20 years time they will be an economic basket case (much worse than now). Thank goodness Howard stood up to all the do-gooders in the first place, and that the people of Australia voted for the boats to be stopped (again).

Australia has a population of 22milion. I would estimate that over 200million people in the world would choose to live in Australia tomorrow if offered the opportunity (and support) to do that. And that is probably very low as there are over 2billion in the third world. Where would they all go? How would we pay for them? Clearly impossible !! So we allow about 200K a year to move to Australia - with about 20,000 as refugees. And nearly every time an illegal immigrant is determined to be a refugee (most are) and given one of those 20K spots, someone else who is waiting (fairly/legally) has to wait longer. 7 pharrkin years in a hell hole in Iran (one sister raped) - spare me your bleeding heart khrapp mate.

END OF .....................................................

Turkey is not a member of the EU, you have also made a number of other incorrect comments - so please spare me your BS. BTW a friend of mine was a Federally appointed Judge on the Refugee Review Tribunal (rule on asylum seeker appeals) for a number of years, I can assure you they are not a 'bleeding heart' organisation.

Turkey is not a 'full' member, but clearly you have no idea about how EU membership works (and many other things). Look it up on Wiki you will see they are an asociate member and they have been given partial membership. I did that for you - here are a few relevent paragraphs for your enlightenment in that dark hole of yours:

In December 2013, after signing a readmission agreement, the EU launched a visa liberalisation dialogue with Turkey including a "Roadmap towards the visa-free regime".^[47] An agreement was reached in November 2015 on abolishing visas for Turkish citizens within a year if certain conditions are satisfied.^[48]

On 18 March 2016, EU reached a migration agreement with Turkey, aiming at discouraging refugees to enter EU. Under this deal, Turkey agreed to take back migrants who enter Greece, and send legal refugees to EU. In exchange, EU agreed to give Turkey six billion euros, and to allow visa-free travel for Turkish citizens by the end of June 2016 if Turkey meets 72 conditions.^[49]

I know the RRT - and I know it very well. I know all about therir integration with the MRT (Migration Review Tribunal) - I was directly involved. And I know what most of the people who work there are like and how they think. And guess what? Like most other people who get in there close and see these illegal immigrants and see what they really are - they are mostly not supporters of 'illegal immigrants'. It does not surprise me that your friend's organisation is not a bleeding heart - but it does surprise me that anyone with your twisted utopian views and ignorance has any correct views.

By the way - when did I mention the RRT?? And did I not mention that most are granted asylum (by the RRT for lack of evidence that they are unworthy or a terrorist).

Get back in that dark hole and keep those rose glasses away from me. You are the one clearly full of BS - mate.

PS - the NZ guy is clearly right and I agree 100%. Sorry they have such a bad life - but it aint my fault, and it is not the fault of all the Australian taxpayers/people. We both do what we can, and we have a fair system in place - anyone jumping the queue is an illegal immigrant. They may be claiming asylum - but that does not make them a genuine refugee - and that is reality for the majority of them. I know - close up and personal mate. That is the view of the majority of the people in Australia and NZ (and more and more so in Europe now that they are seeing close up who it really is that is comoing over their borders and claiming to be refugees).

[simple1]

In fact the majority are assessed as genuine refugees. The problem is those positively assessed can wait years for resettlement as countries aligned to the UNHCR only provide about 120k places p.a. So far as the 'queue' is concerned it's proven nonsense as priorities are constantly in flux as new conflict / humanitarian issues do not enable any promises for resettlement timelines.

As far as I'm concerned countries that subscribe to the UN Convention for refugees and associated agreements have significantly contributed to the current mess due to major under funding & relative indifference over a number of years concerning host countries, a few current examples being Turkey & Lebanon. We will have to wait and see if the EU / Turkey proposed agreements actually comes to fruition. Paying traffickers is a huge risk for genuine refugees, but one can understand the drivers when families are potentially looking at decades, again an example, Pakistan, living in poverty, no foreseeable future and no education for the children. To blame genuine asylum seekers is far to common and wrong.

BTW I do know an asylum seeker couple resettled in Oz, Serbian Christian, who were extremely bitter concerning the unprovoked aggression by the State for the goal of Greater Serbia.

Yes I do understand the EU membership requirements and IMO Turkey is years away from membership, if ever, based upon the current realpolitik games at play by all parties.

I trust you are no longer up close and personal as to me you come across as ex members of the Australian military I have known who became incredibly bitter and twisted - mate

Edited May 9, 2016 by simple1

[up2u2]

Papua High Court finds Naru detention centre illegal and orders it closed. Quite extraordinary when a corrupt country like Papua gives Australia a lesson in Human Rights. Very embarrassing.

Also Save The Children workers were found to be not guilty of allegations they incited refugees to self harm and awarded compensation. Morrison (now Treasurer) who removed Save The Children Staff from Naru refused to apologise.

Interesting how the current Immigration Minister Dutton is playing exactly the same card:

"Australia’s Immigration Minister

Peter Dutton acknowledged there had been a rise in cases of self-harm but blamed refugee advoctates for inciting such acts."

Anyone who speaks out and objects to people including children being indefinitely imprisoned, raped, sexually assaulted, beaten to death, people burning themselves to death are described as 'bleeding hearts' and told these cruelties are all for a good cause. There are people around the world who commit the most egregious acts of violence and cruelty. Their excuse for committing these crimes against humanity is justified and for a good cause. Manus and Naru demonstrates that Australia is now no different from these globally hated despotic groups and Nations.

It will now be unacceptable for ANY Australian to lecture anyone or ANY Nation on human rights violations. When you commit Human Rights violations you can no longer lecture others for doing the same for whatever reason. From now on Human Rights violations are now justified.

I may not agree with facts and figures. But I know if Australia changed its policy that the boats would flood in. And then there would really be a crisis. In the refugee camps around the World there are many who go through the slow process of apply , vetting and possible acceptance into Australia. If you let these that had money and paid to come on a boat , Jumping the queue then the genuine ones in the camps will rot there add infinitum. Or would you have Australia take them as well. Do you know the geography of Australia. Its lack of water, Yes it only has 22 million plus but in places this strains the water supply. To allow rapid growth by immigration and refugee influx may cause more harm. Slow trickle is better. My Country NZ places for 750 refugee per annum , maybe could double that but like Australia we have problems too. Yes we have land and only 4.5 m people but we have housing crisis caused by too many people Auckland and lost houses Christchurch from earthquake 2010. If We or Australia reversed policy the adverse effect on each other could be catastrophic.I am sorry for the hardship these people now have. But had they waited in the queue maybe they would be settled already.

Either you respect Human Rights or you do not. The Australian Government has chosen to violate refugees Human Rights and intentionally set out to torture them and to make it known this is what they are doing. Children included. I refuse to accept that Human Rights and torturing refugees and treating refugees cruelly can be mitigated or excused. Refugees are being raped, beaten, sexually assaulted, killed and killing themselves by setting themselves alight. It's all good though, because it is for a good and noble cause. Really?

To solve an issue of refugees arriving by boat we have decided to capture a number of people ship them to an Island hold them indefinitely and torture them till they decide to kill themselves. All those in favour say Aye.

It would seem at the moment the 'Ayes' have it.

[BB24]

In fact the majority are assessed as genuine refugees. The problem is those positively assessed can wait years for resettlement as countries aligned to the UNHCR only provide about 120k places p.a. So far as the 'queue' is concerned it's proven nonsense as priorities are constantly in flux as new conflict / humanitarian issues do not enable any promises for resettlement timelines.

As far as I'm concerned countries that subscribe to the UN Convention for refugees and associated agreements have significantly contributed to the current mess due to major under funding & relative indifference over a number of years concerning host countries, a few current examples being Turkey & Lebanon. We will have to wait and see if the EU / Turkey proposed agreements actually comes to fruition. Paying traffickers is a huge risk for genuine refugees, but one can understand the drivers when families are potentially looking at decades, again an example, Pakistan, living in poverty, no foreseeable future and no education for the children. To blame genuine asylum seekers is far to common and wrong.

BTW I do know an asylum seeker couple resettled in Oz, Serbian Christian, who were extremely bitter concerning the unprovoked aggression by the State for the goal of Greater Serbia.

Yes I do understand the EU membership requirements and IMO Turkey is years away from membership, if ever, based upon the current realpolitik games at play by all parties.

I trust you are no longer up close and personal as to me you come across as ex members of the Australian military I have known who became incredibly bitter and twisted - mate

You make a couple of fair and reasonable points - but also more that are not so reasonable.

I would just point out to you that just because someone is living in a country in poverty, does not give them the right to illegally enter another country and claim asylum. Although lierals like yourself have changed the rules/laws so that they legally can. IMO their country is their country - stay and fix it (or try) - Australia did not make it that way. According to your logic, most of the African people should be allowed to come to Australia - where are you going to put close to 250million people and how are you going to pay for it. Maybe even 500million !!

Not bitter and twisted (mate) - just a pragmatic realist who knows that upwards of 90% of those who use people smugglars and get to Australia are 'economic' refugees not 'real' refugees. Proving that in a court of law (RRT) is another matter. And no - never a member of the military, but I had a bit to do with them over the years - mostly very good people. I just kill ignorant people on TV - no reason for me to have the personal conflicts that many military people suffer (and need sympathy and support for - not criticism from ignorants).

[BB24]

Papua High Court finds Naru detention centre illegal and orders it closed. Quite extraordinary when a corrupt country like Papua gives Australia a lesson in Human Rights. Very embarrassing.

Also Save The Children workers were found to be not guilty of allegations they incited refugees to self harm and awarded compensation. Morrison (now Treasurer) who removed Save The Children Staff from Naru refused to apologise.

Interesting how the current Immigration Minister Dutton is playing exactly the same card:

"Australia’s Immigration Minister

Peter Dutton acknowledged there had been a rise in cases of self-harm but blamed refugee advoctates for inciting such acts."

Anyone who speaks out and objects to people including children being indefinitely imprisoned, raped, sexually assaulted, beaten to death, people burning themselves to death are described as 'bleeding hearts' and told these cruelties are all for a good cause. There are people around the world who commit the most egregious acts of violence and cruelty. Their excuse for committing these crimes against humanity is justified and for a good cause. Manus and Naru demonstrates that Australia is now no different from these globally hated despotic groups and Nations.

It will now be unacceptable for ANY Australian to lecture anyone or ANY Nation on human rights violations. When you commit Human Rights violations you can no longer lecture others for doing the same for whatever reason. From now on Human Rights violations are now justified.

I may not agree with facts and figures. But I know if Australia changed its policy that the boats would flood in. And then there would really be a crisis. In the refugee camps around the World there are many who go through the slow process of apply , vetting and possible acceptance into Australia. If you let these that had money and paid to come on a boat , Jumping the queue then the genuine ones in the camps will rot there add infinitum. Or would you have Australia take them as well. Do you know the geography of Australia. Its lack of water, Yes it only has 22 million plus but in places this strains the water supply. To allow rapid growth by immigration and refugee influx may cause more harm. Slow trickle is better. My Country NZ places for 750 refugee per annum , maybe could double that but like Australia we have problems too. Yes we have land and only 4.5 m people but we have housing crisis caused by too many people Auckland and lost houses Christchurch from earthquake 2010. If We or Australia reversed policy the adverse effect on each other could be catastrophic.I am sorry for the hardship these people now have. But had they waited in the queue maybe they would be settled already.

Either you respect Human Rights or you do not. The Australian Government has chosen to violate refugees Human Rights and intentionally set out to torture them and to make it known this is what they are doing. Children included. I refuse to accept that Human Rights and torturing refugees and treating refugees cruelly can be mitigated or excused. Refugees are being raped, beaten, sexually assaulted, killed and killing themselves by setting themselves alight. It's all good though, because it is for a good and noble cause. Really?

To solve an issue of refugees arriving by boat we have decided to capture a number of people ship them to an Island hold them indefinitely and torture them till they decide to kill themselves. All those in favour say Aye.

It would seem at the moment the 'Ayes' have it.

WRONG !!! Respect for 'human rights' does not mean agreement for the human rights as defined by the UN. The UN is nothing more or less than the collective expression of its member states, and thieir definition of human rights is a mix-mash of vested interests and politically correct khrapp put together by bureaucrats and politicians. Human Rights is the right to be free of things like slavery, terrorism and genocide - it should not be the right to illegally enter a country and claim asylum (pretending to be escaping real human rights abuse).

Stop reading the liberal press who sensationalise everything that happens over there on the island to fire up ignorant liberals - be more skeptical of headlines. And I would point out that the vast majority of the few bad things that do happen - are being done to them by other refugees (and to themselves as a misguided method to force Australia to accept them).

And just how many refugees (adults and children) have died on the island in the last 3 years? And then tell me how many died on people smuggler boats trying to get to Australia under the previous Govt's open door policy - 100s !! So which Govt's policy is more in line with achieving 'human rights' ???