Australia: protesters call for an end to offshore detention of asylum seekers

[webfact]

Australia: protesters call for an end to offshore detention of asylum seekers

 

 

CANBERRA: -- Protesters have rallied outside the Australian parliament for a second consecutive day. They spent two hours standing in blood red water, calling for an end to the offshore detention of asylum seekers and for a controversial boat turnback policy to be scrapped.

 

They say families are being separated and innocent people killed because of the policies which have the support of both the Liberal/National Coalition and the opposition Labor Party.

 

The Whistleblowers Activists and Citizens Alliance also brought parliament to a halt for 40 minutes, when six demonstrators glued their hands to a railing in the public gallery. Security guards used hand sanitiser to remove them.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-12-02

[simple1]

Waste of time & effort

[Scott]

The difficulty is that, even if you disagree with the policy, it has been effective and it's hard to argue with success.  

 

Probably the only chance of stopping this was before it was implemented.  

 

It doesn't, however, hurt to keep the plight and the situation for the detainees in the public view.  

[ezzra]

 

If you allow it, all of the desuetude and poor people of the world will gladly and in a heart beat migrate to courtiers where they get everything ready for them including generous free housing, jobs and training, education and welfare supports.. now who wouldn't want that? so someone has to be the gate keeper and make sure that the above

will happened but under fair supervision and control.... 

[maoro2013]

People who are, under the Australian system, qualified as refugees are treated as such. The people detained off shore are probably economic refugees, or otherwise don't qualify. Australia cannot afford them as Australia cannot pay their own ageing population.

 

I could rant on about this but won't.

[goldenbrwn1]

Australia is probably the only country of western or colonial decent that has got the right policy on immigration. They saw it coming long before anyone else.

[phantomfiddler]

All over Europe and the Southern Hemisphere these supposed refugees are heading for the easy money. It is nothing other than a planned invasion of civilized countries by people who have made their own countries unliveable in. They will contribute nothing other than a huge increase in the welfare payments, and are not interested in integration. Send them back to their own country.

[Credo]

12 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

All over Europe and the Southern Hemisphere these supposed refugees are heading for the easy money. It is nothing other than a planned invasion of civilized countries by people who have made their own countries unliveable in. They will contribute nothing other than a huge increase in the welfare payments, and are not interested in integration. Send them back to their own country.

For God's sake, why would you want to send them anywhere?   You didn't even let them into your own country.   

[Pepper1959]

Whether you agree or disagree for me is one issue, but what is important is that these people did feel the need to protest and did get their chance before being arrested. A democracy allows people to voice their opposition to the government of the day, unfortunately, it just cannot be in Parliament House. Again though, there did not seem to be any violence with the whole process, which is again important with such the process, which again, is important when people demonstrate against a government in a democracy.

[bark]

4 hours ago, Scott said:

The difficulty is that, even if you disagree with the policy, it has been effective and it's hard to argue with success.  

 

Probably the only chance of stopping this was before it was implemented.  

 

It doesn't, however, hurt to keep the plight and the situation for the detainees in the public view.  

Why ?

Let them stay where they are, period.

[bark]

49 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

All over Europe and the Southern Hemisphere these supposed refugees are heading for the easy money. It is nothing other than a planned invasion of civilized countries by people who have made their own countries unliveable in. They will contribute nothing other than a huge increase in the welfare payments, and are not interested in integration. Send them back to their own country.

In Canada, the Syrian refugees are stay in hotels. What a country.

[DavidVincent]

59 minutes ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

Australia is probably the only country of western or colonial decent that has got the right policy on immigration. They saw it coming long before anyone else.

Too bad the aboriginals didn't see the westerners coming...for a country based solely on immigration..it is a bit ironic.

 

[goldenbrwn1]

14 minutes ago, DavidVincent said:

Too bad the aboriginals didn't see the westerners coming...for a country based solely on immigration..it is a bit ironic.

 

I purposely left the aboriginal point out. Just so people like yourself could fulfill your your posting quota.  Shame us In the British Isles  didn't see the Romans, Vikings, Normans ect ect , blah blah blah.  There is a lot more people in the world nowadays, times have most certainly changed since good old Captain Cook landed. 

[DavidVincent]

3 minutes ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

I purposely left the aboriginal point out. Just so people like yourself could fulfill your your posting quota.  Shame us In the British Isles  didn't see the Romans, Vikings, Normans ect ect , blah blah blah.  There is a lot more people in the world nowadays, times have most certainly changed since good old Captain Cook landed. 

And time will change again, even if you seem to say the situation should freeze, starting now... Immigration happeneds, and will continue to happen, like it or not. The irony is people said it was an old time, and now the immigration is a plea...well maybe in few hundred years refugees from middle east will call themselves proud australians

Edited December 2, 2016 by DavidVincent

[goldenbrwn1]

5 minutes ago, DavidVincent said:

And time will change again, even if you seem to say the situation should freeze, starting now... Immigration happeneds, and will continue to happen, like it or not. The irony is people said it was an old time, and now the immigration is a plea...well maybe in few hundred years refugees from middle east will call themselves proud australians

No just maybe freezing all immigration from Africa and the Middle East for a few decades should suffice. Maybe by then they might get their houses in order and not want to leave..... 

Edited December 2, 2016 by goldenbrwn1

[DavidVincent]

Just now, goldenbrwn1 said:

No just maybe freeze all immigration in Africa and the Middle East for a few decades should suffice. Maybe by then they might get their houses in order and not want to leave..... 

Well if we stopped the bombings on their head for western purposes (oil, geo-strategy) and stop stealing their ressources like in Africa, m3eddling with their politics to suit western needs. things would change.

For 30 years middle-east wars were done for OIL, not for freedom.

For hundred of years political instability and  ressources stealing in Africa was done for western benefits ( I don't even speak of the Franc CFA joke and the refund most of the african countries have to give to Europe old colonial countries, for the "benefits" they gave them).. Maybe they would stay "at home" if they had a decent home.

[goldenbrwn1]

4 minutes ago, DavidVincent said:

Well if we stopped the bombings on their head for western purposes (oil, geo-strategy) and stop stealing their ressources like in Africa, m3eddling with their politics to suit western needs. things would change.

For 30 years middle-east wars were done for OIL, not for freedom.

For hundred of years political instability and  ressources stealing in Africa was done for western benefits ( I don't even speak of the Franc CFA joke and the refund most of the african countries have to give to Europe old colonial countries, for the "benefits" they gave them).. Maybe they would stay "at home" if they had a decent home.

I take your point . And you are very right about the western influence on these countries over the last 100 years or so. But I'm afraid millions of them flooding western , developed countries for whatever reason is not the answer. People are fed up and angry, have you been watching the news of late?  Problems at home do not get sorted at someone else's house. I get your point really I do but you can't change the past and mass exodus of people from these countries to developed countries around the world is just not the answer and if it continues there will eventually be an even bigger backlash than what we have seen already this year.

[DavidVincent]

1 minute ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

I take your point . And you are very right about the western influence on these countries over the last 100 years or so. But I'm afraid millions of them flooding western , developed countries for whatever reason is not the answer. People are fed up and angry, have you been watching the news of late?  Problems at home do not get sorted at someone else's house. I get your point really I do but you can't change the past and mass exodus of people from these countries to developed countries around the world is just not the answer and if it continues there will eventually be an even bigger backlash than what we have seen already this year.

I agree the mass flooding in western countries is not the solution : the solution is : make them have hopes at home.

Stop bombing their houses, stop stealing their ressources, stop maintaining them in poverty with a stupid archaic currency (france CFA)...\

As soon as they feel safe and happy at home, I am quite sure they will not migrate! But for this it would mean, us, western countries, to make sacrifice, to rething our politics and economy....a step 99% of the "developped" countries are not ready to do

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, Scott said:

The difficulty is that, even if you disagree with the policy, it has been effective and it's hard to argue with success.  

 

Probably the only chance of stopping this was before it was implemented.  

 

It doesn't, however, hurt to keep the plight and the situation for the detainees in the public view.  

While on one level I agree with you, if they make it easy for the current detainees, more WILL come, and more WILL die at sea. The classic case of being cruel to be kind ( to those put off trusting their money and lives to scum traffickers ).

I gather that if the detainees agree to go back, they can do so, so somewhat self inflicted. Even the recent agreement to send many to the US will result in more coming that hope for a passage to the US.

If the government agrees to the protesters demands ( unlikely ), every subsequent death at sea will be on them and the protesters.

Australia has a legal refugee program. They need to ( IMO ) stay the course.

If they do not, the only winners are the criminals that prey on the unfortunate.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 minutes ago, DavidVincent said:

I agree the mass flooding in western countries is not the solution : the solution is : make them have hopes at home.

Stop bombing their houses, stop stealing their ressources, stop maintaining them in poverty with a stupid archaic currency (france CFA)...\

As soon as they feel safe and happy at home, I am quite sure they will not migrate! But for this it would mean, us, western countries, to make sacrifice, to rething our politics and economy....a step 99% of the "developped" countries are not ready to do

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/02/australia-asylum-seekers#boat

 

The boat people to Australia ( which is what this thread is about ) are in many cases from Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Iran. None of those countries have had a campaign of western bombing, and policies to maintain them in poverty ( they manage that quite well on their own ).

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, DavidVincent said:

Too bad the aboriginals didn't see the westerners coming...for a country based solely on immigration..it is a bit ironic.

 

Hmmm. Even the Aboriginals were immigrants. Bad news for the kangaroos.

[thaibeachlovers]

Are the protesters offering to house the immigrants in their own properties, or do they want everyone else to pay?

[Peterw42]

Land rights for gay Muslim whales.

If these refugees are hoping on a boat in syria then arriving in Australia (12-15, 000 kilometers). they can stay at my house.

Truth is they are hoping on a plane and flying to Indonesia, staying in a hotel, then paying to hop on a boat to Australia.

Thats country shopping, not refugees.

The one I like most is arriving by boat from a land locked country.

[NumbNut]

44 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/02/australia-asylum-seekers#boat

 

The boat people to Australia ( which is what this thread is about ) are in many cases from Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Iran. None of those countries have had a campaign of western bombing, and policies to maintain them in poverty ( they manage that quite well on their own ).

 

The majority of Sri Lankans attempting to make it to Oz are Tamils. They lost one of the most brutal and largely unreported civil wars of recent times to the majority Sinhalese, and are suffering massive human right abuses on a daily basis as a result. Hard to see Sri Lanka being a safe home for Tamils if these abuses continue. Virtually all Tamils have been found to be genuine refugees.

 

Almost all Pakistani refugees to Australia are actually Afghani. Many sects are fleeing for their lives from Afghanistan, most notably the Hazari. Again, most Pakistani/Afghan refugees have been found to be genuine.

 

Most refugess to Oz from Iran also come from persecuted minorities, and are almost exclusively found to be bona fide refugees upon processing. Notice a pattern here?

 

This ignores the fact that most illegal entries to Australia, if you can use that term to describe genuine refugees, arrive by air anyway with enough correct documentation to get them into the country at the airports they arrive at. Why demonise the Boat People and not the arrivals by air?

 

Not saying everyone arriving by boat are genuine refugees, but once processed the majority do seem to be genuine. That's why I can't support this current bipartisan refugee policy in Oz, too many innocent genuine people are being made suffer purely because they came by boat and not plane.

 

And we are after all an immigrant nation, aren't we?

Edited December 2, 2016 by NumbNut

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, NumbNut said:

 

The majority of Sri Lankans attempting to make it to Oz are Tamils. They lost one of the most brutal and largely unreported civil wars of recent times to the majority Sinhalese, and are suffering massive human right abuses on a daily basis as a result. Hard to see Sri Lanka being a safe home for Tamils if these abuses continue. Virtually all Tamils have been found to be genuine refugees.

 

Almost all Pakistani refugees to Australia are actually Afghani. Many sects are fleeing for their lives from Afghanistan, most notably the Hazari. Again, most Pakistani/Afghan refugees have been found to be genuine.

 

Most refugess to Oz from Iran also come from persecuted minorities, and are almost exclusively found to be bona fide refugees upon processing. Notice a pattern here?

 

This ignores the fact that most illegal entries to Australia, if you can use that term to describe genuine refugees, arrive by air anyway with enough correct documentation to get them into the country at the airports they arrive at. Why demonise the Boat People and not the arrivals by air?

 

Not saying everyone arriving by boat are genuine refugees, but once processed the majority do seem to be genuine. That's why I can't support this current bipartisan refugee policy in Oz, too many innocent genuine people are being made suffer purely because they came by boat and not plane.

I LOVE it that you noted that the Sri Lankans are TAMILS. Why AUSTRALIA, thousands of miles from Sri Lanka, and not TAMIL NADU, just across the water from Sri Lanka????????????????

Could it be that they won't get the free goodies there, or, shock horror, because India won't let them in? I don't know why, and I'm not going to find out, but the idea that because they are persecuted in Sri Lanka it gives them some sort of right to live in Australia is .

 

I"M not DEMONISING the illegals that try to get to OZ by boat, but too many DIED to allow that route to be used.

Like the refugees that are trying for Europe, the only LEGAL way is to stay in the first safe country and apply for refugee status in another country.

ALL of the boat people passed through a safe country.

 

BTW, are the Hazaris at risk in Pakistan?

 

I don't get why refugees are automatically a western problem, as if western countries have an obligation to take every single one of the millions that want to go there.

Come to that, I don't get why fundamentalist Muslims want to go to the land of infidels, unless they believe they get a better deal there than in a Muslim country. Curious isn't it?

[Peterw42]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

This ignores the fact that most illegal entries to Australia, if you can use that term to describe genuine refugees, arrive by air anyway with enough correct documentation to get them into the country at the airports they arrive at. Why demonise the Boat People and not the arrivals by air?

 

They cant arrive by plane as you cant board the plane without a visa. Illegal over stayers (UK etc) arrive by plane, not refugees.

[IAMHERE]

3 hours ago, phantomfiddler said:

All over Europe and the Southern Hemisphere these supposed refugees are heading for the easy money. It is nothing other than a planned invasion of civilized countries by people who have made their own countries unliveable in. They will contribute nothing other than a huge increase in the welfare payments, and are not interested in integration. Send them back to their own country.

Oh no, they will also contribute to the crime rate.

[simple1]

23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I LOVE it that you noted that the Sri Lankans are TAMILS. Why AUSTRALIA, thousands of miles from Sri Lanka, and not TAMIL NADU, just across the water from Sri Lanka????????????????

Could it be that they won't get the free goodies there, or, shock horror, because India won't let them in? I don't know why, and I'm not going to find out, but the idea that because they are persecuted in Sri Lanka it gives them some sort of right to live in Australia is .

 

I"M not DEMONISING the illegals that try to get to OZ by boat, but too many DIED to allow that route to be used.

Like the refugees that are trying for Europe, the only LEGAL way is to stay in the first safe country and apply for refugee status in another country.

ALL of the boat people passed through a safe country.

 

BTW, are the Hazaris at risk in Pakistan?

 

I don't get why refugees are automatically a western problem, as if western countries have an obligation to take every single one of the millions that want to go there.

Come to that, I don't get why fundamentalist Muslims want to go to the land of infidels, unless they believe they get a better deal there than in a Muslim country. Curious isn't it?

 

As this matter is constantly raised which legally defined 'safe countries' are there between say Afghanistan and Australia; none?.

 

Yes the Hazaras are at risk in Pakistan as they are Shia, Christians and  Ahmadis from Pakistan are also granted refugee status. As NumbNut stated nearly all of the remaining boat people have been assessed as genuine refugees.

 

Australia has agreed to a once off refugee intake of 12,000 from the Syrian War from camps in Iraq and elsewhere, some of whom are Christians  In additional refugee resettlement and humanitarian visas will be granted to a  max of 19,000 p.a. by 2019 (this financial year 13,750).

 

Again as NumbNut mentioned thousands arrive by air each year, then claim asylum seeker status, yet there is no vilification of these individuals by the media and very few politicians.

Edited December 2, 2016 by simple1

[simple1]

11 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

 

They cant arrive by plane as you cant board the plane without a visa. Illegal over stayers (UK etc) arrive by plane, not refugees.

 

Incorrect, thousands arrive with a visa in Oz by air each year then immediately claim asylum seeker status.

 

http://www.asyluminsight.com/air-arrivals/#.WEENXdR-bAo

[NumbNut]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I LOVE it that you noted that the Sri Lankans are TAMILS. Why AUSTRALIA, thousands of miles from Sri Lanka, and not TAMIL NADU, just across the water from Sri Lanka????????????????

Could it be that they won't get the free goodies there, or, shock horror, because India won't let them in? I don't know why, and I'm not going to find out, but the idea that because they are persecuted in Sri Lanka it gives them some sort of right to live in Australia is .

 

I"M not DEMONISING the illegals that try to get to OZ by boat, but too many DIED to allow that route to be used.

Like the refugees that are trying for Europe, the only LEGAL way is to stay in the first safe country and apply for refugee status in another country.

ALL of the boat people passed through a safe country.

 

BTW, are the Hazaris at risk in Pakistan?

 

I don't get why refugees are automatically a western problem, as if western countries have an obligation to take every single one of the millions that want to go there.

Come to that, I don't get why fundamentalist Muslims want to go to the land of infidels, unless they believe they get a better deal there than in a Muslim country. Curious isn't it?

 

Both Tamils and Sinhalese originally came from India, so? Don't understand the point you're making. Real refugees all too often barely escape with their lives, they grab what they can when they escape. These people arrive with few possessions, and sometimes nothing. They need an established country to get their lives back together again. I don't blame them for wanting to head to a first world nation, how can countries like India and Indonesia offer then anything when they don't offer anything to their own citizens?

 

The term Illegals shouldn't be used for refugees, it's not illegal to be a refugee. Using the term 'Illegals' to describe refugees does indeed demonise them. Not having a go at you, it's our politicians who are using these terms for cheap political points.