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

[Peterw42]

 

2 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

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

 

Why are people flying to Indonesia then hoping on a boat, why dont they fly straight to Australia ?

The fact that these people can get a visa and leave there country of origin by air, and have the funds to do so, says they are country shopping rather than genuine refugees. 

Visa's are not that easy to get, you need to show some level of residency of the country you are applying in, show bank accounts, proof of funds etc. 

[simple1]

Just now, Peterw42 said:

 

 

Why are people flying to Indonesia then hoping on a boat, why dont they fly straight to Australia ?

The fact that these people can get a visa and leave there country of origin by air, and have the funds to do so, says they are country shopping rather than genuine refugees. 

Visa's are not that easy to get, you need to show some level of residency of the country you are applying in, show bank accounts, proof of funds etc. 

 

Many do not have the capability to file for a visa from their home country as they are persecuted, fleeing war etc.  Indonesia is not a signatory to the UN Convention for Refugees.

 

If you read the link I provided approx 40% arriving by air, then claiming asylum, are deemed genuine refugees.

 

Currently an average of around 57,000 illegal over stayers in Oz, thousands from Western countries such as UK & USA, majority nationality is Chinese.

[bridge2bridge]

The easiest solution to this is:

Let these IDIOTS who have ALL the free time to protest.

Each take in a REFUGEE to their own homes( if they have one).

And care for them there, WITHOUT any Government WELFARE handouts.

[thaibeachlovers]

39 minutes ago, NumbNut said:

 

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.

Tamils originally came from India. They should go home. Australia is not home. They have never been there and have no blood ties to it. They will have relatives in India.

 

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.

Please explain how people with nothing are able to get to Indonesia and pay traffickers to get on a boat to Australia.

 

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?

Agreed, but why is it Australia's problem to solve?

 

Australia already takes refugees. Why should a boat person jump the q on people that waited years to be approved?

 

Illegal applies to Illegal economic immigrants, that can afford to pay traffickers. Refugees applies to those that stop in the first safe country and wait for their asylum application to be processed.

[thaibeachlovers]

24 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

Many do not have the capability to file for a visa from their home country as they are persecuted, fleeing war etc.  Indonesia is not a signatory to the UN Convention for Refugees.

 

If you read the link I provided approx. 40% arriving by air, then claiming asylum, are deemed genuine refugees.

 

Currently an average of around 57,000 illegal over stayers in Oz, thousands from Western countries such as UK & USA, majority nationality is Chinese.

40% arriving by air, then claiming asylum, are deemed genuine refugees.

 

How is it that I have to prove I have a valid passport and an onward ticket to be allowed on a plane to Thailand without a visa, and it appears loads of people that must be suspicious looking ( genuine refugees because they have nothing but the rags they escaped in and no passport, because they were fleeing for their lives ) are able to get on a plane to a country with a supposedly functioning computer system?

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

 

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.

which legally defined 'safe countries' are there between say Afghanistan and Australia;

Why does it have to be to Australia? Why not to China, or Russia, or India, or even Bangladesh. Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea also lie on the road to Oz. could it be though, that their streets aren't lined with gold?

[jesimps]

The anarcos are at it again. Be nice if they spent as much time working and paying taxes as they do protesting.

 

[simple1]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

40% arriving by air, then claiming asylum, are deemed genuine refugees.

 

How is it that I have to prove I have a valid passport and an onward ticket to be allowed on a plane to Thailand without a visa, and it appears loads of people that must be suspicious looking ( genuine refugees because they have nothing but the rags they escaped in and no passport, because they were fleeing for their lives ) are able to get on a plane to a country with a supposedly functioning computer system?

 

Many arrive on tourist, student visa etc then claim asylum; not all asylum seekers are disheveled poor people and have a variety of nationalities, including non Muslims. Approx 20% - 30% of air arrivals claiming asylum are Chinese

[simple1]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

which legally defined 'safe countries' are there between say Afghanistan and Australia;

Why does it have to be to Australia? Why not to China, or Russia, or India, or even Bangladesh. Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea also lie on the road to Oz. could it be though, that their streets aren't lined with gold?

 

I do believe you're having a laugh, if not amazingly ill informed

[thaibeachlovers]

36 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

I do believe you're having a laugh, if not amazingly ill informed

Not at all. I want to know why it is supposed to be a problem for Australia to solve? Australia did not participate in the Sri Lankan civil war. Why should they be required to take a single Tamil, as opposed to taking Chinese that are equally deserving of refugee status. Tamils can go to India, from whence they originated.

Enough already.

Australia is doing the right thing by discouraging illegal economic immigrants trying to jump the q of legal refugees that waited years for approval. I hope they keep doing the right thing.

If the illegal economic migrants don't like living in a tent on Naru, go home.

[simple1]

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If the illegal economic migrants don't like living in a tent on Naru, go home.

 

You really are a troll. Any cursory research will inform you the large majority remaining on Naura and Manis Island have been assessed  as genuine refugees.

Edited December 2, 2016 by simple1

[rosst]

For my two cents worth, our Government has got it right and if Labor had not got in before the current mob, we would have had a lot less to deal with.

[biggles45]

"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 they dont even come directly from these places do they.? They stop over in Malaysia  or Indonesia where they are no longer in fear, many having been there for a long time. So why don't they stay there, why risk an expensive, perilous journey to Australia..........because they can get on the government welfare and dont need to work.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

You really are a troll. Any cursory research will inform you the large majority remaining on Naura and Manis Island have been assessed  as genuine refugees.

Irrelevant. They won't be going to Australia.

My point, that you ignore, is that they have no rights to more than being safe from being killed. They have no "rights" to go to Australia.

Unless some other country wants to take them, they have no options other than staying or going back.

 

My sympathy goes to those doing it the right way.

Edited December 2, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[White Christmas13]

10 hours 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. 

The first known landing in Australia by Europeans was by Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon in 1606

maybe you got up late ?

[Scott]

Continuing to re-define what a refugee is will get member's posts removed and possibly a warning.   A 'real' refugee is someone who has been screened and determined to be a refugee, they do not have to flee with nothing and fear for their life.   They have to flee because of a well-founded fear of persecution.  

 

It is perfectly understandable for many people, and countries, to not want their country inundated by any groups of people, but that does not change the criteria for what is a refugee and what isn't.  

 

You may not want them in your country, but that does preclude them from being genuine refugees.  

 

 

[goldenbrwn1]

3 hours ago, White Christmas13 said:

The first known landing in Australia by Europeans was by Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon in 1606

maybe you got up late ?

You are quite correct. But I never actually said he was the first to land....maybe you got up later than me?

Edited December 2, 2016 by goldenbrwn1

[RED DOG]

16 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.

you are spot on I fully agree

[Stargeezr]

I have to also ask why these Muslim refugees, feel that they have to go to any

non Muslim country?  Most of the non Muslim countries in the world do not want

or need to be overrun by these people who then want to put their Mosques all over

the world then eventually get their Sharia laws in action.  No Thanks, keep all that

junk in your home countries. Australia,  Do Not  change your policy. People in

Canada are getting hosed by our current PM and his policies.

Geezer

Edited December 3, 2016 by Stargrazer9889
correc word then.

[daveAustin]

While I think Oz could do more, they have the right policy and should ignore the snowflake protesters. There are something like 250,000 people (Brits mostly) sleeping rough on the streets of England, while non-tax paying immigrants with no connection to the country are given housing, welfare and whatnot. Makes me puke. Look after your own first!