MySwag.org The Off-road Camper Trailer Forum
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: muzza01 on January 09, 2014, 07:29:18 AM
-
Claims from Asylum Seekers stating that they were handcuffed and beaten by the Navy before being towed back to Indonesian waters. Now they are claiming that some of the asylum seekers were drowned.
I am happy for the boats to be towed back to Indonesia. If the asylum seekers need to be handcuffed or man-handled so be it.
I find it annoying that The Indonesian Government can detect any boat coming in to their waters but can't detect any that are leaving their waters.
What do you Swaggers think?
-
Firstly lets clarify something......
They are entering illegally. This makes them lawbreakers.
If they truly seek asylum, there are legal avenues to take.
They break the law to jump the queue.
They pay lots of money to get a place on the boats.
If you dont like our navy officers protecting themselves, try somewhere else.
I hear Singapore's lovely this time of year........
We offer support to those in need, just don't cheat to try get it. Then complain when handcuffed.
If you want club med, get a job, earn money and call a travel agent.
Sadly another glorified media hype to feed the lefties....
-
Does this have anything to do with Campertrailers? ???
The undue attention the whole boat people issue brings is an embarrassment, political and hardly likely to make this forum a better place! :-[
-
Happy to let this stay for the moment. It has been posted in the correct section.
Please be aware with what you are posting though as this topic WILL be sensitive to some and has the potential to go south very quickly. Keep it clean and no personal attacks please.
-
I think this is a camper trailer forum
-
Does this have anything to do with Campertrailers? ???
I think this is a camper trailer forum
We have always permitted all types of conversations in the "General" section provided they do not run off the rails.......
-
The Billion + $$ of our tax money given to the mob up north and the deal to stop the boats seems to have been forgotten by our pollies and the little chest beater neighbours ..
Its in the Indo's pollies best interests to whip up a controversy again against Australia [ call it pay back for getting booted out of East Timor ]. ...Makes for a sensational propaganda story to say big bad Aussies drowned and beat poor boat people ..
As if the Indo's give a rats about them anyway....
-
I just checked the 1st page of this section, over half the threads have nothing to do with Camper trailers !!!
Personally I struggle to understand how people can fly into Indonesia and then board a boat and be legitimate refugees. Especially from countries like srilanka, if its an opressive regime lets address that, stop playing sport with them etc.
When the camps in other parts of the worn torn world are overflowing because there is nowhere for the displaced persons to go I think it's tragic.
-
Does this have anything to do with Campertrailers? ???
I think this is a camper trailer forum
To Alan and Allan,
If it offends you both that much I will get the mods to lock it up otherwise if the topic doesn't interest you, don't read it and don't post a reply.
It has as much to do with Camper Trailers as these top six General discussion threads (no offence to the OPs) That is why it is called General Discussion
What did you do in the shed today
Remote control cars
What's the weather like near you
AFL season 2014
Funny you tube clips
Huge explosion a bit close to home
-
If your looking for Indonesia's complicity in this think about this.
Look at the distance from Dili East Timor to Darwin, then find how many repressed Timorese made it out on boats during Indonesia's control.
Then look at the starting point within Indonesia and the distance that the current boats are traveling from, and Indonesia can't stop them???
-
Firstly lets clarify something......
They are entering illegally. This makes them lawbreakers.
If they truly seek asylum, there are legal avenues to take.
They break the law to jump the queue.
They pay lots of money to get a place on the boats.
If you dont like our navy officers protecting themselves, try somewhere else.
I hear Singapore's lovely this time of year........
We offer support to those in need, just don't cheat to try get it. Then complain when handcuffed.
If you want club med, get a job, earn money and call a travel agent.
Sadly another glorified media hype to feed the lefties....
Couldn't agree more.
-
Couldn't agree more.
I agree more ;D We see it every day with people brought to town for eye tests and other stuff. They go from living in desert camps with no water or food to singles or family rooms with 3 meals and fresh fruit as needed with pool tables and foxtel playing Arabic news channels, well that's at Curtin Air Base. They have gardens that some tend to ad all air-conditioned.
-
It is not unlawful to seek asylum in another country.
Australia is a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights.
"Until a request for refuge has been accepted, the person is referred to as an asylum seeker. Only after the recognition of the asylum seeker's protection needs, he or she is officially referred to as a refugee and enjoys refugee status, which carries certain rights and obligations according to the legislation of the receiving country"
"A refugee has the right to be free from penalties pertaining to the illegality of their entry to or presence within a country, if it can be shown that they acted in good faith- that is, if the refugee believes that there was ample cause for their illegal entry/presence, i.e. to escape threats upon their life or freedom, and if they swiftly declare their presence. This right is protected in Article 31:
The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. (Article 31, (1))"
The ONLY issue with the current asylum seekers is generally the issue of 'coming directly' but this does not prevent them seeking asylum.
From a legal perspective its really really simple;
They are entitled to come here and seek asylum.
We are obliged to address those claims.
Where their claim for refuge is founded we are obliged to resettle them here or abroad.
If the claim is not founded they can be forcibly returned.
If they have not come here 'directly' then they may be subject to penalty (detention etc).
What is sad, and makes Australia laughable, is we go on and on about 'a fair go' and 'mates' and 'diggers' and all the good we do in the world like our great work our soldiers and UN people do and then we flush it down the toilet with the anti asylum seeker garbage. They are a drop in the ocean in not only the world asylum issue but the Australian asylum issue.
Australians are smarter than falling for the crap fed by the government and the media. Think about it. The only reason this all started was because John Howard (who I liked) grabbed onto it when his future looked bleak and he needed to push to the right to secure votes. Each government has kept it going to get voted in. The media use it as a cash cow to sell their product. Think about the questions the asylum seekers would have been asked by the media when they got back to Indonesia (Did they hand cuff you?. Did they manhandle you? How did you feel?) Media then spins this - Asylum seekers handcuffed and assaulted".
So there are some things we cannot control because we agreed to do them (UN HR).
There are some things we can control (Penalties for those who don't come directly, where they are resettled).
The STUPID thing is this. Australia has the power to deal with this simply, lawfully and cost effectively through our visa system. Forget the issue of whether or not they came here directly and deal solely with the asylum issue but with a simple twist.
If you come here indirectly you will never be issued permanent residency. You will be issued with a temporary visa while your claims are assessed and this will be revoked once your country is safe to return to. So we meet our obligations under the UN conventions and remove the pull factors. If you come here you will never be resettled here permanently - ever. You might have kids here, buy a house, buy a car but once your country is safe, and lets face it most places sought their crap out in a reasonably short time, you are going home. The ONLY benefit is that the kids they produce here would be Australian citizens but most would go with their parents.
Here is a link that shows the statistics of our immigration;
http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf (http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf)
Go to page 27 and check out the numbers and from where.
In 2011 we took 29,000 from China and 26,000 from the UK. In Queensland actual 'humanitarian' resettlement was 4% of the total. 26% was for family reunions and 44% for skilled migration. 26% simply came over from New Zealand.
If anyone thinks we are being flooded by 'illegals' you are being fooled.
And I bet pounds to pennies that if us big tough Aussie myswaggers were in these peoples position we would fight like a thrashing machine - harder than the subjects of these media reports did.
-
They PAY to seek asylum,
lob on OUR doorstep with designer cloths, laptops etc,
DEMAND gov't handouts and the right to have t shirts removed from shops because it is OFFENSIVE to them,
There is a process to enter Australia by the front door not sneaking in the back door, destroy all their documentation so the Australian gov't spends countless thousands trying to prove who they CLAIM to be as they are not true ASYLUM seekers......
-
True aslyum seekers need to be helped - no doubt here. However, as stated on the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugess (UNHCR) website, the terms asylum-seeker and refugee are often confused: an asylum-seeker is someone who says he or she is a refugee, but whose claim has not yet been definitively evaluated. National asylum systems (that is the Immigration Dept for Australia) are there to decide which asylum-seekers actually qualify for international protection. Those judged through proper procedures not to be refugees, nor to be in need of any other form of international protection, can be sent back to their home countries.
The definition of a refugee from the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees is "A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.." A lot of the people coming to Australia by boat are actually illegal immigrants and therefore by definition not entitled to refugee/asylum status. A lot are 'economic refugees' which is fascinating considering they have paid for airfares to Indonesia and then a space on a boat - go figure.
Also, there is the third country rule, i.e., you normally cannot claim asylum or be a refugee in a third country. If you 'flee' from Sri Lanka to Indonesia, you cannot claim asylum in Australia, you have to claim asylum in Indonesia. The whole process is very complicated and wrapped in emotion, politics and money. Politically, the Abbot government was elected with one of their policies of 'we'll stop the boats' - that's the Australian political side. Also, this year sees elections in Indonesia - so the Indonesian Government making things hard for Australia will go down well from their local perspective.
But, we should never lose sight of the challenges that our Border Protection people undergo each day - Navy, Army and Air Force (yes they are all very much involved with Navy being on the tip), Customs, Immigration, AFP, non-government support like medical etc. These people bear the brunt and largely go unrecognised. The Armidale Patrol boat crews, along with Army/RAAF embarked security personnel should be praised for their efforts.
Am I close to this - yes, was intimately involved and the one thing I really learned was ignore the media reports - they are self serving and report (read here guess and analysis by assumption) only to sensationalize and sell papers and air time.
As to what Camper Trailer have to do with this - maybe we should set up a CT park in Central WA in summer and house the people there!
-
They PAY to seek asylum,
lob on OUR doorstep with designer cloths, laptops etc,
DEMAND gov't handouts and the right to have t shirts removed from shops because it is OFFENSIVE to them,
There is a process to enter Australia by the front door not sneaking in the back door, destroy all their documentation so the Australian gov't spends countless thousands trying to prove who they CLAIM to be as they are not true ASYLUM seekers......
:cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup:
-
They PAY to seek asylum,
lob on OUR doorstep with designer cloths, laptops etc,
DEMAND gov't handouts and the right to have t shirts removed from shops because it is OFFENSIVE to them,
There is a process to enter Australia by the front door not sneaking in the back door, destroy all their documentation so the Australian gov't spends countless thousands trying to prove who they CLAIM to be as they are not true ASYLUM seekers......
Good to see today tonight getting its message out.
A considerd, evidence based response
clap clap clappity clap
LOL
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
Being someone who has been heavily involved personally in these Operations, Op Relex, Op Resolute and now Op Sovereign Borders over man years there is much I cannot dievolge but let's just say, don't believe all what is sold by media or Government. Personal feelings aside and in reply to the direct accusation in the article, in my experience and everything I have seen all is every single Boat Person is treat well and with the utmost respect that every human deserves. This is briefed heavily prior to every boarding. Our sailors/my colleagues put up with much in return which again I have witness and managed. So, all I ask is to please appreciated and understand the un-winnable situation our Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen. They do their utmost with very little.
Interesting so much is taken by the words of these boat people......
-
Well the front door is always open for genuine Asylum seekers, no problems with that.
Finally there is someone prepared to shut the back door to the illegals.
Rob
-
It is not unlawful to seek asylum in another country.
Australia is a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights.
"Until a request for refuge has been accepted, the person is referred to as an asylum seeker. Only after the recognition of the asylum seeker's protection needs, he or she is officially referred to as a refugee and enjoys refugee status, which carries certain rights and obligations according to the legislation of the receiving country"
"A refugee has the right to be free from penalties pertaining to the illegality of their entry to or presence within a country, if it can be shown that they acted in good faith- that is, if the refugee believes that there was ample cause for their illegal entry/presence, i.e. to escape threats upon their life or freedom, and if they swiftly declare their presence. This right is protected in Article 31:
The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. (Article 31, (1))"
The ONLY issue with the current asylum seekers is generally the issue of 'coming directly' but this does not prevent them seeking asylum.
From a legal perspective its really really simple;
They are entitled to come here and seek asylum.
We are obliged to address those claims.
Where their claim for refuge is founded we are obliged to resettle them here or abroad.
If the claim is not founded they can be forcibly returned.
If they have not come here 'directly' then they may be subject to penalty (detention etc).
What is sad, and makes Australia laughable, is we go on and on about 'a fair go' and 'mates' and 'diggers' and all the good we do in the world like our great work our soldiers and UN people do and then we flush it down the toilet with the anti asylum seeker garbage. They are a drop in the ocean in not only the world asylum issue but the Australian asylum issue.
Australians are smarter than falling for the crap fed by the government and the media. Think about it. The only reason this all started was because John Howard (who I liked) grabbed onto it when his future looked bleak and he needed to push to the right to secure votes. Each government has kept it going to get voted in. The media use it as a cash cow to sell their product. Think about the questions the asylum seekers would have been asked by the media when they got back to Indonesia (Did they hand cuff you?. Did they manhandle you? How did you feel?) Media then spins this - Asylum seekers handcuffed and assaulted".
So there are some things we cannot control because we agreed to do them (UN HR).
There are some things we can control (Penalties for those who don't come directly, where they are resettled).
The STUPID thing is this. Australia has the power to deal with this simply, lawfully and cost effectively through our visa system. Forget the issue of whether or not they came here directly and deal solely with the asylum issue but with a simple twist.
If you come here indirectly you will never be issued permanent residency. You will be issued with a temporary visa while your claims are assessed and this will be revoked once your country is safe to return to. So we meet our obligations under the UN conventions and remove the pull factors. If you come here you will never be resettled here permanently - ever. You might have kids here, buy a house, buy a car but once your country is safe, and lets face it most places sought their crap out in a reasonably short time, you are going home. The ONLY benefit is that the kids they produce here would be Australian citizens but most would go with their parents.
Here is a link that shows the statistics of our immigration;
http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf (http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf)
Go to page 27 and check out the numbers and from where.
In 2011 we took 29,000 from China and 26,000 from the UK. In Queensland actual 'humanitarian' resettlement was 4% of the total. 26% was for family reunions and 44% for skilled migration. 26% simply came over from New Zealand.
If anyone thinks we are being flooded by 'illegals' you are being fooled.
And I bet pounds to pennies that if us big tough Aussie myswaggers were in these peoples position we would fight like a thrashing machine - harder than the subjects of these media reports did.
Well put Dazzler,
Interesting to see how the current (now 12 years!) situation has been exploited politically, compared to the bi-partisanship when the Vietnamese boat people were ariving.
The difference was that Hawke had the intelligence to see that stiring up racism was a very dangerous ploy.
Australia takes approx 4% of world refugee intake and many see this as unreasonable. We also generate 4% of the world's greenhouse gasses and this is described by many as insignificant. Go figure...
Also interesting to compare the response to this issue with the attack on the calls for Aldi & Woolworths to withdraw their 'Est. 1788' t-shirts.
-
I've got a few questions, so if someone in the know can answer them and educate me and anyone else who really knows bugger all about the system,,, I'd appreciate it.
When is someone considered an illegal immigrant?
If someone enters Aus as an asylum seeker, and they are granted refugee status what happens to them then?
If they are to live in Aus (granted permission etc), how is this done and how long does it take, do they get to choose where they live?
If they enter Aus as asylum seekers and are considered not genuine refugees what happens to them then?
How is this process of "deciding refugee status" done and how long does it take?
If they are found to be non genuine are they sent?
Who are the people in the detention centres?
Thanks in advance......
-
Well put Dazzler,
Interesting to see how the current (now 12 years!) situation has been exploited politically, compared to the bi-partisanship when the Vietnamese boat people were ariving.
The difference was that Hawke had the intelligence to see that stiring up racism was a very dangerous ploy.
Australia takes approx 4% of world refugee intake and many see this as unreasonable. We also generate 4% of the world's greenhouse gasses and this is described by many as insignificant. Go figure...
Also interesting to compare the response to this issue with the attack on the calls for Aldi & Woolworths to withdraw their 'Est. 1788' t-shirts.
Hawke was still getting drunk on union members fees when Fraser started accepting Vietnamese refugees, soon after the fall of sth Vietnam circa 75. where I lived we had a lot resettle, they received minimal assistance and started working very hard to establish themselves. they were very well established by the 80's. Hawkes contribution was to cry for the tinmen square massacre and cause an immigration headache with his promise to the then Chinese students in Australia.
I think the issue here for many is as above, we are getting played by Indonesia here they are the gateway for a large proportion. how many people do you hear complaining about the large Sudanese populations being settled in Blacktown, Melton and other areas?
-
I've got a few questions, so if someone in the know can answer them and educate me and anyone else who really knows bugger all about the system,,, I'd appreciate it.
When is someone considered an illegal immigrant?
If someone enters Aus as an asylum seeker, and they are granted refugee status what happens to them then?
If they are to live in Aus (granted permission etc), how is this done and how long does it take, do they get to choose where they live?
If they enter Aus as asylum seekers and are considered not genuine refugees what happens to them then?
How is this process of "deciding refugee status" done and how long does it take?
If they are found to be non genuine are they sent?
Who are the people in the detention centres?
Thanks in advance......
I'll open the batting and try to answer question 1 and some of 4, 5 and 6.
Those people who have not gained prior approval to enter Australia for the purpose of seeking asylum were referred to as irregular arrivals.
There are two classifications for irregular arrivals: Illegal Maritime Arrivals (IMAs; prior to 2013 the term "Irregular Maritime Arrivals" was used) and Non-IMAs (those arriving in Australian territory without a visa by non-maritime means, such as by air). In the 2011-12 period, the number of IMAs was greater than the number of Non-IMAs for the first time. This is an important point, as you do not usually here about illegal arrivals other than 'Maritime Arrivals' - not as sensational as maritime arrivals for the media.
In 2013, the Minister for Immigration, Scott Morrison, directed his department to use the term "illegal maritime arrivals" instead of the previous term "irregular maritime arrivals". The application of the term "illegal" to asylum seekers is controversial, but legally correct.
An illegal immigrant is more commonly a person who overstays their visa. That is, people who enter the country legally by any means but remain there after the expiry or revocation of their visa.
Questions 4, 5 and 6. If an asylum seeker is not granted refugee status, as one of many options, Australia has the legal right to return them to their country of origin. While the majority of asylum seekers may have a good case to become a genuine refugee, there are always the rotten eggs in the mix - i.e. genuine bad people and/or people who are not being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion (the criteria as set down to become a refugee by the UNHCR). This is why there is a large effort in trying to establish the bona fides of all IMAs. While Australia should and does accept genuine refugees, we do not want criminal/terrorist/non-genuine persons coming in. Hence why there are so many departments involved in establishing IMAs actual credentials. The time this takes, a point of debate mind you, is dependent upon many factors including availability of an IMA's personal documentation, eg passport, medical, family considerations, relatives in Australia etc etc etc.
A note here, you will get differing views from different parties as they all have an axe to grind.
-
Good to see today tonight getting its message out.
A considerd, evidence based response
clap clap clappity clap
LOL
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Evidence based.........well that's you opinion but bear in mind, I'm a lot closer to the issue than you think..........
as for today tonight et al, absolute carp and I don't watch 'em.
Have no issues with people trying to get true asylum however....................How is it that they can afford to PAY someone to SMUGGLE them into Australia?
Oh, and another thing, why is the majority of these supposed "seekers" male? I know as a family man, the first and formost for me would be sending my wife and kids away from coflict etc rather than myself........ ??? ??? ???
-
I believe and I don't have the facts in front of me to support this but apparently there are more illegal immigrants in Australia who have arrived by air than by sea.
Now some questions of mine that hopefully someone can answer.
When these people arrive in Indonesia is it legally or illegally. If the latter how do they get through border control
When they leave their homeland don't they have to go through some sort of government controlled port who would be checking documentation or doesn't the government care.
-
there is always two sides tot he story, the media only give one....hence I don't watch or read the news
-
I believe and I don't have the facts in front of me to support this but apparently there are more illegal immigrants in Australia who have arrived by air than by sea.
Now some questions of mine that hopefully someone can answer.
When these people arrive in Indonesia is it legally or illegally. If the latter how do they get through border control
When they leave their homeland don't they have to go through some sort of government controlled port who would be checking documentation or doesn't the government care.
If you have a read of "The Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers" of 2012 see http://expertpanelonasylumseekers.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/report/expert_panel_on_asylum_seekers_full_report.pdf (http://expertpanelonasylumseekers.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/report/expert_panel_on_asylum_seekers_full_report.pdf) you will get an appreciation of the complexities involved.
With respect to the question on air verses maritime arrivals, the following from the above report states:
"Onshore asylum figures are made up of both air and maritime arrivals. from 1 July 1998 to 27 July 2012 there were 79,498 applications for a protection visa by persons who arrived in Australia by air and subsequently applied for a protection visa. This compares with some 33,412 boat arrivals over the same period, most of whom applied for protection."
As I stated before, the boat people issue is more 'sexy' from a media point of view. Do most Australians even realise the above fact that some 46,000 more people arrived by air means seeking protection visas????
For some background to the remaining questions see the above Report Annexes.
-
Evidence based.........well that's you opinion but bear in mind, I'm a lot closer to the issue than you think..........
as for today tonight et al, absolute carp and I don't watch 'em.
Have no issues with people trying to get true asylum however....................How is it that they can afford to PAY someone to SMUGGLE them into Australia?
Oh, and another thing, why is the majority of these supposed "seekers" male? I know as a family man, the first and formost for me would be sending my wife and kids away from coflict etc rather than myself........ ??? ??? ???
Hi Doc
Apologies for being a little aggressive earlier.
People who seek asylum are not routinely poor so paying someone is not really an issue. I have friends who escaped Iran when the shah was exiled. They were Bahai and were genuinely being persecuted and left through the darkness of night. They actually had some time to prepare as they could see it coming politically and liquidated their assets. The kids had gold in the lining of their clothes and the parents carried diamonds they could swallow if they needed to. They hid through the day and then travelled at night until they got to Iraq and I cant remember how they ended up here. But the point is that they had a fair bit of money to get them through.
I imagine that if push came to shove I and I had to genuinely escape Australia I could put my hand on sufficient money to pay my way somewhere. And of course I would use it. Keep in mind they are coming from Indonesia and if you are caught in Indonesia you are jailed for between 6months and 2 years. It is simply a corrupt country so many transit through it. I wonder what you or I would do if we were in their position. We have money to transit so we dont need to take the chance of getting locked up or going into one of their camps where you are slowly bled of money due to the corruption. It's not a simple yes no answer as anything is in life. There is also no queue to line up in but THERE BLOODY WELL SHOULD BE!.
As for the single male issue, in many instances it is the male of the family that is targeted or at risk in their own country. The Hazara are a perfect example. It is rare for women and children to be killed but males often. The other issue is that poorer families pool money to get the son or father out on the hope they will make it and arrange for the rest to come later.
Dont get me wrong here, I am not a bleeding heart greens supporter. I understand the law and get the darks when our country blatantly screws with it for political gain. Our defence force is not a police force/immigration service. Their role should simply be the protection of our borders against THREAT. There is no threat from asylum seekers. Other than a possible health issue dealt with through quarantine there is no threat.
The defence force need only determine a threat and in the event that there is no threat it becomes a police/dimia issue.
My views on this softened after I arranged the deportation of a family of Hazara from Devonport to Baxter and back to Afghanistan. I have written of this before. This fella knew he was going home to die. You could see it in his eyes. He had a lovely family. Four kids, two in school. He worked at the meatworks in Longford and asked nothing of our Government except our protection.
He had made his claims but Dimia determined he was not at risk despite being a Hazara who are at risk so had to return. We chatted for about an hour while the private charter jet was prepared (I kid you not a private charter). Which just chatted about our families and life in general. He had a govt job in his country but lost that when the govt changed. As he left he shook my hand and thanked me for my time and wished my family well. (If anyone is still reading this read it again.) I doubt anyone here would shake the hand of the prick sending them back to at the very least a poor future.
Of course there are exceptions and there are people using the system. But they get caught once they are here anyway. If they cant prove their grounds for asylum they go to detention until it is dealt with. Many do destroy their documents on the way and some do it at the suggestion of the smugglers. But many do it simply to stay alive. If you are a Tamil or a Hazara you do not want to get caught with your real name on anything. Funny thing is that if you look at the history of Scotland their people did a similar thing when the civil war was on and would adopt the local clan name. So a Campbell would become a McDonald simply to stay alive.
cheers
Daz
-
Of course the Navy beat them. The RAN have been around for ages and the boaties are just getting here.
Tehrefore the RAN beat them ........ here ;D
-
Asylum seekers claim to be have been beaten by Navy- what do you think...... what...no witnesses? weren't there any spectators or even an umpire to prove otherwise.. looks like we won another game :cup: wait till they take on the English cricket team they might have a WIN... :angel:
-
My 2c worth:
1) I don't know all the ins & outs of the legality of these boaties but to pay & attempt to enter the country in a different method to joining the que is poor.
2) I feel for those that have had to travel 100's even 1000's of kms to get to the Aussie ferry terminus but I have to ask what is wrong with Indonesia or some of the other countries you have travelled through? Were you shot at, bombed etc?
3) why destroy any papers you have when these can be used to expedite your entry into Australia? Surely by destroying your documents you realise that lengthy stays in detention centres will occur.
I could go on for some time but from my seat these boaties are not starting off well and to claim abuse without evidence just because they didn't get to their desired destination is very poor form and I wish you luck finding the money required for your next ticket aboard some derelict old fishing boat.
-
If the claims of abuse are true, then we need to investigate and discipline and parties involved.
If the claims are false, then we need to ensure these trouble makers are never processed when they eventually successfully arrive on another boat. The hard working people of the Defence Force don't need bad publicity and false accusations made against them.
-
Let me see. The claims have been ‘exposed’ by the media. One of them (the media apparently) spoke to a few alleged asylum seekers who have failed to enter Australia and are now back in Indonesia. They claim they were threatened, handcuffed and bashed and some have drowned. We can trust our media to be truthful can’t we. The alleged asylum seekers would not lie. I can see a problem here. >:D Sorry, but I personally trust our services, they do an extremely difficult job. Kevin
-
A boatload made it to hobart.
They left behind 7 rolex's, $400,000 in cash and three beemers.
At least I got their boat :)
(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/09/3a7eny8y.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
I think we shouldn't comment unless we know the facts! The media has been known to exaggerate things every now and again ;).
Aaron
-
Stealthy little buggers. (http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/09/jaqemajy.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
I have always tried to stay out of the political related threads, but this one gets up my goat.
Lets look at it this way.
"ALLEGED" abuse and violence from ADF personal, be it RAN, RAA or RAAF.
All ADF personal operating have SOP's ROE's and a bs load of other requirements before they think about acting.
Not one of the personal doing this have an easy job. They are called professionals for a reason. lets face it, 99% of the time they are dam good at what they do.
Yes like all organisations there are always going to be a bad apple or two. The video footage "uncovered" by Aussie reporters shows that the ADF personal involved were professional and very relaxed.
For gods sake, people seem to forget that a soldier, sailor, airman/woman, police officer, medic, firey are just an another hardworking Aussie doing a tough job!
I blame the media for this, Seriously these people put themselves in harms way doing a job for less money than you think for our benefit.
AND the media still persist in finding a story no matter how trivial or benign and turning it into an execution.
The other point to note is the last I saw, I have never EVER seen a general or Admiral conducting a boarding party on a foreign vessel.
So why blame the poor shmucks following orders?
I know that the vast majority here don't think like this, but how about we all as AUSTRALIANS get behind our serving family and tell the media where to shove it?
ok Soap box kicked away and used for kindling now....
Cheers
Evo
(ps: please excuse my horrible grammar in this post)
-
Why would they waste their time beating these people up, when they should be making sure their guns are in top notch condition? :angel:
-
I have always tried to stay out of the political related threads, but this one gets up my goat.
Lets look at it this way.
"ALLEGED" abuse and violence from ADF personal, be it RAN, RAA or RAAF.
All ADF personal operating have SOP's ROE's and a bs load of other requirements before they think about acting.
Not one of the personal doing this have an easy job. They are called professionals for a reason. lets face it, 99% of the time they are dam good at what they do.
Yes like all organisations there are always going to be a bad apple or two. The video footage "uncovered" by Aussie reporters shows that the ADF personal involved were professional and very relaxed.
For gods sake, people seem to forget that a soldier, sailor, airman/woman, police officer, medic, firey are just an another hardworking Aussie doing a tough job!
I blame the media for this, Seriously these people put themselves in harms way doing a job for less money than you think for our benefit.
AND the media still persist in finding a story no matter how trivial or benign and turning it into an execution.
The other point to note is the last I saw, I have never EVER seen a general or Admiral conducting a boarding party on a foreign vessel.
So why blame the poor shmucks following orders?
I know that the vast majority here don't think like this, but how about we all as AUSTRALIANS get behind our serving family and tell the media where to shove it?
ok Soap box kicked away and used for kindling now....
Cheers
Evo
(ps: please excuse my horrible grammar in this post)
:cup: :cup: best reading of the week, good work mate.
Cheers
Disco teddy.
-
Being someone who has been heavily involved personally in these Operations, Op Relex, Op Resolute and now Op Sovereign Borders over man years there is much I cannot dievolge but let's just say, don't believe all what is sold by media or Government. Personal feelings aside and in reply to the direct accusation in the article, in my experience and everything I have seen all is every single Boat Person is treat well and with the utmost respect that every human deserves. This is briefed heavily prior to every boarding. Our sailors/my colleagues put up with much in return which again I have witness and managed. So, all I ask is to please appreciated and understand the un-winnable situation our Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen. They do their utmost with very little.
Interesting so much is taken by the words of these boat people......
Thanks you Tea Bag.... That't also what I have seen after being with in the camps to fix lines that were dug up by the gardeners on the group. It was an accident, but what I saw was not some thing to cause concern. There reading too much into their own press these days and that vagueness needs to stop
-
Thanks you Tea Bag.... That't also what I have seen after being with in the camps to fix lines that were dug up by the gardeners on the group. It was an accident, but what I saw was not some thing to cause concern. There reading too much into their own press these days and that vagueness needs to stop
There is a very simple mechanism to stop this ... The same one that Howard was happy to see applied in recent conflicts in what the yanks apparently refer to as 'south west Asia'.
Embed journos on the naval boats.
I am damn sure that the service personnel would be happy to have media scrutiny, to put un-fair claims to bed.
However, would perhaps constrain the feckless polices from what they order service men and women to do.
It is a fundamental tenet of any society that 'daylight is a great disinfectant'. If it was good enough in a genuine shooting war then surely there is no reason, beyond political expediency, that it should not be achievable for these border patrols.
-
Were they beaten? I doubt it.
Do I care? Not really.
Am I sympathetic to Boat People? Not at all.
Have I got other issues to worry about? Yes.
-
If I was an asylum seeker with a family I probably would make up as much crap as has humanly possible in the belief that I would get what I wanted just to get shutup ( squeakiest wheel gets the most oil, bla bla, bla), so do i think they were bashed before being led back to where they came from = nope, that was the original question wasn't it ;D
-
Interesting so much is taken by the words of these boat people......
And Sarah Hanson-Young is someone who believes every word, then her minions believe her.
-
I'm not going to comment on the beating claims, as there is always 2 side to every story, but in the big scheme of things who here is or has been affected directly by boat people? I haven't, nor has anyone I know been? I've never been able to understand why pollies need to make this their no. 1 election promise. I can think of a ton of things that deserve a higher priority.
-
If your post is missing, well the first round of cleaning has been done.
If you want the thread to stay open and to continue to participate in myswag, we all now how to behave.......otherwise, feel free to carry on :police:
-
I've never been able to understand why pollies need to make this their no. 1 election promise. I can think of a ton of things that deserve a higher priority.
Agreed.
The only reason why this has been beat up to this level is because of the Greens. Essentially both Labor and the Liberals are pretty much aligned on this issue, it was only due to the strong influence of the Greens during the 1st Rudd government that brought about the dismantling of the Pacific Solution - which although wasn't perfect, overall wasn't a bad system. That created major headaches for Labor and they never really were able to fix it. I don't think Abbott will fix it either, it will probably be another 10 years or so before we see some rational solution evolve.
Cooler heads need to prevail here, and there is too much emotion and politics associated with this issue that cloud the decision making. What needs to happen is get this out of the spotlight so that the relevant people (on both sides of the house) can focus on fixing the issue with long term solutions rather than the quick-fix stuff we are currently seeing.
As the old saying goes, laws are like sausages, you don't ever want to see how they are made.
-
Asylum issues aside.....
The RAN have cameras.
Boardings are recorded.
Show me the footage please.
Then decide if our boys were innapropriate.
Requesting "illegal" entrants wear handcuffs to protect our military personnel is far from out of line.
As for the beating and verbal abuse, interview the officers. Conduct an investigation, but for the love
of all things sane ---- No trial by media.....
-
I do feel sorry for the people. If they are told how good we all have it in this great country then no wonder they risk so much to get here. My wife has a lot to do with doctors from overseas and they all just cannot believe the welfare system here and how certain members of our community are given so much and yet they contribute nothing. (I am trying to be political correct here). In fact they say this country just cannot go on like this, something has change. But how? I think the thing about people who arrive by boat, and yes I agree, they are not illegal if seeking asylum is that they have been pushing the people who try and arrive here via the correct channels off or down the list. That does not seem fair. The earlier point made about how we have been affected. Maybe partly by the financial cost to us all. (Well those who pay taxes.) Yep, it is a big problem. I am glad I live here and don’t have to worry about trying to get to another country except for a holiday. (Good to see one of the moderators getting involved as there have been some inappropriate comments in some thread recently.)
And about the claims about beaten by Navy, this morning they are now saying they were forced to put their hands on the hot engine as punishment! And now are in hospital being treated. Now come on, this is total bull.... Kevin
-
Were they beaten? I doubt it.
Do I care? Not really.
Am I sympathetic to Boat People? Not at all.
Have I got other issues to worry about? Yes.
X2
-
The main issue is that the "boat people" tag is an easier target for pollies, when there are other bigger immigration issues such as persons overstaying visa's.
Quote:
There are 13 times more illegal immigrants than there are asylum seekers in detention who have arrived by boat.
Figures obtained by The Advertiser from the Immigration Department and under the Freedom of Information Act show plane arrivals from the United States (5080) and Britain (3610) are near the top of the list of those in the country without a valid visa. China (8070), and Malaysia (4200) round out the top four.
There are 4446 detained boat people, the largest national grouping of which are Afghans (1422).
Three in four of the 58,400 visa overstayers came on tourist or holiday-working visas; one in seven arrived as students and one in 15 disappeared after being granted temporary residency.
Last year, only 6720 visa overstayers were sent home, most voluntarily, after applications to stay longer were rejected.
The US Government refused to answer questions about how it tried to stop visa overstayers but British Deputy High Commissioner Jolyon Welsh was critical of those who broke the rules.
Mr Welsh said only limited help was given to visa overstayers who were deported and had travel restrictions imposed. "My strong advice to British nationals is that they make sure they have the right visa for what they want to do and stay within the terms of that visa," Mr Welsh said.
Other details provided by the Immigration Department include:
MORE than half of the overstayers have called Australia home for five or more years.
ABOUT 20,000 have lived here a decade or more.
TWO in three have evaded immigration authorities for more than two years.
The figures do not include thousands of visitors who overstay their visas by up to a fortnight.
Refugee Council of Australia chief executive officer Paul Power said the figures helped put boat arrivals into context.
"The impact of boat arrivals on Australia's migration program is very small," he said.
"Political leaders continue to add to public fears about people arriving by boat but they make little or no effort to put the small number of asylum seekers entering Australia into any global context. Little attention is paid to the fact that so many asylum seekers who arrive by boat are found to have well-founded fears of persecution."
But Ethnic Communities' Council chairman Sam Afra said more should be done to round up visa overstayers and send them home. "It's shocking - to have one in three who have been here more than 10 years (suggests) something's wrong with the system," he said.
Mr Afra said illegal overstayers hurt everyone, including legitimate migrants and refugees, by taking jobs and housing, using public services and not paying tax.
Monash University migration expert Bob Birrell said tens of thousands of foreign students, who had expected to get residency here once their course was finished, were now scrambling to find ways to stay after immigration laws were tightened last year. "A surge in the number of students who have overstayed without any form of bridging visa is a reflection of their desire to extend their stay by hook or by crook," he said.
There were 10,600 more visa overstayers at June 30 last year than in 2005.
A spokesman for Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said less than 0.1 percent of visitors overstayed visas and many only for short times before leaving without immigration's involvement.
The 58,000 represents only around one fifth of those who overstay their visas, most being found and sent home within the first two weeks after the document expires.
End Quote:
Feel free to comment here!
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1389313069/14#14 (http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1389313069/14#14)
-
If the claims are false, then we need to ensure these trouble makers are never processed
What ever happens to the *trouble makers* ... like the ones that caused $8million damage at Villawood... or the X Millions of damage at Christmas Island..
it goes very quiet after the initial "THEY BURNT IT ALL DOWN" reports... I bet ZERO happens to them, but either released into our society, or just stuffed back in with the rest instead of booted out of the country instantly never to return.. Micro chip them if you have to.
Do we really want that sort of person walking our so called safe streets ???
-
Being someone who has been heavily involved personally in these Operations, Op Relex, Op Resolute and now Op Sovereign Borders over man years there is much I cannot dievolge but let's just say, don't believe all what is sold by media or Government. Personal feelings aside and in reply to the direct accusation in the article, in my experience and everything I have seen all is every single Boat Person is treat well and with the utmost respect that every human deserves. This is briefed heavily prior to every boarding. Our sailors/my colleagues put up with much in return which again I have witness and managed. So, all I ask is to please appreciated and understand the un-winnable situation our Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen. They do their utmost with very little.
Interesting so much is taken by the words of these boat people......
I have a collegue that also works in this area as we are both in Safety they have consulted with me from time to time on various issues and summarising our confidential discussions i can totally concur with the above
-
What ever happens to the *trouble makers* ...
Do we really want that sort of person walking our so called safe streets ???
I dont know what happens to the trouble makers, vandals amd rioters. If I had my way their claims would never be processed and they would never reside in OZ.
-
It is not unlawful to seek asylum in another country.
Australia is a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights.
"Until a request for refuge has been accepted, the person is referred to as an asylum seeker. Only after the recognition of the asylum seeker's protection needs, he or she is officially referred to as a refugee and enjoys refugee status, which carries certain rights and obligations according to the legislation of the receiving country"
"A refugee has the right to be free from penalties pertaining to the illegality of their entry to or presence within a country, if it can be shown that they acted in good faith- that is, if the refugee believes that there was ample cause for their illegal entry/presence, i.e. to escape threats upon their life or freedom, and if they swiftly declare their presence. This right is protected in Article 31:
The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. (Article 31, (1))"
The ONLY issue with the current asylum seekers is generally the issue of 'coming directly' but this does not prevent them seeking asylum.
From a legal perspective its really really simple;
They are entitled to come here and seek asylum.
We are obliged to address those claims.
Where their claim for refuge is founded we are obliged to resettle them here or abroad.
If the claim is not founded they can be forcibly returned.
If they have not come here 'directly' then they may be subject to penalty (detention etc).
What is sad, and makes Australia laughable, is we go on and on about 'a fair go' and 'mates' and 'diggers' and all the good we do in the world like our great work our soldiers and UN people do and then we flush it down the toilet with the anti asylum seeker garbage. They are a drop in the ocean in not only the world asylum issue but the Australian asylum issue.
Australians are smarter than falling for the crap fed by the government and the media. Think about it. The only reason this all started was because John Howard (who I liked) grabbed onto it when his future looked bleak and he needed to push to the right to secure votes. Each government has kept it going to get voted in. The media use it as a cash cow to sell their product. Think about the questions the asylum seekers would have been asked by the media when they got back to Indonesia (Did they hand cuff you?. Did they manhandle you? How did you feel?) Media then spins this - Asylum seekers handcuffed and assaulted".
So there are some things we cannot control because we agreed to do them (UN HR).
There are some things we can control (Penalties for those who don't come directly, where they are resettled).
The STUPID thing is this. Australia has the power to deal with this simply, lawfully and cost effectively through our visa system. Forget the issue of whether or not they came here directly and deal solely with the asylum issue but with a simple twist.
If you come here indirectly you will never be issued permanent residency. You will be issued with a temporary visa while your claims are assessed and this will be revoked once your country is safe to return to. So we meet our obligations under the UN conventions and remove the pull factors. If you come here you will never be resettled here permanently - ever. You might have kids here, buy a house, buy a car but once your country is safe, and lets face it most places sought their crap out in a reasonably short time, you are going home. The ONLY benefit is that the kids they produce here would be Australian citizens but most would go with their parents.
Here is a link that shows the statistics of our immigration;
http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf (http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/racial_discrimination/face_facts/ftf_2012_web.pdf)
Go to page 27 and check out the numbers and from where.
In 2011 we took 29,000 from China and 26,000 from the UK. In Queensland actual 'humanitarian' resettlement was 4% of the total. 26% was for family reunions and 44% for skilled migration. 26% simply came over from New Zealand.
If anyone thinks we are being flooded by 'illegals' you are being fooled.
And I bet pounds to pennies that if us big tough Aussie myswaggers were in these peoples position we would fight like a thrashing machine - harder than the subjects of these media reports did.
Perfectly said. :cup:
-
Were they beaten? I doubt it.
Do I care? Not really.
Am I sympathetic to Boat People? Not at all.
Have I got other issues to worry about? Yes.
Why bother posting then?
-
Were they beaten? I doubt it.
Do I care? Not really.
Am I sympathetic to Boat People? Not at all.
Have I got other issues to worry about? Yes.
:cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup:
-
Getting back to the actual question which went off in another direction.
If they were handcuffed and were non compliant then they would have been manhandled and probably quite heavily. That would not mean a 'beating' but could easily be spun that way, by the detainee, the media or other interested groups.
I must have handcuffed 2000 people in 18yrs. About 500 of those would have been non compliant. Unless you are very very very good (an ex screw maybe) with a set of cuffs then you use physical strength, or rat cunning, to get control of them before getting the cuffs on. My tactic was nearly always an arm bar, rotating the arm to bring the body forward, my leg in front of theirs to 'trip' them forward then 14stone on their back into the ground chest and face first. Knee in the back and arm behind their back until they chose to comply.
And that my friends is as good as a beating.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
Getting back to the actual question which went off in another direction.
If they were handcuffed and were non compliant then they would have been manhandled and probably quite heavily. That would not mean a 'beating' but could easily be spun that way, by the detainee, the media or other interested groups.
I must have handcuffed 2000 people in 18yrs. About 500 of those would have been non compliant. Unless you are very very very good (an ex screw maybe) with a set of cuffs then you use physical strength, or rat cunning, to get control of them before getting the cuffs on. My tactic was nearly always an arm bar, rotating the arm to bring the body forward, my leg in front of theirs to 'trip' them forward then 14stone on their back into the ground chest and face first. Knee in the back and arm behind their back until they chose to comply.
And that my friends is as good as a beating.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
And i thought my love life was adventurous ;D
-
And about the claims about beaten by Navy, this morning they are now saying they were forced to put their hands on the hot engine as punishment! And now are in hospital being treated. Now come on, this is total bull.... Kevin
I agree that this is BS. However, I have no problem with such things being bandied about in the media. Hopefully it will reach the ears of some of these boat people and might deter them from trying. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it was part of the deterrent strategy.
-
Why bother posting then?
Why not, it's one of the freedoms I enjoy in this country.
I answered the Question... "Do I think they were beaten." My answer is = No.
Do I care if they were? = No.
-
Wow! This is sounding like the Allan Jones radio show. Grow up.
-
I reckon if I was in a situation even close to that of asylum seekers, I would be doing whatever it took to get myself and my family out.
As Australians and citizens of the world, the least we can offer is welcome refuge.
Enough of the Alan Jones, shock jock media tripe... try the shoe on the other foot!
-
Do I think that naval personnel beat people? "No"
Am I outraged that the Australian Gov't, through faux claim of the need for 'operational secrecy' makes such claims possible? "Totally"
Am I heartened by the number of Swaggers who can identify shock jock jingoism and call it for what it is? "Absolutely".
-
I would be doing whatever it took to get myself and my family out.
Including Country shopping???
Traveling through several "Safe" countries to get the land of milk and honey is not seeking Asylum.
Before anyone jumps down my throat for that, I don't have a problem helping anyone in need, I DO have a problem with being told how I'm going to help them.
One question,
Are the Asylum Seekers being persecuted in Indonesia?
-
......
Traveling through several "Safe" countries to get the the land of milk and honey is not seeking Asylum.
......
Bingo.....
-
Including Country shopping???
Traveling through several "Safe" countries to get the the land of milk and honey is not seeking Asylum.
Before anyone jumps down my throat for that, I don't have a problem helping anyone in need, I DO have a problem with being told how I'm going to help them.
One question,
Are the Asylum Seekers being persecuted in Indonesia?
If you are seeking asylum why not go to the best country in the world. Australia would not be the amazing place it is without all of the different cultures we have.
If you were an Afgan looking for the best for your family would you settle on Iraq or Pakistan or Indonesia? No you would choose the best you could find. Australia.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
Then once here and under the freedoms given to you by the best place in the world .
Some of you can then all start to congegrate in one suberb at a time till others feel intimidated and move out, then start turf wars with other ethnic groups that have done the same in their neigbourhoods and in no time start turning the best place in the world into a cess pool of ethnic viorlence like where you came from in the first place ...
Gotta love multy culturalism and the challenges of getting a melting pot of people that have thousands of years of built in hatreds and intolerance to anything other then their cultural beleifs to live in harmony ...
But then again this is getting off track a bit to the original post == No I dont think they were beaten, just handled in the manner to which was needed under the circumstances at the time.
-
And that my friends is as good as a beating.
God help your daughter's first boyfriend ;D
-
Did our ancestors come here by boat and took over the country ;D
Mark
-
Did our ancestors come here by boat and took over the country ;D
Mark
Good call Mark
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
-
Then once here and under the freedoms given to you by the best place in the world .
Some of you can then all start to congegrate in one suberb at a time till others feel intimidated and move out, then start turf wars with other ethnic groups that have done the same in their neigbourhoods and in no time start turning the best place in the world into a cess pool of ethnic viorlence like where you came from in the first place ...
Gotta love multy culturalism and the challenges of getting a melting pot of people that have thousands of years of built in hatreds and intolerance to anything other then their cultural beleifs to live in harmony ...
But then again this is getting off track a bit to the original post == No I dont think they were beaten, just handled in the manner to which was needed under the circumstances at the time.
Well said and so true.
-
Did our ancestors come here by boat and took over the country ;D
Mark
Not sure if the following came by boat or plane, born in London England though :-P
-
Did our ancestors come here by boat and took over the country ;D
Mark
-
(http://3things.org.au/_wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/aboriginal-meme.jpg)
-
Good to see some light hearted debate with these last three pictures. ;D
Would be interesting for people to post how there families and ancestors ended up here.
Heres mine;
On mums side they were gypsy's that came out in the 1860's from germany. Not much on how or why they came here but they did end up here in Tas and 'married' into the indigenous population in the New Norfolk area. Basically they were scum and from what I hear behaved like scum.
Dads side is a bit more researched. They were Calvanists and lived in France and were thrown out by the catholics around the time of the revolution. They were given about a week to decide whether to remain Calvanists (and die) or embrace catholicism (and live). ( I always think I would have taken the Kent Brockman approach - "I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality I could be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves!" I am sure I could have carried a cross or someones sins). But no they left everything and went to the Channel Islands so became English. The menfolk came out as sailors and jumped ship in Melbourne in 1846.
So we were boat people. Came here uninvited. Hope there is no statute of limitations. ;D
-
Including Country shopping???
Traveling through several "Safe" countries to get the land of milk and honey is not seeking Asylum.
Before anyone jumps down my throat for that, I don't have a problem helping anyone in need, I DO have a problem with being told how I'm going to help them.
One question,
Are the Asylum Seekers being persecuted in Indonesia?
:cup: :cup: :cheers:
-
Good to see some light hearted debate with these last three pictures. ;D
Would be interesting for people to post how there families and ancestors ended up here.
Heres mine;
On mums side they were gypsy's that came out in the 1860's from germany. Not much on how or why they came here but they did end up here in Tas and 'married' into the indigenous population in the New Norfolk area. Basically they were scum and from what I hear behaved like scum.
Dads side is a bit more researched. They were Calvanists and lived in France and were thrown out by the catholics around the time of the revolution. They were given about a week to decide whether to remain Calvanists (and die) or embrace catholicism (and live). ( I always think I would have taken the Kent Brockman approach - "I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality I could be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves!" I am sure I could have carried a cross or someones sins). But no they left everything and went to the Channel Islands so became English. The menfolk came out as sailors and jumped ship in Melbourne in 1846.
So we were boat people. Came here uninvited. Hope there is no statute of limitations. ;D
Great story Dazzler but you do know, don't you, that Immigration are monitoring this forum and it would pay you to have a rapid evacuation plan in place when you hear that knock on your door early one morning. ;D ;D ;D
-
Well said Robbo. Actually I am booked on the Spirit of Tas in the morning. Hope it doesn't get dragged back to Devonport.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
To late Dazzler, phone call has been made to inform them of you intention to cross boarders ;D
Run Forrest Run
-
Well said Robbo. Actually I am booked on the Spirit of Tas in the morning. Hope it doesn't get dragged back to Devonport.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Ooops!! I think Hairs might work for Border Control Dept. Best you wear your disguise when arriving on the mainland.
By the way, i can be bribed into not dobbing you in and you can hide in my woodshed for a couple of bottled of JD. ;D ;D
-
Woodshed. Robbo. Do you turn pens over at ubeaut.
If you do, and you own an altendorf/hammer or l'invincible I am on my way.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
(http://i1347.photobucket.com/albums/p718/CodyB133/this-thread-rocks_zps71896152.jpg) (http://s1347.photobucket.com/user/CodyB133/media/this-thread-rocks_zps71896152.jpg.html)
-
Woodshed. Robbo. Do you turn pens over at ubeaut.
If you do, and you own an altendorf/hammer or l'invincible I am on my way.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
LOL. Hey Dazzler, did'nt quite understand your last post but i'll get the woodshed cleaned out and the glasses and mixers ready.
Safe travells mate. ;D ;D
-
There is a robbo over at the woodwork forums and when you mentioned woodshed I put 2 and 2 together and got 7.
Altendorf, Hammer and L'invincible are three of the top tablesaw combo's
cheers
-
There is a robbo over at the woodwork forums and when you mentioned woodshed I put 2 and 2 together and got 7.
Altendorf, Hammer and L'invincible are three of the top tablesaw combo's
cheers
Ah!, Yep that makes more sense now. I was beginning to think that you'd started on the bottle a little early and were sluring your words. Mind you, i would,nt know one tablesaw from another.
Still wondering why you would leave Tassy to come to the GC. It's no where near what it used to be in the earlier days and the people have changed. (except for me) LOL
Cheers
-
Good to see
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/navy-chief-expresses-deep-concern-over-medias-lack-of-respect-for-officers-20140120-314l5.html (http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/navy-chief-expresses-deep-concern-over-medias-lack-of-respect-for-officers-20140120-314l5.html)
We can debate all night long about weather they should have been tasked with these kinds of duties, but they deserve respect for the job they do.
A pity the media added its final two paragraphs to the story!
-
Reporters are grubs. They won't let the truth get in the way of a good story.
The big TV networks love to have a shot at the Defence Force.
-
Good to see
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/navy-chief-expresses-deep-concern-over-medias-lack-of-respect-for-officers-20140120-314l5.html (http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/navy-chief-expresses-deep-concern-over-medias-lack-of-respect-for-officers-20140120-314l5.html)
We can debate all night long about weather they should have been tasked with these kinds of duties, but they deserve respect for the job they do.
A pity the media added its final two paragraphs to the story!
Sorry but what the hell was that????
Did I just see a small dose of common sense there? ???
And I certainly don't want to start a political debate or go OT, but does this mean that Abbotts plan may be working and the opposition just wants to call foul?
I'm not suggesting political persuasion of either way, but hey lets call a spade a spade.
-
Sorry but what the hell was that????
Did I just see a small dose of common sense there? ???
And I certainly don't want to start a political debate or go OT, but does this mean that Abbotts plan may be working and the opposition just wants to call foul?
I'm not suggesting political persuasion of either way, but hey lets call a spade a spade.
Not sure I get your drift!
None of my posts have mentioned political persuasions of either sides.
Yes , I think the demonisation of asylum seekers by both major parties is a complete cop out, thats irrelevant to the points I've made. There are far more important issues we as a Nation should be worrying about.
That doesn't mean that the services should be made a scapegoat for the sake of circulation. Good on the vica admiral for making his point.
-
As far as I am concerned it is typical of all the political correctness facade, while people agree the boat people are not wanted here, they also want to be self righteous and full of arrogance quickly playing the blame game and pointing the finger any anything that will turn attention away form the their own hypocritical lifestyle.
Just like taking out the garbage, it is a job that has to be done, no one at home volunteers for it, but someone has to do it. Sometime you do have to get your hands in the garbage to do the job, why then make an obituary complaint about someone doing their job. Of course unless you are going to do it yourself. It is called the real world and in the real world sometimes some people need a real good old fashion shut the f&*( up and just let those doing there job do their job.
-
Not sure I get your drift!
None of my posts have mentioned political persuasions of either sides.
Yes , I think the demonisation of asylum seekers by both major parties is a complete cop out, thats irrelevant to the points I've made. There are far more important issues we as a Nation should be worrying about.
That doesn't mean that the services should be made a scapegoat for the sake of circulation. Good on the vica admiral for making his point.
Sorry Mace, I was trying to be sarcastic....
I was amazed that common sense came out. That's all.
Just my opinion that its political scapegoating and innocent military personnel suffer because of it.
Sorry,
Brian
-
All good. Were both on the same track!
-
There is a robbo over at the woodwork forums and when you mentioned woodshed I put 2 and 2 together and got 7.
Altendorf, Hammer and L'invincible are three of the top tablesaw combo's
cheers
I thought we were about to add another to the list, at least 4 cross forum members by my reckoning, might need another non camper trailer thread to check. ;D
-
:)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
I think what a lot of people choose to forget when using the, "we were the original asylum seekers " or "we invaded here first" argument, is that we didn't exactly come here on the Love Boat. Most were convicts dragged here in chains. For those who came later as immigrants, they came here to be Australians and embrace the way of life. They worked their buts off to get ahead and make a difference in this country. Now it seems Australia is the easy way to settle in with no intention of assimilation or hard work and all the while receiving generous government handouts while trying to bring in the very culture that has caused them to want to 'escape' their own country.
-
I think what a lot of people choose to forget when using the, "we were the original asylum seekers " or "we invaded here first" argument, is that we didn't exactly come here on the Love Boat. Most were convicts dragged here in chains. For those who came later as immigrants, they came here to be Australians and embrace the way of life. They worked their buts off to get ahead and make a difference in this country. Now it seems Australia is the easy way to settle in with no intention of assimilation or hard work and all the while receiving generous government handouts while trying to bring in the very culture that has caused them to want to 'escape' their own country.
True. :cheers:
-
I think what a lot of people choose to forget when using the, "we were the original asylum seekers " or "we invaded here first" argument, is that we didn't exactly come here on the Love Boat. Most were convicts dragged here in chains. For those who came later as immigrants, they came here to be Australians and embrace the way of life. They worked their buts off to get ahead and make a difference in this country. Now it seems Australia is the easy way to settle in with no intention of assimilation or hard work and all the while receiving generous government handouts while trying to bring in the very culture that has caused them to want to 'escape' their own country.
:cheers:
The whole asylum seekers by boat thing is a scam and their supporters *won't* see through the charade, or are actively *choosing* to be part of it.
Would a 'human-rights lawyer' get paid by anyone other than a tax payer?
I don't care who comes to live in Australia, just leave your bu11sh1t behind.
-
I don't care who comes to live in Australia, just leave your bu11sh1t behind.
[/quote]
Couldn't agree more. :cheers:
-
I don't care who comes to live in Australia, just leave your bu11sh1t behind.
Couldn't agree more. :cheers:
Wouldn't it be great if that was the case.
-
:cheers:
The whole asylum seekers by boat thing is a scam and their supporters *won't* see through the charade, or are actively *choosing* to be part of it.
Yes, the greens and the opposition should hang their heads in shame for believing the lies told by Indonesia... Absolute disgrace..
-
Great article in the Telegraph the other day by Jason Morrison titled "Indonesia - when we're sorry, it's not enough. When we're generous, we need to try harder". read the full article here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/indonesia-when-were-sorry-its-not-enough-when-were-generous-we-need-to-try-harder/story-fni0cwl5-1226806143020 (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/indonesia-when-were-sorry-its-not-enough-when-were-generous-we-need-to-try-harder/story-fni0cwl5-1226806143020) but my favourite paragraphs were the last two:
"Operation Sovereign Borders is only happening because it was the will of the voters at the last election. I know democracy matters little when you're a world- renowned expert on everything, like Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. Perhaps she should be on commission from Jakarta because she's saying all the things they wouldn't dare.
Many in this country are sick and tired of the one-way street with Indonesia. There is seemingly no pleasing them unless it's everything they want and how they want it."
-
I think what a lot of people choose to forget when using the, "we were the original asylum seekers " or "we invaded here first" argument, is that we didn't exactly come here on the Love Boat. Most were convicts dragged here in chains. For those who came later as immigrants, they came here to be Australians and embrace the way of life. They worked their buts off to get ahead and make a difference in this country. Now it seems Australia is the easy way to settle in with no intention of assimilation or hard work and all the while receiving generous government handouts while trying to bring in the very culture that has caused them to want to 'escape' their own country.
Now thats well said.........
And pretty much exactly whats happening.
-
Great article in the Telegraph the other day by Jason Morrison titled "Indonesia - when we're sorry, it's not enough. When we're generous, we need to try harder". read the full article here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/indonesia-when-were-sorry-its-not-enough-when-were-generous-we-need-to-try-harder/story-fni0cwl5-1226806143020 (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/indonesia-when-were-sorry-its-not-enough-when-were-generous-we-need-to-try-harder/story-fni0cwl5-1226806143020) but my favourite paragraphs were the last two:
"Operation Sovereign Borders is only happening because it was the will of the voters at the last election. I know democracy matters little when you're a world- renowned expert on everything, like Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. Perhaps she should be on commission from Jakarta because she's saying all the things they wouldn't dare.
Many in this country are sick and tired of the one-way street with Indonesia. There is seemingly no pleasing them unless it's everything they want and how they want it."
I am struggling to understand how they can even speak to us the way they do when they receive so much foreign aid from us.
If I had a say in parliament, I'd say, fine then, don't like us. We'll send the money to someone who does.
How's them apples???
-
I am struggling to understand how they can even speak to us the way they do when they receive so much foreign aid from us.
If I had a say in parliament, I'd say, fine then, don't like us. We'll send the money to someone who does.
How's them apples???
You get my vote!
-
I am struggling to understand how they can even speak to us the way they do when they receive so much foreign aid from us.
If I had a say in parliament, I'd say, fine then, don't like us. We'll send the money to someone who does.
How's them apples???
:cup: :cup: :cheers:
-
I am no apologist for Indonesia. Pages back you can see my thoughts on how they are playing us, but keep in mind with foriegn aid there is many ways to give it. And all though it's measured monetarily together it's different. When you are donating it to say schools in Indonesia your doing it with conditions and using it to support moderate Islamic teachings. If the US had of kept up a minimal portion of a Aid to Afghanistan after the war with Russia you may never of seen the Taliban! And we don't want Islamic crazies in our doorstep?
Military aid has other advantages. When our troops hit the ground in Timor whilst the TNi (Indonesian military) were still there. It was the officers who had worked with these guys through aid and exercises that negotiated the peaceful transfer (peaceful for our troops)
Aid for aid sake is rarely given and when it does like in a natural disaster or helping displaced in Syria we should contribute what we can afford as a nation.
-
Really can't see our Boys harming asylum seekers, I call it BS from all those that are dealing in this FUD.
Once upon a time Australia use to kick arse, not lick it.
-
I am struggling to understand how they can even speak to us the way they do when they receive so much foreign aid from us.
If I had a say in parliament, I'd say, fine then, don't like us. We'll send the money to someone who does.
How's them apples???
From what I understand they are a significant trade partner the money we give them for aid that builds schools is quite small so to lose them as a trade partner would be very costly indeed something we don't need.
When it comes to foreign affairs this government is so lacking it almost comical, anyone see his speech yesterday when he was referring to "baddies and goodies" it was embarrassing to watch.
As for the RAN, did this happen well I very much doubt it but without an investigation how do we prove to the world that it didn't at the moment all we have is Morrison saying it didn't (can trust him at all) and the head of the RAN sending out a tweet, I understand we are all new age and everything but a flapping tweet?
Why the hell we are in their waters I have no idea as well, will have to wait from my nephew to get back to get an answer on that one I think he is due back next month.
-
The boat people are desperate people and obviously will go to great lengths to get what they want, even holding onto a boiling pipe to get blisters
-
probably beat them up so they wont come back to australia
-
They should to to England - They cant beat anyone!
-
I am struggling to understand how they can even speak to us the way they do when they receive so much foreign aid from us.
If I had a say in parliament, I'd say, fine then, don't like us. We'll send the money to someone who does.
How's them apples???
I'd stop all foreign aid.
probably beat them up so they wont come back to australia
Lets hope it works.
honestly who cares if the navy did it. I don't.
-
They should to to England - They cant beat anyone!
;D
-
I'd stop all foreign aid.
Lets hope it works.
honestly who cares if the navy did it. I don't.
We are citizens of the world, not just Australia! As such we have responsibilities, foreign aid being one.
I'd like the confidence of knowing other countries would be willing to help us if the need arose.
-
We are citizens of the world, not just Australia! As such we have responsibilities, foreign aid being one.
I'd like the confidence of knowing other countries would be willing to help us if the need arose.
True but Indonesia wouldn't give us the steam of their sh!t.
-
The majority of illegals, very different to asylum seekers, are people overstaying their visas. These are people who fly in on a plane not risking life or limb coming by a crappy boat. Why is there no uproar about that, why haven't ACA and TT got all the mindless drones screaming at the tv about that?
-
I don't care who comes to live in Australia, just leave your bu11sh1t behind.
Couldn't agree more. :cheers:
Except most of the bullShit is from here not from the immigrants
-
Except most of the bull**** is from here not from the immigrants
Exactly, those coming from Afghanistan, for example, are escaping religious persecution.
As such they would be likely to support tolerance. It is those whom they are fleeing who are the intolerant.
-
Except most of the bull**** is from here not from the immigrants
That's gold. If we are already here we have no bu11sh1t to leave behind - what you are referring to is a reflection of our country today, therefore you are saying we are mostly bu11sh1t.
Interesting.
-
That's gold. If we are already here we have no bu11sh1t to leave behind - what you are referring to is a reflection of our country today, therefore you are saying we are mostly bu11sh1t.
Interesting.
That makes no sense
-
True but Indonesia wouldn't give us the steam of their sh!t.
lol ... tell me how you really feel ?
-
True but Indonesia wouldn't give us the steam of their sh!t.
and most of the others couldn't afford to give us the paper to wipe our arses with... not that most of them seem to appreciate the money in the first place. Nor are any of them a power if it came to war.
-
I've got a growing feeling that we might have to give these buggers a quick whack before they get too big for their foreign-aid subsidised boots.
They're talking tough, but they do not have the military organisation to support the veiled threats they've been making. They don't even have the fuel for the ship they want to use to confront us over people smugglers.
A quick pre-emptive air strike on parts of Jakarta might get the message across and show them that we mean business.
Cheers, Tony
-
Exactly, those coming from Afghanistan, for example, are escaping religious persecution.
As such they would be likely to support tolerance. It is those whom they are fleeing who are the intolerant.
Escaping religious persecution? Funny how they then try and bring their religion in over here and force it into our culture. And support tolerance, ha. If they come over here and want to build a mosque, we say ah yes that's OK, whatever you want to do, here's some more money to help with that. If we went over there and said we want to build a church, bang, we'd be shot dead in a heartbeat.
-
It's not just the boat people.
We have soccer violence in Australia now? we used to watch that bullsh!t on the news as it was happening over in Europe. Different ethnic groups claiming local soccer teams as their new club and then waiving flags from their country of origin whilst in the stands. This violence is caused by immigrant ethnics groups who want to bring their bullShit in to OZ.
While i were stationed in Sydney, we went to quite a few NRL games to watch the NQ Cowboys play. I would wear my Cowboys jersey and sometimes cop a bit of friendly banter when we lost. One ground that was not safe for the family to watch footy was Canterbury/Bankstown. It was full of ethnic groups that were looking for a scrap. No offence to doggies fans but your home ground is full of ethnic thugs.
I decided after that game that i would never travel to Canterbury with the family to watch another game.
-
I've got a growing feeling that we might have to give these buggers a quick whack before they get too big for their foreign-aid subsidised boots.
They're talking tough, but they do not have the military organisation to support the veiled threats they've been making. They don't even have the fuel for the ship they want to use to confront us over people smugglers.
A quick pre-emptive air strike on parts of Jakarta might get the message across and show them that we mean business.
Cheers, Tony
I really hope you're joking.
-
It's not just the boat people.
We have soccer violence in Australia now? we used to watch that bullsh!t on the news as it was happening over in Europe. Different ethnic groups claiming local soccer teams as their new club and then waiving flags from their country of origin whilst in the stands. This violence is caused by immigrant ethnics groups who want to bring their bull**** in to OZ.
While i were stationed in Sydney, we went to quite a few NRL games to watch the NQ Cowboys play. I would wear my Cowboys jersey and sometimes cop a bit of friendly banter when we lost. One ground that was not safe for the family to watch footy was Canterbury/Bankstown. It was full of ethnic groups that were looking for a scrap.
I decided after that game that i would never travel to Canterbury with the family to watch another game.
Sadly some people will never see it as a problem. They will keep flooding in and bringing their bullShit problems with them...
Flag burning, protests in the streets and all that Shit. If they feel that strongly about it I'll chip in for a 1 way ticket to send them back to fight "for their country" ( I thought Australia was now their country ???)
I did my diploma with 2 people from Canterbury area, and my girlfriend at the time came to pick me up from Tech in a bikini top and shorts (summer)... One of the bombers said if she ever turned up dressed like that in their area she'd get raped.
He made big news in Sydney with a group of people for a gang rape several years later.
Instead of Jakarta being bombed, I think the airstrike would be better placed from about Marrickville out to about.. Padstow at least.
-
Escaping religious persecution? Funny how they then try and bring their religion in over here and force it into our culture. And support tolerance, ha. If they come over here and want to build a mosque, we say ah yes that's OK, whatever you want to do, here's some more money to help with that. If we went over there and said we want to build a church, bang, we'd be shot dead in a heartbeat.
Obviously you have never met an Hazara.
Here is just one example of evidence of persecution of the Hazara. (The Afghan minority who make up the vast majority of Afghani refugees.)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/deadly-road-blocks-afghanistans-hazara-minority-from-homeland/story-e6frg6so-1226808384472 (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/deadly-road-blocks-afghanistans-hazara-minority-from-homeland/story-e6frg6so-1226808384472)
I would be more than happy for anyone to post any evidence of any ethnic violence or sectarianism by Hazaras anywhere, let alone in Australia.
As to your comment about being "shot in a heartbeat over there" if we wanted to beuild a church, you are correct, however it would be by the Taliban, whom these people are escaping and that the Aussies and our allies were there there to fight.
Your accusations against Afghani refugees make as little sense as accusing the Vietnamese refugees of 30+ years ago of being 'communists'.
-
It's not just the boat people.
We have soccer violence in Australia now? we used to watch that bullsh!t on the news as it was happening over in Europe. Different ethnic groups claiming local soccer teams as their new club and then waiving flags from their country of origin whilst in the stands. This violence is caused by immigrant ethnics groups who want to bring their bull**** in to OZ.
While i were stationed in Sydney, we went to quite a few NRL games to watch the NQ Cowboys play. I would wear my Cowboys jersey and sometimes cop a bit of friendly banter when we lost. One ground that was not safe for the family to watch footy was Canterbury/Bankstown. It was full of ethnic groups that were looking for a scrap. No offence to doggies fans but your home ground is full of ethnic thugs.
I decided after that game that i would never travel to Canterbury with the family to watch another game.
And how many of these ethnic thugs are refugees and how many arrived by plane from Europe, N.Z., etc?
Frankly, the most prominent groups of 'thugs' I have read about in the press in recent years are the neckless 'security' staff at licenced venues who's major 'qualification' is being built like Arnie, without the need for steroids, but possibly enhanced by them. These 'heroes' seem to get off on thumping women / finding the least excuse to belt up on those who have had 'one too many'. And I bet that none of them are refugees - as you don't even need a visa from NZ, not sure about the Pacific Island nations...
A gross generalisation I know, and probably offensive to the majority of law abiding migrants / over stayers from those nations, but no less true than the ignorant prejudiced accusations against refugees in this thread.
-
They come here for our way of life - or they would stay where they are. isn't that why they come here???
but some people seem blind to the fact that they want things changed to suit themselves, so they aren't *offended*..
Try having Easter, Christmas at your kids school these days. Soon there'll be no Australia day as it will offend them too.
Anyway this thread has run its course.
-
Well the ABC have finally woken up - http://www.smh.com.au/national/abc-boss-gaven-morris-responds-to-news-criticism-with-edict-to-staff-20140201-31u5b.html (http://www.smh.com.au/national/abc-boss-gaven-morris-responds-to-news-criticism-with-edict-to-staff-20140201-31u5b.html)
And this pretty much sums up what I think of the Greens -
Tv Show Sea Patrol is real (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moJ7j86MyWw#ws)
-
Thanks for that clip Symon. I wasn't aware that had happened. Speaks volumes.
-
do you mean the tv show isn't real, it's fiction, like the Greens 8)
-
Who actually votes for Sarah Hansen Young? She is a moron, and that clip shows it perfectly.
-
Who said Sea Patrol isn't real? C'mon?
We are coming up to seven weeks without a an illegal boat arrival.
-
Who said Sea Patrol isn't real? C'mon?
We are coming up to seven weeks without a an illegal boat arrival.
That you've been told about.....:-)
-
That you've been told about.....:-)
Or the ones that got though undetected...
Never mind the hundreds of illegals that come via plane every week. ::)
-
50 days since a boat load of asylum seekers have set foot on Australian soil :cup:
I guess something is workin.
-
Never mind the hundreds of illegals that come via plane every week. ::)
I agree, turn the planes around too.
-
50 days since a boat load of asylum seekers have set foot on Australian soil :cup:
I guess something is workin.
Wrong again.....:-)
-
Wrong again.....:-)
careful mate....the government is watching and they will come get you for being their leak......... ;D
-
Hence I can't say too much...:-)
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
-
Who actually votes for Sarah Hansen Young? She is a moron, and that clip shows it perfectly.
x 200000000000......the greens party are completely irrelevant in Australian politics
-
I am fairly neutral on the whole boat people topic to be honest but i was lsitening to Tony Abbot on the radio yesterday. First thing he said was that he beleived what the Navy was telling him totally and that they have only ever behaved in a professional manner.
In the same interview he then said he would not release the Navy's footage because he would not release infomration that may be detrimental to the Navy.
I just think the whole clandestine nature of the Abbot Government is a concern. Everything is secret for this reason or that.
-
I am fairly neutral on the whole boat people topic to be honest but i was lsitening to Tony Abbot on the radio yesterday. First thing he said was that he beleived what the Navy was telling him totally and that they have only ever behaved in a professional manner.
In the same interview he then said he would not release the Navy's footage because he would not release infomration that may be detrimental to the Navy.
I just think the whole clandestine nature of the Abbot Government is a concern. Everything is secret for this reason or that.
I don't think everything is secret about the Abbot government. The only thing they have been secretive about is how they are stopping the boats.
IMO, the ABC should apologise for the bull5hit media story they made up. The Navy are doing a good job.
-
Hey Muzza,
Can we agree to disagree perhaps?
If there is only one side of the story to listen to then that is what people will do. At no stage did the ABC say that they had difinative proof our Navy made them hold their hands on engine parts, as soon as one of the guys said they fell onto a hot engine part (after being sprayed with a substance) they reported that etc... I could well imagine (and I have to never having served in the armed forces) that if I had peper spray or similar and I was on a boat full of illegal immigrents if they started to come towards me I would spray the s@!t out of them, better than shoting them.
Could it have been worded better, of course it could. The ABC have acknowledge that. I don;t think they need to apologise for reporting it just the words which they used. I am sure they would report the Governments side of the story if they would tell it.
The idea that the Government is basically trying to tell the independant public broadcaster what they should report on worries me more tha a few poorly selected words.
I notice the Government don't complain about the one sided reporting that Alan Jones and the rest of the liberal media purport to be news.
-
Hey Muzza,
Can we agree to disagree perhaps?
Sure can :cheers:
-
I like the way that this govt hasn't turned every day into a media circus, re-announcing old policies & announcements, and calling media events for the purpose of calling media events..
However, I wouldn't go as far as saying that the Libs are doing a great job yet, but I think they are doing a lot better than the previous mob.
-
I like the way that this govt hasn't turned every day into a media circus, re-announcing old policies & announcements, and calling media events for the purpose of calling media events..
However, I wouldn't go as far as saying that the Libs are doing a great job yet, but I think they are doing a lot better than the previous mob.
agreed... :cheers:
-
We get scores of illegals every month. The biggest 'group' are those who entered legally on some form of temporary visa, and stay past the expiry date. I don't see the guvment spending much money tracking this mob down.
-
We get scores of illegals every month. The biggest 'group' are those who entered legally on some form of temporary visa, and stay past the expiry date. I don't see the guvment spending much money tracking this mob down.
Exactly. And, in my direct experience, many asylum seekers, if accepted and allowed to work, are taking on important but low paid and under valued work that Aussies don't want to do, usually because it is poorly paid and 'unpleasant' in some form. For example base level workers in nursing homes, etc.
Spent some time in a nursing home over the past couple of years with my partner visiting her dad before he passed away. Met a number of lovely people with strange names and dark skin, who will make great Aussies if they are eventually given the opportunity.
Meanwhile, some groups who don't need viad are lobbying to be allowed to get new start allowance! >:D
-
They come here for our way of life - or they would stay where they are. isn't that why they come here???
but some people seem blind to the fact that they want things changed to suit themselves, so they aren't *offended*..
Try having Easter, Christmas at your kids school these days. Soon there'll be no Australia day as it will offend them too.
Anyway this thread has run its course.
Just arrived back from touring overseas in Europe for a few weeks (got back on the 6th December 2013) and while there was pleasantly surprised to see CHRISTMAS being celibrated by, well everyone. Including Israel. Yes they were all celibrating CHRISTMAS. The local council has changed their MERRY CHRISTMAS decorations to SEASONS GREETINGS. I am deeply offended by the lack of atempting to assimilate into the AUSTRALIAN community, by a minority of refugees.
Nothing helps their case more than burning their government owned house, or seting fire to a processing facility. This should be reason to return them to their own country where this is more acceptable.
Ken.
-
Australia is a vast, diverse and welcoming country. Our past is heroic and tragic however we are in 2014 and this is how it is.
We:
* recognise that indigenous Australians were the first humans here
* Christianity is the basis of our laws, customs and with some derivation, way of life (Note: I am an atheist/agnostic)
* English is our national language
* The current flag is our national flag (Note: I would prefer something else)
* We are free to do and pursue basically anything we like as long as it is confined within our current laws and expectations of our current society
We dont:
* Force people to wear certain clothes once their body changes
* accept that English is our second language
* expect that new arrivals bring customs, beliefs or attitudes that impinge upon, or force change to, on what I have outlined above
We are Australia. We get along with everyone. Just don't bring your sh1t or bad attitude to my country.
-
Australia is a vast, diverse and welcoming country. Our past is heroic and tragic however we are in 2014 and this is how it is.
We:
* recognise that indigenous Australians were the first humans here
* Christianity is the basis of our laws, customs and with some derivation, way of life (Note: I am an atheist/agnostic)
* English is our national language
* The current flag is our national flag (Note: I would prefer something else)
* We are free to do and pursue basically anything we like as long as it is confined within our current laws and expectations of our current society
We dont:
* Force people to wear certain clothes once their body changes
* accept that English is our second language
* expect that new arrivals bring customs, beliefs or attitudes that impinge upon, or force change to, on what I have outlined above
We are Australia. We get along with everyone. Just don't bring your sh1t or bad attitude to my country.
BINGO!!! :cup:
-
I have only read the first page, was gladdened to read some sensible posts.
There is a reason that asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat cost us so much. Hysteria! If everyone calmed TF down they could be accepted and processed without shipping or flying them thousands of kilometres to expensive facilities erected in the highest cost locations.
I don't for a minute advocate that we simply "open the door", but the globally reality is that there are millions of refugees or people under persecution and those that have the capacity to attempt to escape will. And they need to go somewhere. I'm pretty sure others have highlighted the fact that asylum seekers coming by boat are a minority of refugees or illegal immigrants* who come to Australia. Countries like Italy face a far greater number of arrivals than Australia, by virtue of being closer to North Africa where there are some horrific wars going on.
Stop being afraid; these poor b4stards won't take our jobs and rape our women. There might be some bad apples in there, as there are in any group of people, and so our laws will take care of them.
People keep bringing up the fact that asylum seekers pay, so they have money so how bad could it have been for them. If my kids, my family were living in fear I'd do whatever I could to change that too. Those millions of poor people living under a sheet of plastic in a refugee camp for the rest of their lives didn't have the resources to do more than they did. In truth it would probably be harder to integrate those folks into a society like ours just because they have absolutely nothing.
I am an avid listener to the ABC, and was very surprised when I first heard the reports of abuse by Navy on asylum seekers. I felt then that the report had asserted as fact something that was clearly only an allegation, and was almost certainly not true. They made a mistake. Last week the boss of the ABC admitted this and apologised. I also believe the Govt has taken this as a convenient opportunity to attack the ABC and asylum seekers. There is almost certainly Navy video that clears the sailors, but it seems the Govt won't release anything because that would end the debate. The Indon Govt has never been a bastion of morality and this continues. It is the 19th largest country in the world by landmass but the 4th biggest by population. They've got their own issues.
I implore those who feel boat arrivals are a huge problem to seek some independent facts, not those spouts by Alan Jones or Ray Hadley or even our current Govt (whose primary goal was election, not stopping the boats). We don't have to accept them (all) but we don't need to hate them either.
Also, apart from some racist crap on Facebook have you ever heard of any credible evidence that anyone wants to:
Stop Australians celebrating Xmas or Easter?
Rename Australia Day?
fundamentally alter our national being?
It is easy to create a meme that looks like it has facts etc, but most of it is simply untrue. Worse, most of it is copied and altered from some hillbilly US crackpot post and then made to look Australian.
-
We get scores of illegals every month. The biggest 'group' are those who entered legally on some form of temporary visa, and stay past the expiry date. I don't see the guvment spending much money tracking this mob down.
They do in fact. The compliance area in each of the DIBP regions undertakes regular raids on employers. They locate and remove somewhere in excess of 8000 per year.
-
Exactly. And, in my direct experience, many asylum seekers, if accepted and allowed to work, are taking on important but low paid and under valued work that Aussies don't want to do, usually because it is poorly paid and 'unpleasant' in some form. For example base level workers in nursing homes, etc.
Spent some time in a nursing home over the past couple of years with my partner visiting her dad before he passed away. Met a number of lovely people with strange names and dark skin, who will make great Aussies if they are eventually given the opportunity.
Meanwhile, some groups who don't need viad are lobbying to be allowed to get new start allowance! >:D
My experience as well with mil is cared for by great carers from Africa in a nursing home. Very skilled and caring.
-
We get scores of illegals every month. The biggest 'group' are those who entered legally on some form of temporary visa, and stay past the expiry date. I don't see the guvment spending much money tracking this mob down.
A good mate of mine heads up a taskforce in Sydney that tries to catch illegal immigrants that have overstayed their visa. He works with immigration, Federal Police NSW Police and APS. He has a huge operating budget to catch these guys. What he does and how much the government spends on catching these guys is not reported in the media because its boring. It is sometimes a huge operation to just catch one person.
His job is difficult because he can't investigate an illegal immigrant until their visa has expired, by that time they can be anywhere. Just because it is not on the news every day like the boat people, does not mean the government is not spending big $$$ trying to catch illegal immigrants that have arrived by plane and overstayed their visa.
-
I am an avid listener to the ABC, and was very surprised when I first heard the reports of abuse by Navy on asylum seekers. I felt then that the report had asserted as fact something that was clearly only an allegation, and was almost certainly not true. They made a mistake. Last week the boss of the ABC admitted this and apologised. I also believe the Govt has taken this as a convenient opportunity to attack the ABC and asylum seekers. There is almost certainly Navy video that clears the sailors, but it seems the Govt won't release anything because that would end the debate. The Indon Govt has never been a bastion of morality and this continues. It is the 19th largest country in the world by landmass but the 4th biggest by population. They've got their own issues.
The boss of the ABC has not apologised and refuses to.
The statement says the ABC makes no apologies for covering the story, but the two senior ABC managers say they regret if the ABC's reporting led anyone to mistakenly assume that the ABC supported the asylum seekers' claims.
-
The boss of the ABC has not apologised and refuses to.
The statement says the ABC makes no apologies for covering the story, but the two senior ABC managers say they regret if the ABC's reporting led anyone to mistakenly assume that the ABC supported the asylum seekers' claims.
Having heard the initial story IMO no disinterested person would've read it in the way that Abbott, etc have interpreted it, which, of course, was convenient for his on-going campaign of denigrating the ABC.
If a statement of regret, not apology, was always good enough for Howard and the Libs in relation to government actions over the 'stolen generation', then it should also be good enough here.
-
I have only read the first page, was gladdened to read some sensible posts.
There is a reason that asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat cost us so much. Hysteria! If everyone calmed TF down they could be accepted and processed without shipping or flying them thousands of kilometres to expensive facilities erected in the highest cost locations.
I don't for a minute advocate that we simply "open the door", but the globally reality is that there are millions of refugees or people under persecution and those that have the capacity to attempt to escape will. And they need to go somewhere. I'm pretty sure others have highlighted the fact that asylum seekers coming by boat are a minority of refugees or illegal immigrants* who come to Australia. Countries like Italy face a far greater number of arrivals than Australia, by virtue of being closer to North Africa where there are some horrific wars going on.
Stop being afraid; these poor b4stards won't take our jobs and rape our women. There might be some bad apples in there, as there are in any group of people, and so our laws will take care of them.
People keep bringing up the fact that asylum seekers pay, so they have money so how bad could it have been for them. If my kids, my family were living in fear I'd do whatever I could to change that too. Those millions of poor people living under a sheet of plastic in a refugee camp for the rest of their lives didn't have the resources to do more than they did. In truth it would probably be harder to integrate those folks into a society like ours just because they have absolutely nothing.
I am an avid listener to the ABC, and was very surprised when I first heard the reports of abuse by Navy on asylum seekers. I felt then that the report had asserted as fact something that was clearly only an allegation, and was almost certainly not true. They made a mistake. Last week the boss of the ABC admitted this and apologised. I also believe the Govt has taken this as a convenient opportunity to attack the ABC and asylum seekers. There is almost certainly Navy video that clears the sailors, but it seems the Govt won't release anything because that would end the debate. The Indon Govt has never been a bastion of morality and this continues. It is the 19th largest country in the world by landmass but the 4th biggest by population. They've got their own issues.
I implore those who feel boat arrivals are a huge problem to seek some independent facts, not those spouts by Alan Jones or Ray Hadley or even our current Govt (whose primary goal was election, not stopping the boats). We don't have to accept them (all) but we don't need to hate them either.
Also, apart from some racist crap on Facebook have you ever heard of any credible evidence that anyone wants to:
Stop Australians celebrating Xmas or Easter?
Rename Australia Day?
fundamentally alter our national being?
It is easy to create a meme that looks like it has facts etc, but most of it is simply untrue. Worse, most of it is copied and altered from some hillbilly US crackpot post and then made to look Australian.
Julian, congratulations on perhaps the most comprehensive and accurate assessment of the range of issues involved that I have read ANYWHERE in the 15 years that this issue has been running.
-
Julian, congratulations on perhaps the most comprehensive and accurate assessment of the range of issues involved that I have read ANYWHERE in the 15 years that this issue has been running.
This forum needs a "like" button. Would save a lot of crap being posted.
-
Having heard the initial story IMO no disinterested person would've read it in the way that Abbott, etc have interpreted it, which, of course, was convenient for his on-going campaign of denigrating the ABC.
If a statement of regret, not apology, was always good enough for Howard and the Libs in relation to government actions over the 'stolen generation', then it should also be good enough here.
???
How did this turn in to a political rant? I don't care how you think Abbot interpreted it, its not even relevant. if the ABC makes a statement of regret (another name for I am not apologising) and the Howard government was happy with that so what, that's got nothing to do with this issue either.
It's the Navy that is copping a bad wrap from the over the top reporting from ABC. This has nothing to do with previous PM's, Liberal vs Labor or religion.
-
just to add a laugh
Tv Show Sea Patrol is real (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moJ7j86MyWw#ws)
Cheers
Evo
-
just to add a laugh
Tv Show Sea Patrol is real (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moJ7j86MyWw#ws)
Cheers
Evo
:cup:
What an idiot.
Sometimes it is best to remain silent and appear stupid then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
-
This is not a political comment.
this is a personal comment.
She could have borrowed someones phone to GOOGLE it, I mean google still works right?
FFS, don't we pay her over $110k a year as a senator?
that is ridiculous when she can't even use google....
Cheers
Evo
-
???
How did this turn in to a political rant? I don't care how you think Abbot interpreted it, its not even relevant. if the ABC makes a statement of regret (another name for I am not apologising) and the Howard government was happy with that so what, that's got nothing to do with this issue either.
It's the Navy that is copping a bad wrap from the over the top reporting from ABC. This has nothing to do with previous PM's, Liberal vs Labor or religion.
Everything to do with the issue Muzza01, the Minister who is complaining that regret is not good enough was part of the government that used exactly the same term in relation to stolen generations. Im was pointing out the inconsistency and hypocrisy.
Happy to see anyone post a copy of the transcript of the ABC reporting and identify the exact wording which you claim is OTT.
-
Australia is a vast, diverse and welcoming country. Our past is heroic and tragic however we are in 2014 and this is how it is.
We:
* recognise that indigenous Australians were the first humans here
* Christianity is the basis of our laws, customs and with some derivation, way of life (Note: I am an atheist/agnostic)
* English is our national language
* The current flag is our national flag (Note: I would prefer something else)
* We are free to do and pursue basically anything we like as long as it is confined within our current laws and expectations of our current society
We dont:
* Force people to wear certain clothes once their body changes
* accept that English is our second language
* expect that new arrivals bring customs, beliefs or attitudes that impinge upon, or force change to, on what I have outlined above
We are Australia. We get along with everyone. Just don't bring your sh1t or bad attitude to my country.
I ask again, where is the evidence that asylum seekers are bringing "sh1t or bad attitude" to This country.
Most of them are victims of religious persecution, not the perpetrators of it.
-
Having heard the initial story IMO no disinterested person would've read it in the way that Abbott, etc have interpreted it, which, of course, was convenient for his on-going campaign of denigrating the ABC.
If a statement of regret, not apology, was always good enough for Howard and the Libs in relation to government actions over the 'stolen generation', then it should also be good enough here.
Let's just keep this statement correct and unbiased the Howard government. Some members of the liberal party at the time participated in the "sorry " walks. Costello for one so your statement of "Libs" is off the mark
-
We get scores of illegals every month. The biggest 'group' are those who entered legally on some form of temporary visa, and stay past the expiry date. I don't see the guvment spending much money tracking this mob down.
There is a little difference to consider. Come by plane, we have a record of there entry and you have been checked by customs making sure you haven't bought anything with you deemed illegal.
Maybe the do gooders should all sign up to the navy so can do something positive handling the situation firsthand themselves, I'm sure if they were faced with the same difficulties as those already doing a good job they'd handle it all so differently and then we wouldn't have this apparent problem. lol
-
Everything to do with the issue Muzza01, the Minister who is complaining that regret is not good enough was part of the government that used exactly the same term in relation to stolen generations. Im was pointing out the inconsistency and hypocrisy.
Happy to see anyone post a copy of the transcript of the ABC reporting and identify the exact wording which you claim is OTT.
FFS,
Why are you bringing politics into this thread B&B? The thread is titled:
Re: Asylum Seekers claim to have been beaten by Navy - what do you think?
This thread is not asking about Abbots opinion, Shortens opinion or the Greens opinion. I was asking for forum members opinions. I brought up on this thread that the ABC should apologise to the Navy and all of my family and friends feel the same way.
I understand you don't like Abbot or the Liberal party but this thread was not for political rants. Lets keep political beliefs out of it.
If if generates in to a political 5hitfight, I will ask the Mods to lock it.
-
I'm very glad that I'm no longer in the Navy - they're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't...
-
I ask again, where is the evidence that asylum seekers are bringing "sh1t or bad attitude" to This country.
Most of them are victims of religious persecution, not the perpetrators of it.
There have been numerous news articles of alleged Asylum Seekers bringing in the "sh1t or bad attitude" and going through our Judical system for the same.
-
I ask again, where is the evidence that asylum seekers are bringing "sh1t or bad attitude" to This country.
Most of them are victims of religious persecution, not the perpetrators of it.
You are joking, seriously, aren't you?
Some just love to bury their heads in the sand and pretend there is no problem.
-
Let's just keep this statement correct and unbiased the Howard government. Some members of the liberal party at the time participated in the "sorry " walks. Costello for one so your statement of "Libs" is off the mark
Liberal Gov't didn't say sorry, so not off the mark at all. They were reconciliation walks, I know, participated in the Melb one myself.
-
You are joking, seriously, aren't you?
Some just love to bury their heads in the sand and pretend there is no problem.
I am aware of various jihadists etc going before the courts, but heard nothing about them being refugees.
Similarly, the Syrian immigrants going back to fight in Syria, most of them here for decades, again not refugees.
Lots of 'problems' many would say that the problem is "multi-culturalism", but again that isn't anything to do with refugees.
IMO lumping this on 'refugees' is exactly the type of fear monger ins hype that Big Jules was addressing.
Seriously, you are obviously convinced that you are right, so surely it isn't unreasonable to request at least an anecdotal exale of what has led you to that conclusion.
-
B&B, I am not sure what it is you are asking for. Just what "sh1t or bad attitude" you are referring to, or just which asylum seekers you are specifically referring to.
There have been numerous refuges charged with various offences, minor to major, but there is no easy way of gathering that data as when someone is charged the only race data recorded is if they are ATSI or Non ATSI.
-
I am aware of various jihadists etc going before the courts, but heard nothing about them being refugees.
Similarly, the Syrian immigrants going back to fight in Syria, most of them here for decades, again not refugees.
Lots of 'problems' many would say that the problem is "multi-culturalism", but again that isn't anything to do with refugees.
IMO lumping this on 'refugees' is exactly the type of fear monger ins hype that Big Jules was addressing.
Seriously, you are obviously convinced that you are right, so surely it isn't unreasonable to request at least an anecdotal exale of what has led you to that conclusion.
Didn't you see, hear or believe in that they done and how they treated the island detention centre when rioting ?
I believe IMO the island had better conditions even though not prefect (after all it is a processing centre for illegal arrivals and not a hotel) than the boats they choose to risk there lifes coming here in. If thats how there going to behave when they don't get what they want, IMO I'm not sure we need them here, especially illegally.
We ought to be showing faith and supporting our navy, if you don't trust them now what would we do if war or similar broke out ?
There doing a good job under orders for us, and for anyone to say otherwise IMO is bloody wrong.
-
There has been some atrocious behaviour in the detention centres, that is undisputed. Would those people have created problems if they were not incarcerated for an indeterminate amount of time in relative difficult conditions? This is not a defence of their behaviour, but as I wrote earlier I believe our approach to the detention of these people has contributed to the cost, complexity and difficulty of the whole thing.
Getting back to the original question, I doubt that the Navy mistreated those refugees. I think the ABC acted irresponsibly in the way in which it reported the allegations.
A few people made an allegation against our Navy, does that taint all of them?
-
I'm sorry guys but some don't seem get it.
How many countries do these 'Asylum Seekers' need to cross to get to Australia.?
I'm all for people wanting to escape injustice, but to denigrate our Service People in order to get to Australia, I think not.
Indonesia has a problem I agree, but they now claim that they are increasing their Navy presence. Good- maybe they can stop more boats.
However, Australia can play it's part.
Give Christmas Island to Indonesia.
Then it becomes too far to travel.
Cheers Guys.
-
However, Australia can play it's part.
Give Christmas Island to Indonesia.
Then it becomes too far to travel.
Cheers Guys.
Then they go to Cocos Island (west of Xmas Island) or Ashmore Reef, just south of West Timor and the more 'traditional' place to land in 'Australia'. Anyway you look at it, still a complex issue.
-
Then they go to Cocos Island (west of Xmas Island) or Ashmore Reef, just south of West Timor and the more 'traditional' place to land in 'Australia'. Anyway you look at it, still a complex issue.
Cocus Island is a LOOOOOONG way to the West.
Ashmore Reef is just a Light Station.
Believe me , I've been there when I worked for the the old Commonwealth Dept of Shipping and Transport, Lighthouse service on the old, 'M.V. Cape Don', lighthouse vessel.
Cheers.
-
Cocus Island is a LOOOOOONG way to the West.
Ashmore Reef is just a Light Station.
Believe me , I've been there when I worked for the the old Commonwealth Dept of Shipping and Transport, Lighthouse service on the old 'Cape Don', lighthouse vessel.
Cheers.
Agree Cocos is a far way, but still a lot closer than the mainland by some 1000s of kms.
While Ashmore Reef is 'only a light station' as you put it, it is still territorial Australia and only 180 km from Indonesia. so same rules apply as if landing at Xmas Island, only compound the issue as there is a 'transportation to .....' perspective to undertake.
-
Why would we give any territory to Indonesia?
ABC reported the claims, didn't say they agreed with them. This became instant beat-up on bash the ABC, which is totally unsurprising, given where the complaints came from.
I am damn sure that the naval personnel involved in the case of the life boat didn't sign up to put women and kids onto life boats in international waters. What p1sses me off is that politicians have created the 'necessity' to do this, in order to appease the political fear that they generated about it.
As I have said before, we should not give aid to any country which isn't a signatory to the UN agreement on refugees. More signatories means less need for them to try and get here, and greater chance to create a regional solution.
-
I too am an avid ABC listener. I travel approx. 3.5hrs a day in the car and always have ABC on.
I can honestly say that when I first heard the report I in no way assumed that the ABC were saying they agreed with the allegations, just that video appeared to back up the allegations.
As an adult with the ability for free thought I immediately questioned the validity of the claim base don the fact that the video was not shot on the boat, showed no Navy personnel and really was jsut a video of someone getting a burn treated. I could show you a video like that after several camping trips we have had around NSW.
Like BigJules I doubt very much that the Navy has behaved unprofessionally, however I do question the Governments reluctance to say or show anyting relating to the turn back the boats policy, in particular (now this is from memory so may not be 100% correct) their changing a law/rule or whatever to say that Navy Personnel cannot be held personally accountable for their actions.
Happy to be constructively corrected on my last point.
Bunyip
-
hhhm having done time in the RAN in engineering branch, i never once saw an unlagged pipe that someone could wrap their hands around & get burnt, especially not to the degree as shown in the pic by the claimant.
To my knowledge ALL hot pipes/lines on ships are lagged...
I would suggest the guy wrapped his hands around a pipe on the clapped out boat he was on prior to being picked up by the navy................
desperate act by desperate individual, now he's paying for it with the pain & scars
-
I hear the padlock coming..........
So im in for my 2 cents.
The UNHCR has rules and definitions are what a refugee is and a countrys esponsibilites to them.
We are NOT the closest SAFE country to anywhere that ends with -stan or africa! Accordingly we are not obliged to accept anyone who Bypasses a number of other countries to lob here where we have nice weather and a welfare system that hands out $$$$$ like a broken ATM.
If you can afford to pay the people smugglers, you can afford a plane ticket. Que up.go to the embassy in Jakarta. Get a Visa. Happy Days! Welcome to Australia!
-
I hear the padlock coming..........
So im in for my 2 cents.
The UNHCR has rules and definitions are what a refugee is and a countrys esponsibilites to them.
We are NOT the closest SAFE country to anywhere that ends with -stan or africa! Accordingly we are not obliged to accept anyone who Bypasses a number of other countries to lob here where we have nice weather and a welfare system that hands out $$$$$ like a broken ATM.
X2............ :cup:
If you can afford to pay the people smugglers, you can afford a plane ticket. Que up.go to the embassy in Jakarta. Get a Visa. Happy Days! Welcome to Australia!
-
I have only read the first page, was gladdened to read some sensible posts.
There is a reason that asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat cost us so much. Hysteria! If everyone calmed TF down they could be accepted and processed without shipping or flying them thousands of kilometres to expensive facilities erected in the highest cost locations.
I don't for a minute advocate that we simply "open the door", but the globally reality is that there are millions of refugees or people under persecution and those that have the capacity to attempt to escape will. And they need to go somewhere. I'm pretty sure others have highlighted the fact that asylum seekers coming by boat are a minority of refugees or illegal immigrants* who come to Australia. Countries like Italy face a far greater number of arrivals than Australia, by virtue of being closer to North Africa where there are some horrific wars going on.
Stop being afraid; these poor b4stards won't take our jobs and rape our women. There might be some bad apples in there, as there are in any group of people, and so our laws will take care of them.
People keep bringing up the fact that asylum seekers pay, so they have money so how bad could it have been for them. If my kids, my family were living in fear I'd do whatever I could to change that too. Those millions of poor people living under a sheet of plastic in a refugee camp for the rest of their lives didn't have the resources to do more than they did. In truth it would probably be harder to integrate those folks into a society like ours just because they have absolutely nothing.
I am an avid listener to the ABC, and was very surprised when I first heard the reports of abuse by Navy on asylum seekers. I felt then that the report had asserted as fact something that was clearly only an allegation, and was almost certainly not true. They made a mistake. Last week the boss of the ABC admitted this and apologised. I also believe the Govt has taken this as a convenient opportunity to attack the ABC and asylum seekers. There is almost certainly Navy video that clears the sailors, but it seems the Govt won't release anything because that would end the debate. The Indon Govt has never been a bastion of morality and this continues. It is the 19th largest country in the world by landmass but the 4th biggest by population. They've got their own issues.
I implore those who feel boat arrivals are a huge problem to seek some independent facts, not those spouts by Alan Jones or Ray Hadley or even our current Govt (whose primary goal was election, not stopping the boats). We don't have to accept them (all) but we don't need to hate them either.
Also, apart from some racist crap on Facebook have you ever heard of any credible evidence that anyone wants to:
Stop Australians celebrating Xmas or Easter?
Rename Australia Day?
fundamentally alter our national being?
It is easy to create a meme that looks like it has facts etc, but most of it is simply untrue. Worse, most of it is copied and altered from some hillbilly US crackpot post and then made to look Australian.
L E G E N D !
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Oh, and the other thing. If you cant trace your lineage unbroken to 1770 Aboriginal Australia I hope you can see the hypocrisy if you set up a soap box declaring people as 'illegal immigrants',
Think about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Oh, and the other thing. If you cant trace your lineage unbroken to 1770 Aboriginal Australia I hope you can see the hypocrisy if you set up a soap box declaring people as 'illegal immigrants',
Think about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I was born here, so I'm every bit if not more Australian than the first to arrive here starting that lineage regardless of there colour or how they got here.
Think about that.
-
damnnnnnnn and I can only go back as far as 1791............
-
I was born here, so I'm every bit if not more Australian than the first to arrive here starting that lineage regardless of there colour or how they got here.
Think about that.
No you don't. A race of people had custody of this land for between 35 and 70'000 years. Others came here later uninvited by these custodians, including yours and my descendants. Unless of course yours were invited here by original owners.
EDIT: Sorry I think I misunderstood your post. Are you suggesting that because you were 'born here' you are more 'Australian' than indigenous Australians?
Can you explain this in detail?
-
Bring on the torpedos.
-
I am aware of various jihadists etc going before the courts, but heard nothing about them being refugees.
Similarly, the Syrian immigrants going back to fight in Syria, most of them here for decades, again not refugees.
Lots of 'problems' many would say that the problem is "multi-culturalism", but again that isn't anything to do with refugees.
IMO lumping this on 'refugees' is exactly the type of fear monger ins hype that Big Jules was addressing.
Seriously, you are obviously convinced that you are right, so surely it isn't unreasonable to request at least an anecdotal exale of what has led you to that conclusion.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/13/06/20/asylum-seeker-pleads-guilty-to-pool-gropes (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/13/06/20/asylum-seeker-pleads-guilty-to-pool-gropes)
-
(http://img.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/1183144943171.jpg)
(http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/5323/ibtl.jpg)
-
No you don't. A race of people had custody of this land for between 35 and 70'000 years. Others came here later uninvited by these custodians, including yours and my descendants. Unless of course yours were invited here by original owners.
Pfft, self appointed.
1770 or 35,0000 or 70,0000 if your born here your just as aussie (sadly just not equal) as the next bloke, and the sooner people realize and accept it the better we'll all be.
-
(http://img.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/1183144943171.jpg)
(http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/5323/ibtl.jpg)
It shouldnt get locked provided the debate is civil.
I had left this thread alone until Big Jules added some rational input. I hope this is left open. Its healthy to debate controversial stuff.
cheers
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Oh, and the other thing. If you cant trace your lineage unbroken to 1770 Aboriginal Australia I hope you can see the hypocrisy if you set up a soap box declaring people as 'illegal immigrants',
Think about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sorry Dazzler, but what a load of crap.
You know quite well that this is a totally different situation. I don't hear any foul cries against the Aboriginal people for wiping out the Papuan's who were here before them. Every country has been invaded, war style at some point in time.
I was born here, making me indigenous to this land and I have just as much right to the land as anybody else. Not to take anything away from the terrible atrocities that happened to Aboriginal's in the past, but don't go telling people they were the original illegal immigrants because most of our forefathers were dragged here in chains as convicts and had to fight to survive.
-
Pfft, self appointed.
1770 or 35,0000 or 70,0000 if your born here your just as aussie (sadly just not equal) as the next bloke, and the sooner people realize and accept it the better we'll all be.
I agree for the most part. To be Australian means that you are patriotic, follow its history, accept its ways and love your country. It also means, stop putting your hand out, get off your arse, get a job and contribute something positive to this country.
Sadly, some people continue to milk the welfare system generation after generation. They have never worked and don't have any intention of ever working. To me, that is unAustralian. You don't have to be born here to be an Aussie.
-
This thread is still open and for the most part the discussions are healthy and respectful. I say for the most part because some are starting to forget again to keep personal attacks out of it.
I am happy to report that a topic that we thought was going to be closed so quickly has actually stayed open. This proves that the maturity of the discussion is still strong.
I also want to see this kept open, but you need to play by the rules on these topics that can so quickly go off line.
-
Sorry Dazzler, but what a load of crap.
You know quite well that this is a totally different situation. I don't hear any foul cries against the Aboriginal people for wiping out the Papuan's who were here before them. Every country has been invaded, war style at some point in time.
I was born here, making me indigenous to this land and I have just as much right to the land as anybody else. Not to take anything away from the terrible atrocities that happened to Aboriginal's in the past, but don't go telling people they were the original illegal immigrants because most of our forefathers were dragged here in chains as convicts and had to fight to survive.
Your off my point. I was suggesting it was hypocritical to call people illegal when we are all here illegally anyway - other than those who can trace their ancestry, or bloodline, back to 1770. I too have indigenous in my past from New Norfolk though it is so diluted, and I have no connection with their customs, that I dont identify as one.
Can you put a link to the Aboriginals killing Papuans? The Australian Aboriginals are the oldest living culture on earth and pre date Papuans. They may have displaced Mungo who are dated to 25000 yrs ago and are a different species but I am unaware of any other Papuan culture. Could be wrong of course and seeing as you identify as aboriginal I would expect you would know. Where was the Papuan Culture based in Australia and where did these battles take place?.
Your not confusing Papuan with Torres Islanders are you?
From a legal point Mabo established that aboriginal people had possession of the land prior to 1770. Terra Nullius was thrown out. Therefore, any person here from that point on, without being invited, has come here as a trespasser.
And here is the thing. Forgetting the aboriginal part of yours, and my, heritage why did our ancestors come here? Mine came as where they were living was awful and some to get rich. No different probably to todays immigrants.
Would love the Papuan v Aboriginal link - that would be quite interesting - you learn something everyday! :cheers:
-
I was suggesting it was hypocritical to call people illegal when we are all here illegally anyway
Under that theory every single living person on the face of the earth is here illegally, cause nobody has a copy of the original ownership papers for the planet from 40,000,000,000,000 years ago - but then again we all stem from that single being. So nobody anywhere is illegal.
And if we were all illegally here against the Australian laws, we would be in Shit, but we aren't, so Fail.
-
Under that theory every single living person on the face of the earth is here illegally, cause nobody has a copy of the original ownership papers for the planet from 40,000,000,000,000 years ago - but then again we all stem from that single being. So nobody anywhere is illegal.
And if we were all illegally here against the Australian laws, we would be in ****, but we aren't, so Fail.
No not fail.
Historians believe the evidence shows that the Australian Aboriginals were the first people to have ownership of Australia. The only other people may have been Mungo however there is no evidence they were anything but nomadic.
Mabo tied the AA to Australia and this was based on the fact that they had marked out land and identified boundaries. So they was first. They owned it. Your other examples may be valid but not on this one.
Not Fail. Pass. :cheers:
-
From Gene Wilder;
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHqL7dNujNc#)
-
Some reading for you Dazzler, but there are also other's who refute Norman Tindale and Joseph Birdsell's (http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/history-wars/2002/06/the-extinction-of-the-australian-pygmies/) studies.
The 'debate' continues, but one thing's for sure...MABO should never have happened unless/until Tindale and Birdsell's finding were proven to be completely wrong!
-
Your off my point. I was suggesting it was hypocritical to call people illegal when we are all here illegally anyway - other than those who can trace their ancestry, or bloodline, back to 1770. I too have indigenous in my past from New Norfolk though it is so diluted, and I have no connection with their customs, that I dont identify as one.
Can you put a link to the Aboriginals killing Papuans? The Australian Aboriginals are the oldest living culture on earth and pre date Papuans. They may have displaced Mungo who are dated to 25000 yrs ago and are a different species but I am unaware of any other Papuan culture. Could be wrong of course and seeing as you identify as aboriginal I would expect you would know. Where was the Papuan Culture based in Australia and where did these battles take place?.
Your not confusing Papuan with Torres Islanders are you?
From a legal point Mabo established that aboriginal people had possession of the land prior to 1770. Terra Nullius was thrown out. Therefore, any person here from that point on, without being invited, has come here as a trespasser.
And here is the thing. Forgetting the aboriginal part of yours, and my, heritage why did our ancestors come here? Mine came as where they were living was awful and some to get rich. No different probably to todays immigrants.
Would love the Papuan v Aboriginal link - that would be quite interesting - you learn something everyday! :cheers:
Dazzler, you missed my point too mate. I never intended to insult or belittle aboriginal people, as your condescending willy wonka YouTube clip portrays. And as for the links you ask for as evidence, you're a big boy, I'm sure you can use google (I've actually read books on the matter, not the net) and just because you've never heard of something (yes, even with your infinite wisdom) doesn't mean it didn't happen. What I'm saying is that all countries have been invaded at some time in history and all we achieve by continually pushing the "we were here first " agenda is to drive a greater racial wedge between us all. It was a long time ago, and not perpetrated by any of us and I think most of Australia feels sorry for what happened in the past and are ready to move forward together. Our ancestors were not illegals in the context of how they came and settled here. As for me and many others, I only have to trace my bloodline back to the day I was very luckily born here in my Australia
-
Dazzler, you missed my point too mate. I never intended to insult or belittle aboriginal people, as your condescending willy wonka YouTube clip portrays. And as for the links you ask for as evidence, you're a big boy, I'm sure you can use google (I've actually read books on the matter, not the net) and just because you've never heard of something (yes, even with your infinite wisdom) doesn't mean it didn't happen. What I'm saying is that all countries have been invaded at some time in history and all we achieve by continually pushing the "we were here first " agenda is to drive a greater racial wedge between us all. It was a long time ago, and not perpetrated by any of us
We have a winner.
-
I know we are getting off topic, but after reading the above posts I just realised one important point. At the time that the English took over this country was that illegal back then? If it was not then why do people call it an invasion? If it was illegal then why do we have to apologise and not the current English government? Maybe they should be held financially responsible. I don’t wish to spark another debate, just interesting to know. ;) Kevin
-
Finally I meet my match. Or at least my ability to have any sort of dialogue that makes sense.
Lost - Here is ownership - Rejection of terra nullius: The decision recognised that the indigenous population had a pre-existing system of law, which, along with all rights subsisting thereunder, would remain in force under the new sovereign except where specifically modified or extinguished by legislative or executive action. The Court purported to achieve all this without altering the traditional assumption that the Australian land mass was "settled". Instead, the rules for a "settled" colony were said to be assimilated to the rules for a "conquered" colony.
.
Grafy - The link is not belittling Aboriginal People but as a parody of racism and has been seen as such around the world since blazing saddles. Humour me here. Please link to Aboriginal People at war with Papuans who were here first or withdraw it. As for Mabo. I actually think they interpreted the evidence incorrectly in that Mabo was aligned with Islander culture not Aboriginal Cutlure as was the majority of Aboriginal Australia.
I never turned this into a debate about who was here first. My argument is simple - dont refer to people who are coming, or trying to come, here as illegals unless your immediate descendants were invited here by people who actually owned the land they settled on.
But I suppose really by branding them as illegal it allows most to avoid actually thinking about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
From Gene Wilder;
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHqL7dNujNc#)
In another thread this video was misinterpreted as being racist. It is NOT a racist video it is about racism and just about sums up the whole debate.
The white people move into new settlements on Indian land.
A black sherriff comes to town.
The whites treat him poorly based on his colour.
The black man does not understand why.
The thinking white guy then asked him what he expected would happen "Be welcomed", "Marry my daughter" and finally, identifies racists as 'Morons'.
Whew. Sorry for the spoiler if you hadnt seen it yet.
cheers
Daz
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
In another thread this video was misinterpreted as being racist. It is NOT a racist video it is about racism and just about sums up the whole debate.
The white people move into new settlements on Indian land.
A black sherriff comes to town.
The whites treat him poorly based on his colour.
The black man does not understand why.
The thinking white guy then asked him what he expected would happen "Be welcomed", "Marry my daughter" and finally, identifies racists as 'Morons'.
Whew. Sorry for the spoiler if you hadnt seen it yet.
cheers
Daz
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Dazzler,
I wasn't implying that you were being racist by posting up the YouTube clip and I understand exactly the message that is portrayed in the video. I just don't like the way you aimed it at me to say that I am racist. That seems to be the easiest way for anyone to win/end a debate these days, just tell the other person they're racist. I'm far from that mate.
Not trying to sound like a hero or saviour of the masses, but my wife and I are involved in helping and providing care for Karen families that have escaped real persecution in their home countries (the father of the latest family has had his knees and legs smashed in an attack just before coming to Australia). The big difference is, they came here following the correct legal channels.
Anyway Dazzler, no hard feelings mate, you win.
-
Lost - Here is ownership - Rejection of terra nullius: The decision recognised that the indigenous population had a pre-existing system of law, which, along with all rights subsisting thereunder, would remain in force under the new sovereign except where specifically modified or extinguished by legislative or executive action. The Court purported to achieve all this without altering the traditional assumption that the Australian land mass was "settled". Instead, the rules for a "settled" colony were said to be assimilated to the rules for a "conquered" colony.
I never turned this into a debate about who was here first. My argument is simple - dont refer to people who are coming, or trying to come, here as illegals unless your immediate descendants were invited here by people who actually owned the land they settled on.
But I suppose really by branding them as illegal it allows most to avoid actually thinking about it.
Dazzler times have changed, laws have changed and what was once acceptable is now not.
You are trying to bring ancient history and ancient laws in to the 21th Century. That doesn’t make sense. Back then ownership of a country was not decided by a law Court it was decided by occupation. The English, French, Spanish and Dutch invaded countries, took what ever they wanted, slaughtered anyone who stood in their way, turned survivors in to slaves and in some cases slaughtered entire civilisations. Back in those times this was acceptable practice and there were no laws to protect original occupants. It was survival of the strongest.
In regards to us invading Australia, I refuse to apologise for something that was done by the English over 200 years ago. It could have been much worse if Australia had been settled by the ancient Romans or the Spanish. The would have slaughtered an entire race and there would be no one to apologise to.
In this day and age we try and make things fair, we have established new laws. We recognise native titles and we try to protect countries from being invaded by others.
For boat people to lob up on our shores uninvited is illegal. The law has established the correct means of entering in to our country.
What my ancestors did over 200 years ago was not illegal. That was the way things were done. If the Yanks had not dropped a couple of H bombs in Japan, we would be all speaking Japanese right now. Any Australians would be either dead or living life as a castrated slave.
-
Dazzler times have changed, laws have changed and what was once acceptable is now not.
You are trying to bring ancient history and ancient laws in to the 21th Century. That doesn’t make sense. Back then ownership of a country was not decided by a law Court it was decided by occupation. The English, French, Spanish and Dutch invaded countries, took what ever they wanted, slaughtered anyone who stood in their way, turned survivors in to slaves and in some cases slaughtered entire civilisations. Back in those times this was acceptable practice and there were no laws to protect original occupants. It was survival of the strongest.
In regards to us invading Australia, I refuse to apologise for something that was done by the English over 200 years ago. It could have been much worse if Australia had been settled by the ancient Romans or the Spanish. The would have slaughtered an entire race and there would be no one to apologise to.
In this day and age we try and make things fair, we have established new laws. We recognise native titles and we try to protect countries from being invaded by others.
For boat people to lob up on our shores uninvited is illegal. The law has established the correct means of entering in to our country.
What my ancestors did over 200 years ago was not illegal. That was the way things were done. If the Yanks had not dropped a couple of H bombs in Japan, we would be all speaking Japanese right now. Any Australians would be either dead or living life as a castrated slave.
save your electrons...
-
save your electrons...
???
Don't get it.
-
Finally I meet my match. Or at least my ability to have any sort of dialogue that makes sense.
Lost - Here is ownership - Rejection of terra nullius: The decision recognised that the indigenous population had a pre-existing system of law, which, along with all rights subsisting thereunder, would remain in force under the new sovereign except where specifically modified or extinguished by legislative or executive action. The Court purported to achieve all this without altering the traditional assumption that the Australian land mass was "settled". Instead, the rules for a "settled" colony were said to be assimilated to the rules for a "conquered" colony.
.
Grafy - The link is not belittling Aboriginal People but as a parody of racism and has been seen as such around the world since blazing saddles. Humour me here. Please link to Aboriginal People at war with Papuans who were here first or withdraw it. As for Mabo. I actually think they interpreted the evidence incorrectly in that Mabo was aligned with Islander culture not Aboriginal Cutlure as was the majority of Aboriginal Australia.
I never turned this into a debate about who was here first. My argument is simple - dont refer to people who are coming, or trying to come, here as illegals unless your immediate descendants were invited here by people who actually owned the land they settled on.
But I suppose really by branding them as illegal it allows most to avoid actually thinking about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Here be the winner! Summed up in a single sentence.
-
Dazzler times have changed, laws have changed and what was once acceptable is now not.
You are trying to bring ancient history and ancient laws in to the 21th Century. That doesn’t make sense. Back then ownership of a country was not decided by a law Court it was decided by occupation. The English, French, Spanish and Dutch invaded countries, took what ever they wanted, slaughtered anyone who stood in their way, turned survivors in to slaves and in some cases slaughtered entire civilisations. Back in those times this was acceptable practice and there were no laws to protect original occupants. It was survival of the strongest.
In regards to us invading Australia, I refuse to apologise for something that was done by the English over 200 years ago. It could have been much worse if Australia had been settled by the ancient Romans or the Spanish. The would have slaughtered an entire race and there would be no one to apologise to.
In this day and age we try and make things fair, we have established new laws. We recognise native titles and we try to protect countries from being invaded by others.
For boat people to lob up on our shores uninvited is illegal. The law has established the correct means of entering in to our country.
What my ancestors did over 200 years ago was not illegal. That was the way things were done. If the Yanks had not dropped a couple of H bombs in Japan, we would be all speaking Japanese right now. Any Australians would be either dead or living life as a castrated slave.
Oh stop it Muzza01, now you're being sensible. And besides, nobody likes the truth.
-
This extracts are from the ABC fact checker, and are undisputed.
"While it is accurate to describe asylum seekers who enter Australia without a valid visa as "unlawful" or even "illegal entrants", it is not a criminal offence to enter Australia without a visa. Calling someone "unlawful" or an "illegal entrant" is a description of how they entered the country and determines the way authorities process them. It does not mean they have broken any law. Arriving without a visa can only result in criminal sanctions if there is some other offence involved such as falsifying a passport or forging a document.
An asylum seeker who is simply a passenger on a people smuggling vessel does not commit an offence by paying a smuggler for their passage. Section 233D of the Migration Act makes it an offence for someone to provide "material support or resources to another person or an organisation" which helps the "conduct constituting the offence of people smuggling". However, this section does not apply if the "conduct constituting the offence of people smuggling" relates to the person that was providing that support (i.e. if the support is given by the person being smuggled)."
"'Breaking the law' is generally understood to mean committing a criminal offence; persons arriving in Australia irregularly, especially asylum seekers, do not do that."
Times certainly have changed.
-
Really! Are we going to debate the technical descriptions between words like Unlawful and Illegal?
OK fair enough. We will use the term unlawful.
Here are a couple of other descriptions:
Descriptions
Murder
The unlawful killing of another person where there is either the intent to kill, or the intent to cause grievous bodily harm with the knowledge that it was probable that death or grievous bodily harm would occur, or without intent to kill in the course of committing a crime.
Attempted Murder
The attempted unlawful killing of another person where there is either the intent to kill, or the intent to cause grievous bodily harm with the knowledge that it was probable that death or grievous bodily harm would occur but where death did not actually occur.
Steal Motor Vehicle
Unlawfully using a motor vehicle without the consent of the owner or the person in charge of that motor vehicle. 'Steal motor vehicle' excludes attempts to steal a motor vehicle, damaging or tampering/ interfering with a motor vehicle, or the theft of motor vehicle parts or the contents of a motor vehicle. For the purpose of this offence category, a motor vehicle is defined as a self-propelled vehicle that runs on a land surface (but is not restricted to rails or tram lines) and is eligible for registration for use on public roads, or could be made eligible for registration for use on public roads with modifications that would not change the essential nature of the vehicle. 'Steal motor vehicle' therefore excludes the theft of some types of motorised vehicle such as large mining trucks (super-haulers), gophers (motorised wheel chairs), golf carts, miniature motor cycles (pocket rockets), go carts and motorised bicycles/scooters, and also excludes the theft of trailers, semi-trailers or caravans (regardless of whether or not they were attached to a motor vehicle at the time of theft).
Theft
The unlawful taking or obtaining of money, goods or services, without the use of force, threat of force or violence, coercion or deception, with the intent to permanently deprive the owner or possessor of the use of the money or goods. This category of offence includes the theft of vehicle parts or the contents of a vehicle.
http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeOffenceDescriptions/tabid/1213/Default.aspx (http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeOffenceDescriptions/tabid/1213/Default.aspx)
-
Dazzler,
I wasn't implying that you were being racist by posting up the YouTube clip and I understand exactly the message that is portrayed in the video. I just don't like the way you aimed it at me to say that I am racist. That seems to be the easiest way for anyone to win/end a debate these days, just tell the other person they're racist. I'm far from that mate.
Not trying to sound like a hero or saviour of the masses, but my wife and I are involved in helping and providing care for Karen families that have escaped real persecution in their home countries (the father of the latest family has had his knees and legs smashed in an attack just before coming to Australia). The big difference is, they came here following the correct legal channels.
Anyway Dazzler, no hard feelings mate, you win.
We must really be living in different worlds. Here is what you said in response to my video;
"Dazzler, you missed my point too mate. I never intended to insult or belittle aboriginal people, as your condescending willy wonka YouTube clip portrays."
You actually state that my youtube clip insults / belittles aboriginal people. The last thing I wanted was for anyone else on here to misinterpret what the video refers to.
Which is why I wrote "In another thread this video was misinterpreted as being racist. It is NOT a racist video it is about racism and just about sums up the whole debate."
Any movement on the Papuan genocide. I have googled, being a big boy and all, and cannot find a single reference?
-
Dazzler times have changed, laws have changed and what was once acceptable is now not.
You are trying to bring ancient history and ancient laws in to the 21th Century. That doesn’t make sense. Back then ownership of a country was not decided by a law Court it was decided by occupation. The English, French, Spanish and Dutch invaded countries, took what ever they wanted, slaughtered anyone who stood in their way, turned survivors in to slaves and in some cases slaughtered entire civilisations. Back in those times this was acceptable practice and there were no laws to protect original occupants. It was survival of the strongest.
In regards to us invading Australia, I refuse to apologise for something that was done by the English over 200 years ago. It could have been much worse if Australia had been settled by the ancient Romans or the Spanish. The would have slaughtered an entire race and there would be no one to apologise to.
In this day and age we try and make things fair, we have established new laws. We recognise native titles and we try to protect countries from being invaded by others.
For boat people to lob up on our shores uninvited is illegal. The law has established the correct means of entering in to our country.
What my ancestors did over 200 years ago was not illegal. That was the way things were done. If the Yanks had not dropped a couple of H bombs in Japan, we would be all speaking Japanese right now. Any Australians would be either dead or living life as a castrated slave.
Hi Muzza
Your off at a tangent here. I am not suggesting we apologise for anything and yes, what happened in the past was quite acceptable back then. My point is that we have all come here uninvited as there were people here before hand and it is hypocritical to call anyone 'illegal' unless of course they have entered 'illegally'.
And here is the thing. People who overstay there visa's are here illegally. Those that enter seeking asylum, as BigJules has stated, are not illegal. Yet the media give the overstayers a free pass. They are protected by the UN convention that we are signatures to.
cheers
Daz
-
Really! Are we going to debate the technical descriptions between words like Unlawful and Illegal?
OK fair enough. We will use the term unlawful.
Here are a couple of other descriptions:
Descriptions
Murder
The unlawful killing of another person where there is either the intent to kill, or the intent to cause grievous bodily harm with the knowledge that it was probable that death or grievous bodily harm would occur, or without intent to kill in the course of committing a crime.
Attempted Murder
The attempted unlawful killing of another person where there is either the intent to kill, or the intent to cause grievous bodily harm with the knowledge that it was probable that death or grievous bodily harm would occur but where death did not actually occur.
Steal Motor Vehicle
Unlawfully using a motor vehicle without the consent of the owner or the person in charge of that motor vehicle. 'Steal motor vehicle' excludes attempts to steal a motor vehicle, damaging or tampering/ interfering with a motor vehicle, or the theft of motor vehicle parts or the contents of a motor vehicle. For the purpose of this offence category, a motor vehicle is defined as a self-propelled vehicle that runs on a land surface (but is not restricted to rails or tram lines) and is eligible for registration for use on public roads, or could be made eligible for registration for use on public roads with modifications that would not change the essential nature of the vehicle. 'Steal motor vehicle' therefore excludes the theft of some types of motorised vehicle such as large mining trucks (super-haulers), gophers (motorised wheel chairs), golf carts, miniature motor cycles (pocket rockets), go carts and motorised bicycles/scooters, and also excludes the theft of trailers, semi-trailers or caravans (regardless of whether or not they were attached to a motor vehicle at the time of theft).
Theft
The unlawful taking or obtaining of money, goods or services, without the use of force, threat of force or violence, coercion or deception, with the intent to permanently deprive the owner or possessor of the use of the money or goods. This category of offence includes the theft of vehicle parts or the contents of a vehicle.
http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeOffenceDescriptions/tabid/1213/Default.aspx (http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeOffenceDescriptions/tabid/1213/Default.aspx)
Hi again
If you are going to use law to discuss technical descriptions then you apply the definitions as defined within the law you are discussing. If you can't find it in the specific legislation then you look in the Acts Interpretation Act - http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00001 (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00001)
In this case you would use the 1951 Convention on Refugees;
http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/images/convention%20and%20protocol.pdf (http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/images/convention%20and%20protocol.pdf)
This identifies who a refugee is and what they can do. If you read the document you will see that it is not illegal to enter ANY country to seek asylum.
The Australian Government ratified the Convention on Refugees. We agreed to it. This is why I get so peeved at the wagging the dog that successive governments have done in the name of votes.
If you read the document that we signed up for, and can find where they are acting illegally, I would be mighty impressed!.
cheers
Daz
-
Hi again
If you are going to use law to discuss technical descriptions then you apply the definitions as defined within the law you are discussing. If you can't find it in the specific legislation then you look in the Acts Interpretation Act - http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00001 (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00001)
In this case you would use the 1951 Convention on Refugees;
http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/images/convention%20and%20protocol.pdf (http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/images/convention%20and%20protocol.pdf)
This identifies who a refugee is and what they can do. If you read the document you will see that it is not illegal to enter ANY country to seek asylum.
The Australian Government ratified the Convention on Refugees. We agreed to it. This is why I get so peeved at the wagging the dog that successive governments have done in the name of votes.
If you read the document that we signed up for, and can find where they are acting illegally, I would be mighty impressed!.
cheers
Daz
You are dead right Dazzler, and the impetus for the document was the disgraceful way that so many nations treated refugees from Nazi Germany, leaving them to sail the world unsuccessfully seeking a haven, with some being forced to return to Nazi occupied Europe and, subsequently, death camps.
The civilised world, through the UN, said "never again" and the International Convention on Refugees was the result.
Of course many countries did not sign up, predominantly 'third world' nations, such as our Asian neighbours - many of which were still colonoys / fighting wars of independance at the time.
From what I can see the situations from which many refugees are coming constitute persecution the equivalent of that faced by Jews and other minority groups under the Nazis.
Sadly, I don't think that the affluent nations in general will look to have had their finest hour when history looks back on the current period.
-
If we want to put it in the same context as when the 'whites invaded australia'. Does that mean we can defend with force? Just as some of the aboriginals did way back when.
We now need to peacefully defend our way of life. We can take in genuine refugees, but if the doors are open, our way of life will change, as it already is.
I don't agree with turning boats back at the risk of loosing life, as everyone's life is important. But surely some of the money we send overseas could be used to relocate these people safely back to where they came from and tell them to go about entry the correct way.
On the point of 'invasion by the whites' well, I hate to say it, but the aboriginals are either not real smart OR do NOT actually want reconciliation.
If Australia wasn't defended by the white people (yes along with people of other races) then the aboriginals wouldn't have one grain of sand they could call their own.
I think almost all white Australians want to live equally and have respect for the aboriginal people (just look at the way we accommodated and welcomed and were interested in the culture of a certain person on this forum last year). But the more that we 'reconcile' the more the aboriginal people push and push for more. This is what builds resentment.
IMHO there is more racism towards white people now days. (Oh, I don't mind being called white..... because I am!)
Do they really want equality? If so, why do they want preferential treatment?
I have as much pride in OUR country as any aboriginal person. But this bull$..... about 'invasion day' tips it over the edge for me and many people I know.
They say that we have gone backwards with eliminating racism. Yeah, I 100% agree with that. But you don't need to look far to see why!
-
Hi Muzza
Your off at a tangent here. I am not suggesting we apologise for anything and yes, what happened in the past was quite acceptable back then. My point is that we have all come here uninvited as there were people here before hand and it is hypocritical to call anyone 'illegal' unless of course they have entered 'illegally'.
I was born here, there for never traveled here, didn't not have any say in weather I wanted to be born here and yet you still fail to accept anyone born here has as much right as those born here with a history of xyz years. Weather it's you or the law, don't you think that sounds raciest/supremest ?
And here is the thing. People who overstay there visa's are here illegally. Those that enter seeking asylum, as BigJules has stated, are not illegal. Yet the media give the overstayers a free pass. They are protected by the UN convention that we are signatures to. Thats all to easy to hide behind that card, and untill processed IMO law breakers
cheers
Daz
-
"All to (sic) easy to hide behind that card"...? Oh, I see, you mean too easy to hide behind legal treaties, etc.
Thankfully for all concerned the law doesnt give a toss about "IMO", be it yours, mine or anyone elses.
In reality "IMO" is the easiest card to hide behind. But you are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you want.
-
No, what I am saying is this;
If your ancestors came here AFTER the ORIGINAL inhabitants and they were not INVITED by those inhabitants then it is HYPOCRITICAL to call someone else ILLEGAL who later comes UNINVITED.
And yes, it is easy to hide behind the LAW. You know - the law. That thing that democracy loves.
:cheers:
-
How is this thread still going?
It started as a simple question.... They claim to have been beaten - What do you think?
Now its gone to sh!t, and every time I log in I see more dribble.
-
So we just need to call them 'uninvited' then send them on their way back home!
Uninvited/illegal either works for me.
The 'invited' ones get to stay. Happy days!
-
The media seems to have dropped their little beat up. Much more important thinks, like .... no I won't say her name..... >:( Kevin
-
"All to (sic) easy to hide behind that card"...? Oh, I see, you mean too easy to hide behind legal treaties, etc.
Thankfully for all concerned the law doesnt give a toss about "IMO", be it yours, mine or anyone elses.
In reality "IMO" is the easiest card to hide behind. But you are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you want.
Lets see, the courts never get it wrong do they ?
Just saying it the way I see it.
-
No, what I am saying is this;
If your ancestors came here AFTER the ORIGINAL inhabitants and they were not INVITED by those inhabitants then it is HYPOCRITICAL to call someone else ILLEGAL who later comes UNINVITED.
And yes, it is easy to hide behind the LAW. You know - the law. That thing that democracy loves.
:cheers:
Unless you can see the blindingly obvious difference between the way our ancestors came here and the way the asylum seekers are coming in, well it just ain't worth arguing.
Lost, please cue the "you win" to Dazzlers next post as his intelligence is clearly on the next level.
Like I said before, no hard feelings.
-
How is this thread still going?
It started as a simple question.... They claim to have been beaten - What do you think?
Now its gone to sh!t, and every time I log in I see more dribble.
Agreed.
(http://i.imgur.com/oWVPPXF.gif)
-
Sorry, I don't come to myswag to read members sound off about each other on their point of view on issues such as this, I come to relax. I know where, I stand, I have ignored this thread for a few weeks now so I don't get involved.
Upon returning and viewing a few past posts can I suggest that we wind this up and those involved go either here:
http://pickeringpost.com (http://pickeringpost.com)
Or here:
http://refugeesinternational.org/blog (http://refugeesinternational.org/blog)
I read both of these to keep things in perspective as to how others view the issue.
Oh yeah, well done to all for keeping things relatively civil.
:cheers:
-
In relation to the original question, I don't know but I will ask the BIL in a couple of weeks when he returns from service up there. I guarantee I know what the answer is ;D
-
OK, before this thread goes south.
To summarize, I think most of us think the Navy are innocent of the allegations.
Some of us are happy with more boat people arriving, some of us are not.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I think most people have expressed it. At the request of some other swaggers, let's consider that this thread has run its course.
Mods, please lock it up.