Why do boat people pay tens of thousands of dollars to illegal people smugglers to come to Australia ?

because we are soft and full of handouts...

Obes, why are the "refugees" not stopping in Indonesia, or Malaysia or any other SE Asian country? Why do they use it as a launching pad to Australia?

We need temporary protection visas back and we need Nauru back immediately.

Greazy, why are the "refugees" not stopping in Indonesia, or Malaysia or any other SE Asian country? Why do they use it as a launching pad to Australia?

Just tax the smuggler?

why are the "refugees" not stopping in Indonesia, or Malaysia or any other SE Asian country?

Almost all the countries along the way are not UN signatories. Australia is, though for some reason that is never discussed.

If you dont want refugees in Australia, just say so. The two-faced bullshit from the Australian right is pathetic.

yeah funny that hey, traveling thousands of miles hopping from country to country, so they can get the proper UN status. seems more strategic than desperate.

Desperate is like Syrians or Rwandans pouring across their border into the neighbouring country.

This is something different - this is commerce.

Obes, why are the "refugees" not stopping in Indonesia, or Malaysia or any other SE Asian country?

Because if you are being forced to leave your country are you going to pick one of those countries over Australia, where police aren't overtly corrupt, legal system is good, the government is actually reasonably democratic, there is little chance of a major conflict, religion will never be used to persecute you by the government.

No doubt your argument against Malaysia for offshore processing is they aren't signatories to jack shit.

See this map ?
The ones in green are the countries that have signed the UNHCR.
Naruu only signed because this was going to be crucial pin in the LNP argument against Malaysia.
Notice how in the SEA region there is not a lot of green. (Cambodia, Philippines, East Timor, PNG and Australia).
So even by the LNP argument you would not want to stop in most of South East Asia as a refugee.

Either the UNHCR matters (which it didn't when Naruu was in use) or it does (when Malayasia was an idea).

last edited by Obes at 15:55:54 27/Jun/12

The part of the argument I simply don't get is that if they truly are refugees and want to live away from whatever they're trying to get away from, then it should make no difference whether we allow them to live here or give them safe passage and relocation to another country.
The UN refugee program should be global, and there should be absolutely no guarantee that the country you maaage to make your way to should be the one you get to live in.

last edited by Raven at 15:52:37 27/Jun/12

Why do boat people pay tens of thousands of dollars to illegal people smugglers to come to Australia ?

How do refugees from poor countries have that sort of cash? (Assuming the tens of thousands is a real figure)

I saw a picture on the front page of the Australian a few weeks back, did not pay any attention to it.. looked like some people out for a cruise, fairly well dressed, read the story about boat people then realised that was what the picture was of. (noticed someone say the same thing in the comments section a week or so later)
I am not making any judgement one way or the other from that as it is a sample of one, it just struck me as odd. (for all i know the editor cropped out all the people that werent pretty enough for the front page)

Greazy, why are the "refugees" not stopping in Indonesia, or Malaysia or any other SE Asian country? Why do they use it as a launching pad to Australia?

I dont know and I don't give a fuck. When a person pays some asshole 10 grand because they think that is the only way to get over here, gets on a shitty boat, risks their lives and their families lives, when that person comes to your country or your house can't have you have some sympathy for their struggles? Can you not realise that whatever is waiting for them in their home country is worse than death at sea? and finally, can't you see that in the grand scheme of things the numbers aren't that big (they're unbelievably tiny)?

Here is a fact for you: It's not illegal to come by boat to Australia and seek refugee status.

Still think you are trolling.

$10,000+ to juimp the queue,

There is no queue to jump, stop using that term.

This discussion should be about hunting boat smugglers down, putting them on a boat and watching it sink (hopefully with infi onboard).

The fact that we even consider it a major political issue is an embarrassment.
eg. a UK newspaper talking about it.

QFT, that Guardian article is pretty spot on.

One of his first questions to me was "Did you arrive here by boat?" The question took me aback. "No," I spluttered. "I arrived here by plane. With a passport." In my near-decade living in the UK, not once was I asked if I had hidden in the back of a truck to sneak across the border into the country. And yet, for many in Australia the stigma exists that if you weren't born in the country, you are assumed to have entered it through unauthorised means.

Australia's protectionism and casual racism getting the better of it, those asylum detention centres are terrible.

Also, Australia's the no1 for south east asia as its one of the few nice 1st world countries nearby, just look at the illegal immigration stats for the UK with all the peeps coming from Africa.

Nice xenophobia and willful ignorance in this thread.

Our generous welfare system is very attractive .. so attractive that people are willing to die for it.

Fucken A. I'd do the same thing if I was in these peoples position. If my life was shit and someone said to reach unimaginable reward all you have to do is get on a boat and hang the fuck on I'd be all over it.

Because that's what they do, they want to make a better life for themselves and their families. Shouldn't everyone be afforded that right?

can we afford to offer that right?

Fucken A. I'd do the same thing if I was in these peoples position. If my life was shit and someone said to reach unimaginable reward all you have to do is get on a boat and hang the fuck on I'd be all over it.

I don't think you people quite grasp what $10,000 (which is what they are paying for passage) is to some(a lot) of these people prior to being displaced and sneaking around off of their passports they earnt a $1 a day.

Setup a "fake boat"
Shoot this boat and claim all refugees(actors)died, make sure to have heaps of footage,
Have press conference stating that this is our new asylum policy and any more boats that turn up will also be shot and sunk with pasengers not rescued.

send more fake boats as a "oh yeah really" sink them.
if a actual boats shows up, stage it and send them home on planes
no more boats will come.

I'm sure all the Afghans and Iraqis are sitting at home watching for news on Australian refugee policy before setting out.

Defintely not fleeing for their lives.

news.com.ir app ont here iphones

The cost of setting them up at the moment and detaining them is massive as it is. What's a $2k flight in the scheme of things.

Yeah but how could the government justify it to taxpayers? It would be a huge initial cost that would generate a lot of criticism from people who want to know why refos get a free flight and they don't.

Pretty sure It won't ever stop because they know once they land, They are given Visa's, Accomodation, Money... So why would they stop coming here when our government Is giving them a fucking amazing reason to keep coming...

This thread is pretty much as qgl.txt as you get.

I'd settle for the liberals just to drop their openly racist 'Stop the Boats' campaign which I can only assume is mostly responsible for the blatant ignorance and bigotry I have seen in this thread (infi leading the pack in that regard).

The govt and opposition have compromised in the house of reps on offshore processing, now the crazy greens are holding things up.

No they haven't.

Katter voted with the government, and a single loan liberal Mal Washer was prepared to cross the floor but in the end didn't need to. (Greens only have 1 person in the lower house) He sounds like a pragmatic sensible person... he won't survive in politics.

I would have liked our bill to get up, okay but it didn't, we can't have a continuing Mexican stand-off between the two parties.

Pragmatic

So to get through the senate it needs 8 votes so either the Greens (9) which won't happen, or for some people to cross the floor (or leave the room for the count) unlikely to happen.

I am sick of hearing LNP bigwigs say it's up to the government to govern. They were elected too, they are as much as part of the process as anyone else, their job is not to oppose everything, they can wheel and deal and get an outcome that makes everyone happy.

It's such a stupid system we have here, wish they'd vote how they feel on issues not how some party machine tells them to.

Libs had a great system - TPVs and Nauru. if it ain't broke don't fix it, but Labor DOESN'T LISTEN.

You really need to go and do some research. Specifically look up Siev X during the Howard years.

Not sure what I think, although I think there is an issue with the amount of foreign aid with give indonesia correlating to what they do in return/are willing to do with regards to human rights.

Seems most of it is just more political wrangling wrapped up in some crocodile tears.

TPVs stopped the perception that Australia is a meal ticket.

A TPV says: We will protect you until you are out of harms way, and this may occur on Nauru. If you otherwise wish to immigrate then here's the form.

A boat a day at the moment and people suggest the Howard policies didn't work? HAH

edit:

Labor's Senate leader Chris Evans, a former immigration minister, said in 2008 that abolishing Howard-era offshore processing and temporary protection visas was “one of my greatest pleasures in politics”.

Today, he said offshore processing would work, admitting “you have to provide a deterrent”.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/minister-who-scrapped-pacific-solution-says-new-boats-bill-is-one-chance-to-get-it-right/story-fn59niix-1226410971635

last edited by infi at 16:11:34 28/Jun/12

If it was me, I would have our ships intercept theirs and escort them back to their country, give them food/water etc for the trip. The person responsible for smuggling the so called "refugees" is taken into Australian custody and sentenced to jail for whateva number of years is deemed appropriate and sent back to home country when their sentence finishes.

that'll fucken deter them.


edit: oh and while we're at it, we charge their government for the costs incurred to our government/us tax payers to do it all. Put it all back on their government and I'm sure we'll see them do something about it from their end.

last edited by maRtz at 16:55:29 28/Jun/12

I dont understand the "paying thens of thousands of dollars" thing.

Why would you pay that much to get on a boat when a plane ticket is much less than that?

Im pretty sure its not hard to just pretend to be a person on holiday, then just stay.

immigration probably wouldn't give them a visa in the first place I guess. Plus if they can afford tens of thousands of dollars, they are doing it pretty fucking well imo and shouldn't have any issue living comfortably in their own country.

They are not refugees, they just can't stand their own shithole. True refugees can't afford tens of thousands of dollars. I don't know.

last edited by maRtz at 17:31:49 28/Jun/12

wow maRtz ... clueless much ?

Even under Howard and the TPV and Nauru the vast majority of boat people were given PPVs and ended up in Australia or New Zealand.

They can't fly in because they weren't given/capable of getting passports at home, much less wandering into an airport.
By the way many more people fly in and stay then boat in ... and they aren't even trying for refugee status.

Boat people are a complete non-issue.

provide them with safe boats but then take them to the lost island
the dharma solution imo

$10,000+ to juimp the queue, There is no queue to jump, stop using that term. This discussion should be about hunting boat smugglers down, putting them on a boat and watching it sink (hopefully with infi onboard).

What do you mean there is no queue to jump? The number of permanent visas that are allocated yearly is based on the population and influx to it. People who will be applying for future residency will be affected by the influx of illegal immigrants years before.

If they were queue jumping they'd get sent home, in reality the vast majority are granted protection, ie. their claims are genuine. ie. they can't stay at home, now put yourself in their shoes. If you had to get out of the country would you try any and all means to get to a country that had processes in place to deal with you ?

And they aren't flying in because they can't!!!!

If they could fly in I am sure they would, because overstaying your visa after flying in is a far far more common thing and much harder to chase.

It needs a regional or global approach in that when you go a country that has agreed to the process, you get processed fast then sent randomly but permanently to any of the countries that signed up.

Problem being no countries will sign up for that except countries like Australia and New Zealand. So the best solution is impossible for our government to achieve, The LNP solution tried to mimic it, you got a TPV you had to stay on Nauru and could be sent to either New Zealand, Australia or "home" if conditions improved. The other bit of the LNP solution "turn the boats around" is pretty bad it just puts Aussie sailors at risk, and leaves the smugglers with their boats and refugees in a country that doesn't give a shit and isn't UN anything.

So Joe Hockey's tears are those of a hypocrit, can't send them to Malaysia, but that same 13 year old we'll turn around and send em to a different country that hasn't signed jack.
Ultimately tho the problem with it was it simply made the process longer and left people in limbo.

It's a shit problem, I don't think Malaysia is a solution either really.

They really need to find countries somewhere randomly that will play boat people lotto. (Which I think was the LNP solution put forward late last night, except at the moment no countries have agreed to play boat people lotto) but because everyone had gone to bed it didn't get up... oh and now they have gone on break for 2 months ... yes 2 months

I like the comparison of protecting ones border to bigotry. Do you just let people off the street walk into your house?? would you be called a 'bigot' if you took offense to this.

fpot. if your so fucking righteous why dont you shack some refugees up in your house?? Get a pay out from government.

All talk.

Its easy to be a do-gooder when you've never had to make any hard choices in your life.

So someone is a bigot when they oppose the illegal people smuggling industry, and the well-planned travellers who enable those criminals. These "refugees" are not pouring over a border in desperation to save their lives, they are country hopping and paying organised criminals to get what they want.


See calsy, do-gooders never sign up for personal inconvenience, they like committing others to it via taxes and govt agencies.

The crisis is always "a terrible tragedy" of course but do-gooders are never directly responsible for making any impact. I would at least expect to hear fpot say he mailed a carton of cigarettes to a detention centre - some token conduct to prove how humane he is.

Tell me you have done at least something aside from just thinking charitable progressive and humane thoughts fpot?

Logic says we DONT have the resources to care of every joe blog who knocks on the door and says 'Hey I want fair treatment and a proper assessment'. This is evident by asylum seekers staying up to years in processing camps with kids included.

Now LOGIC also states that with numbers of boat people increasing and cost of processing them rising, one has to PAY for this task. Who is going to do that?? Thats why they have a plan to 'house refugees in homes' in the first place cause they have run out of resources to accomodate them while they are processed.

Now you argument states 'i want every person treated fairly' but LOGICALLY that is not possible.

I understand the humane side of course we would like everyone to have a fair opportunities but unfortunately we live in a real world where there are people with and people without.

If you want to help the people without, then you need to give them something of yours. You cant just say 'Hey I want it all to be perfect, my logic is sound', thats not LOGIC, thats not based on any hard facts whatsoever just your ideals.

I understand the humane side of course we would like everyone to have a fair opportunities but unfortunately we live in a real world where there are people with and people without.

It's amazingly easy to say this when you are the person with.

(speaking of 'all talk')

I expect another rebuttal with some tirade about rascist bigots.

its a logical fallacy of course.

You're a fucking idiot.

im just a rainman dipping into my big bag of strawmen.

'stop the boats' and 'stop the poor immigrants' are not the same! One arrives by illegal means while the other through due process.

Immigration keeps the economy going, its not a problem. Who suffers with all the illegal immigrants, the people trying to go through the proper channels to gain citizenship.

Whatever the fuck, fine fuck due process live in your world just all line up at the door, its a freebie this country we got plenty of resources to support all your claims dont worry about the proper channels just get here anyway you can, we will take care of the rest guys.

P.S. We love supporting organised crime in Indonesia, i mean there a well to do country im sure these lovely criminal organisations are putting that money to good use in their community.

It's ok, those good souls that perished who were so eager and keen for a chance to flee affliction and get a shot at a fantastic fresh life here in AUS have faced trial and have been reincarnated with wings whilst those who are so falsely self-righteous and are just as keen not to give to those in need will be reincarnated as something us tryers will find not so tref, but delectabley muscle enabling! RIP yo.* :)

*Non Religious skinned day qgl translation = oh dear. :'(

they're only coming here to leech off our doll. Fucking awesome hey.

I'm not sure what to belive, having never spoke to a person who came illegally by boat it is hard to understand. I know a few that came legally by boat lol

So you don't want refugees in Australia, period.

thats an unfair assemsent when you consider our volume of refugees per person in this country.

we take on more refugees than most other western countries per capita, if you also consider the higher cost for our standard of living.

someone has to pay for it, which means you're going to have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

i'm ok with them taking our dolls.

Did you guys hear about that sweet ACA expose? BOAT PEOPLE SMUGGLER KINGPIN FOUND (working as a trolly pusher like all millionaires).

I was just yappin' over the back fence to me neighbour the other day. He's one of those boat fellas.

double post. my bad

fpot of all people should know better since he was/is a bouncer. If someone cuts in line you tell them to go to the back. Unless it's a hottie then all bets are off.

Our current boat people friendly laws are what's causing all the boats.

Yeah man. ALL the boats.

Arrivals in 2009 were 2867, in 2010 they were 6900 and in 2010 they were 4733. That is hardly an amount of people that you would need to start worrying about financial ruin if we supply them with aid. And your ridiculous little slippery-slope logical fallacy (again you use one in your argument) is typically fucking stupid.

And yeah Howard definitely had the right idea with how to handle asylum seekers. He never blatantly lied to the public to create brown savage fear mongering oh wait

source

You're an ignorant and bigoted piece of shit infi. Plain and simple.

I liked Palmers Plan.
Let them buy an air tickets here (instead of buy a seat on a boat) and apply for Refugee status, if they fail send them home.

I like a lot of Palmers ideas, Maybe he should start a Party or run for the Senate.

last edited by FaceMan at 11:46:10 01/Jul/12

so you say there is no need need to consider ever the possibility of those higher numbers. It could never EVER happen to us.

yawn no. I am saying at the moment the numbers of boat people are financially insignificant, and that the trends seem to say it will stay that way. You are aware that 95% of asylum seekers arrive by plane, right?

http://www.asrc.org.au/media/documents/myths-facts-solutions-info-apr-2011.pdf

You really really really need to read that infi. Every single word of it. That way you can avoid ironic situations of calling me as dumb as dog shit when you are so completely ignorant and uninformed of the whole asylum seekers situation.

I know I am never going to change your mind no matter how many facts I lay on the table. You are just as bad as a religious fundamentalist in that regard. So just keep saying 'do gooder' and 'hipster' and other such nonsense (seriously is that all you've got?) and I am sure people like Calsy and Door will be ready with that high-five for you.

About a billion and Australia has a $1.5 trillion dollar economy.

Ladies and gentlemen... your next PM

TONY Abbott yesterday claimed boatpeople were acting in an un-Christian manner by "coming through the back door" and should not be encouraged to "jump the queue" with people-smugglers.

See staying stuff that is blatantly untrue like 'jumping the queue' would be okay, but unfortunately there are impressionable little minds out there like infi who swallow it hook line and sinker :(

So looks like our next government will be one that has openly racist policies _and_ will be pandering to silly little religious groups. I wonder if he thinks gay marriage is unchristian as well?

- the people smuggling industry is illegal;
- it is big busines. organised crime and corrupt officials are making money off of it;
- foreigners wouldn't bother travelling to australia if they knew they couldn't get an asylum visa - that is straight from the refugee's mouth parked indo waiting for their ship;
- aussie's don't like queue jumpers and cheats.

Fpot is your typical green's voter: roll out the red carpet and never mind the cost. The taxpayer can afford it. We'll just add another billion onto our budget deficit, that won't matter will it?

Hey look! Everyone's favourite flag-waving bigot is here to post more misinformed shite! Welcome :)

The people smuggling industry is illegal yes. But entering the country unauthorised in order to gain asylum isn't. Now I am not saying that these people smugglers are all Oskar Schindler's facilitating this, but they are helping people escape poverty and a chance at a better life. And no shit they wouldn't travel here if they couldn't get an asylum visa. It's a good thing they can though because they need it so they can have a chance of enjoying the quality of life we do. You see I don't think someone should be condemned to poverty and disease just because of the geographical location of where they were born. I guess that makes me a hipster do-gooder (lol) but I really think it just makes me not a total piece of shit like you are infi.

haha typical green's voter. I voted them for a little while when I just turned 18 because well... I guess I was pretty young then. They are nothing more than a protest party. They are miles better than the christian pandering openly racist liberal party though.

- aussie's don't like queue jumpers and cheats.

That's really cool but no-one is jumping queues and no-one is cheating. By the way, you don't put apostrophes on plurals.

without people smugglers our navy would have nothing to do

meh, turn them back, they are doing it deceitfully

the people come on boats pay large sums of money, and for what, to lie and cheat their way in, chucking passports and ID documents overboard etc, they are jumping the queue in a way

if these people were legit they would rock upto an embassy (before somebody tells me it is too hard, remember many of these people are jumping onto planes, flying to Indonesia, then jumping onto a boat after paying some large amount of money)

there are report of people spending $5000, to 10k to get on a boat, to travel to christmas island, now i know that many of these people are unable to work in indonesia, but honestly for 5k you could live well for a few months, you know, while you wait to board that plane to aus (fyi the average income over there is like 2k a year)

the easiest thing would be to make some of the islands areas that can't accept refugees, in effect making the main land the goal, (making the distance needed to cover go from 400 odd kms to something closer to 2000 odd kms, this would mean better boats from the start, which would fix some of the issues because it would make it harder, and therefore less tempting)



one point that greazy made was, that it isn't illegal to come by boat to ausralia, however endangering lives in an non sea worthy vessel is, there are more options open to them, but they dont want to wait, they dont want to live in a safe place (at their expense) while they wait, they want it proved to them (or be that in a camp), you know that many of these camps are better equipped than some community's, we treat other people better than those who are already here,

you also have the cost on the locals of christmas island, boat wrecks aren't fun, they have a small population that loses buildings and food stocks, and the mental impact of the hardships they have seen and for what, because a few greedy people wanted to make a quick buck, and a few hundred couldn't wait (or more likely wouldn't pass the normal process)

dazhel they've already started deliberately sinking the boats so that they are rescued by the navy.

dazhel they've already started deliberately sinking the boats so that they are rescued by the navy.

Have the navy confirmed yet that the boats were deliberately sank?
I know the couple were under investigation as to whether it was deliberate sabotage or not. At the moment the policy is to escort the boats to Christmas island, but if the policy changes to towing them back or else they'll be fired upon it'll be even more chaos.

copuis - that's what I'm saying:
Escorting leaky boats to Christmas island is a shitty solution, but the alternative PM's idea seems even worse.
Not even John Howard was that harsh.

Because to come by plane you need a passport and the people who come by boat aren't given the opportunity by their governments to get one.

Read this, you dull, ignorant shitheel.

http://www.asrc.org.au/media/documents/myths-facts-solutions-info-apr-2011.pdf

Particularly this bit -

MYTH 3 ASYLUM SEEKERS DESTROY THEIR DOCUMENTATION; THEY ARE TRYING TO CHEAT THE SYSTEM

The vast majority of asylum seekers do not arrive without documentation in an attempt to cheat the system. Not only are most boat arrivals found to be genuine— typically between 85 and 90%—but arriving without documentation only delays legal-status resolution, prolonging their stay in detention. So for a genuine asylum seeker, of which the majority of boat arrivals are, there is no advantage to arrive without documentation. The Refugee Convention and the Australian Government recognise that asylum seekers are not to be punished for their illegal entry or irregular travel because they have good cause (see myth 1). This is because asylum seekers will often have to fl ee quickly and are unable to obtain the necessary documentation before leaving; especially if that requires approaching the very government responsible for their persecution. At other times, asylum seekers will destroy documentation because they fear being sent back home or, for this reason, are instructed to do so by people smugglers.

There's more, but because it is a PDF the formatting is all fucked and I cbf fixing a whole other paragraph.

See the problem is that literally every person who has a problem with boat people are so very ignorant about what their circumstances are and the facts surrounding them. infi saying "oh the conditions aren't so bad that they are coming from I know this because they use strategy" is probably the height of it so far in this thread. I found that PDF after googling for less than 5 seconds. It has sources in it if you want to check, and really dispels most of the bullshit the liberal party and A Current Affair have been dishing out to their loyal followers.

Did anyone see the advert for A Current Affair last night? BOAT PEOPLE IN OUR BACKYARD - we will show you the suburbs where they are putting the evil brown menace! Absolutely disgusting. I couldn't believe my fucking ears when I heard it.

More like, the only part of the argument you chose to see and/or understand.

My argument is that we live in a well off country. Economic times are not as rosy as they used to be, but I go outside and look around the streets and they aren't exactly falling into decay. Disadvantaged people have access to an excellent welfare system and or healthcare kicks arse all over the place. Keep in mind that I am speaking relative to developing nations. Not just 3rd world pits, but places you wouldn't exactly call 1st world paradises (like the USA lols).

Now there are places in the world where if you have a baby you can pretty much guarantee that they will never have enough nutritious food, will have to drink dodgy water, and will never have an opportunity at a decent education. They will never have a chance to to reach their full potential entirely based on the circumstances they were born in. On top of this, they live under incredibly corrupt governments. They are totally at the mercy of criminals because there is no effective police force. Their access to health care is pathetic, and they can easily die from infections that could be cleared up in days if they had access to proper medication. People whose lives aren't about living but solely about surviving.

Now a billion dollars is not an insignificant amount of money, but keep in mind we live in 1.57 trillion dollar economy. A billion dollars is... well I just tried to work it out but I am terrible at maths. A trillion is a million million and a billion is a thousand million... someone work out the percentage a billion is of our GDP :P But the point is that it is small and you are going to have to do better than infi's tongue on the cock rhetoric speak to convince me that if we continue to provide aid and even if it goes up a bit we will be put into financial ruin. I am not interested in any logical fallacy slippery slop arguments of 'what about 50000, 50 million people?' because that is just fucking dumb. At the moment the average is about 5000 and looking at the trends it looks like it will stay that way.

Everyone should be willing to sacrifice a little bit to help these people out. It isn't about me letting asylum seekers sleep in my bed and trying to use that argument against me is yet another logical fallacy (all of infi's arguments are). It is about our country and other first world countries sacrificing something as a whole to try and make the world a bit better for everyone. Fine, if the numbers suddenly jump up by 1000% and it will literally change Australia into one big giant Inala to help them, end it. But that isn't going to happen. The sentiment I feel from people who would just send them back is schoolyard 'fuck you got mine' which is just bullshit. It's a childish little devotion they have to their political party and pure selfishness that they try and disguise with nationalistic benevolence.

Fpot, you argued that you needed a passport to fly.

most refugees that make the boat trip have taken an aeroplane to Indonesia so your argument that flying here isn't an option might have a flaw

the major issue I have (and I dont know the cause) if we have an embassy in indonesia, nothing is stopping them applying there, it is a fair safer method

also, as I have pointed out, an overwhelming amount of refugee's (as a percentage) come via air, so what makes those that come by air different from those in boats? as you pointed out most people escape without documentation, yet most come by air?

there is no NO reason to pay large sums of money to travel by boat when there are quicker methods of travel, so why would someone escaping go the longer expensive method?

how else do they get there, afgans are not boating it to indo, and there is no road that link the two places

so, if the boat ride costs 5k (it is a figure i have heard on the ABC a few times, but i doubt there is a set rate) and the average income of people in indo is 2k per year, you're telling me they couldn't hire a taxi, get a hotel room and get to the embassy (any embassy, wouldn't have to be just ours) I know that legally they have fuck all right in indo, they would have no access to schooling, or be able to work (legally) or get any aid, but then again they have the cash to catch a boat

also it isn't hard to be an offshore refugee, the process is simple, and easy, and doesn't involve risking lives, and putting pressure on small islands

How do asylum seekers obtain a visa to live in Australia?

The Australian Government groups refugees into different categories depending on their circumstances, their support in Australia and how they came here

Offshore program

The offshore program accepts people who apply for refugee status before they arrive in Australia.

The government groups these people into:

* “standard” refugees.

* women who are at risk.

* people needing emergency rescue (generally at the special request of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) eg Kosavar refugees

* people who are refugees who have the support of someone in Australia such as a family member or charity organisation. The Government calls this support having a ‘proposer’ and these refugees Special Humanitarian Program entrants. Approximately 60 percent of refugees are Special Humanitarian Program entrants.

All of these groups of refugees have applied for protection after they have left their country of origin but before they get to Australia. For example a person from Afghanistan travels to Pakistan and applies for refugee status. In this case Pakistan is called the country of first asylum.

A very small number of people are given refugee visas while they are still living in their country of origin. Technically they fall outside the accepted definition of refugees because they are still in their own country. However, world leaders and the United Nations have agreed that ‘internally displaced persons’ are similar to refugees and deserve similar protections.
top

You wouldn't happen to be copy pasting your posts from here, would you? :P

The problem with offshore programs is that if they are fleeing persecutors in Afghanistan then they are not going to be safe from them in Pakistan (for one example, just replace those two countries with two other neighbouring countries).

I have seriously had enough of this debate tonight. I am going to bed will post more tomorrow.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/more-boat-drama-as-mps-joust-20120710-21u2v.html#ixzz20GG4F9SL

Eighty-one asylum seekers were transferred to HMAS Childers south-west of Java late yesterday and were on their way to Christmas Island.

Maybe they can stay at fpots place.

An Election is the solution to the Boat problem.

Infi, you should be less forthcoming with the corruption and conspiracy talk, otherwise you may just end up posting incarcerated in a ward alongside the 'mentally ill' (liver tonics) park dwellers. ;p

You two should form a club.

If your tactic is to just repeat the same dumb thing over and over till I give up, don't bother. I have already given up.