Navy intercepts seventh boat of asylum-seekers in two months

[Q.]

Not only are most tolerant but they they believe they should open their homes willingly to strangers of any persuasion. One Muslim thought I was Jewish and still had me stay a few nights. Probably why my next backpacking trip will hopefully be somewhere in the Middle East.

[scoob]

Not only are most tolerant but they they believe they should open their homes willingly to strangers of any persuasion. One Muslim thought I was Jewish and still had me stay a few nights. Probably why my next backpacking trip will hopefully be somewhere in the Middle East.

Iraq is pretty cheap at the moment - see how you get on there...

[Psyber]

Not only are most tolerant but they they believe they should open their homes willingly to strangers of any persuasion. One Muslim thought I was Jewish and still had me stay a few nights. Probably why my next backpacking trip will hopefully be somewhere in the Middle East.

I certainly got on quite well with a Shia working from home motor mechanic, from Iraq, who did some work on my old Musso with me assisting him while I was in Melbourne.
A countryman of his who worked at the local supermarket put me on to him when I asked about similar issues with his Musso.

The problem is that there are tolerant and intolerant Muslims, just as among Christians.
(And just as there are tolerant and intolerant words in both holy books.)

Hussein, certainly, told me what he thought about Osama bin Laden and his Saudi extremist Sunni associates.

[Q.]

Not only are most tolerant but they they believe they should open their homes willingly to strangers of any persuasion. One Muslim thought I was Jewish and still had me stay a few nights. Probably why my next backpacking trip will hopefully be somewhere in the Middle East.

Iraq is pretty cheap at the moment - see how you get on there...

Close. It's eastern neighbour, if visas and flights work out.

[ORDoubleBlues]

Their lives ARE very likely at risk in Sri Lanka:

http://www.rethinkrefugees.com.au/in-th ... rsecution/

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/n/mr/1 ... iLanka.pdf

18 people may have wanted to go back, but thousands have not wanted to.

Also, the fact that the number of boats bringing asylum seekers to Australia has increased since the opening of Nauru pretty much proves that they are leaving because their lives are in danger. According to the Liberal and Labor parties, numbers should be decreasing. Numbers will not decrease though as the vast majority of asylum seekers don't care where they end up, as long as they get away from the persecution they would be suffering in their country of origin.

Cheers

I find that a bit hard to believe.
If their lives are at real risk why would any of them opt to return?
Surely anywhere safe would be a better choice?

I don't believe it at all.

[GWW]

Julie Bishop on the ABC confirms they will turn the boats around, in Govt.

[Jimmy_041]

mmmmmmmmmmm

[GWW]

That looks like one of those things that originated about a decade ago, but is circulated every 2 or 3 years.

[DOC]

An urban myth . And quite old.

[Jimmy_041]

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/the-truth-on-refugees-is-worse-than-fiction-20120729-2369z.html

[DOC]

Which confirms that the picture above and the contents included are false. His opinion that the truth is much worse is an opinion that is quite open to debate.

[Roxy the Rat Girl]

That looks like one of those things that originated about a decade ago, but is circulated every 2 or 3 years.

I've also seen this several times over the past 5 to 10 years. Definitely an urban myth, probably falsified by anti-refugee campaigners. I suggest a visit to the Centrelink website for current eligibility criteria, entitlements and payment amounts http://www.humanservices.gov.au

[Jimmy_041]

Got a bite though

[Roxy the Rat Girl]

Oh Jimmy, you are such a kidder

[ORDoubleBlues]

I guess I will have to admit that I did get it wrong with previous terminology that I used but would still argue that we only have so much money

[Bully]

another boat found heading our way.

[Grahaml]

The problem with boat arrivals is it's a money making scheme, not a life saving scheme. Most refugees we take in are honest, hard working, good people who were unlucky enough to find their lives in immediate danger. Many are victims of torture and/or have had family members executed. In some instances in front of them. These people don't arrive on boats. They drive, walk, hitch hike or do anything they can to get out and usually arrive in a safer part of the country or in another country and end up staying in a refugee camp. From there they are processed and allocated countries they can stay if the one they are in is incapable of looking after them long term. These arrivals come by plane and wait their turn in conditions often worse than Nauru in climates that are often quite hostile.

Coming by boat is not an option for these people. Boat owners don't make a long and dangerous journey if they aren't getting paid and most honest refugees leave with barely enough money for their next meals. In fact, any money they might have would probably go towards bribing an official to turn a blind eye.

The reality is the boat arrivals these days (things were different in the 60s and 70s where most boat arrivals were genuine) are people who want to come to work in Australia for money reasons. They aren't in direct danger in their home countries so would never be accepted as refugees under normal processing and as most lack skills would never be able to emigrate. They pay someone (often as a promise of paying later on when they can work in Australia) to bring them over where it's just a matter of time before they are accepted. They then can send money back to their families where even a couple of hundred a month is more than they could earn working. In the meantime, the places they take mean genuine refugees sit in those camps even longer.

These people also are well aware of the situation in Australia. They believe (fairly, IMHO) that this practice will become much harder under an Abbott government. So they will do what they can to get here before the election.

[Psyber]

The core issue in the debate about the illegality or not of those entering Oz by boat rather than by plane.
http://www.politifact.com.au/truth-o-me ... y-enterin/

Mary Crock, a law professor at Sydney University and a specialist in immigration and refugee law, told PolitiFact:
"The bottom line in the refugee convention is that it prohibits signatory states from imposing penalties on refugees for their illegal entry to the country. Refugees can’t be called illegal because the presumption has to be that they could be legitimate refugees."

The problem is with language and it’s touched on in Crock’s own reference to "illegal entry". Section 14 of Australia’s Migration Act specifies that "a non-citizen in the migration zone who is not a lawful non-citizen [ie, a non-citizen holding an appropriate visa] is an unlawful non-citizen".

Section 228B spells out that "a non-citizen seeking protection or asylum" but without a valid visa has "no lawful right to come to Australia", regardless of Australia’s protection obligations. Prior to 1994, an unlawful non-citizen was known in law as an "illegal entrant".

And article 31 of the UN convention says a refugee who enters a country without authorisation does so illegally, although nations that have signed the convention "shall not impose penalties on account of their illegal entry or presence".

[Q.]

They aren't in direct danger in their home countries

Actually, most of them are.

They drive, walk, hitch hike or do anything they can to get out and usually arrive in a safer part of the country or in another country and end up staying in a refugee camp

And a few drive, walk, hitch hike and catch boats all the way to a country that is signatory to the Refugee Convention.

They believe (fairly, IMHO) that this practice will become much harder under an Abbott government

The offshore processing we have now is little different to that of the Howard Govt, and it will be little different under an Abbott Govt, unless they can somehow convince Indonesia to accept returned boats.

[bulldogproud2]

The problem with boat arrivals is it's a money making scheme, not a life saving scheme. Most refugees we take in are honest, hard working, good people who were unlucky enough to find their lives in immediate danger. Many are victims of torture and/or have had family members executed. In some instances in front of them. These people don't arrive on boats. They drive, walk, hitch hike or do anything they can to get out and usually arrive in a safer part of the country or in another country and end up staying in a refugee camp. From there they are processed and allocated countries they can stay if the one they are in is incapable of looking after them long term. These arrivals come by plane and wait their turn in conditions often worse than Nauru in climates that are often quite hostile.

Coming by boat is not an option for these people. Boat owners don't make a long and dangerous journey if they aren't getting paid and most honest refugees leave with barely enough money for their next meals. In fact, any money they might have would probably go towards bribing an official to turn a blind eye.

The reality is the boat arrivals these days (things were different in the 60s and 70s where most boat arrivals were genuine) are people who want to come to work in Australia for money reasons. They aren't in direct danger in their home countries so would never be accepted as refugees under normal processing and as most lack skills would never be able to emigrate. They pay someone (often as a promise of paying later on when they can work in Australia) to bring them over where it's just a matter of time before they are accepted. They then can send money back to their families where even a couple of hundred a month is more than they could earn working. In the meantime, the places they take mean genuine refugees sit in those camps even longer.

These people also are well aware of the situation in Australia. They believe (fairly, IMHO) that this practice will become much harder under an Abbott government. So they will do what they can to get here before the election.

Unfortunately, you have your facts wrong, Graham. As pretty much everyone knows, well over 90% of asylum seekers who arrive by boat are found to be genuine refugees whilst only about 60% of those who arrive by plane are. There is a big reason for why people who come to Australia by boat do not go to refugee camps... there are no refugee camps in the areas that they come from. Instead, they show how much their lives are in danger by being prepared to travel over the seas knowing that there is a large possibility they may not finish the journey alive. As for the money aspect, you must be aware that it is, in many cases, the life savings of 20 to 30 people who pool them together to have one person travel... giving at least someone a chance of life. Each person contributes about $100 (their life saving) to try to save one member of their extended family.

As for the possibility of boats decreasing under an Abbott government, they won't unless conditions improve in the countries they are coming from. The numbers who travel are dictated by push factors, not pull factors. It is well known that people travelling to Australia by boat now have to wait five, possibly ten, years in what can only be described as appalling conditions before even being considered for entry to Australia. Has this decreased the numbers coming??? NO

Cheers