SA Footy

matt thistlewaite on sky news this morning taking credit for the "no boat arrivals in 5 weeks " this morning on sky

pretty interesting article on asylum seeker movements worldwide, and puts our problem (or lack thereof) into sperspective

http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/wh ... -turn/827/

for australia, the fact that china and india are such a bit proportion of the total amount surprised me somewhat. I think that they mostly account for plane arrivals, whilst afghan and iraqui asylum seekers come by boat a lot of the time.

Correct, Chinese and Indians make up the majority of plane arrivals.

Q. wrote:Correct, Chinese and Indians make up the majority of plane arrivals.

The Indians make up the majority of taxi arrivals as well

The part about them loading a toddler back onto a lifeboat and sending them back to sea particularly worries me, though the whole practice of sending boats back is still ridiculous

http://ab.co/1kY1GDD

Lifeboats are safer than selfish parents taking them onto unsafe boats in the first place

That doesn't make it ok to put them back in a boat.

And how is running for your life selfish? 90 odd percent of boat arrivals are assessed as genuine refugees

Jimmy_041 wrote:Lifeboats are safer than selfish parents taking them onto unsafe boats in the first place

Jimmy why would these people be making decisions we couldn't even consider.?

Afganistan? Iraq? are we at all responsible for the plight of these people????

Bloody ABC. This is so un-australian posting this.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-07/v ... on/5245280

shoe boy wrote:

Jimmy_041 wrote:Lifeboats are safer than selfish parents taking them onto unsafe boats in the first place

Jimmy why would these people be making decisions we couldn't even consider.?

Afganistan? Iraq? are we at all responsible for the plight of these people????

A snippet from the link below

Indonesian sources have told the ABC those on board came from Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal.

bennymacca wrote:The part about them loading a toddler back onto a lifeboat and sending them back to sea particularly worries me, though the whole practice of sending boats back is still ridiculous

http://ab.co/1kY1GDD

Looked very safe to me. Come through the proper channels and stop risking your kids.

What is their proper channel? Please tell me.

How about trying to fix the problem of why they need to flee their country of origin in the first place. If all nations that accept Asylum seekers got together & helped the UN, surely they could make the Refugee camps safer. Of course there would still be the need to accept some Asylum seekers and we should IMO.

bennymacca wrote:That doesn't make it ok to put them back in a boat.

And how is running for your life selfish? 90 odd percent of boat arrivals are assessed as genuine refugees

Putting your kids life at risk is selfish, mind you, I bet the boats look very good in the brochure the snakeheads distribute
Fair enough on the 90%, but can we stop calling them refugees until they are assessed as genuine refugees.
I'm not sure people understand there is a difference.

Maybe change that car stickers to "Say yes to GENUINE refugees" and you wont lose the trees for the forest.
Australia has every right to protect its borders and to check people to see if they are refugees.

The main question I have is WHY are people from Iran, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal coming to Australia?
Do they open an atlas and go: "Gee Australia looks nice - let's go there"

Leaping Lindner wrote:Bloody ABC. This is so un-australian posting this.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-07/v ... on/5245280

I love this:

Indonesia's foreign minister takes swipe at Australian policy

Indonesia's foreign minister Marty Natalegawa has again expressed concern over the boat turn-backs policy.
"This kind of policy of transferring people from one boat to another and then directing them back to Indonesia is not really helpful," he said.

Not helpful to them - what a laugh
Means they have to start looking at the problem instead of turning a blind eye to it

Jimmy_041 wrote:Fair enough on the 90%, but can we stop calling them refugees until they are assessed as genuine refugees.
I'm not sure people understand there is a difference.

fair point, they are asylum seekers until they have been granted refugee status. still doesnt change my point though.

Jimmy_041 wrote:Australia has every right to protect its borders and to check people to see if they are refugees.

i dont think you will see anyone disagreeing with this part - it is not the processing of asylum seekers i have an issue with, the thing i have an issue with is shipping them off to manus island and then not letting them settle in australia at all.

Jimmy_041 wrote:The main question I have is WHY are people from Iran, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal coming to Australia?
Do they open an atlas and go: "Gee Australia looks nice - let's go there"

because it is a nice place to live! i would want to come here.

especially when you consider that places like malaysia and indonesia are not signatories to the UN refugee convention, so there is no obligation of these countries to process people that claim asylum, and they quite often have no access to work, healthcare, etc etc in these countries. so its not just that they are looking for the nicest place, but also somewhere that will have them.

Jimmy_041 wrote:Indonesia's foreign minister takes swipe at Australian policy

Indonesia's foreign minister Marty Natalegawa has again expressed concern over the boat turn-backs policy.
"This kind of policy of transferring people from one boat to another and then directing them back to Indonesia is not really helpful," he said.

Not helpful to them - what a laugh
Means they have to start looking at the problem instead of turning a blind eye to it

it is not just their problem though, which is what we are trying to make it at the moment.

i would much rather see processing centres set up in indonesia, so that asylum seekers can be assessed there, and then, if granted refugee status, transferred safely to australia.

cracka wrote:How about trying to fix the problem of why they need to flee their country of origin in the first place. If all nations that accept Asylum seekers got together & helped the UN, surely they could make the Refugee camps safer. Of course there would still be the need to accept some Asylum seekers and we should IMO.

Lovely ideal but it won't happen.
Self-interest is a natural part of being human and it tends to obscure truth.
Then suspicion born of that pattern obstructs the impulse to helpfulness.

Another problem in an overpopulated world, getting short of food and water, is that if we share it evenly we all live poorly, and we may be already beyond the point where we can prevent that in the longer run.

Psyber wrote:
Another problem in an overpopulated world, getting short of food and water, is that if we share it evenly we all live poorly, and we may be already beyond the point where we can prevent that in the longer run.

Don't know about that one Psyber. Might be a good idea for some first world countries stopped wasting food and lost some weight.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

Psyber wrote:
Another problem in an overpopulated world, getting short of food and water, is that if we share it evenly we all live poorly, and we may be already beyond the point where we can prevent that in the longer run.

Don't know about that one Psyber. Might be a good idea for some first world countries stopped wasting food and lost some weight.

Another nice ideal.
Unfortunately it costs more to ship excess food production than waste it (unless the cost it is subsidised).
AND it results in more CO2 contribution to global warming.