Boat People

Lets discuss this.

First of all, the boat people are NOT illegal. Under International Law, it is legal to seek asylum by boat if you are fleeing persecution. That is what those people are fleeing from.
The vast majority of asylum seekers are accepted into the country - a handful are sent back.

Australia takes in less than one percent of asylum seekers - yet the Liberals complain about us being 'flooded' by them - this is complete and utter bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

The asylum seekers involved in the crash off Christmas Island will be processed and will most likely be given asylum. If any are sent back it will be only a few.

We should be compassionate and help these people where we can, instead of expecting them to remain in their countries and be killed.

 

In any given year we get about 1000 to 2000 boat people. In that same times tens of thousands of illegals arrive by air. They're well off white people though for the most part so the Liberal party doesn't see them as a problem.

 

Most illegals arrive by plane, not by boat - but we only hear about the boat people, and because they are Afghanis and Iraqis, the Libs beat their chests and demand that we get rid of them. I guess those Muslims might pollute the country.

 

Correct; they are "unauthorised", not illegal arrivals.

It's interesting how the debate changes over decades (and probably varies depending on race, but it's mostly geopolitical bollocks).

Seekers from Eastern Europe during the cold war: traffickers were considered heroes by us (the West).

Vietnam: Those poor vietnamese were fleeing a cruel and evil communist regime. To send them back must show that it's not so bad there after all.

Now?

It's quite amazing to see us basically chuck people back to Afghanastan. Clearly, it is one of the most dangerous and joyless places in the world. I'm amazed our politicians don't let them come for political purposes. It would go some way to corroborate their justification for invading the country (and staying there).

 

I agree with offshore protesting and the Liberals policy on asylum seekers. I don't necessarily agree with how they are selling it but that's another issue. Howard's policy helped stop the boats which I think was good not because it keeps out muslims but because it stopped people risking their lives to make an extremely dangerous journey.

Labor got in and decided that the policy that was extremely effective in stopping boats and therefore saving lives wasn't fair and axed meaning that more boats started coming and more people got stranded at sea and had to wait for the navy to rescue them.

And as we found out a couple of months ago with the Christmas Island disaster that the navy couldn't save everyone and tragically lives were lost.

I ask any of you who support Labor's or the Green's policies on asylum seekers of would of the Christmas Island tragedy happened with Howard's policy enforced? Because I and many others doubt it.

Also there is the fact that each time someone jumps ahead, those who go through the right, legal means to gain residency lose their chance to get in.

 

We can't say that turning the boats back saves lives because it doesn't - we send those people back to countries were they lie in fear of being raped or killed, or worse.
Howards solution was inhumane and cruel and supported only by the racist Liberals.

The people whinging about the recent loads of boat people are the same people who thought Howards solution was the better one - those people lack compassion for their fellow human beings.

 

No they go to refugee camps and get processed like everyone else. Like it or not in this day and age we need to put people through security checks.

It's not a lack of compassion for fellow human beings that makes me believe that Howard's policy was better. It's the fact that not everyone is going to get what they want, life isn't perfect and we can't afford to give, give and give. Sometimes someone's going to get the short straw sometimes that's life.

Howard's policy meant that less refugees made the dangerous journey, and those who did the right thing and came through the legal ways were let in the to our great country first.

PS
I don't like being called a racist liberal, I may have only just started posting here but I have been a reader for a couple of months now and I notice that you are very quick to dismiss people with different opinions to yours with cheap insults. Don't be so close minded you might learn something.

 

In 2001, when John Howard was prime minister, 356 refugee lives were lost at sea: SEIV-X.

146 children, 142 women, 65 men.

When John Howard was prime minister.


SIEV-X, 2001

http://www.sievxmemorial.com/about-sievx.html

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/tragic-legacy-of-sievxs-fatal-sinking-20091019-h38e.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/22/1053585647492.html

O, the despicable Howard years.

 

We put them through security checks, yes, but that doesn't mean we have to turn them around.

You think that less refugees making 'the dangerous journey' is better than them being raped or killed in their homeland? Howard thought that, but then he had no compassion at all for minority groups - Howard was a racist and a terrible PM. Thank god he is gone.

You are also forgetting that the boat people ARE taking the legal way to enter the country - why do Liberals assume that asylum seekers are illegals when they are NOT!!

 

It must be a boat phobia, thats all I can say. Refugees arriving by plane apparently count as being legal but if they come by boat they dont. Im amazed that these people just dont see the simple irrationality of their argument.

 

Liberals tend to see what they want to see - to Liberals, you are an illegal immigrant if you are a Muslim. That's why they don't care about illegals arriving by plane - they aren't Muslims.

 

Come to the US our "boat" people just walk right in and then transform the areas they settle into Mexico.

 

They should not be allowed to do this.

 

Well they do and if you try to protest or stop them they call you a racist...I don't think i am a racist because I feel everyone should chip in and pay for the things we all use..highways..schools..etc...Mexicans come here for the free ride and the rest of us have to pay for it

 

Don't forget all those Cubans in Miami.

 

Yeah but Cuban women are hot so its ok....

 

Okay your point about having to come to Australia to escape rape and torture is just plain wrong. Sure this is undeniably a factor in say Afghanistan but these people have made it all the way to Indonesia. Sure it's not the safest country in the world but it is livable, thousands of Australians holiday there every year. Being raped or tortured is hardly major concern there. Why not just be classified as a refugee there and then apply for citizen ship or residency in Australia from Indonesia. It would save them coming on a leaky boat and risking their lives.

I'm not denying that it isn't legal for these people to come here I just think that coming via some dinky old boat isn't the right way to go about it. They are risking the lives of not only themselves but of the Australian Navy trying to save them. What a lot of people miss is that the people who make it over on planes have documentation and can prove they are no threat, therefore they are let in. People who come on boats burn or just don't bring documentation so we need to put them in detention while they are processed.

I must stress that I have no grudge with people wanting to come here, Coming by boat is just too risky and dangerous. All that point made about the boat sinking during the Howard years was that we needed to stop them so less lives would be lost. Guess what this happened the boats were stopped and lives were saved. You can hardly blame that tragedy on Howard, you lot aren't blaming Gillard for the latest Christmas Island debacle are you?

 

And Labor want to lock them up on Timor, without telling the Timorese.

Do you actually have a point? Why do you support people smuggling?

Blind partisan nonsense.

 

Indonesia, like most countries, is already overpopulated. I doubt they want these refuges. Nor can they be usefully employed. But Australia on the other hand...

 

People will desperate things when they are desperate. Why do you want to turn those boats around?

 

We don't even try.

We support the rape of various countries while pretending to be friends of the people, East Timor was a case in point. We supported Indonesia in their slaughter of roughly a third of the Timorese - a genocide greater (per capita) than that of the Cambodian Khmer Rouge (whom we riled against).

If it happened that the East Timorese fled and came to our shores, would you have the same attitude?

We take 10 times with one hand what we give with the other.

Many, many other countries are treated the same way. Though the relative lack of size and power we project internationally reduces our culpability compared to some nations, the intent is the same: hold others down to keep ourselves up.

We pick and choose when people fleeing persecution, torture and abject poverty is a good thing, and that is disgusting.

 

I guess to aus_91, receiving such arrivals is 50% better than by boat because it's safer. I'm not sure what he/she sees the advantage of offshore processing is. I believe doing so is actually contrary to the UN conventions of the refugee.

 

The advantage is that is among other measures put in place, it acted as a disincentive to people smugglers. Which means hat less refugees risk their lives. Even the ALP sees this, although they are wasting time and money trying to get Indonesia on board rather then using Nauru.

No one has answered my question. If the coalitions policy was still enforced would have the christmas Island tragedy happened? I know it's hypothetical but look at the figures of boat arrivals during Howard's time compared to now and tell the chance would not have at least been significantly reduced.

Another fun fact for you all when Howard stopped the boats from coming he actually increased migration, so your cries of racism are null and void.

 

I think we should send them all back and have zero migration. There are too many people in Austrlia already. We should be aiming for population reduction, as should the rest of the world.