yer funky ...what you say is OK but I think I would ask myself.

why did all my friends get it so wrong, and should i change my

thought pattern to something that seems to be better, or just

continue in the same idealism. Work hard and send many dollars back

to the old country, so that those that want to stay and exist like I was

continue with the stupidity and carnage ???? praize be to.....[}:)]

getfunky said...


Again, I am happy to be corrected here but I don't believe being classified as an (genuine) asylum seeker, and being given tempory status, automatically means you will be green thumbed for permenant residency.

Well nobody else has so I might as well.
The present policy is that after processing, you are pretty much guaranteed to be given a permanent protection visa because temporary protection visas do not exist any more.

Temporary protection visas were abolished in August 2008.
It was part of Kev's election platform.

There were a few unduly harsh conditions attached to the TPV's which made the policy an easy target for those opposed to it. Other parts of the policy were reasonable under the circumstances.
It was recognised by the previous government that this policy was harsh, but their objective was to stop the flow of unauthorised boat arrivals, and it did work, so on that basis, they put up with the bad press to achieve the result.

The present policy is now that any unauthorised arrivals who say the magic words, "I am seeking assylum in your country" are automatically placed in the 'fast track' for processing, after which, if no evidence is found that they are not who and what they say, they are given a permanent protection visa. i.e. permanent residency.
They can then apply to have their family join them on 'compassionate grounds', which they could not do under the TPV's.

This small change in policy has now made the risky 'boat arrivals' the new but now well established method for 'fast track' immigration.

Since the removal of the TPV's policy, the number of unauthorised arrivals has risen alarmingly, particularly over the last year. This is probably due to the success of the earlier trips soon after the law was changed.
More success means even more buyers of the service.
I feel entitled to use the word "alarmingly" because I quote it from a United Nations report on the matter.

Today's news said 200 in the last 2 days.
Will it stop at that number?
Not if they are successful. And they are being very successful so far.

Boat arrivals hit 'new milestone'
April 26, 2010, 4:35 pm

A boat carrying 49 suspected asylum seekers has helped Australia achieve a new, but unenviable milestone on arrivals, the federal opposition says.

It's attacking the government again over what it says is a new financial year record for the number of boat arrivals to Australia.

The latest vessel, stopped near the Ashmore Islands on Sunday, carrying 49 passengers and two crew, means 4210 people have come to Australia since July 2009, according to opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison.

He said it was the highest figure on record, eclipsing the 4174 who arrived the financial year ending 2000.

He's demanded the government detail exactly what it is costing taxpayers to accommodate them, believing the bill to be some $200 million more than originally thought.

Now that Christmas Island is "spilling over", he believes the government is shelling out millions more in operational costs, air transport and the reopening of the Curtin detention centre in Western Australia.

"(Prime Minister) Kevin Rudd must make clear in the coming federal budget just how much extra we are now going to have to pay for his failed policies," Mr Morrison said.

But a spokesman from Immigration Minister Chris Evans's office denied a budget blowout, adding all costings will be publicly released.

It also made sense to wait until the current financial year had finished, he said.

"The Howard government spent over $1.4 billion dealing with irregular maritime arrivals," the spokesman said in a statement.

"The Rudd government has maintained the same funding ... which will be made available during the normal budget process."

The latest spat surrounding border protection comes as 75 Sri Lankans were finally persuaded from their leaking boat off the Malaysian coast.

Stopped on their way to Australia, they had a two-day standoff with authorities, but were eventually lured off when police boarded the vessel on Sunday.

Meanwhile, the immigration department has hosed down safety concerns regarding a plane-load of detainees who were flown from Christmas Island to the mainland wearing face masks.

A departmental spokesman denied there was any health risk posed by the group, who were being flown to Brisbane.

He confirmed about a dozen of the 27 people had been ordered to wear face masks on the plane as a precautionary measure, adding they had all passed preliminary health checks.
Their medical checks were in the process of being completed in Brisbane, he added.

Is there any surf on xmas island?

GypsyDrifter said...

doggie said...

Is there any surf on xmas island?

I think the answer to that would be yes

Looks lovely

www.christmasislandsurf.com/

Wrong Christmas Island. That one is Kiritimati/Christmas Island in Kiribati (the Line Islands) several hundred miles south of Hawaii. Looks like a nice place but a looooong way from anywhere else and certainly out of the range of any refugee boats from Indonesia.

GypsyDrifter said...

cisco said...

GypsyDrifter said...

doggie said...

Is there any surf on xmas island?

I think the answer to that would be yes

Looks lovely

www.christmasislandsurf.com/

Wrong Christmas Island. That one is Kiritimati/Christmas Island in Kiribati (the Line Islands) several hundred miles south of Hawaii. Looks like a nice place but a looooong way from anywhere else and certainly out of the range of any refugee boats from Indonesia.

I had a feeling that was not the same Xmas island... as it looked too flat...dam this one looks good though...

+1

Might not be the right thread for this but it is somewhat relevant.

downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplayer/cbnPlayer.swf?aid=11991

Cisco said it is "somewhat relevant" and I would have to agree.
The vid is not directly relevant because we are not talking about terrorists in our armed forces.
But, the point this ex general guy is making is that there are now double standards when it comes to dealing with peoples beliefs.
He was forced out of the army for openly being christian, however, they were not prepared to deal with the muslim guy, Nidal Hassan, who ended up doing the shooting massacre, because they were scared of being labelled racist.
And he claims that Nidal Hassan's views and beliefs were well known.
And worse still, Hassan's job was to counsel soldiers who came back from Afghanistan and Iraq which many muslims believe is an 'anti muslim' war.
It's hard to know all the facts relating to this because in view of the outcome, they try to put a lid on it all. But on the face of it, it does seem to be an appallingly bad choice of person to do that job.

Anyway, the relevant point is that there now seems to be double standards in speaking against a persons character depending on whether they be christian or something else.
If they are christian you can say what you like.
If they are something else, you can say nothing, otherwise you are racist.

pweedas said...

Cisco said it is "somewhat relevant" and I would have to agree.
The vid is not directly relevant because we are not talking about terrorists in our armed forces.
But, the point this ex general guy is making is that there are now double standards when it comes to dealing with peoples beliefs.
He was forced out of the army for openly being christian, however, they were not prepared to deal with the muslim guy, Nidal Hassan, who ended up doing the shooting massacre, because they were scared of being labelled racist.
And he claims that Nidal Hassan's views and beliefs were well known.
And worse still, Hassan's job was to counsel soldiers who came back from Afghanistan and Iraq which many muslims believe is an 'anti muslim' war.
It's hard to know all the facts relating to this because in view of the outcome, they try to put a lid on it all. But on the face of it, it does seem to be an appallingly bad choice of person to do that job.

Anyway, the relevant point is that there now seems to be double standards in speaking against a persons character depending on whether they be christian or something else.
If they are christian you can say what you like.
If they are something else, you can say nothing, otherwise you are racist.

Fair points but I am not railing on about the double standards where women in the work place feel cozy about making dumb bloke jokes (a lot) or sending emails - whereas I'd be flipping burgers for a living if i dared to make a dumb female joke - cause it aint related to the topic of boat arrivals. (Er.. then again I just did I think?) Yet time and again issues that have zero to do with boat arrivals and generally involve fear of muslims come up in these discussions (look back through this thread for example). Ask yourself why that is?

Perhaps we could talk about how the Collombine kids were WASPy chrissos? The UNA bomber was WASPy etc etc. One case of a Muslim bloke goin off the deepend (even if he squirmed through a anti-discrimination loophole) does not relate to boat arrivals. Zero in fact.

Perhaps a new thread discussing the stuff up in the US military by allowing the crackpot to remain and wreak havoc would be better?



BTW - I have to agree the number of arrivals is concerning and is needing some decent policy to help reduce the numbers. By decent policy in MHO your could strike a line through nearly all of the policies shabbily whacked together by successive govts seeking shallow votes over the last decade.

Until then we just have to do the righty and treat the arrivals humanely and justly.

evangelicalism at work.

dunno what scares me most fundamentalist Muslims or Evangelicals.

GypsyDrifter said...
So that's averaged out as 19 asylum seekers a day since the beginning of the year...but I wonder what they have done with the 50 boats

They let them go back to get more of course, silly. We are not allowed to deprive people of their means of deriving an income. Didn't you know that??

poor relative said...

evangelicalism at work.

dunno what scares me most fundamentalist Muslims or Evangelicals.

TOTALLY agree Rellie. TBH (and I have been saying it ever since 911) ther are nuts on the Muslim and Christian side but the chrisso nuts scare me more because they (via the US govt) have far more say over the western world and indeed our politics. They are amongst us(no foil hat required ) they are connected to govt (ey Tony Abbot) and they want it all their way.

Any fundamentalist from any side of the religious fence should be condemmed and indeed feared.



Now back on topic:

Cisco - a nutter going bonkers in the US military has fek all to do with immigrants/asylum seekers/boat people - whatever you want to (correctly or incorrectly) call them - any way you look at it.

Clouding the waters on unrelated debates by lobbing in examples of random nutters is too easy to do. It distracts from the real issues and allows joe public to neatly pidgeon hole the issue into the fear and loathing folder, without spending the time or exercising the grey matter to understand the real issue. Ultimately the technique works on the happily ignorant - and lets face it - there is no shortage out there. So gather as much kudos from the fick and fickle if you like.



To those that assume all boat arrivals are Muslim (and therefore destined to be an extremist nut??) the arrivals from Sri Lanka are nearly all Tamils and are generally Hindu.



Historically Oz has been both admirable and condemable with it's treatment of refugees.

Post the Vietnam war (or perhaps more correctly the American war - as it is referred to in Vietnam) the liberal govt showed incredibly progressive and compassionate treatment of boat arrivals. There was also an understanding that the people fleeing Vietnam were the victims (not the perps) and a fairly big factor in them arriving was because of the actions of our and and our allies govt/military.

Do refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan not deserve the same treatment 40 yrs later?


Have we evolved culturally or not?




EDIT: Great post gestalt. Very informative and says it all really. 5:50 - 6:50 should be compulsive viewing for anyone interetsed in the real issues (not the fear and loathing the issue).