• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Regarding the so called "refugees" invading Australia

So, whats in the news today?

MMIGRATION Minister Scott Morrison has issued a stern warning to refugees escaping the Syrian crisis - if they try to come to Australia by boat they will not be welcome.
Mr Morrison this morning said there would be "no sympathy" given to boat people, regardless of their country of origin.
His comments come in the wake of the latest boat tragedy in which at least 31 people, mostly children, drowned off the coast of Indonesia with many more still missing.

News Corp Australia this morning revealed among the dead were a group of Lebanese refugees lured (really, lured?) to Australia on fake Syrian passports.

The families from an impoverished area of Lebanon were promised a safe "ship" to Australia via the fake identification.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-new...17/story-fncynjr2-1226730671584#ixzz2gX8pX47w

So lets see, these people:

(1) Obtained false identities for their whole families with the full intent of fraudulently entering Australia - a criminal act
(2) Had the money to procure this fake ID for their whole family and pay for their whole families travel to indonesia and then pay a people smuggler to buy a boat to transport them to Australia
Lets say a family of 5, that wouldn't come cheap.

Once again we get back to the elephant in the room that you don't want to see and refuse to address.

These people are economic migrants, not desperate refugee's

Furthermore, the vast majority of these people are muslims from the middle east and I don't want them here because the ones that are here already have shown themselves to be exactly like muslims in France, Germany, Sweden - reject their host country, be over represented in every crime, especially violence and sexual violence and generally live in a parasitic way, contributing nothing to the country.

Fuck them, fuck off, your not welcome, not because we are full, but because we don't want you.

I would happily see lots more immigration from places non muslim countries in South East Asia, South America and christians or gay people who are minorities in Muslim countries, you know, real refugees.
Not people who are in the ethnic majority - fucking stay and sort out your own shit, don't bring it here
 
Last edited:
Your so called elephant fails to address the fact the the UN does not consider travel using fake documentation a crime. In fact I quoted the same link you so clumsily linked above earlier...

The UNHCR emphasises that a person who has a well-founded fear of persecution should be viewed as a refugee and not be labelled an ‘illegal immigrant’ as the very nature of persecution means that their only means of escape may be via illegal entry and/or the use of false documentation.[8]

Thankfully far more intelligent people than you accept that desperate people will have to rely on desperate measure to escape hardship. There is no such thing as an "illegal refugee", any man has the right to state his case just as any country has the right to ignore it. Violent changes in government that occur during a civil war will always create a class of refugee who perhaps were once in power but are now considered a persecuted group. Throw religious persecution on top of this and you will often see once wealthy government members suddenly cast adrift and their families targets of retribution. Often there is no such thing as good and evil. Peoples fortunes can often turn on a literal sword so it is naive to judge a man who looks like he once lived the life of a gym junky or has a wardrobe of designer clothes.
 
I'm more impressed that for the first time someone has accused me of leftish leanings (whatever that is). I would have thought wanting to allow the more wealthy and less decrepit to come into the country would make me more of a conservative.

It is laughable for people to complain that "people are jumping the queue" like there is some sort of ordered processing procedure that creates fairness once they land. To have to then be imprisoned for several years while they assess your suitability is ridiculous. It takes only 5 minutes to be allowed into the country on holiday, surely it should take less than a week to run a back ground check if you want to stay long term. If it takes longer than this why not integrate them into the country and let them work, generate taxable income and only deport them once you eventually deem them unsuitable? That way there is no queue and you can allow just as many poor refugees as working ones. It would be cost effective too.


The bottom line is Australia will only accept so many refugees, The people you talk about being imprisoned for years may have to wait longer because they were on the wrong side of a number.
 
If the OP thinks clothing is a determiner of refugee status then he/she is a dribbling moron and I have no interest in understanding the sort of dark, hateful thought processes that brought them to this point.


I thought his argument was that legitimate refugees may be missing out to people who payed money to people smugglers.
 
http://bit.ly/19kYJEs

Would you like me to hold your hand as well?

I researched before asking, but thanks.

Your country doesn't have a refugee problem. The premise of the thread, that those arriving are too wealthy, too well dressed, too educated, too (whatever) to be considered refugees has absolutely no bearing when considering the countries these people are fleeing. They're fleeing warzones. Poor, uneducated peasants in rags eating 100 calories a day aren't the only citizens affected by war and persecution. Of the 14k refugee visas granted in 2011, 2k were from Iraq. 1.5k from Myanmar, 1k from Afghanistan, and 1k from Bhutan. If A few thousand refugees showing up every year is enough to ruffle your feathers this much you either have absolutely no grasp on the global displacement situation or long for the days of the white Australia policy. There are 47 million refugees worldwide. The reason I bring up the nation neighboring Syria is because they have real issues with handling fleeing Syrians.

Let us know when you start seeing camps like this popping up in Darwin:

NSFW:
ap10thingstoseemideastjordanuskerry103445.jpg



On the list of countries by refugee population, Australia ranks #47. For such a massive and wealthy country your situation could be much, much worse and you seem oblivious to this. Consider yourself lucky, I suppose.
 
I researched before asking, but thanks.

Your country doesn't have a refugee problem. The premise of the thread, that those arriving are too wealthy, too well dressed, too educated, too (whatever) to be considered refugees has absolutely no bearing when considering the countries these people are fleeing. They're fleeing warzones. Poor, uneducated peasants in rags eating 100 calories a day aren't the only citizens affected by war and persecution. Of the 14k refugee visas granted in 2011, 2k were from Iraq. 1.5k from Myanmar, 1k from Afghanistan, and 1k from Bhutan. If A few thousand refugees showing up every year is enough to ruffle your feathers this much you either have absolutely no grasp on the global displacement situation or long for the days of the white Australia policy. There are 47 million refugees worldwide. The reason I bring up the nation neighboring Syria is because they have real issues with handling fleeing Syrians.

Let us know when you start seeing camps like this popping up in Darwin:

NSFW:
ap10thingstoseemideastjordanuskerry103445.jpg



On the list of countries by refugee population, Australia ranks #47. For such a massive and wealthy country your situation could be much, much worse and you seem oblivious to this. Consider yourself lucky, I suppose.

Not just that. The vast majority of asylum seekers arrive by plane. He is going into hysterics over a few thousand Afghan Hazarra, Iraqi, Iranian and Sri Lankan asylum seekers who arrive by boat. It is the most confected and disingenuous outrage imaginable.
 
The bottom line is Australia will only accept so many refugees, The people you talk about being imprisoned for years may have to wait longer because they were on the wrong side of a number.

Depends on where they start from. You could argue that those who start off from Indonesia have an unfair advantage over those have to start their journey from say the Middle East. Why not have a Hunger Games style contest starting at the tip of cape York where every one has to fight through swamps, crocodiles and mosquitos with nothing but a loin clothe and a VB singlet, all the way to Cairns, winner gets a visa?
 
In the US we have over a million Mexicans that are doing jobs (picking vegs) that are needed because no one here wants to do it. We accept it as a whole, but the racists still complain (dey took my job). They send money home but spend a lot here. There taxes are taken out of there pay on a lot of farms, can't say there bosses give it all to the government but you can't say its not available. Also the Mexicans provide good dope, A++++
 
depends on where they start from. You could argue that those who start off from indonesia have an unfair advantage over those have to start their journey from say the middle east. Why not have a hunger games style contest starting at the tip of cape york where every one has to fight through swamps, crocodiles and mosquitos with nothing but a loin clothe and a vb singlet, all the way to cairns, winner gets a visa?

Hahaha :D
 
Like everything Middleway says this is full of shit too. He used to pretend that he only hated people based upon their religion but now he atleast has the decent to admit to being nothing more then your typical reactionary conservative that the likes of Abbott and company count on.

As you come from a country which was not happy with merely slaughtering and enslaving the indigenous population but also using Irish slaves to build their early infrastructure you should go back to your own country as well. Actually the aboriginals called they said everyone could stay but middleway has to go :p
 
Depends on where they start from. You could argue that those who start off from Indonesia have an unfair advantage over those have to start their journey from say the Middle East. Why not have a Hunger Games style contest starting at the tip of cape York where every one has to fight through swamps, crocodiles and mosquitos with nothing but a loin clothe and a VB singlet, all the way to Cairns, winner gets a visa?


Yeah that would be bonza, but I doubt the greeny pinko basterd party AKA the liberals would allow it. Theyd probably see it as "inhumane".
 
Like everything Middleway says this is full of shit too. He used to pretend that he only hated people based upon their religion but now he atleast has the decent to admit to being nothing more then your typical reactionary conservative that the likes of Abbott and company count on.

As you come from a country which was not happy with merely slaughtering and enslaving the indigenous population but also using Irish slaves to build their early infrastructure you should go back to your own country as well. Actually the aboriginals called they said everyone could stay but middleway has to go :p


Wow, you know heaps about Australia.
 
The arguments used against allowing "boat people", "refugees", and "asylum seekers" to cross international borders are generally ad hominem fallacies.

How quickly Australians forget that the majority of them are descendants of Europeans that came here on boats, and that the argument for settling via the doctrine of terra nullius was itself fallacious. Europeans settled Australia illegally, from 1788 onwards. Therefore, the majority of the population of Australia (except indigenous Australians, perhaps) are "boat people" and/or descendants of "boat people".

Any arguments, for not allowing humans to cross the border, that remain, are not reasonable or logical in the strict senses of the terms. The premises that form the arguments are based on legal fiction. Therein lies the problem; resolving apparent contradictions that result from political ideology based on legal fiction.
 
The arguments used against allowing "boat people", "refugees", and "asylum seekers" to cross international borders are generally ad hominem fallacies.

How quickly Australians forget that the majority of them are descendants of Europeans that came here on boats, and that the argument for settling via the doctrine of terra nullius was itself fallacious. Europeans settled Australia illegally, from 1788 onwards. Therefore, the majority of the population of Australia (except indigenous Australians, perhaps) are "boat people" and/or descendants of "boat people".

Any arguments, for not allowing humans to cross the border, that remain, are not reasonable or logical in the strict senses of the terms. The premises that form the arguments are based on legal fiction. Therein lies the problem; resolving apparent contradictions that result from political ideology based on legal fiction.


Care to explain you last paragraph a little further?
 
Ha, Greeks and Italians from the same religious and cultural background as Anglo-Saxons? Greece is orthodox and Italy is Catholic, pretty different to Anglicanism/Protestantism, and culturally, Southern Europe is a long, long way from Britain. In fact, the UK, my country, was deeply affected by Catholic terrorism for a long time, and historically there has been a lot of anti-Catholicism and sectarianism in the UK, and it continues to this day. I think that you're oversimplifying things here, and I'd make the argument that Greeks and Turks have a lot more in common, culturally, than either do with Brits. My understanding, though, is that from your perspective, Greeks are GOOD immigrants, 'cos they believe in Jesus, and Turks are BAD immigrants, 'cos they believe in Muhammed. Amirite?
 
Top