And the boats keep coming

Just making a point about the queue. I'm surprised a person of your intelligence missed that - I thought made it quite clear (the first and last sentences are a good hint too) . :rolleyes:
 
A.A. Alfie said:
I believe it is your turn.

What policy set best represents your position?
Click to expand...

No. I asked you about Tony Abbott's refusal to accept any compromise on his part. The only compromis he will accept is his proposal and nothing else. You could divert to something else again, but you won't be answering the question.
 
So you've told us your story, but what are you suggesting as a solution to this problem? That we just lock up the asylum seekers in a detention centre until the refugee camps in places like Kenya, the DRC and Pakistan are empty?
 
The point clearly went whoosh. Simple language for those lacking an ability to grasp tricky concepts.

No queue.
Limited vacancies.
When filled.
No more left.
It feels like a queue for those who wait.
 
Last edited:
philkensebben said:
James from Somalia, a muslim country. He sounds a bit.....you know....made up.
Click to expand...

Actually - if anything - he is Christian (I say this because he says his mother was Christian, he has never mentioned religion in my presence).
Did you never hear of the Somalian Civil war?

Some info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Civil_War

Refugees are still in Kenya:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wor...-in-kenyas-dadaab-camp-aid-agencies-warn.html

Residents who fled famine and warfare in Somalia have now seen grandchildren born and raised in what was supposed to have been a temporary home. They have also seen predators and criminal groups flourish; and watched as recruiters lure bored and frustrated boys back to Somalia to serve in armed militias or pirate gangs.

Please read the first sentence and tell me they aren't deserving of a crack at Australia or elsewhere.

ETA. I have just read this article and commend it to you. You may find it enlightening.
 
Last edited:
philkensebben said:
Er I never said Somalian refugees werent deserving of a place in Australia.
Click to expand...

No. Quite right on that point at least, you didn't say that.
What was your point? Oh yes, I am making things up. Read and learn please about the plight of the Somalian refugees.

Perhaps you (or anyone else here) could then tell me why those that arrive by boat somehow deserve to be fast tracked through the system because they manage to jump the (proverbial) queue.
 
Last edited:
Wildy said:
So you've told us your story, but what are you suggesting as a solution to this problem? That we just lock up the asylum seekers in a detention centre until the refugee camps in places like Kenya, the DRC and Pakistan are empty?
Click to expand...

I forgot to mention that this was directed at Alfie.
 
Wildy said:
I forgot to mention that this was directed at Alfie.
Click to expand...

I truly wish I knew the answer.

What I do know is that our laws (or lack thereof) draw people to get on boats. Many drown - up to 800 since Labor undid the laws that stopped people drowning. Those that get here are deserving but no more than those in as great a need - if not more so - than those arriving.

What is your answer to the problem?
 
Queues being reality or not, why should someone surviving day to day in a dire refugee camp and/or a war torn country, perhaps with family, consider the idea queuing? Would they even have such a concept of orderly queues to escape such a situation?

It's a fine concept for those in their brick and tile on a quarter-acre block. Maybe we should set up some sort of civilized electronic queuing system with tickets?
 
A.A. Alfie said:
I truly wish I knew the answer.
Click to expand...

I have trouble believing that. Surely you've thought of how you would right the wrong of the people in camps losing their places to those who arrive here and seek asylum.

What I do know is that our laws (or lack thereof) draw people to get on boats. Many drown - up to 800 since Labor undid the laws that stopped people drowning. Those that get here are deserving but no more than those in as great a need - if not more so - than those arriving.
Click to expand...

The bold part is the only really relevant bit in this paragraph. How would you right this supposed wrong?
 
The queue does not exist, even a proverbial one.
Refugees flee in a disorderly manner, the best they can.
The ones with the means to, if that is money or a steely determination get to where they feel is best for them and their families.
If you are desperate enough to do a dangerous leaky boat trip through storm infested tropical waters you will do it.
By taking these people they are not jumping a mythical queue.
Maybe these people are the best for our country anyway, they show a lot of courage and determination to get to Australia.
 
wombatwal said:
The queue does not exist, even a proverbial one.
Click to expand...

Of course it does - as per the explanations above.

wombatwal said:
By taking these people they are not jumping a mythical queue.
Click to expand...

What would you call it?
Let's say we have 5000 places for asylum seekers/refugees (humanitarian places). And lets say the government is due to allocate these places for the next 12 months to African asylum camp residents.
In that 12 months over 5000 people arrive by boat which effectively bumps back those in Africa for (yet) another year.

It's not a queue - I agree. But what do you call it? What should we call it?
By trying to invalidate the word "queue", it seems to me you are attempting to make this part of the issue go away. It won't.

Name it so you can discuss it.
 
Last edited:
How come we never here about all the "queue jumpers" who arrive at our airports every year and outnumber boat arrivals a factor of 10?
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Of course it does - as per the explanations above.



What would you call it?
Let's say we have 5000 places for asylum seekers/refugees (humanitarian places). And lets say the government is due to allocate these places for the next 12 months to African asylum camp residents.
In that 12 months over 5000 people arrive by boat which effectively bumps back those in Africa for (yet) another year.

It's not a queue - I agree. But what do you call it? What should we call it? By trying to invalidate the word "queue", it seems to me you are attempting to make this part of the issue go away. It won't. Name it so you can discuss it.
Click to expand...

You admit that there isn't a queue yet insist on using that term. Politicians and others should stop using these deceptive words that do nothing more than demonize those who arrive on boats. It makes it easier to sell harsh policies though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom