Kids in detention camps - crazy!

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

If a boatload of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS turns up I would expect that they would be escorted to the place they departed from. This is the current policy.

To be murdered hey. But guess not happening here, so not your problem.

They wouldn’t be murdered in Indonsia, because that’s where the boat would have come from.

I think it’s incredibly sad that children are getting caught up in all this. It’s also sad that people leave their homeland because they have completely lost hope.

The question is, though, how best to help.

I doubt if Christian asylum seekers would be allowed to transit through Indonesia. They murder enough Christians in Indonesia as it is.
The Muslim asylum seekers that were coming to Australia from the middle east usually flew (with passport) to Malaysia or Indonesia first, those countries being Muslim and allowing other Muslims in, no questions.
After facilitation payments are made to certain operators they catch a boat in a south westerly direction.
You know the rest.
If they were coming from the middle east they would take their chances and go by boat to Italy and onto Europe; Australia wouldn’t be possible.

dungfungus said :

Mysteryman said :

John Hargreaves said :

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

It should. And it would, if the unlawful non-citizens stopped intentionally destroying their documentation and passports before arriving here.

Read this, John:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/the-impossible-refugee-boat-lift-to-christmas-island.html?pagewanted=all

It’s written by a journalist who did the boat journey to Australia with a load of “refugees” in 2013. It wasn’t widely reported by the media in Australia because it simply doesn’t line up with the narrative that you and others like you are pushing. What you’ll see is that most of the “refugees” traveled through numerous countries to get here, and chose not to resettle in any of them because by their own admission they were not fleeing persecution or in fear of their lives, but rather seeking economic improvement and a more comfortable life. They also paid the equivalent of multiple airfares to do so. They could have spend the same money taking their whole family on an actual flight to Australia, which would have been safer and faster. They didn’t though, because they’re would be no chance of making falsified claims for asylum.

I have no problem with people wanting to come to Australia for a better life and more stable economy. But when they arrive illegally on boats, destroying their documentation so the government can’t verify their claims and jumping ahead of those who chose to come through the correct channels, I become resistant. Especially when people who are genuinely in need of help are being ignored.

Read the article, John. It would do you good to have some more insight on this issue.

The left is having a lot of difficulty dealing with this link, especially as it has been related to boy journalists from the NY Times.

should read “related by journalists at the NY Times”

JC said :

dungfungus said :

If a boatload of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS turns up I would expect that they would be escorted to the place they departed from. This is the current policy.

To be murdered hey. But guess not happening here, so not your problem.

They wouldn’t be murdered in Indonsia, because that’s where the boat would have come from.

I think it’s incredibly sad that children are getting caught up in all this. It’s also sad that people leave their homeland because they have completely lost hope.

The question is, though, how best to help.

Mysteryman said :

John Hargreaves said :

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

It should. And it would, if the unlawful non-citizens stopped intentionally destroying their documentation and passports before arriving here.

Read this, John:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/the-impossible-refugee-boat-lift-to-christmas-island.html?pagewanted=all

It’s written by a journalist who did the boat journey to Australia with a load of “refugees” in 2013. It wasn’t widely reported by the media in Australia because it simply doesn’t line up with the narrative that you and others like you are pushing. What you’ll see is that most of the “refugees” traveled through numerous countries to get here, and chose not to resettle in any of them because by their own admission they were not fleeing persecution or in fear of their lives, but rather seeking economic improvement and a more comfortable life. They also paid the equivalent of multiple airfares to do so. They could have spend the same money taking their whole family on an actual flight to Australia, which would have been safer and faster. They didn’t though, because they’re would be no chance of making falsified claims for asylum.

I have no problem with people wanting to come to Australia for a better life and more stable economy. But when they arrive illegally on boats, destroying their documentation so the government can’t verify their claims and jumping ahead of those who chose to come through the correct channels, I become resistant. Especially when people who are genuinely in need of help are being ignored.

Read the article, John. It would do you good to have some more insight on this issue.

The left is having a lot of difficulty dealing with this link, especially as it has been related to boy journalists from the NY Times.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

If a boatload of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS turns up I would expect that they would be escorted to the place they departed from. This is the current policy.

To be murdered hey. But guess not happening here, so not your problem.

That’s right – it’s not our problem.

dungfungus said :

If a boatload of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS turns up I would expect that they would be escorted to the place they departed from. This is the current policy.

To be murdered hey. But guess not happening here, so not your problem.

vintage123 said :

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

I haven’t seen any photos of any kids in any Australian detention camp.
I think you are being too emotive on this issue.
The people who may have come with these kids you refer to would be their parents, right?

I have seen the children first hand, and some of them do not have their parents in Australia with them. This makes it very difficult to find timely solutions.

Why do the parents send the children to Australia in the first place? I could be cynical and suggest that it is a ruse to have Australia “adopt” the children so they can then apply to have their family (not just parents) come here under the family reunion scheme.
The plan doesn’t seem to work so somehow it becomes Australia’s fault? Give me a break.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

Interesting that you chose to respond to this post but not my far more reasonable question in the post before it.

Can I take from your last sentence then that you would place no limit on Australia’s refugee intake and that you believe we should accept any and all refugees that arrive on our shores?

If I was the PM, I would properly fund aid programs and processing centres for asylum seekers in the country of origin. I would also turn no boats back because this is not the compassionate thing to do. These people are desperate. They are not terrorists in thinly veiled disguise.

I would ensure that the children of these asylum seekers are given succour and education and good health and a childhood.

I wouldn’t send our troops into those theatres of war which generate the need for these asylum seekers to flee.

This is indeed a complicated question and one on which I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I have my views and hope that they contribute to someone out there who can come up with a solution, but I reject the positions of both sides of parliament at the moment.

In relation to posts banging on about the “Muslim invasion”, can I remind folks that previously it was the Vietnamese, some of whom were Buddhists and some Catholics, and more recently, asylum seekers came from North Africa and there is a smattering of all religions in that group.

What if there was a boat load of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS? would you turn them back or send them to Nauru? Methinks not.

John, it is not too late for you to have another go in politics and if you become PM you can try an implement your policies. Good luck with the Senate.
If a boatload of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS turns up I would expect that they would be escorted to the place they departed from. This is the current policy.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

Interesting that you chose to respond to this post but not my far more reasonable question in the post before it.

Can I take from your last sentence then that you would place no limit on Australia’s refugee intake and that you believe we should accept any and all refugees that arrive on our shores?

If I was the PM, I would properly fund aid programs and processing centres for asylum seekers in the country of origin. I would also turn no boats back because this is not the compassionate thing to do. These people are desperate. They are not terrorists in thinly veiled disguise.

I would ensure that the children of these asylum seekers are given succour and education and good health and a childhood.

I wouldn’t send our troops into those theatres of war which generate the need for these asylum seekers to flee.

This is indeed a complicated question and one on which I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I have my views and hope that they contribute to someone out there who can come up with a solution, but I reject the positions of both sides of parliament at the moment.

In relation to posts banging on about the “Muslim invasion”, can I remind folks that previously it was the Vietnamese, some of whom were Buddhists and some Catholics, and more recently, asylum seekers came from North Africa and there is a smattering of all religions in that group.

What if there was a boat load of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS? would you turn them back or send them to Nauru? Methinks not.

I agree with you on regional processing centres but that’s about as far as it goes.

As soon as you allow boat arrivals, you create a massive pull factor that will overwhelm any legitimate program you try to institute.

You would be committing Australia to ever increasing numbers of arrivals, no possible way of processing them effectively and no end to the costs that such a policy would entail. You would also be ensuring that many hundreds would die whilst making the dangerous boat journey across whilst creating large amounts of social tension in the community as a whole.

No, most of the boat arrivals aren’t terrorists in disguise and a majority may be travelling from areas of the world that aren’t very nice places to live. A majority of them may have indeed been fleeing persecution in their country of origin. All of them are seeking a better life for themselves and their families.

But none of this makes them Australia’s responsibility. We simply cannot open our borders to all comers and it’s ridiculous to even suggest it as a legitimate policy, without being fully aware of the social and economic cost that it would have to our country.

The refugee convention is completely outdated and needs rewriting for a world where international air travel is available to almost all. No longer are most/all refugees crossing borders on foot to escape being killed. Those who can afford it are hopping on planes and travelling through multiple “safe” countries until they can hop on a boat to their country of choice where they hope and expect to be resettled. It’s not what the convention was meant for and degrades people’s faith in its execution and fairness.

We need a new global agreement, where those who are most in need of help and most in danger of persecution are processed in an orderly fashion and resettled across the globe if needed. Obviously the large amount of global refugees will make this difficult and the first option should always be resettlement in their home country once safe. There should be absolutely zero possibility of those with the money and means being able to bypass this global agreement by simply forcing themselves on countries. There should be no “better life” clause, equity should be paramount.

And if a boatload of Christians arrived fleeing massacres by ISIS, then they would be treated exactly the same and subject to the same processes as everyone else. Why would you think any differently?

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

I haven’t seen any photos of any kids in any Australian detention camp.
I think you are being too emotive on this issue.
The people who may have come with these kids you refer to would be their parents, right?

How about the 5 year old in detention in Darwin. She developed all sorts of hideous psychological problems on Nauru resulting in over sexualisation (for a 5 year old!) and self harm. This was not some political statement by an adult, it is a child of five years old, Who is going to save her? Who is going to protect her? who is going to give her back her childhood? Who is going to love her?

dungfungus said :

John Hargreaves said :

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

And we don’t practice Christianity in its truest form either. Thank whatever God you want.

Just having Christian values is enough to get you beheaded if you are in the wrong company.

The CIA assassinated Nguyen Van Diem, the Catholic Prime Minister of South Vietnam. Go figure…

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

Interesting that you chose to respond to this post but not my far more reasonable question in the post before it.

Can I take from your last sentence then that you would place no limit on Australia’s refugee intake and that you believe we should accept any and all refugees that arrive on our shores?

If I was the PM, I would properly fund aid programs and processing centres for asylum seekers in the country of origin. I would also turn no boats back because this is not the compassionate thing to do. These people are desperate. They are not terrorists in thinly veiled disguise.

I would ensure that the children of these asylum seekers are given succour and education and good health and a childhood.

I wouldn’t send our troops into those theatres of war which generate the need for these asylum seekers to flee.

This is indeed a complicated question and one on which I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I have my views and hope that they contribute to someone out there who can come up with a solution, but I reject the positions of both sides of parliament at the moment.

In relation to posts banging on about the “Muslim invasion”, can I remind folks that previously it was the Vietnamese, some of whom were Buddhists and some Catholics, and more recently, asylum seekers came from North Africa and there is a smattering of all religions in that group.

What if there was a boat load of Christians fleeing massacres by ISIS? would you turn them back or send them to Nauru? Methinks not.

An interesting article on this topic has just appeard on the ABC news website:

In a step towards possible military action, European Council chief Donald Tusk said leaders had tasked EU foreign policy head Federica Mogherini to “propose action in order to capture and destroy the smugglers’ vessels before they can be used.”

Full article at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-24/eu-leaders-meet-in-brussels-to-pledge-rescue-for-migrants/6417340

John Hargreaves said :

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

It should. And it would, if the unlawful non-citizens stopped intentionally destroying their documentation and passports before arriving here.

Read this, John:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/the-impossible-refugee-boat-lift-to-christmas-island.html?pagewanted=all

It’s written by a journalist who did the boat journey to Australia with a load of “refugees” in 2013. It wasn’t widely reported by the media in Australia because it simply doesn’t line up with the narrative that you and others like you are pushing. What you’ll see is that most of the “refugees” traveled through numerous countries to get here, and chose not to resettle in any of them because by their own admission they were not fleeing persecution or in fear of their lives, but rather seeking economic improvement and a more comfortable life. They also paid the equivalent of multiple airfares to do so. They could have spend the same money taking their whole family on an actual flight to Australia, which would have been safer and faster. They didn’t though, because they’re would be no chance of making falsified claims for asylum.

I have no problem with people wanting to come to Australia for a better life and more stable economy. But when they arrive illegally on boats, destroying their documentation so the government can’t verify their claims and jumping ahead of those who chose to come through the correct channels, I become resistant. Especially when people who are genuinely in need of help are being ignored.

Read the article, John. It would do you good to have some more insight on this issue.

John Hargreaves said :

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

And we don’t practice Christianity in its truest form either. Thank whatever God you want.

Many of us do, John. You wouldn’t know it though, because it doesn’t involve killing and beheading anyone who rejects their faith.

Rather than creating strawman arguments, why don’t you do some actual research on the topic. Research the law surrounding migration, while you’re at it. Hopefully we can have a real conversation when you have some idea of the fallacies you keep holding on to.

justin heywood said :

John, surely you know that there were around a thousand deaths at sea after Rudd/Gillard sought to ‘humanise’ our treatment of asylum seekers. No doubt many were children. Then the hated Abbott got into power, instituted a stricter policy, and the deaths virtually stopped.

This is the uncomfortable truth. The evidence is undeniable. A ‘soft’ approach (immediate release of boat arrivals into the community) will result in more deaths, and I for one would rather have kids detained than drowned.

This is why there is no easy solution, and detaining boat arrivals may be the least worst option.

But I fear that the politics rather than the greater good determines people’s attitudes to the issue.

Two points it was actually Rudd MKII that instigated the tougher policy that resulted in the drop off, just look at the boat arrival statistics and when the trend started downwards.

But you raise a point about no deaths at sea, but how many deaths have their been on land, as a result of persecuted people not easily being able to claim asylum? But guess that is someone else’s problem isn’t it. Which gets back to the question and point I raised earlier on that this a global solution and pretending it doesn’t exist which is what our current government is doing is not the solution.

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

Maybe you should take some of your own advice.

The issues that are hitting the middle east, parts of Europe and Africa are for the most part all ancient tribal feuds. Nothing to do with Islam at all, the only thing in common with them is they practice the religion of Islam.

For the most part these deep stetted issues have been suppressed by dictatorships. So as power in these countries is breaking apart, conflict amongst the various ethnic groups growing to what we see today.

Groups like ISIS are for the most part capitalizing on this breakdown of power with the aim of gaining power for themselves. ISIS is the extreme, hardly representative of the Islam that most in the world practice. Same too with Al-Shabaab, they are the extreme in Africa, not the norm.

Personally I would liken these groups to the Nazi party. As we know the Nazi party grew out of the ashes of the First World War and capitalized on the breakdown of Europe, epically the after the war. It is difficult to say that the Nazi party was representative of main stream Germany, just like it is hard to say ISIS etc are representative of main stream islam either.

Now before these conflicts we had conflicts in Sri Lanka, again power plays along deep rooted ethnic issues. Then of course the Vietnam war, both of these clearly lead to large numbers of asylum seekers seeking asylum in Australia. Cannot blame Islam for them can you?

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

I haven’t seen any photos of any kids in any Australian detention camp.
I think you are being too emotive on this issue.
The people who may have come with these kids you refer to would be their parents, right?

I have seen the children first hand, and some of them do not have their parents in Australia with them. This makes it very difficult to find timely solutions.

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

I suppose the “mad people” you are referring to are ISIS.
They have only come active in the past 12 months so who are the other “mad people” you are referring to?
BTW, they come through several other countries along the way,some Muslim ones. Why on earth would they want to re-settle in a non-western country like Australia run by infidels?

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

I haven’t seen any photos of any kids in any Australian detention camp.
I think you are being too emotive on this issue.
The people who may have come with these kids you refer to would be their parents, right?

John Hargreaves said :

….The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean.

John, surely you know that there were around a thousand deaths at sea after Rudd/Gillard sought to ‘humanise’ our treatment of asylum seekers. No doubt many were children. Then the hated Abbott got into power, instituted a stricter policy, and the deaths virtually stopped.

This is the uncomfortable truth. The evidence is undeniable. A ‘soft’ approach (immediate release of boat arrivals into the community) will result in more deaths, and I for one would rather have kids detained than drowned.

This is why there is no easy solution, and detaining boat arrivals may be the least worst option.

But I fear that the politics rather than the greater good determines people’s attitudes to the issue.

As you can see John, the public, even in Canberra, are more informed than you would like.

I won’t repeat what others have said but point interested readers to the Liberal Democrats Immigration policy:

http://www.ldp.org.au/index.php/policies/1156-immigration

I should also point out that those in ‘detention’ are free to go home or to another safe destination any time they like, we’ll even help with their airfare.

Australia needs migration, but even Kevin Rudd finally admitted the previous policy was too expensive and divisive.

One of the psychologists agitating on behalf of the troubled child made the error of referring to Nauru as hellhole. Well, Nauruans have always had to live there! Who is “rescuing” Nauruans from Nauru? Frankly, attitude is important re detention camps. Look at the Dunera Boys from WWII. Incarcerated in a “hellhole” near Hay in hot, dusty paddocks, they ran a competent society with their own “university”, imparted all the knowledge they had to each other, invented games, and sat out their incarceration. Why don’t detainees on Nauru – who are not locked up – make the best of their situation? If detainees are abusing other detainees, they need to sort themselves out and develop a civil contribution to their new society.

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

Interesting that you chose to respond to this post but not my far more reasonable question in the post before it.

Can I take from your last sentence then that you would place no limit on Australia’s refugee intake and that you believe we should accept any and all refugees that arrive on our shores?

JC said :

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

You are one of the scariest people I have even communicated with.

Scary is not the word that comes to my mind.

But Dungfungus, riddle me this. The UK like Australia has very strong views on this subject. Yet it’s legal migration has lead to a very large population of (legal) migrants that practice islam. How is that any different to what you righties call illegals, considering the number is significantly smaller.

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

Islamic migrants in the UK started coming from the sub-continent. The large resident population of Muslims now in the UK has resulted from the high birth rate that they subscribe to. The same thing is now happening in Australia as it is happening in Europe and Central Africa.
The illegals that follow everywhere are largely relatives of ones already resident. You say we only have small numbers coming to Australia but up until the boats were stopped the entire quota for refugees was being filled by mainly Muslim asylum seekers who have no intention of integrating with our way of life.
I don’t care that you don’t hold my view but don’t come knocking on my door for help when you discover that there really is something to be scared about.

John Hargreaves said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

I for one certainly want vetting – I don’t want crims, potential terrorists, rapists, murderers, ISL supporters and other “undesirables”, to the extent those can be detected, gaining entry here.

You will see from recent developments in Greece and Italy – both of which say they can no longer take the flood of illegal’s arriving by over the Med. from Northern Africa nor save they when in distress on the seas – what happens. Thousands have drowned at sea as a result. Sadly, 700+ drowned in one sinking a few weeks back. Greece has apparently now asked the EU for help and Italy is talking about something akin to a “turn back the boats policy” because they can no longer financially afford to do rescues at sea. That is what happens with a “let them come & we will take them” policy.

wildturkeycanoe said :

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

It is this sort of thinking and bigotry that stops compassionate people fro reaching out the hand of friendship. There are some ugly things happening in the world and some happen here in the desert. But we can’t and don’t have the right to judge a whole people by the actions of a (large) number of zealots bent on destruction those who oppose their views. They are not religious – they are control freaks and mad men and women.

Those who come to our shores are running away form those mad people and we should take them in. FULL STOP.

“How many of you have seen the photos of the kids in the detention camps and have not felt a sorrow for them? How many of you have seen the appalling conditions they live in and haven’t felt some revulsion? How many of you have seen the tent city on Nauru and haven’t thought “I’m glad that’s not me or my kids”?”
I feel better knowing these children are alive and not being turned into sex slaves or future suicide bombers. Unfortunately they also brought with them the people who think the way that their oppressors do. Sorting the good from the bad is made so much more difficult when they haven’t anything to prove who they are or where their allegiances lie. Thus is the problem with what to do with asylum seekers, knowing if they are genuine or not.

John Hargreaves said :

justin heywood said :

John Hargreaves said :

…I note that they [Europeans] are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

At last, someone proposes a solution – address the ‘push’ side of the equation.

But I don’t think that we are going to achieve economic equality between the third world and the West, nor achieve peace in the middle east in our lifetime.
Meanwhile, the kids are still locked up.

Perhaps John Hargreaves believes in this solution also – it is hard to know since although he has clearly described his compassion for the children and his contempt for people who do not share his view, he has not actually outlined what he thinks the solution might be.

I think perhaps he learns towards the idea that the children currently in detention should not be in detention – and it follows from that their parents should not be in detention either. Perhaps for some reason he finds himself unable to articulate this idea.

Correct me if I’m wrong of course John.

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

John,
I’d love you to actually articulate fully your solution then. Particularly in response to the equity issues I raised in post #10.

I don’t think anyone wants to see children in detention but it’s a lot harder to come up with a sensible solution that does not raise its own issues. The sentiment is noble but without solutions it is pointless.

John Hargreaves said :

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

And we don’t practice Christianity in its truest form either. Thank whatever God you want.

Just having Christian values is enough to get you beheaded if you are in the wrong company.

John Hargreaves said :

justin heywood said :

John Hargreaves said :

…I note that they [Europeans] are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

At last, someone proposes a solution – address the ‘push’ side of the equation.

But I don’t think that we are going to achieve economic equality between the third world and the West, nor achieve peace in the middle east in our lifetime.
Meanwhile, the kids are still locked up.

Perhaps John Hargreaves believes in this solution also – it is hard to know since although he has clearly described his compassion for the children and his contempt for people who do not share his view, he has not actually outlined what he thinks the solution might be.

I think perhaps he learns towards the idea that the children currently in detention should not be in detention – and it follows from that their parents should not be in detention either. Perhaps for some reason he finds himself unable to articulate this idea.

Correct me if I’m wrong of course John.

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

“….The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean…….”
I thought you inferred that all asylum seekers were exposed to the risk of sailing in “leaky” boats.
How ironic was it that this boat made it all the way to Christmas Island without “springing a leak”.

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

And we don’t practice Christianity in its truest form either. Thank whatever God you want.

JC said :

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

You are one of the scariest people I have even communicated with.

Scary is not the word that comes to my mind.

But Dungfungus, riddle me this. The UK like Australia has very strong views on this subject. Yet it’s legal migration has lead to a very large population of (legal) migrants that practice islam. How is that any different to what you righties call illegals, considering the number is significantly smaller.

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

Good points and thanks

justin heywood said :

John Hargreaves said :

…I note that they [Europeans] are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

At last, someone proposes a solution – address the ‘push’ side of the equation.

But I don’t think that we are going to achieve economic equality between the third world and the West, nor achieve peace in the middle east in our lifetime.
Meanwhile, the kids are still locked up.

Perhaps John Hargreaves believes in this solution also – it is hard to know since although he has clearly described his compassion for the children and his contempt for people who do not share his view, he has not actually outlined what he thinks the solution might be.

I think perhaps he learns towards the idea that the children currently in detention should not be in detention – and it follows from that their parents should not be in detention either. Perhaps for some reason he finds himself unable to articulate this idea.

Correct me if I’m wrong of course John.

You are half right. I hate the idea of kids being detained anywhere. And… look at the number of seekers who have had their cases sustained. the vast majority. These are desperate people not inanimate objects, numbers. The deaths at sea were a crash onto rocks not in the open ocean. Remember the lies about the kids overboard?

Where do people think that the seekers will abscond to if allowed to go out of a camp? It should take no longer than 6 weeks to give people health checks and no longer than a couple of months to check bona fides.

Mysteryman said :

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

I was trying to word my thoughts yesterday and you have summed it up perfectly.
If people like JC would take their blinkers off and look at the media, they’d see the real impact of Islam already having detrimental effects on our society. Just now I read that a muslim school apparently has banned girls from running because they might lose their virginity. I mean, are these people for real? Some of the backwards mentality being rammed down the throats of their followers might look harmless enough but if they believe that, what is to stop them believing and enforcing that everyone who is a Christian should be condemned to death? Say anything bad about Mohammed and be prepared for retribution, whereas the Christian God is mocked consistently on all forms of media with no violent backlash. We already have violence between different Muslim communities in suburbs of Sydney, involving shootings, beatings etc. How often have you heard of a Protestant gang shooting up a Catholic church in Australia, just because there is a history of the two fighting overseas?
There aren’t that many fundamentalist Christians getting around doing the kind of atrocities that used to be done in the name of God, yet fundamentalist Islam appears to be growing in numbers and strength, whilst quietly on the sidelines there are thousands of followers who condemn their actions but will not stand up against it.
If IS was massacring everyone who was American, or everyone who was Danish, or everyone who wore a baseball cap, the U.N and rest of the world would intervene and come to the rescue. Alas, because it’s only a minority of converts to Christianity in the Muslim countries being slaughtered, there is no motivation to interfere. We wouldn’t want to unfriend our trading partners and source of our oil now, would we?

JC said :

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

That’s either because you don’t understand the real nature of Islam and you’re ignorant of what’s happening throughout the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Europe, or it’s because you’re choosing to ignore it.

The deal toll this year alone from Islamic movements worldwide is well into the tens of thousands. Massacres are happening weekly that involve the deaths of hundreds of Christians and other non-muslims. People in comfortable, white Australia make claims like “the people doing that aren’t REAL muslims. They don’t represent Islam!”, because they don’t want to be seen as saying anything that might be branded racist by lefties and the PC brigade (nevermind the fact the Islam is NOT a race). But that position is both ridiculous and unfounded. They DO represent the true nature of Islam and they are acting in the shadow of their prophet. Look into the Qur’an and study Mohamed for yourself. I have.

And it’s really unfortunate, too. I have muslim friends who I think are wonderful people. They aren’t violent or aggressive with their beliefs. They are friendly and tolerant. They fairly represent the vast majority of muslims in places like Australia. They are certainly not to be feared. But they don’t practice Islam in it’s truest and most pure form.

Start here: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It might open your eyes a little to the problem.

What’s the problem?

Oil, capital and weapons, all the good stuff, can flow freely across borders.

Wisely the victims of our lifestyle choices, the “collateral damage”, are prevented from escaping the consequences.

If it helps there are the ever reliable tools for us; the blinds to pull down, and the broom to sweep the problems under someone else’s carpet.

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

You are one of the scariest people I have even communicated with.

Scary is not the word that comes to my mind.

But Dungfungus, riddle me this. The UK like Australia has very strong views on this subject. Yet it’s legal migration has lead to a very large population of (legal) migrants that practice islam. How is that any different to what you righties call illegals, considering the number is significantly smaller.

PS don’t hold your view, and Islam and its followers are nothing to be scared of. I’m more concerned about the narrow minded individuals that through their irrational thought and political power make this such an issue.

John Hargreaves said :

…I note that they [Europeans] are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

At last, someone proposes a solution – address the ‘push’ side of the equation.

But I don’t think that we are going to achieve economic equality between the third world and the West, nor achieve peace in the middle east in our lifetime.
Meanwhile, the kids are still locked up.

Perhaps John Hargreaves believes in this solution also – it is hard to know since although he has clearly described his compassion for the children and his contempt for people who do not share his view, he has not actually outlined what he thinks the solution might be.

I think perhaps he learns towards the idea that the children currently in detention should not be in detention – and it follows from that their parents should not be in detention either. Perhaps for some reason he finds himself unable to articulate this idea.

Correct me if I’m wrong of course John.

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

You are one of the scariest people I have even communicated with.

The stuff I am talking about is scary but I am not.
You obviously didn’t read about the Christians that were thrown overboard from an asylum seeker boat en-route to Lampadusa because the dared to pray to God in the presence of followers of Islam yet we are expected to be compassionate and tolerant?
The people who check out what I am saying are getting scared as well.

dungfungus said :

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

You are one of the scariest people I have even communicated with.

Paul Costigan said :

John

As I said the issues are complex.

It is important that Australia maintains a humane attitude to any peoples who are forced to make the decision to become refugees to escape danger and by whatever means then become migrants into a safer place, such as Australia.

The situation for Europe has become extraordinary. I note that they are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

I wonder how we would cope if Australia was next to a country that was involved in such devastating internal wars and huge numbers were forced to flee from the higher risk of being slaughtered and to take the lesser risk of travelling by questionable boats.

Your effort to put a human face on this is important. Highlighting that children are suffering is one way of reminding people of what is happening here.

No matter how complex and no matter how difficult to identify solutions (and it is bloody difficult), we must remain focused on the reality that this is about people and this country can afford to do much more to assist when confronted by such human tragedies.

Eloquent and exactly

Paul Costigan said :

John

As I said the issues are complex.

It is important that Australia maintains a humane attitude to any peoples who are forced to make the decision to become refugees to escape danger and by whatever means then become migrants into a safer place, such as Australia.

The situation for Europe has become extraordinary. I note that they are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

I wonder how we would cope if Australia was next to a country that was involved in such devastating internal wars and huge numbers were forced to flee from the higher risk of being slaughtered and to take the lesser risk of travelling by questionable boats.

Your effort to put a human face on this is important. Highlighting that children are suffering is one way of reminding people of what is happening here.

No matter how complex and no matter how difficult to identify solutions (and it is bloody difficult), we must remain focused on the reality that this is about people and this country can afford to do much more to assist when confronted by such human tragedies.

The next wave of refugees heading to Australia will probably be Christians from Europe.
At least they will have the correct paperwork.

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Please let the children who don’t speak the local language out on their own, unsupervised into a culture that generally has a dislike of foreign freeloaders, with no money to spend and no friends for support. See how long it is before they form their own gangs for protection and turn to crime to prevent boredom.
Obviously the parents cannot be released into the community with them, or the whole process of determining if they are legal asylum seekers is lost, as they wiggle their way into the woodwork of underground networks that harbor foreign criminals.
Detention whilst assessing their identity and legitimacy is better than persecution and death. If it isn’t, then send them back to where they came from. Australia’s welfare system is already burdened by too many people, simply letting everyone who arrives unannounced to sign up is not going to help our country flourish in decades to come. There’s humanitarian aid but you have to start in your own backyard first or you end up with a country full of racists, constantly burdened with jumping through Centerlink’s hoops for essentials whilst illegal entrants get given everything on a silver platter.

John, do you ever contemplate what might happen if Australia is unable to fund social welfare anymore?
Would you forgo your taxpayer funded pension in favour of the kids in detention?
I doubt it, given that you could have resigned from politics in protest when you had the chance but you didn’t.
Not many people are supporting your stance on this one.

Firstly, I don’t have a taxpayer funded pension so stop maligning me on that one. Secondly, you cast aspersions on my commitment when in public office. This is gunna be news to you but I had a lot more to contend with, all of which challenged my conscience. My resignation on this one would have changed heaps eh? As it happened I was able to help newly arrived migrants, asylum seekers among them, better form that position.

John, I apologise for suggesting you have a taxpayer funded pension. I wasn’t aware that being a MLA meant you had to forego retirement benefits. You must be as poor as some of the asylum seekers we are discussing. It takes a lot of resolve to refuse to accept an age pension or part thereof and you are the first Labor person that has admitted to it. You had better cut back on those regular overseas trips you go on.
You admit that you helped newly arrived migrants (some of whom were asylum seekers) from your position as an MLA when you were an MLA.
Wouldn’t this be giving some people an unfair advantage?

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

There are two solutions, Australia has chosen one that works. We will probably remain a Western democracy longer than most others.
The European democracies will do nothing that challenges their perception of human rights and they will fall one by one and become Islamic caliphates. Won’t be any need for people smugglers or immigration camps so realistically, the problem is solved in that part of the world.

justin heywood said :

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

Good post.

Children in detention centres sucks, so time to start putting options on the table for discussion.

John

As I said the issues are complex.

It is important that Australia maintains a humane attitude to any peoples who are forced to make the decision to become refugees to escape danger and by whatever means then become migrants into a safer place, such as Australia.

The situation for Europe has become extraordinary. I note that they are now looking to do more about the ‘push’ problem and trying to address what makes people want to take such high risks. Australian governments (all parties) should look to this rather than just the pull question.

I wonder how we would cope if Australia was next to a country that was involved in such devastating internal wars and huge numbers were forced to flee from the higher risk of being slaughtered and to take the lesser risk of travelling by questionable boats.

Your effort to put a human face on this is important. Highlighting that children are suffering is one way of reminding people of what is happening here.

No matter how complex and no matter how difficult to identify solutions (and it is bloody difficult), we must remain focused on the reality that this is about people and this country can afford to do much more to assist when confronted by such human tragedies.

JC said :

….How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

Almost every Western democracy is struggling with this problem. Nobody has a solution.

Saying ‘They’ (usually a political enemy) should fix it without proposing a workable solution is pointless.
Saying ‘They’ are heartless while I care deeply, without proposing a workable solution, smacks of moral grandstanding.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Asylum seeders are not migrants and our immigration needs and systems are completely different to what they were 60 years ago.

By allowing asylum seekers and their children into the community, we are effectively allowing them residence and encouraging others to make the dangerous sea journey, risking their lives and their children’s. The idea that they can be sent back if their claims are not true is unrealistic and also then places pressure on our refugee intake.

Surely we want to be accepting for resettlement those refugees who are most in danger of persecution, those who are most likely to be killed. By allowing boat arrivals preferential treatment, we are allowing those who have money to self select into our resettlement program, limiting the amount we can help those most in need. I thought Labor people were all about equity and equality regardless of your financial status?

Interesting that the Europeans, describing the thousands of asylum seekers from Libya, talk about “migrants” not illegal asylum seekers.

And look at the mess Europe is in.
The “migrants” arrive in Italy and under the “rules” they must apply for residency there but Italy doesn’t have the capacity to take any more so they are allowed to cross the border and head east to the softer countries like France, Germany and The Nederlands.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Asylum seeders are not migrants and our immigration needs and systems are completely different to what they were 60 years ago.

By allowing asylum seekers and their children into the community, we are effectively allowing them residence and encouraging others to make the dangerous sea journey, risking their lives and their children’s. The idea that they can be sent back if their claims are not true is unrealistic and also then places pressure on our refugee intake.

Surely we want to be accepting for resettlement those refugees who are most in danger of persecution, those who are most likely to be killed. By allowing boat arrivals preferential treatment, we are allowing those who have money to self select into our resettlement program, limiting the amount we can help those most in need. I thought Labor people were all about equity and equality regardless of your financial status?

Interesting that the Europeans, describing the thousands of asylum seekers from Libya, talk about “migrants” not illegal asylum seekers.

Or illegals for that matter.

justin heywood said :

Hosinator said :

Wow, the vitriol in this thread, at least it’s from a small group of people. As to your piece John, murderers, paedophiles and seriously violent criminals don’t do as much time in incarceration as asylum seekers do.

On the particular issue of children in detention, John you’re right. There needs to be a better system in place to ensure their welfare. There is a growing body of evidence that the experience of being in detention is traumatic and has adverse and sometimes severe effects on mental health.
Not to mention those children who are genuine asylum seekers from war/conflict and minority persecution have experienced traumatic events that have a huge impact on their mental welfare in the long term. These issues need to be dealt with to ensure their long term future prospects and contribution to society are favourable.

Most of you will wash you hands of the situation. But take into account, if a child is granted permanent residency in Australia with underlying mental issues from a combination of their experiences, do we really expect that this child will grow up to be a meaningful contributor to our society or at best a person suffering depression and at worst a career criminal, who is unable to feel compassion for others because none was shown to them in their formative years.

Where is the vitriol? NOBODY likes to see kids locked up. Nobody thinks the kids deserve it.

But the uncomfortable fact for the hand wringers is that under the harsh regime of the hated Abbott, fewer children are being placed in leaky boats and fewer children are in detention.

What is missing from the OP and several other posters is a proposed solution to having children locked up. Should the children be released without their parents? Should only families be released? Should there be no detention for anyone?

How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

Until then, I can only assume that the issue is simply an ideological exercise in ‘I’m more compassionate than the other guy’

And those that don’t come are in countries facing persecution and death.

How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

PS saying someone else problem because they are not in Aus is not a solution. A look to what is happening in Europe, highlighted by the boat sinking this week goes to show we are not alone.

John Hargreaves said :

Seeking asylum is not an illegal activity and it was not an invasion. This is over the top and strictly speaking – wrong.

John, how many times does it need to be explained to you? Nobody is saying that it’s illegal to seek asylum. What we are telling you (correctly, I might ad) is that the method of arrival IS illegal, regardless of their reasons for doing so.

I’ve posted the sections of the relevant legislation and UN convention before. I don’t have the patience to do it again right now. Let me summarise it for you: arriving unauthorised and without proper documentation is illegal according to our migration act. The arrivals are considered “unlawful non-citizens”. The UN convention that we agreed to says that if these people are seeking asylum, they won’t be treated as “unlawful” provided they came here directly from the state they are seeking asylum from. It’s clear as day that these boats are not coming from the states that the occupants are fleeing. Therefore, they are still unlawful non-citizens, regardless of what you or anyone else wants to believe.

Paul Costigan said :

Thanks John,

Your story and words are apt in addressing a situation that all politicians should take responsibility for. Having been around migrant centres for most of my early years, I cannot understand why people fear these latest refugees. There was a time in our recent past when it looked as though the country had matured a little because of the way the country accepted the migrations after WW II and then the Vietnam War.

This is a complex situation and requires some compassionate approaches by all governments. I wonder how many lives could have been saved if former governments had worked with our neighbours to directly assist those who had fled their own homelands for whatever reason.

Again, thanks for your thoughts on this subject.

Paul, thank you for the encouragement

watto23 said :

dungfungus said :

If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? [/quote>

The issue with these figures are that while most Australians and myself included feel that the boat arrivals needed to be stopped, we purely look at figures regarding Australia, but ignore the fact of how many refugees die overseas in refugee camps. Sure none are coming in boats and drowning at see, but they still die elsewhere. So claiming credit for a policy that basically still does nothing for the overall issue is a bit ripe if you ask me.

I’m not one to think the issue with refugees globally is as simple as that though. But the current and previous government are very good at fixing little bits they gain votes, but then have nothing for the bigger picture. However governments are masters of fear mongering to gain votes and that is what refugee policy is mostly about.

I’m still trying to work out what offshore detention centres that cost us millions to run actually did? We could have run them in the country in areas of low unemployment.

But it doesn’t surprise me, politics is very short term thinking in this country and all about paying back political donors and winning the next election than beneficial policies. So to give credit to a government for a policy designed to shift the focal point away from Australia doesn’t really deserve credit.

Good points

dungfungus said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Please let the children who don’t speak the local language out on their own, unsupervised into a culture that generally has a dislike of foreign freeloaders, with no money to spend and no friends for support. See how long it is before they form their own gangs for protection and turn to crime to prevent boredom.
Obviously the parents cannot be released into the community with them, or the whole process of determining if they are legal asylum seekers is lost, as they wiggle their way into the woodwork of underground networks that harbor foreign criminals.
Detention whilst assessing their identity and legitimacy is better than persecution and death. If it isn’t, then send them back to where they came from. Australia’s welfare system is already burdened by too many people, simply letting everyone who arrives unannounced to sign up is not going to help our country flourish in decades to come. There’s humanitarian aid but you have to start in your own backyard first or you end up with a country full of racists, constantly burdened with jumping through Centerlink’s hoops for essentials whilst illegal entrants get given everything on a silver platter.

John, do you ever contemplate what might happen if Australia is unable to fund social welfare anymore?
Would you forgo your taxpayer funded pension in favour of the kids in detention?
I doubt it, given that you could have resigned from politics in protest when you had the chance but you didn’t.
Not many people are supporting your stance on this one.

Firstly, I don’t have a taxpayer funded pension so stop maligning me on that one. Secondly, you cast aspersions on my commitment when in public office. This is gunna be news to you but I had a lot more to contend with, all of which challenged my conscience. My resignation on this one would have changed heaps eh? As it happened I was able to help newly arrived migrants, asylum seekers among them, better form that position.

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Asylum seeders are not migrants and our immigration needs and systems are completely different to what they were 60 years ago.

By allowing asylum seekers and their children into the community, we are effectively allowing them residence and encouraging others to make the dangerous sea journey, risking their lives and their children’s. The idea that they can be sent back if their claims are not true is unrealistic and also then places pressure on our refugee intake.

Surely we want to be accepting for resettlement those refugees who are most in danger of persecution, those who are most likely to be killed. By allowing boat arrivals preferential treatment, we are allowing those who have money to self select into our resettlement program, limiting the amount we can help those most in need. I thought Labor people were all about equity and equality regardless of your financial status?

Interesting that the Europeans, describing the thousands of asylum seekers from Libya, talk about “migrants” not illegal asylum seekers.

Pork Hunt said :

What was the reason your family stayed in the hostel? Could people not simply rent/buy a house in the community?

My father joined the Air Force and my mother worked in a laundry. Poverty, my friend, poverty.

dungfungus said :

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

A couple of comments without the “leaky boats”emotion that usually clouds the real issues with asylum seeker detention.
John, why didn’t you write this while the Rudd/Gillard Labor government was in power? Sure, you say that both sides of politics are as bad as each other but only the coalition should “back down and show compassion to the world”. I understand that when the coalition took office there were about 2000 children in detention – there are now about 100. Why don’t you give credit where credit is due?
If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? Strangely, we never hear their advocates passing on “thank you for saving us” do we, and they never want to return, so is it any wonder we find it hard to believe they are anything but illegal economic migrants.
As to the question as to why you were only in a migrant camp for a few months is, as you well know, because you were invited to come here with your family at a time when we needed migrants and you arrived with valid documentation.
Australia does not need any more migrants now.

I did speak up about this when Labor was in govt. I made speeches when I gave out citizenship to new citizens. I made public speeches in Garema Place and on the lawns outside Parliament House. All when I was a Shadow minister and then as a full minister. My views have not changed in relation to either persuasion. They are both criminals.

My thinking is that we could be more welcoming to those in distress and if their claims are found to be unsubstantiated, they can be sent back. I don’t see much evidence that those who did come weren’t bona fide.

This govt has indeed stopped some boats. By being draconian, hard line and oppressive means. Witness the most recent for some Vietnamese.

I still think some compassion is warranted and I see no, repeat no, reason to imprison children nor to send them to a third world country because that’s the way to stop the boats. There’s gotta be a better way than imprisonment and diversion.

I accept that you feel strongly about what you believe is the way children in detention are treated but Australia does take good care of the asylum seekers as promulgated here: http://www.immi.gov.au/About/Pages/media/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-82.aspx
I don’t see how we can be more welcoming than that.
It’s a bit emotive to say they are “imprisoned” also. The numbers of illegal asylum seekers that were coming in under the previous government was tantamount to an invasion and while you call the way the current government has dealt with that as draconian, hard line and oppressive you do not offer any alternatives.
I believe stopping the boats is the only way to control the problem.
Australia is a very compassionate country but there are limits especially now that we have massive welfare problems to contend with.

Seeking asylum is not an illegal activity and it was not an invasion. This is over the top and strictly speaking – wrong.

dungfungus said :

Hosinator said :

Wow, the vitriol in this thread, at least it’s from a small group of people. As to your piece John, murderers, paedophiles and seriously violent criminals don’t do as much time in incarceration as asylum seekers do.

On the particular issue of children in detention, John you’re right. There needs to be a better system in place to ensure their welfare. There is a growing body of evidence that the experience of being in detention is traumatic and has adverse and sometimes severe effects on mental health.
Not to mention those children who are genuine asylum seekers from war/conflict and minority persecution have experienced traumatic events that have a huge impact on their mental welfare in the long term. These issues need to be dealt with to ensure their long term future prospects and contribution to society are favourable.

Most of you will wash you hands of the situation. But take into account, if a child is granted permanent residency in Australia with underlying mental issues from a combination of their experiences, do we really expect that this child will grow up to be a meaningful contributor to our society or at best a person suffering depression and at worst a career criminal, who is unable to feel compassion for others because none was shown to them in their formative years.

The evidence that being in Australian immigration centres is somehow more traumatic than the alleged horrors they have “escaped” from comes from a “small group of people” who have vested interests in the issues. They are cheered on by people in the UN who wouldn’t have a job if there were no refugees.
The children are not asylum seekers; their parents are, with the kids being there for the ride as this gives the would be migrants a feeling that they will have an advantage in obtaining residency and the kids can learn paint those disturbing pictures of life in an immigration centre to add more pressure.
I may be wrong, but I get the impression that there is a lot of coaching being given by that particular “small group of people”.
We certainly do not want people with mental issues coming to Australia illegally as we already reject those who apply to come here legally. There is a limit to how much resources for metal health treatment can be spread and they have never been adequate for the people already in Australia so it is madness to worsen the situation by admitting more.
When Australian has dealt adequately with our own humanitarian problems then perhaps we can consider assisting other countries.

This is an example of the mindset of that group of people who support the “children in detention industry” promote:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/croakey/2015/04/14/thirteen-year-old-imogen-senior-takes-it-up-to-the-pm-it-is-your-government-that-is-doing-this-to-human-beings/

Hosinator said :

Wow, the vitriol in this thread, at least it’s from a small group of people. As to your piece John, murderers, paedophiles and seriously violent criminals don’t do as much time in incarceration as asylum seekers do.

On the particular issue of children in detention, John you’re right. There needs to be a better system in place to ensure their welfare. There is a growing body of evidence that the experience of being in detention is traumatic and has adverse and sometimes severe effects on mental health.
Not to mention those children who are genuine asylum seekers from war/conflict and minority persecution have experienced traumatic events that have a huge impact on their mental welfare in the long term. These issues need to be dealt with to ensure their long term future prospects and contribution to society are favourable.

Most of you will wash you hands of the situation. But take into account, if a child is granted permanent residency in Australia with underlying mental issues from a combination of their experiences, do we really expect that this child will grow up to be a meaningful contributor to our society or at best a person suffering depression and at worst a career criminal, who is unable to feel compassion for others because none was shown to them in their formative years.

Where is the vitriol? NOBODY likes to see kids locked up. Nobody thinks the kids deserve it.

But the uncomfortable fact for the hand wringers is that under the harsh regime of the hated Abbott, fewer children are being placed in leaky boats and fewer children are in detention.

What is missing from the OP and several other posters is a proposed solution to having children locked up. Should the children be released without their parents? Should only families be released? Should there be no detention for anyone?

How about proposing a solution and then we can argue about that?

Until then, I can only assume that the issue is simply an ideological exercise in ‘I’m more compassionate than the other guy’

Hosinator said :

Wow, the vitriol in this thread, at least it’s from a small group of people. As to your piece John, murderers, paedophiles and seriously violent criminals don’t do as much time in incarceration as asylum seekers do.

On the particular issue of children in detention, John you’re right. There needs to be a better system in place to ensure their welfare. There is a growing body of evidence that the experience of being in detention is traumatic and has adverse and sometimes severe effects on mental health.
Not to mention those children who are genuine asylum seekers from war/conflict and minority persecution have experienced traumatic events that have a huge impact on their mental welfare in the long term. These issues need to be dealt with to ensure their long term future prospects and contribution to society are favourable.

Most of you will wash you hands of the situation. But take into account, if a child is granted permanent residency in Australia with underlying mental issues from a combination of their experiences, do we really expect that this child will grow up to be a meaningful contributor to our society or at best a person suffering depression and at worst a career criminal, who is unable to feel compassion for others because none was shown to them in their formative years.

The evidence that being in Australian immigration centres is somehow more traumatic than the alleged horrors they have “escaped” from comes from a “small group of people” who have vested interests in the issues. They are cheered on by people in the UN who wouldn’t have a job if there were no refugees.
The children are not asylum seekers; their parents are, with the kids being there for the ride as this gives the would be migrants a feeling that they will have an advantage in obtaining residency and the kids can learn paint those disturbing pictures of life in an immigration centre to add more pressure.
I may be wrong, but I get the impression that there is a lot of coaching being given by that particular “small group of people”.
We certainly do not want people with mental issues coming to Australia illegally as we already reject those who apply to come here legally. There is a limit to how much resources for metal health treatment can be spread and they have never been adequate for the people already in Australia so it is madness to worsen the situation by admitting more.
When Australian has dealt adequately with our own humanitarian problems then perhaps we can consider assisting other countries.

Wow, the vitriol in this thread, at least it’s from a small group of people. As to your piece John, murderers, paedophiles and seriously violent criminals don’t do as much time in incarceration as asylum seekers do.

On the particular issue of children in detention, John you’re right. There needs to be a better system in place to ensure their welfare. There is a growing body of evidence that the experience of being in detention is traumatic and has adverse and sometimes severe effects on mental health.
Not to mention those children who are genuine asylum seekers from war/conflict and minority persecution have experienced traumatic events that have a huge impact on their mental welfare in the long term. These issues need to be dealt with to ensure their long term future prospects and contribution to society are favourable.

Most of you will wash you hands of the situation. But take into account, if a child is granted permanent residency in Australia with underlying mental issues from a combination of their experiences, do we really expect that this child will grow up to be a meaningful contributor to our society or at best a person suffering depression and at worst a career criminal, who is unable to feel compassion for others because none was shown to them in their formative years.

watto23 said :

dungfungus said :

If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? [/quote>

The issue with these figures are that while most Australians and myself included feel that the boat arrivals needed to be stopped, we purely look at figures regarding Australia, but ignore the fact of how many refugees die overseas in refugee camps. Sure none are coming in boats and drowning at see, but they still die elsewhere. So claiming credit for a policy that basically still does nothing for the overall issue is a bit ripe if you ask me.

I’m not one to think the issue with refugees globally is as simple as that though. But the current and previous government are very good at fixing little bits they gain votes, but then have nothing for the bigger picture. However governments are masters of fear mongering to gain votes and that is what refugee policy is mostly about.

I’m still trying to work out what offshore detention centres that cost us millions to run actually did? We could have run them in the country in areas of low unemployment.

But it doesn’t surprise me, politics is very short term thinking in this country and all about paying back political donors and winning the next election than beneficial policies. So to give credit to a government for a policy designed to shift the focal point away from Australia doesn’t really deserve credit.

These are not the words of dungfungus.

Paul Costigan said :

Thanks John,

Your story and words are apt in addressing a situation that all politicians should take responsibility for. Having been around migrant centres for most of my early years, I cannot understand why people fear these latest refugees. There was a time in our recent past when it looked as though the country had matured a little because of the way the country accepted the migrations after WW II and then the Vietnam War.

This is a complex situation and requires some compassionate approaches by all governments. I wonder how many lives could have been saved if former governments had worked with our neighbours to directly assist those who had fled their own homelands for whatever reason.

Again, thanks for your thoughts on this subject.

Hi Paul, have you been to the detention centres in the last five years? I didn’t think so. I have. If you get a chance to go there you may conclude differently as to why some people fear the latest refugees.

Thanks John,

Your story and words are apt in addressing a situation that all politicians should take responsibility for. Having been around migrant centres for most of my early years, I cannot understand why people fear these latest refugees. There was a time in our recent past when it looked as though the country had matured a little because of the way the country accepted the migrations after WW II and then the Vietnam War.

This is a complex situation and requires some compassionate approaches by all governments. I wonder how many lives could have been saved if former governments had worked with our neighbours to directly assist those who had fled their own homelands for whatever reason.

Again, thanks for your thoughts on this subject.

If their parents kept their I.D they would either be in the community or sent back home and not in a Immigration center.

They are called Immigration centers. Calling Australian Immigration centers detention camps is actually insulting what earlier people went through that actually were in detention camps.

dungfungus said :

If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? [/quote>

The issue with these figures are that while most Australians and myself included feel that the boat arrivals needed to be stopped, we purely look at figures regarding Australia, but ignore the fact of how many refugees die overseas in refugee camps. Sure none are coming in boats and drowning at see, but they still die elsewhere. So claiming credit for a policy that basically still does nothing for the overall issue is a bit ripe if you ask me.

I’m not one to think the issue with refugees globally is as simple as that though. But the current and previous government are very good at fixing little bits they gain votes, but then have nothing for the bigger picture. However governments are masters of fear mongering to gain votes and that is what refugee policy is mostly about.

I’m still trying to work out what offshore detention centres that cost us millions to run actually did? We could have run them in the country in areas of low unemployment.

But it doesn’t surprise me, politics is very short term thinking in this country and all about paying back political donors and winning the next election than beneficial policies. So to give credit to a government for a policy designed to shift the focal point away from Australia doesn’t really deserve credit.

wildturkeycanoe said :

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Please let the children who don’t speak the local language out on their own, unsupervised into a culture that generally has a dislike of foreign freeloaders, with no money to spend and no friends for support. See how long it is before they form their own gangs for protection and turn to crime to prevent boredom.
Obviously the parents cannot be released into the community with them, or the whole process of determining if they are legal asylum seekers is lost, as they wiggle their way into the woodwork of underground networks that harbor foreign criminals.
Detention whilst assessing their identity and legitimacy is better than persecution and death. If it isn’t, then send them back to where they came from. Australia’s welfare system is already burdened by too many people, simply letting everyone who arrives unannounced to sign up is not going to help our country flourish in decades to come. There’s humanitarian aid but you have to start in your own backyard first or you end up with a country full of racists, constantly burdened with jumping through Centerlink’s hoops for essentials whilst illegal entrants get given everything on a silver platter.

John, do you ever contemplate what might happen if Australia is unable to fund social welfare anymore?
Would you forgo your taxpayer funded pension in favour of the kids in detention?
I doubt it, given that you could have resigned from politics in protest when you had the chance but you didn’t.
Not many people are supporting your stance on this one.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Please let the children who don’t speak the local language out on their own, unsupervised into a culture that generally has a dislike of foreign freeloaders, with no money to spend and no friends for support. See how long it is before they form their own gangs for protection and turn to crime to prevent boredom.
Obviously the parents cannot be released into the community with them, or the whole process of determining if they are legal asylum seekers is lost, as they wiggle their way into the woodwork of underground networks that harbor foreign criminals.
Detention whilst assessing their identity and legitimacy is better than persecution and death. If it isn’t, then send them back to where they came from. Australia’s welfare system is already burdened by too many people, simply letting everyone who arrives unannounced to sign up is not going to help our country flourish in decades to come. There’s humanitarian aid but you have to start in your own backyard first or you end up with a country full of racists, constantly burdened with jumping through Centerlink’s hoops for essentials whilst illegal entrants get given everything on a silver platter.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

Asylum seeders are not migrants and our immigration needs and systems are completely different to what they were 60 years ago.

By allowing asylum seekers and their children into the community, we are effectively allowing them residence and encouraging others to make the dangerous sea journey, risking their lives and their children’s. The idea that they can be sent back if their claims are not true is unrealistic and also then places pressure on our refugee intake.

Surely we want to be accepting for resettlement those refugees who are most in danger of persecution, those who are most likely to be killed. By allowing boat arrivals preferential treatment, we are allowing those who have money to self select into our resettlement program, limiting the amount we can help those most in need. I thought Labor people were all about equity and equality regardless of your financial status?

What was the reason your family stayed in the hostel? Could people not simply rent/buy a house in the community?

John Hargreaves said :

dungfungus said :

A couple of comments without the “leaky boats”emotion that usually clouds the real issues with asylum seeker detention.
John, why didn’t you write this while the Rudd/Gillard Labor government was in power? Sure, you say that both sides of politics are as bad as each other but only the coalition should “back down and show compassion to the world”. I understand that when the coalition took office there were about 2000 children in detention – there are now about 100. Why don’t you give credit where credit is due?
If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? Strangely, we never hear their advocates passing on “thank you for saving us” do we, and they never want to return, so is it any wonder we find it hard to believe they are anything but illegal economic migrants.
As to the question as to why you were only in a migrant camp for a few months is, as you well know, because you were invited to come here with your family at a time when we needed migrants and you arrived with valid documentation.
Australia does not need any more migrants now.

I did speak up about this when Labor was in govt. I made speeches when I gave out citizenship to new citizens. I made public speeches in Garema Place and on the lawns outside Parliament House. All when I was a Shadow minister and then as a full minister. My views have not changed in relation to either persuasion. They are both criminals.

My thinking is that we could be more welcoming to those in distress and if their claims are found to be unsubstantiated, they can be sent back. I don’t see much evidence that those who did come weren’t bona fide.

This govt has indeed stopped some boats. By being draconian, hard line and oppressive means. Witness the most recent for some Vietnamese.

I still think some compassion is warranted and I see no, repeat no, reason to imprison children nor to send them to a third world country because that’s the way to stop the boats. There’s gotta be a better way than imprisonment and diversion.

I accept that you feel strongly about what you believe is the way children in detention are treated but Australia does take good care of the asylum seekers as promulgated here: http://www.immi.gov.au/About/Pages/media/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-82.aspx
I don’t see how we can be more welcoming than that.
It’s a bit emotive to say they are “imprisoned” also. The numbers of illegal asylum seekers that were coming in under the previous government was tantamount to an invasion and while you call the way the current government has dealt with that as draconian, hard line and oppressive you do not offer any alternatives.
I believe stopping the boats is the only way to control the problem.
Australia is a very compassionate country but there are limits especially now that we have massive welfare problems to contend with.

People who advocate releasing illegal boat arrivals into the community can never answer one simple question;

Q. What is to be done with the flotilla of leaky/sinking boats that will (as experience has shown) be launched immediately after Australia relaxes its current stance on asylum seekers? Answer? I expect none.

Nobody likes to see the kids in detention centres. But there will, and has been, many entire families drowned if asylum seekers are ‘released into the community” immediately after arrival.

chewy14 said :

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

Children behind barbed wire living in tents and huts? The difference for me was I could go out of the gate. Why can’t hey? They are innocent children. It is theft of their childhood.

dungfungus said :

A couple of comments without the “leaky boats”emotion that usually clouds the real issues with asylum seeker detention.
John, why didn’t you write this while the Rudd/Gillard Labor government was in power? Sure, you say that both sides of politics are as bad as each other but only the coalition should “back down and show compassion to the world”. I understand that when the coalition took office there were about 2000 children in detention – there are now about 100. Why don’t you give credit where credit is due?
If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? Strangely, we never hear their advocates passing on “thank you for saving us” do we, and they never want to return, so is it any wonder we find it hard to believe they are anything but illegal economic migrants.
As to the question as to why you were only in a migrant camp for a few months is, as you well know, because you were invited to come here with your family at a time when we needed migrants and you arrived with valid documentation.
Australia does not need any more migrants now.

I did speak up about this when Labor was in govt. I made speeches when I gave out citizenship to new citizens. I made public speeches in Garema Place and on the lawns outside Parliament House. All when I was a Shadow minister and then as a full minister. My views have not changed in relation to either persuasion. They are both criminals.

My thinking is that we could be more welcoming to those in distress and if their claims are found to be unsubstantiated, they can be sent back. I don’t see much evidence that those who did come weren’t bona fide.

This govt has indeed stopped some boats. By being draconian, hard line and oppressive means. Witness the most recent for some Vietnamese.

I still think some compassion is warranted and I see no, repeat no, reason to imprison children nor to send them to a third world country because that’s the way to stop the boats. There’s gotta be a better way than imprisonment and diversion.

For a fair while there I thought you were going to say childhood detention isn’t too bad!

And I mostly agree with the other responses. You of all people should understand the role of government in implementing effective process.

So all illegal arrivals are straight into full employment, housed and have their kids in school. Gee, I can’t see any problems at all when their request for asylum is rejected 2 or 3 years down the track.

And why can’t we equate apples to oranges?

It’s unfair that they are completely different things.

What is the solution John? The current process is a safe and secure method of taking people who arrived through illegal channels (and I think it is important to state that to arrive on the shores of Australia without obtaining prior approval is illegal), until such time as the relevant checks are undertaken to determine if they are in fact actual asylum seekers and not economic migrants. If these checks come back substantiating their claims they are actually introduced to our society with a great deal of support. Are you suggesting we remove this process? How would they then be supported. Where would they go to live and how would they earn an income? Are you suggesting we just wave to them as they arrive to the shores at broom and start walking down the road to no where starving or dehydrating to death.

A couple of comments without the “leaky boats”emotion that usually clouds the real issues with asylum seeker detention.
John, why didn’t you write this while the Rudd/Gillard Labor government was in power? Sure, you say that both sides of politics are as bad as each other but only the coalition should “back down and show compassion to the world”. I understand that when the coalition took office there were about 2000 children in detention – there are now about 100. Why don’t you give credit where credit is due?
If these people are true refugees they should be grateful that they have made it to the safety and security of an Australian controlled refugee facility. This is assuming they were fleeing from life threatening situations. How could “the appalling conditions” they are living in now be worse than what they were leaving? Strangely, we never hear their advocates passing on “thank you for saving us” do we, and they never want to return, so is it any wonder we find it hard to believe they are anything but illegal economic migrants.
As to the question as to why you were only in a migrant camp for a few months is, as you well know, because you were invited to come here with your family at a time when we needed migrants and you arrived with valid documentation.
Australia does not need any more migrants now.