Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > Australia
Reload this Page >

High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Old Mar 3rd 2005, 2:41 am
  #61  
Karma Comedian
 
jayr's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 3,506
jayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond reputejayr has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Ruptured gonad
You are still doing it.

It is very difficult to have a reasonable debate on this matter as anyone who doesn't adopt an open door policy is shouted down or called a tinpot Nazi/Daily Mail reader, it is increadibly tidious.

There is a 'human rights' industry who are actually incredibily patronising to 'asylum seekers' with their 'we know what is best for you' attitude. In reality these people just want to work & have a decent home like everybody else, they don't give a fig about being offended by school plays, Xmas carols or the public display of national flags. It is the people who make a career out of 'human rights' and their emotive supporters that cause most of the misplaced resentment by locals towards 'asylum seekers'.

I couldn't give a monkeys about school plays, carols, nativity scenes etc. None the less, I think it is difficult to blame those who do for the racist attitudes of people towards asylum seekers, immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and others of different culture or skintone.

I don't have a problem with reasonable debate about sustainable poulation numbers for individual countries/economies. However, it seems that trying to create such a debate attracts those with ill-informed racist opinions out of the woodwork complaining not only about illegal immigrants but the racial mix of UK cities and the suggestion that white people are somehow persecuted in the UK.

I happen to believe that people should have as many freedoms to move internationally as other forms of goods and trade. It seems rational that people should economically migrate to areas where work, food, housing etc. ae more available. This has after all occurred since our ancestors emerged out of Africa.
jayr is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 2:42 am
  #62  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 44
Ruptured gonad is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by bondipom
They bypass assylum and just work illegally and uncounted. Assylum means being registered by authorities. The cockle pickers who drowned were not assylum seekers nor were they refugees.

One of the touted benefits of the EU expansion is that legal East Europeans could be used to squeeze out the criminal elements behind the smuggling of the workers.
The whole point is that is they had temporary visas or PR visas they can work legally, get employment benefits and pay taxes. The cockle pickers would have been in this category so not need to work in the black market doing unsafe work for poverty pay levels.

I say again, asylum is a privileged status which is being used by economic migrants because they cannot get in otherwise. We need unskilled economic migrants just as much as skilled migrants.
Ruptured gonad is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 2:47 am
  #63  
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 11,149
bondipom is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Ruptured gonad
The whole point is that is they had temporary visas or PR visas they can work legally, get employment benefits and pay taxes. The cockle pickers would have been in this category so not need to work in the black market doing unsafe work for poverty pay levels.

I say again, asylum is a privileged status which is being used by economic migrants because they cannot get in otherwise. We need unskilled economic migrants just as much as skilled migrants.
There are economic migrants in there but they must present a case along with the other genuine assylum seekers. The system of assessment is where a major problem is.

I also cannot blame a lot of economic migrants for trying to improve their lot in life when you consider the nature of the war ravaged countries that they are leaving. One must also consider the role of Britain in shaping the nature of wars in Aghanistan and Iraq.
bondipom is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 8:43 am
  #64  
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
 
NedKelly's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
NedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Ceri
Tough one.
I quite agree. You don't want to go down this road.

A country's language eroded because of the influence of a foreign language.Things such as schools had to teach in this foreign language. Also even going as far as setting up company schools to educate the workers children in this alien, foreign language. Courts of law , this foreign language had to be used, and the countries own language would not be accepted in the lands court. Children were whipped if they uttered their own language in a classroom.
Influence of many migrants who walked into the country without a passport for the work at the time, but yet they wanted to change the nation they walked into.

Recent years, these immigrants are still coming in, taking jobs, many scrounging off the dole and taking public housing. If that was not enough they still have the cheek to moan about the nations language, such as they can't read road signs and need to flick their eyes to read the language that they understand - there are so many of them that they influence the nations vote and the ethnic vote is fast becoming the minority.

These immigrants think they have the right to come and go as they please , treat the country as their own.

I say run them back into their own country. They don't have far to go (a bums rush would do it) and gladly accept the real immigrants who don't want to change anything, but integrate.


These same people also travelled the world going into many nations, changing the nations language, taking over their laws of the land, and putting down their own rule. Instead of integrating into that nation.

Today, many nations flee to these above peoples own land, not to rape it's culture or put down it's own laws, but to live in a nation which they think is democratic, not to face persecution, but to give a better life for their children and families. But many of these above people are not very reciprocal are they? After centuries of swanning in and out of other lands, changing laws, dominating other cultures , they do not wish for people today to come to their own little part of the world


pick up a mirror

You should not throw stones in glasshouses

Are you talking about the culture and wealth the English gave to Wales and other backward nations?
NedKelly is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 8:51 am
  #65  
BE Forum Addict
 
karenjc's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: Gilston, GOLD COAST.
Posts: 1,661
karenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud ofkarenjc has much to be proud of
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by jayr
I couldn't give a monkeys about school plays, carols, nativity scenes etc. None the less, I think it is difficult to blame those who do for the racist attitudes of people towards asylum seekers, immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and others of different culture or skintone.

I don't have a problem with reasonable debate about sustainable poulation numbers for individual countries/economies. However, it seems that trying to create such a debate attracts those with ill-informed racist opinions out of the woodwork complaining not only about illegal immigrants but the racial mix of UK cities and the suggestion that white people are somehow persecuted in the UK.

I happen to believe that people should have as many freedoms to move internationally as other forms of goods and trade. It seems rational that people should economically migrate to areas where work, food, housing etc. ae more available. This has after all occurred since our ancestors emerged out of Africa.
I think that you will find that my comments were not ill- informed or that i said that the non white population were all new immigrants to the city of my birth, to the comment of being persecuted well i have to say that is open to question, when for a example B'ham city council says that a department in its accounts area is after new staff but the applicants have to be from the ethnic minorites, personaly the best person for the job no matter what group they come from gets the job. To call people racist is just weak, certainly when the views that i mentioned are shared with the people that i work with in my group, 1 from Nigeria, 2 from pakistan.You say that you can't give a toss when nativity plays etc are scrapped to stop offending other relgious groups well here lies the trouble. This you will find is the action of your white do-gooder not your down to earth Jew,Muslim,or whoever who are quite happy to let us carry on with our last bit of culture that this tiny island has left.(i am not calling you white so please do not take offence to my outburst). When i was at school they said we had to stop calling the blackboard by this name and call it a chalkboard, well my partner works in a school and they now use a white board, i am shocked and offended by this and am wondering when will something be done about it :scared: .Complaining about something that is illegal well bugger me i thought that was what demoracy was about.
karenjc is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 9:10 am
  #66  
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
 
NedKelly's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,584
NedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond reputeNedKelly has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by jayr
I happen to believe that people should have as many freedoms to move internationally as other forms of goods and trade. It seems rational that people should economically migrate to areas where work, food, housing etc. ae more available. This has after all occurred since our ancestors emerged out of Africa.
A very altruistic notion, the problem is that the UK is but a small island with it's own unemployment, housing and economic problems and with it's population of some 57 Million cannot support the 500 Million from the Asian sub continent, the 200 Million from Africa and the 100 Million other potential economic migrants who would aspire to move to it's green pastures.
NedKelly is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 9:36 am
  #67  
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 11,149
bondipom is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by NedKelly
A very altruistic notion, the problem is that the UK is but a small island with it's own unemployment, housing and economic problems and with it's population of some 57 Million cannot support the 500 Million from the Asian sub continent, the 200 Million from Africa and the 100 Million other potential economic migrants who would aspire to move to it's green pastures.
Britain is not open to them and your notion that it is is rediculous. Other much poorer countries do more than Britain in what is the worlds duty to help.
bondipom is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 9:39 am
  #68  
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 11,149
bondipom is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by karenjc
I think that you will find that my comments were not ill- informed or that i said that the non white population were all new immigrants to the city of my birth, to the comment of being persecuted well i have to say that is open to question, when for a example B'ham city council says that a department in its accounts area is after new staff but the applicants have to be from the ethnic minorites, personaly the best person for the job no matter what group they come from gets the job. To call people racist is just weak, certainly when the views that i mentioned are shared with the people that i work with in my group, 1 from Nigeria, 2 from pakistan.You say that you can't give a toss when nativity plays etc are scrapped to stop offending other relgious groups well here lies the trouble. This you will find is the action of your white do-gooder not your down to earth Jew,Muslim,or whoever who are quite happy to let us carry on with our last bit of culture that this tiny island has left.(i am not calling you white so please do not take offence to my outburst). When i was at school they said we had to stop calling the blackboard by this name and call it a chalkboard, well my partner works in a school and they now use a white board, i am shocked and offended by this and am wondering when will something be done about it :scared: .Complaining about something that is illegal well bugger me i thought that was what demoracy was about.
Bladdy do gooders eh. Whats the world coming to when people do good.
bondipom is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 10:38 am
  #69  
Superfreak!!
 
Stormz's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: Thornlie, Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,177
Stormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to all
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Ruptured gonad
Which ones exactly?

Stormz you cannot make comments like that without being accused of being a tinpot Nazi.
Erm, I think you are addressing the wrong person with the comment you quoted. Have another look.
Stormz is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 11:32 am
  #70  
Superfreak!!
 
Stormz's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: Thornlie, Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,177
Stormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to allStormz is a name known to all
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by bondipom
Bladdy do gooders eh. Whats the world coming to when people do good.
You know what he means..... the bloody ultra-pc brigade who want to make everyone a `sportsperson`; an `actor`; no more `black boy` trees; no more `blackboards`; no more X`mas cards with any reference to Christianity in UK councils (for fear of offending other religions); no more nativity plays; job quota`s for minority races in the UK (too bad if you`re Caucasian); etc etc.

I have Pakistani, Indian and Black friends. We all agree that the UK is going to pot because too many immigrants are being allowed in, and not wanting to integrate into the British culture or society. I`m all for a certain amount of people coming here for whatever reason (economic, asylum, refugee) as long as they come here with a view to fit in... not try and make it into a carbon copy of where they came from (ie drive through Southall and Slough and alot of street signs are in Urdu only... unbelievable... even in Wales where the English invaded the signs are bilingual) and create their own sub-states within the UK.

This is an interesting topic I think and it`s good to hear different facts and opinions (barring idiotic statements from people like NedKelly).

I don`t think it`s too harsh to want England to ultimately remain English (no matter where someones ancestors are from, and to integrate into British society (even if you`re from Outer Mongolia).

As I stated earlier. People who travel half-way across Europe or around the world to claim `asylum` or `refugee status` are taking the piss.

Britain is a small country with a large population. It can`t take much more, and that is why so many people are leaving.

btw My Pakistani friend just said that he thinks there shouldn`t be any more people allowed in the UK (as there are too many here already), especially from Eastern Europe. He says alot of people come here for the benefits, but alot of the Eastern Europeans are criminals, so are much worse. Oh, he also said it`s funny, because he`s heard (he has family in Melboune) that the largest group of illegal immigrants in Aus are actually British They get their on a holiday visa and then go into hiding. Don`t know if that`s true myself obviously, but would be hilariously ironic if it was.
Stormz is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 11:42 am
  #71  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 62
pusky123 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Dear All,

Throwing in my two pence worth, I think there may well have been too much migration into the UK over a relatively short period of time.

However, I also think that people do seem to perceive the problem to be much worse than it actually is. For instance my parents who live in a very rural area of the UK are very concerned about asylum seekers and immigration, yet they've never even seen an asylum seeker.

Also, we need to bear in mind that if it wasnt for immigration there wouldnt be any doctors or nurses in London, let alone shop assistants or cleaners.

One final controversial point (no offence intended) - isnt it a bit rich for all of us who are seeking a better life abroad to try and deny that opportunity to others in a far less fortuate position than ourselves? Wheres the logic in saying i'm leaving the UK because of immigration to be a migrant myself? It just seems a bit hypocritical to me.
pusky123 is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 1:08 pm
  #72  
BAY
BE Enthusiast
 
BAY's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 743
BAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by jayr
I couldn't give a monkeys about school plays, carols, nativity scenes etc. None the less, I think it is difficult to blame those who do for the racist attitudes of people towards asylum seekers, immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and others of different culture or skintone.

I don't have a problem with reasonable debate about sustainable poulation numbers for individual countries/economies. However, it seems that trying to create such a debate attracts those with ill-informed racist opinions out of the woodwork complaining not only about illegal immigrants but the racial mix of UK cities and the suggestion that white people are somehow persecuted in the UK.

I happen to believe that people should have as many freedoms to move internationally as other forms of goods and trade. It seems rational that people should economically migrate to areas where work, food, housing etc. ae more available. This has after all occurred since our ancestors emerged out of Africa.
So you like a debate 'I don't have a problem with reasonable debate' but if anyone oppposes your liberal views 'I happen to believe that people should have as many freedoms to move internationally as other forms of goods and trade' you appear to be labelling them as racist 'attracts those with ill-informed racist opinions'.
BAY is offline  
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 1:38 pm
  #73  
PommieLeague
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Larissa
I think it's a great ruling and a victory for human rights. What we go through for visa applications is *nothing* in comparison to what some of these poor guys go through. Last week I met some lovely Sudanese guys and I found their stories heartbreaking. I'd much rather share a drink and some tucker with some those guys than someone who thinks he's better than someone else purely because he's been able to buy his way into the country.
Maybe some of you should go live with Sharia law.
Yeah that right, open the floodgates.
 
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 1:40 pm
  #74  
PommieLeague
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by Koza
Outrageous!
How could anybody these days believe jews are persecuted in Russia?

Not just these days, been going on for at least 300 years.
 
Old Mar 3rd 2005, 2:00 pm
  #75  
BAY
BE Enthusiast
 
BAY's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 743
BAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to beholdBAY is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: High Court rules Australia must take asylum seekers

Originally Posted by pusky123
Dear All,

Throwing in my two pence worth, I think there may well have been too much migration into the UK over a relatively short period of time.

However, I also think that people do seem to perceive the problem to be much worse than it actually is. For instance my parents who live in a very rural area of the UK are very concerned about asylum seekers and immigration, yet they've never even seen an asylum seeker.

Also, we need to bear in mind that if it wasnt for immigration there wouldnt be any doctors or nurses in London, let alone shop assistants or cleaners.

One final controversial point (no offence intended) - isnt it a bit rich for all of us who are seeking a better life abroad to try and deny that opportunity to others in a far less fortuate position than ourselves? Wheres the logic in saying i'm leaving the UK because of immigration to be a migrant myself? It just seems a bit hypocritical to me.
So you don't mind the fact that the countries where these nurses and doctors are coming from are possibly going to be left with not enough.

Thats a very selfish attitude : as long as the UK has enough doctors and nurses I don't give a monkeys about the country from where they come from.

Isn't the difference between us emmigrating to Australia and illegal economic immigrants coming to the UK (i) we have been effectively invited to Australia,
they haven't (ii) we will be self supporting, they will not.
BAY is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.