but then what about those in these hellish camps, who've been waiting legally for so much longer? should they miss their spot in our yearly quota simply due to geographical circumstance?
believe me, if there was a way to take everyone (which could possibly be done by greatly expanding our quota and appropriate state apparatus), then that's what should happen. however, that's not what's happening. my objection doesn't come out of some dislike for those who come by boats - one of my dearest friends came here that way. however, this cannot come at the cost of those who've been through an even GREATER hell of waiting for much longer. they deserve preference, not those who wait a lesser time under the same circumstances. i can't see how you can condemn the refugee camps, but then ignore the plight of those in those same camps who miss their spot due to others having a few more bucks and a few less miles to go. that's not fair, and i while i have no ill will for those who come by boat, they must take a back seat to those who've been waiting longer.
with respect to the declaration of human rights, you're missing something. yes, it is illegal to turn away genuine asylum seekers and refugees. however, there's a difference between them, and economic migrants. if you come by boat, fleeing the taliban, directly to australia (which doesn't happen), then you'd be a refugee, and denying you entrance would be illegal. however, if you ignore refugee camps and processes in other countries because you don't like them, or want something better (which is understandable, again), then you're no longer a refugee - you're an economic migrant. hence, turning away boat people from indonesia and other places with refugee camps is not a breach of the declaration, nor a breach of international law.
it's a shitty situation, and the best outcome would be for our political system to take more refugees. but, if that doesn't happen (and given our political climate, it probably won't), preference must be given to those who wait the longest, and by the general rule, that's not what happens with the "boat people" from indonesia, etc. supporting their taking of a quota spot over a 10-year wait-er in a kenyan UNHCR camp is wrong.
bloody hell someone was spoonfed information by Howard et al and Murdoch news
I'll post a legitimate response in a bit
Eugh you seriously pulled the 'my best friends are [x]' line. It doesn't work for homophobic people, it doesn't work for racist people, and it's not working right now.
[QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33842031]but then what about those in these hellish camps, who've been waiting legally for so much longer? should they miss their spot in our yearly quota simply due to geographical circumstance?
believe me, if there was a way to take everyone (which could possibly be done by greatly expanding our quota and appropriate state apparatus), then that's what should happen. however, that's not what's happening. my objection doesn't come out of some dislike for those who come by boats - one of my dearest friends came here that way. however, this cannot come at the cost of those who've been through an even GREATER hell of waiting for much longer. they deserve preference, not those who wait a lesser time under the same circumstances. i can't see how you can condemn the refugee camps, but then ignore the plight of those in those same camps who miss their spot due to others having a few more bucks and a few less miles to go. that's not fair, and i while i have no ill will for those who come by boat, they must take a back seat to those who've been waiting longer.[/quote]
Yeah, you're attacking my argument for the wrong reasons and making assumptions about things I haven't said. I don't agree with having a [i]quota[/i] for the amount of people who need homes. Therefore, no, I'm not prioritizing people who are in those camps above those who have paid people smugglers. I think you're working through this with the idea that existing structures and institutions need to be used - and they don't. Sometimes they're broken. Sometimes they need to be overhauled. Sometimes they need to be discarded altogether. I condemn the camps, yes, but I'm not 'ignoring the plight' of the residents of those camps. You need to separate the two in your mind, and think before you type. I never said that - I don't believe that, and I find it offensive that you claim I do.
Also, I find your assertion that those in the camps have it worse a little short-sighted. Whilst I have, as I said earlier, those camps [i]are[/i] hellish, but I don't think you can compare those experiences with those coming here by boat and say the people in camps have it worse. You can't possibly know that. You don't know the intricacies of the lives of these people. You make out like those on boats are rich fuckers who are paying their way into Australia, and that's simply not true.
[QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33842031]with respect to the declaration of human rights, you're missing something. yes, it is illegal to turn away genuine asylum seekers and refugees. however, there's a difference between them, and economic migrants. if you come by boat, fleeing the taliban, directly to australia (which doesn't happen), then you'd be a refugee, and denying you entrance would be illegal. however, if you ignore refugee camps and processes in other countries because you don't like them, or want something better (which is understandable, again), then you're no longer a refugee - you're an economic migrant. hence, turning away boat people from indonesia and other places with refugee camps is not a breach of the declaration, nor a breach of international law. [/quote]
Wow, I don't even know where to start with this one. Again, as I said before - if you're coming to Australia on a boat, it is [i]incredibly[/i] unlikely that you're going to be able to just say, "Oh, can I just pop into Indonesia to go to one of the camps, kthnx." As for the rest of what you've said, it's so ignorant I'm not even going to try to tackle it.
[QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33842031]it's a shitty situation, and the best outcome would be for our political system to take more refugees. but, if that doesn't happen (and given our political climate, it probably won't), preference must be given to those who wait the longest, and by the general rule, that's not what happens with the "boat people" from indonesia, etc. supporting their taking of a quota spot over a 10-year wait-er in a kenyan UNHCR camp is wrong.[/QUOTE]
Sigh.
Saying "boat people" is not a good move. Grasping at 'queue' discourses is even worse.
[quote]John Menadue, former Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, remarked that the idea of the queue ‘was invented by bureaucrats in Canberra’ (Stephens 2002).[/quote]
You argue that there exists a queue, but accept that certain places do not have Australian consulates and are unable to take refugees from what tends to be the most volatile and dangerous places?
So then, what does our current 'queue' look like? (where it even exists)
[quote]To mark World Refugee Day on 20 June 2002, the Australian Government issued a statement claiming that ‘Within the Humanitarian Program we will continue to give priority to people who are in the most vulnerable situations and who have the greatest need for resettlement places’. Yet [B]a substantial proportion of places within this program are in fact set aside for ‘Special Humanitarian
Program’ (SHP) applicants who need not be refugees under the 1951 Convention, but must have sponsors in Australia[/B]. They are also subject to stringent health screening to eliminate the disabled, sometimes with tragic results as became clear [B]when the father of a child rejected because of cerebral palsy set fire to himself outside Parliament House in Canberra on 2 April 2001[/B] (Commonwealth Ombudsman 2001). The provision of such SHP places is popular with established ethnic
communities, and [B]allows the costs of resettlement to be shifted to sponsors (who typically pay the applicant’s air fares)[/B], but could hardly be said ‘to give priority to people who are in the most vulnerable situations and who have the greatest need for resettlement places’.[/quote]
[quote]The Australian government attempts to justify its deterrent policies as a matter of principle rather than expediency. It does so by stigmatizing asylum seekers coming from other regions as "queue-jumpers"90 who do not wait their turn in the resettlement "queue." Australia has for a long time viewed its primary role in the international refugee protection regime as that of a resettlement country91 and has resettled some 600,000 refugees and humanitarian cases since the Second World War. It is only since September 2001, however, that there has been official bias against those who "could have lodged applications for consideration under Australia's humanitarian programs" but instead chose to come spontaneously. They have been wrongly portrayed as people who "simply do not want to wait.[/quote]
The 'camps' in places like Indonesia and Malaysia are absolutely shocking
[quote]In summary, the main protection problems faced by refugees in Southeast Asian transit countries during 2000 and early 2001 were the risk of arbitrary detention, ill-treatment and deportation as "illegal migrants," exploitation and misinformation by smugglers, and difficulties in accessing the UNHCR determination and resettlement system. Lack of trust in the justice and efficiency of UNHCR procedures also caused many refugees, who obviously would have preferred to forgo the dangers and financial costs of illegal travel, to continue their journey toward Australia.[/quote]
please read this
[url]http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/australia/australia1202.pdf[/url]
Oh look at that, Labor is considering Nauru as well, congratulations Australian politics, con-fucking-gratulations you regressive bastards
What happens when labor and liberal are both the same and not just slightly different?
[editline]22nd December 2011[/editline]
Devotch, get an SA account and go to debate and discussion -> Aussie politics
[quote]The revelation comes as the Herald Sun today reports that more than 11,000 years have been lost due to fatal accidents on Victoria's roads already in 2011.[/quote]
sensationalist reporting at it's best
also lol
also also speeding time
[QUOTE=McGee;33843510]What happens when labor and liberal are both the same and not just slightly different?
[editline]22nd December 2011[/editline]
Devotch, get an SA account and go to debate and discussion -> Aussie politics[/QUOTE]
That thread is just a front for pipe dreamer trolling stupid people
My grandfather had better like what I bought him for christmas.
Guy at the bottle shop gave me a glare when I bought a bottle of Bailleys. And then asked for ID in a nasty way.
Wanted to say, "Chill dude."
Heard a backfire and thought it was a gunshot, so I called the police
I feel like a retard
[QUOTE=McGee;33858420]Heard a backfire and thought it was a gunshot, so I called the police
I feel like a retard[/QUOTE]
Brunswick?
[editline]23rd December 2011[/editline]
Because if so I wouldn't blame you
car won't start
it spits at my attempt to charge it
~fine american engineering~
My bike starts merry Christmas bro
[QUOTE=McGee;33858420]Heard a backfire and thought it was a gunshot, so I called the police[/QUOTE]
hahaha oh well
i'm sure there was a laugh somewhere. did the police come out?
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Contag;33859401]car won't start[/QUOTE]
bump start that fucckerrr
in the top floor of car park
bump starting not the best idea
that's perfect? you dont need someone to push you, you already got the hill.
problem is getting it to the hill without it rolling away.
someone stole my bike tire
them cunts
of all things to steal, just the tyre?
[QUOTE=DogGunn;33859828]that's perfect? you dont need someone to push you, you already got the hill.
problem is getting it to the hill without it rolling away.[/QUOTE]
the levels are offset to each other, so you wouldn't get much speed
and considering the terrible parking that makes it hard enough to squeeze through on a normal day
not particularly game without power steering either
[QUOTE=DogGunn;33859945]of all things to steal, just the tyre?[/QUOTE]
I had the front tire attached to the chain link so they stole the back tire
[QUOTE=Mlisen14;33858846]Brunswick?
[editline]23rd December 2011[/editline]
Because if so I wouldn't blame you[/QUOTE]
South brisbane.
The cops did come out, I heard sirens. There were fireworks too so others must have complained. It's not the first time someone's been arrested for fireworks around here
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
Last year at 10pm new years a dude ran out in front of my mums car, planted one on the road and ran back inside
[QUOTE=Contag;33859981]the levels are offset to each other, so you wouldn't get much speed
and considering the terrible parking that makes it hard enough to squeeze through on a normal day
not particularly game without power steering either[/QUOTE]
don't really need much speed. 3km/h is enough in my car to get the engine turning, but fair call about the power steering. it would be a workout to have to keep turning the wheel
[QUOTE=McGee;33843510]
Devotch, get an SA account and go to debate and discussion -> Aussie politics[/QUOTE]
SA account? Sorry, beyond me :(
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=McGee;33860232]South brisbane.
The cops did come out, I heard sirens. There were fireworks too so others must have complained. It's not the first time someone's been arrested for fireworks around here[/quote]
I called the police when people in my apartment complex were getting a bit rowdy during a party (non-holidays related). Of course, it's a newer apartment complex, so when they got here I realized I couldn't get them up to the floor it was on, because I didn't have a pass to that floor. Good job, Jennifer.
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNOhjyxL6ok[/media]
oh dear god I have this song stuck in my head kill me now
Something awful
Does anyone have an american free vpn, I remember someone here talking about it when RO2 came out
SR3 is $33 USD on the american store
just testing the vpn
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
oh yeah amuurika
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
"error processing your transaction" and I cant sign in through firefox :(
happy easter guys
[QUOTE=McGee;33874190]just testing the vpn
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
oh yeah amuurika
[editline]24th December 2011[/editline]
"error processing your transaction" and I cant sign in through firefox :([/QUOTE]
[url]http://cdkeyprices.com/search.php?q=saints+row[/url]
merry xmas
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
