Asylum seekers

[lightningdance]

It's been pretty much acknowledged that the 50.000 who came here under the Rudd/Gillard failed government were economic refugees  and not fleeing for their lives.

The self harming and riots stem from the reality they will probably not succeed in their endeavours to access Australia.

Bob Carr belled the cat on this and now we have to process these 50.000 or more and it's going to take a long time and cost billions. In the meantime we are able to take genuine refugee who are in fear of their lives.

The Greens and all the other rent seeking refugee industry who are sorely missing the millions of dollars Rudd and Gillard handed them are now screaming for a government policy to be overturned even though the majority of voters voted for it.

The Labor party had outsourced their agenda to 3rd party activists because they know if they even try to go back to opening our borders they'll be obliterated.

This policy should not be used as a political football by the opponents of government policy but sadly that is what they are doing. Tte majority are quite satisfied with the orderly intake we are seeing now and no one wants to go back to the  the Pandora's box of failures  labor opened.

[ufo_investigations]

The asylum seekers don't need to go to Europe to be saved!

In northern Africa all they have to do is head toward Egypt and seek asylum there or go to Saudi Arabia.

To the asylum seekers Saudi Arabia would be heaven. It has all the luxuries they deeply and profoundly desire.

Look at the benefits they will enjoy:

- It is the home of Mecca they can pray in front of it daily instead of having to work out the direction of it in Europe.

- Islamic Sharia Law is the law of the land.

- Saudi law allows the death penalty for many crimes. For example:

    Adultery (Unmarried adulterers can be sentenced to 100 lashes, married ones can be sentenced to stoning.)
    Apostasy (Apostates are sentenced to beheading but are usually given three days to repent and return to Islam.)
    Armed robbery
    Blasphemy
    Burglary
    Carjacking
    Aircraft hijacking
    Drug smuggling
    Fornication
    Home invasion
    Sodomy, homosexuality, or lesbianism (If a man or woman is sodomized by their own consent, then they will also be sentenced to death along with the sodomizer)
    Idolatry
    Murder
    Rape
    Sedition
    Sexual misconduct
    Sorcery
    Terrorism
    Theft (fourth conviction)
    Treason
    Waging war on God
    Witchcraft

The asylum seekers will LOVE these laws, these are the same laws they want in Australia and all over Europe. Why try to implement them elsewhere when they already have it in their beloved Saudi Arabia.

To a Muslim Islamic Sharia Law, the Koran (Holy Book) and a country that follows this doctrine is heaven.

Besides, the Saudi's will take them with open arms, this is their brothers and sisters of islam.

Saudi Arabia would be a dream destination for these people. It is as closest to heaven as possible for them.

[ufo_investigations]

This is Dira Square in Saudi also known as chop-chop square. This is where crowds gather almost daily to watch beheadings live in public. The asylum seekers will love this, it is exactly what the Holy Koran mandates. The Saudi's will not disappoint whereas in Europe they will not enjoy this spectacle.

[cherry*135]

Parts of Libya are closer to Italy than Saudia Arabia, but thats besides the point anyway (your inflammatory point anyway).

[pct001wine]

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@pct001wine wrote:

 Whilst I agree with the tone of the statement, I think they may have rose-coloured glasses on regarding the acceptance of Vietnamese boat people.  They were greeted with the same fear, suspicion and loathing that we see every day here on the boards in respect of our current crop of refugees and asylum seekers.

Now that a few decades have passed, things are better, but they are still subjected to the same mindless drivel emanating from the mouths of the fear-mongers.

---

Perhaps the Catholic Church's role in that crisis was different? Our Church openly supported those refugees from Vietnam, we sponsored families in the neighbourhood. So, we would not have seen it as anything but supportive, there was not the widespread use of internet and other media that we have today either, so our immediate view was what we knew.

---

Good point Az, all we had in those days were tabloid-style media, and the good deeds of others went largely unnoticed by the many.

We had a large Vietnamese community in Adelaide (happily still do) and their contribution to our lives has been remarkable.

Our State Governor (SA) is a Vietnamese "boat person" and he is an inspirational man.

[karliandjacko]

---

@lightningdance wrote:

It's been pretty much acknowledged that the 50.000 who came here under the Rudd/Gillard failed government were economic refugees  and not fleeing for their lives.

---

Acknowledgement does not by necessity equal truth.

50,000 looks like a small crowd compared to the number at the footy final a few weeks ago.

[ufo_investigations]

---

@am*3 wrote:

Parts of Libya are closer to Italy than Saudia Arabia, but thats besides the point anyway (your inflammatory point anyway).

---

I'm not being inflammatory at all. Muslims love Saudi Arabia it has all the Islamic benefits they deeply desire.

Did you know that in Saudi Arabia pork is banned and all food and drink has to be halal as mandated by law?

Imagine that, a muslim does not have to protest to any company about having their food made halal. In Saudi it already is halal.

If a person contravenes this, it is deemed "Waging war against God" which carries the death penalty. Everything there is 100% halal.

Saudi is heaven on earth for a muslim.

[azureline**]

http://www.refugees.org/resources/refugee-warehousing/archived-world-refugee-surveys/2009-wrs-countr...

This might be why.

[boris1gary]

ufoinvestigations wrote: Due to my strict religious beliefs I do not consume halal foods and I do not bow down to them or serve them!

ufoinvestigations, just what is your religion, I am a little confused by your posts as they seem far removed from Catholicism at least my understanding of it from reading Pope Francis and the Catholic leadership against the asylum seeker treatment of this and the last govt.?  

[boris1gary]

http://theconversation.com/what-underlies-public-prejudice-towards-asylum-seekers-23974

  What underlies public prejudice towards asylum seekers?

One very important and consistent predictor of prejudice is the acceptance of inaccurate information, or myths, as true. A 2006 study, carried out by one of this article’s authors, identified three frequently cited myths that depicted asylum seekers as “queue jumpers”, “illegals” and not having a genuine reason to seek asylum. This study found that people who were high in prejudice were significantly more likely to accept these myths as being true.

These beliefs have been linked with government rhetoric about asylum seekers under the previous Howard government. Under the Abbott government, there has been no shortage of hostile rhetoric. The punitive asylum seeker policies of the Labor government under Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd have also continued.

  The ugly side of nationalism and perceptions of consensus

Some research links extreme levels of nationalism to prejudice towards asylum seekers. In one study into the phenomenon of flying Australian flags on one’s car for Australia Day, researchers from the University of Western Australia and Curtin University surveyed 501 people in public spaces in the week leading up to and on Australia Day in 2011.

The study found car-flag flyers rated more highly on measures of patriotism and nationalism and were significantly more likely to express prejudiced views against asylum seekers than non-flag flyers. Of those who flew flags, only 9.9% held positive views towards asylum seekers, compared to 24.7% of non-flag flyers.

We have found that people who held prejudiced views against asylum seekers are also notably more likely to over-estimate support in the community for these views compared with those more accepting of asylum seekers.

A 2008 study carried out by one of the authors found while both groups over-estimated their support in the community, the effect was much more pronounced among people holding prejudiced views.

This finding is of concern because other research finds people who see themselves as having a “majority voice” are more likely to be vocal and less flexible in their views than others who see themselves as having a “minority voice”.

People who seek to be tolerant and accepting of asylum seekers often find it difficult to speak out. This compounds the problem: prejudiced people’s influence can be disproportionate to their numbers.