|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 7, 2006 15:09:56 GMT 7
I strongly disagree with people labelling the majority of the voting public "stupid" because they don't like who they voted for. That's just being a sore loser, in my book.
And I'm not Andrew Bolt. I don't think I'm looking for a fight, and this "graceful withdrawal" only makes me think that I might have an irrefutable point.
I could be wrong, though...
|
|
|
Post by George61 on Dec 7, 2006 16:19:14 GMT 7
I don't think there are any "irrefutable" points in politics. One side always sees black, the other side always white.......except in the case of the Tampa, when both sides saw black!!
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 7, 2006 17:13:02 GMT 7
George61,
despite my tone, I don't mean to be rude. I'm just saying that you should state your reasons for believing what you do. Sure, I believe what I do and I might state my opinions forcefully, but that's no reason to assume we'll get into a flame war just for you stating yours.
I'm honestly interested in your reasoning. Calling JH a cunning rat-bastard doesn't really say a lot. I'm inviting you to expand on your point a bit, that's all.
As for refugees/asylum seekers/queue jumpers, only in the soft, cowardly West do we turn these people into victims and accept the blame for the despicable acts they commit.
1. Setting your boat on fire upon spotting the Australian Navy. Moral blackmail at its best. Never mind that you're putting the lives of your own children at risk (and, one way or another, those kids were going overboard)... only in the confusing fog of liberal guilt-mongering and self-flagellation do we lose sight of what those scumbags did and instead turn our full fury on the Prime Minister. A bunch of white Australians who deliberately set their boat on fire with kids on board would be castigated to high heaven. But these people are not white and they played their victim status in a willing media beautifully.
Remember, only whites are racist! Everybody else is just reacting to it!
2. These people then have the temerity to sabotage the Australian Navy ships carrying them to safety. They spit at the Australian sailors who rescued and fed them. They assaulted Australian sailors. But it's ok, because they're so poor and desperate, right?
3. These scumbags then sewed their own childrens' lips together. Of course, they made sure to call the media first. Nothing like a good photo op to show the inhumanity of those barbarian Australians who feed and shelter them while they attempt to sort out the status of people who "accidentally" lost their papers - despite apparently being cleared by the UNHCR. I assume this means that replacement papers or UN passports are issued. I guess not. Fancy having time to collect tens of thousands of dollars to pay for passage on a boat but forgetting your passport! Does anyone else smell bullxit here?
I understand Australia accepts a certain number of refugees each year. That's all well and good. But to accept people like this? I wouldn't want to live next door to them. Not even Jewish refugees, at the height of the Palestinian Question in the late 1940s, behaved like this! And they really had something to be mad about.
|
|
|
Post by George61 on Dec 7, 2006 17:35:46 GMT 7
On the other hand, turning away a sinking boat and letting 300-odd people drown is an example of ....what?..good Australian Government? ..Australian values?? I wouldn't believe anything that came from Howard's lips. If he told me the time, I'd check my watch! Do you really believe he knew absolutely nothing about AWB? What about the "biological agent" that turned out to be flour? WMD?? How about "There will never be a GST"? The list of his out-and-out lies is endless! The "man" is a scumbag, racist bastard without any redeeming values, in my book.
|
|
|
Post by Vegemite on Dec 7, 2006 19:01:29 GMT 7
And I just know Howard is responsible for the utter failure of the Pacific nations to get their acts together. Oi - don't be so judgmental! Some of us are actually proud to hail from the Pacifika... and to lump all the Pacific nations together is bu hao. We're just as varied as Europe is.
|
|
|
Post by George61 on Dec 7, 2006 20:15:39 GMT 7
It's Howard's attitude towards Pacific Islands that is so pooful!!
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Eater on Dec 8, 2006 2:37:39 GMT 7
OK - you asked for it. I have worked in Aboriginal affairs for a LOOOONG time - and believe me I know the problems. When we are talking equity we are talking starting from a similar basis - Aboriginal affairs DO NOT start from the same basis as the rest of us. They start from so far behind then 8-ball that it is not funny. So to make any inroads on the destruction that white people have caused to this culture is a truly monumental job. Added to that is the destruction caused by white fellas bringing alcohol, drugs and other substances onto a clean community and stating this is your right to use these substance despite the destruction caused to your community. If you have nothing else in life you will gladly accept any chemical way out. Look at the DOGITS - where the hell are they situated - on profitable lands, on productive lands? - get real mate - no where near!! They are situated on lands where no white fellas figure they can make any sort of profit. So why the hell do we figure Murris can make any money from land we couldn't? I have been to every DOGIT in Qld - and believe me apart from Palm Island and Seisa and Umagico I wouldn't want to live in any of them. Siesa, PI and Umagico - only because of the views not because of the living conditions!!! They have the crappist living conditions this side of rubbish dumps in India that I want to see. Money spent on them - well I too would like to see some sort of accountability - but it would be the EXACTLY the same sort of accountability as any other local government - not more stringent not less stringent. And I KNOW local government spending is not that strictly accounted for too!! Murris need education, job opportunities and life opportunities. We sent them to area where there is no possibility of making money, living a good life, but these areas are now their-"homelnds". Do you want to be forcibly removed from your families property because there is no work in your area - no way! Do you want a a fair chance at the welfare system? Too right! The Murris are the only people who have genuinely accepted a 'work for the dole ' program on the DOGITS. The rest of Australia has said - no way Jose!! Aboriginal affairs is a major passion of mine. If you figured I was fire-y on any other issue just start me on Murri stuff!!! I have lived, breathed and worked this stuff for so long it is way beyond funny!! White Aussies stuffed up BIG Time on this - it will take a hell of a long time to fix! Do you label people stupid for voting for the "Free marijuana Party", or Pauline Hansen'? I do - and can! Simplistic answers to complex problems are always stupid and any party that proposes them has to be by definition m'kaying stupid and the people who vote for that party are then also labelled with the same nomeclature. And believe me - I was brought up by a strong Liberal party member and runner for parliament!!
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Gonzo on Dec 8, 2006 2:37:46 GMT 7
It has to be said G Stringed Avenger: Your collection of Murdoch press rabid right shock-horror stories makes Vanstone and Rudoch look like bleeding heart humanitarians.
Given that it took years for the "children overboard" story to be exposed as the pure fudge that it was, and given that Howard, despite having been categorically told this still chose to use it in his campaign to whip up the xenophobe vote, I would appreciate a little more substance to your posts. Some reliable media links for example.
And the suggestion that Iraqi Kurds or Iranian Baha'i should have applied for passports before decamping is nonsense. Such applications would have been met with a midnight knock on the door.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Eater on Dec 8, 2006 2:59:05 GMT 7
Bu shi. In Scandanavian countries these people are given decent housing and opportunties while their credentials are examined. WE send them to bloody horrible Pacific islands that we wouldn't want to live on, or detention centres in the middle of the bloody desert - and not only do we send adults to these detention centres we also send totally innocent children to them. Fair go mate!!
Did you actually see the final report on this? - NO child went over board in an effort to attract the Navy - only in an attempt to save their lives while their parents were stuck with the option of drowning!! Check the OFFICIAL reports, not those given out by Howard and his cohorts!! Even at the time of the occurence the Navy was giving a totally different interpretation - based on actual observed evidence - than Howard was.
Howard government manipulation knows no boundaries
|
|
|
Post by Hamish on Dec 8, 2006 5:31:44 GMT 7
LE and GSA
Can you give us references for sources that you believe are reliable?
|
|
|
Post by The Canink on Dec 8, 2006 9:07:13 GMT 7
I knew as soon as I saw the subject heading that this thread wasn't going to go well....
Thankfully I come from a country with a perfect record in human rights (Canada), have ancestry that lies into another paragon of human rights (Germany) and have married into a third country that has no human rights issues whatsoever (China) or I might have to get involved in all this.
(Warning: for complete comprehension you may have to insert <irony/> tags in the above message.)
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Eater on Dec 8, 2006 9:47:33 GMT 7
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 11:23:31 GMT 7
OK - you asked for it. I have worked in Aboriginal affairs for a LOOOONG time - and believe me I know the problems. When we are talking equity we are talking starting from a similar basis - Aboriginal affairs DO NOT start from the same basis as the rest of us. They start from so far behind then 8-ball that it is not funny. So to make any inroads on the destruction that white people have caused to this culture is a truly monumental job. Added to that is the destruction caused by white fellas bringing alcohol, drugs and other substances onto a clean community and stating this is your right to use these substance despite the destruction caused to your community. If you have nothing else in life you will gladly accept any chemical way out. Look at the DOGITS - where the hell are they situated - on profitable lands, on productive lands? - get real mate - no where near!! They are situated on lands where no white fellas figure they can make any sort of profit. So why the hell do we figure Murris can make any money from land we couldn't? I have been to every DOGIT in Qld - and believe me apart from Palm Island and Seisa and Umagico I wouldn't want to live in any of them. Siesa, PI and Umagico - only because of the views not because of the living conditions!!! They have the crappist living conditions this side of rubbish dumps in India that I want to see. Money spent on them - well I too would like to see some sort of accountability - but it would be the EXACTLY the same sort of accountability as any other local government - not more stringent not less stringent. And I KNOW local government spending is not that strictly accounted for too!! Murris need education, job opportunities and life opportunities. We sent them to area where there is no possibility of making money, living a good life, but these areas are now their-"homelnds". Do you want to be forcibly removed from your families property because there is no work in your area - no way! Do you label people stupid for voting for the "Free marijuana Party", or Pauline Hansen'? I do - and can! Simplistic answers to complex problems are always stupid and any party that proposes them has to be by definition m'kaying stupid and the people who vote for that party are then also labelled with the same nomeclature. I totally agree - equity is where it's at! I have seen with my own eyes (Darwin - big Aboriginal population) the conditions these people live in. I went to school with Aboriginal kids who breakfasted on junk food every day because they didn't get a good meal at home. Their marks were lousy. They roamed the streets late at night. Dozens of them lying drunk outside a bottle shop every night of the week. So yeah, I know something of what you mean. It's a huge task and they are well behind us in every way, but my point is that their leaders don't represent them well and divert time, resources and attention to this pointless "Sorry" campaign. So what if Howard says sorry? It won't change a damn thing. I did say before that the whole dry community thing has been opposed by whites and not by Aborigines themselves. In fact, Aborigines have had some good ideas that have been vetoed by well-meaning but clueless whiteys. As for the voters... I think if we got past the headlines and observed the profile of the typical Hanson voter, you'd see that these people were not especially racist (and there's a little racist in all of us, whether we admit it or not), but were voting a) as a protest against the perceived inattention of the major parties and b) for someone they honestly believed had the guts to stand up and talk about issues deemed politically incorrect to mention. Many Australians had legitimate concerns about immigration and multiculturalism and they were being frozen out and disregarded by the powers-that-be, the academics and the media. People vote to extremes when frustrated... history has shown this before. When things are good, people return to the middle of the road. So no, I would not label One Nation voters as stupid. Free Marijuana voters, likewise. They believe what they believe and I think it's unnecessary to insult them for the choices they make.
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 11:24:49 GMT 7
On the other hand, turning away a sinking boat and letting 300-odd people drown is an example of ....what?..good Australian Government? ..Australian values?? True! But remember who created the situation in the first place... some people don't deserve to be called "parents".
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 11:27:13 GMT 7
Oi - don't be so judgmental! Some of us are actually proud to hail from the Pacifika... and to lump all the Pacific nations together is bu hao. We're just as varied as Europe is. I'm with you right there... my grandmother is from the Cook Islands! But look... Solomon Islands, Fiji, Bougainville, PNG, and that other one with the coup... Vanuatu, was it? It's becoming depressingly regular.
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 11:40:17 GMT 7
It has to be said G Stringed Avenger: Your collection of Murdoch press rabid right shock-horror stories makes Vanstone and Rudoch look like bleeding heart humanitarians. Given that it took years for the "children overboard" story to be exposed as the pure fudge that it was, and given that Howard, despite having been categorically told this still chose to use it in his campaign to whip up the xenophobe vote, I would appreciate a little more substance to your posts. Some reliable media links for example. And the suggestion that Iraqi Kurds or Iranian Baha'i should have applied for passports before decamping is nonsense. Such applications would have been met with a midnight knock on the door. If anything, the media is more than sympathetic to these people. Please avoid smearing me as "rabid right wing". It does none of us credit. Your other points... At the end of the day, the people on that boat deliberately set it on fire. This should be at the centre of the debate. That scumbag parents willingly and deliberately put the lives of their kids at risk. This is continually overlooked. Why? Why is no condemnation, no reproval, no criticism directed at these "people"? Yes, Howard was guilty of semantics, of distorting the facts, of playing around with information, but come on. We still return to that simple fact - they sank the boat themselves! Howard lied about it. I think he's a b*stard for doing that, but criticism should be evenly applied, and the criminal actions of the saboteurs have gone entirely overlooked, when in a sane society they would have been severely punished. "Reckless endangerment" or something, right? By papers, I never meant passports per se. Even downtrodden Kurds have some form of identity. They would have had to in order to leave the interior of Iraq, cross an ocean and enter Indonesia. Correct? And if they passed through the hands of the UN at some stage, it stands to reason that some paperwork or form of ID was processed for them. Anyway, as I said before, I vote Howard mainly because the opposition is not a viable alternative. I did that in 2001 and not because a bunch of kids went overboard. Labor cannot be trusted to rule yet. Their public pronouncements show that they haven't learnt a thing since 1996.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Gonzo on Dec 8, 2006 12:24:40 GMT 7
It has to be said G Stringed Avenger: Your collection of Murdoch press rabid right shock-horror stories makes Vanstone and Rudoch look like bleeding heart humanitarians. Given that it took years for the "children overboard" story to be exposed as the pure fudge that it was, and given that Howard, despite having been categorically told this still chose to use it in his campaign to whip up the xenophobe vote, I would appreciate a little more substance to your posts. Some reliable media links for example. And the suggestion that Iraqi Kurds or Iranian Baha'i should have applied for passports before decamping is nonsense. Such applications would have been met with a midnight knock on the door. If anything, the media is more than sympathetic to these people. Please avoid smearing me as "rabid right wing". It does none of us credit. Look again and you'll see I was specifically addressing the Murdoch press. You seem obsessed with the so-called "boat people", and unwilling to distinguish between a dastardly few [your call] and the tens or even hundreds of thousands who've come through legitimate channels. I don't know any Kurds who came via Indonesia: that's not to say there weren't any, but all those I've met came from camps in Turkey. As for the so called "illegals", Australia is signatory to a UN convention that tells us to care for these people whilst their cases are being assessed. To my knowledge, Australia is the only Western democracy that locks them up while doing so. Please, links to reliable media sources/reports. I was in China when all of this happened.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Eater on Dec 8, 2006 12:36:09 GMT 7
The concerns around immigration were not especially legitimate - most of them were fear induced and based on the prospect of a worsening economy. So Hanson and her supporters saw simplistic answers to complex problems as the way to go. The same with each other issue she raised. The individual issues touched individual chords in people but the options she proposed were always simplistic - easy to understand by her supporters. But any analysis the solutions would have shown her massive lack of understanding of the issues.
The majority of her supporters were the elderly, those with a lower level of education and rural conservative voters.
Voting for parties such as "Free Marijuana Party" is again a simplistic response to a single issue. It is NOT a way to manage the complexity of running a country. My favourite parties are actually based in Britian - the "Rock and Roll Loony Party" and the "Witchingtour Party". Clearly strong contenders for Darwin Awards.
The request for a "Sorry' is not a statement that all will be better if Howard says it. But it is instead a request for a simple acknowledgement that successive governments at state and federal level in Australia have clearly and at times deliberately mistreated Aboriginal Australians. Whilever you have a leader who cannot acknowledge wrong-doing - past or present - then you have a continuing pretense that previous and present policies, attitudes and behaviours were OK.
To commence any type of healing process there needs to be an understanding of the level of pain and depth of the wound. A "Sorry" would acknowledge that the wound and pain suffered is real. Howard's failure to say sorry is based on his fear of litigation - and that is a fairly unfounded fear - legal avenues are already available and have been used for restitution. It will not open any floodgates.
I would agree that many Aboriginal leaders do not have the 'control' that we would expect in a community - but again this is because the majority of Australians do not understand Aboriginal culture. My view here is that if we profited by wrong-doing then we should do all in our power to clean up the mess we made.
How long was the conservative party in power in the Northern Territory? What policies did it put in place to ameliorate the situations you describe? What changes in policies have occurred since the switch to a Labor government?
Howards government has been in power long enough also to have made the strong policy changes that would create some level of change in these problems? Has it happened? Not that I can see. But in Q'ld policies have been put in place that have made differences - "The Indigenous Employment Policy" for one example - this provides opportunities for training and employment and ensures that employement is offered for Aboriginal community members. Practical, workable and having results. Just quietly done.
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 17:23:59 GMT 7
Dr. Gonzo, as far as I know, almost the entire print press in Australia is in the hands of Murdoch. In any case, you'll see little difference in reporting between them and other forms of media, regardless of ownership. And you cannot tell me the Kurds sailed all the way from Turkey. They and others made their way to staging camps in Indonesia, that much is well known. The Australian government reached an agreement with Indonesia to close them down. Note I'm not attacking them for being refugees, if indeed they are. A Courier-Mail report (this was back in 2001-02) noted that a large number claiming to be Afghans turned out to be Pakistani businessmen! No, I'm attacking their behaviour. As I pointed out before, Jewish refugees were locked up after WW2 while their applications to move to Palestine were being processed and they didn't behave like that. I know and agree with Australia's obligations towards refugees. But we must make sure. Too many refugee intakes have backfired on us before. The Vietnamese government was more than happy to offload something like a group of five hundred criminals (can't remember where I read it) on us in the 80s, sending them out of the country in the guise of refugees. Many of them now form the backbone of Vietnamese gangs in Sydney - gangs that prey on honest, hardworking, legal Vietnamese migrants. The exact same thing happened with all too many Lebanese refugees in the late 70s. This is not based on fear. It's based on history - i.e. it has happened before. We would be fools not to be careful. Sweden's very successful experiment: "Swedish Police admit losing control of Sweden's third largest city". They are talking of Malmo, with an extremely high immigrant population - most of them refugees of Muslim background - which has seen a record number of rapes, arson and other crimes, as well as open attacks against the police and other authorities. Native Swedes are moving out. Go to www.dhimmiwatch.org and look it up. Funnily enough, the increase in crime exactly corresponds with the refugee intake. So, are we fools, or just being sensible? I am not by any means labelling the people in camps right now as potential criminals, but the Swedes are paying the price (losing authority over an entire city!) for lax procedures when dealing with their own refugees. A little bit of caution goes a long way.
|
|
|
Post by The G-Stringed Avenger on Dec 8, 2006 17:37:29 GMT 7
The concerns around immigration were not especially legitimate - most of them were fear induced and based on the prospect of a worsening economy. So Hanson and her supporters saw simplistic answers to complex problems as the way to go. The same with each other issue she raised. The individual issues touched individual chords in people but the options she proposed were always simplistic - easy to understand by her supporters. I think concerns about $2 billion spent every year to promote multiculturalism are a little the opposite of unfounded. The dividing of Australia to buy ethnic votes, the quick use of the word "racist" to silence ANY criticism (probably more damaging than anything else), the little allowances given here and there at the expense of ordinary Australians that mean little by themselves, but a lot when put together. The continuing of old ethnic rivalries and hatreds - Serb vs Croat, Greek vs Turk and so on. I don't think most Hanson voters cared as much about her policies as they did about putting a scare into the major parties.
|
|
|
Post by George61 on Dec 8, 2006 19:18:27 GMT 7
How about the use of "Un-Australian" to silence any criticism? One of howards most convenient comebacks!!
|
|
|
Post by George61 on Dec 8, 2006 19:30:41 GMT 7
Thinking further about "labels", the strangest one, to my mind, is the term "do-gooder". Why has it become bad (in some minds) to want to do good?? Does this make people who label others "do-gooders" and scorn them, "do badders??..or do-nothingers"?? Labels are a convenient, but dangerous items.
|
|
|
Post by The Canink on Dec 8, 2006 19:41:27 GMT 7
I think "do-gooder" is supposed to invoke either the image of the bumbling, well-intentioned fool or the old "road to Hell" adage.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Gonzo on Dec 9, 2006 1:33:40 GMT 7
And you cannot tell me the Kurds sailed all the way from Turkey. They and others made their way to staging camps in Indonesia, that much is well known. The Australian government reached an agreement with Indonesia to close them down. Is this the incident you're refering to? www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2003/s988736.htmand www.wsws.org/articles/2003/nov2003/refu-n17.shtmlPS As both a participant and moderator, I'm impressed with the decorum displayed by posters on this thread. It's an emotive issue which, on Daves, would probably have descended to mudslinging, followed by locking, by now. I think declaring Melville Island a "non migration zone" is a neat trick, and wonder why the government has stopped there. And as I said, my concern is for the majority, not the handful unfortunate enough to get washed up in non-Australian Australia. And this one is thought provoking: Shia refugee sent home killed as Aussie spy Rebecca Weisser 27nov06 AN Iraqi asylum-seeker sent home by Australian officials was assassinated in Baghdad after being accused of being an Australian spy. Immigration officials refused to allow Mohammed Sharif al-Saraf to stay in Australia when his three-year temporary protection visa expired in 2004, claiming the removal of Saddam Hussein meant it was safe to go back to his homeland. But The Australian has learned he was back in Iraq for only a few months when he was killed, in Baghdad, in late 2004. News of his murder was posted on the Shia website, YaaHosein, which said al-Saraf, a Shi'ite, had been murdered because he was wrongly charged with spying for the Australian forces in Iraq. Last week the High Court upheld the TPV system, ruling that asylum-seekers asking for further Australian protection must prove their refugee status still exists after their initial three-year visa expires. Iraqi Community Cultural Association of South Australia president Tariq al-Haris said al-Saraf was a Shia whose family came from Najaf, a hotbed of opposition to Saddam's Baath Party supporters. After fleeing to Iran, where he left his wife and two children, al-Saraf travelled alone to Australia, arriving by boat in late 1999, shortly after the federal Government introduced TPVs for unauthorised arrivals. He was detained in Woomera, South Australia, for about a year. His claims for refugee status were found to be valid, but under the terms of the TPV his status had to be reassessed at the end of three years. By the time his claims were reassessed in 2003, the regime of Saddam Hussein had been overthrown and he was found to no longer be in need of protection. Friends say he was under stress from his uncertain status and the separation from his wife and children. He had a heart attack in mid-2003 and was treated at the Royal Adelaide Hospital. "He was deeply lonely and after his heart attack he missed his wife and children even more," said Mr al-Haris. Mr al-Saraf gave up his battle to remain in Australia and in 2004 returned to Iraq. "We don't know who murdered him, but at that time, most of these sorts of murders were being committed either by ex-Baathists or by al-Qa'ida in Iraq. Most likely it was one of these two groups that killed him," said Mr al-Haris. "For these people, anybody who comes back from Australia must be a spy and they target anyone who they suspect of working with the Coalition forces in Iraq." When asked about al-Saraf's case, Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone said: "The limited details provided at this point do not enable any comment to be made on a specific individual case"
|
|
|
Post by Vegemite on Dec 9, 2006 19:22:23 GMT 7
PS As both a participant and moderator, I'm impressed with the decorum displayed by posters on this thread. It's an emotive issue which, on Daves, would probably have descended to mudslinging, followed by locking, by now. I agree...it's a very emotive issue, that can get one's back riled up easily...however, 'tis the sort of normal chat and conversation we'd be having in a 'real' bar. Oops, I didn't mean to allude to the fact that Raoul's isn't 'real' - of course, this is a normal, proper bar.
|
|