Australia, the UN, and Refugees

Just as I thought.

White flag accepted.

 

No my dear boy, that's not the argument at all. Only an ignoramus would suggest such a thing.

The "queue" refers to an orderly system (starting with an application process) and the subsequent progression through that system to attain the status of 'asylum seeker'.

No such system exists for asylum seekers (remember, we're talking about asylum seekers, not refugees).

Thus, the constant cries from ignorant right-wing buffoons labelling boat people as "queue jumpers" is absolutely ludicrous.

A person can seek asylum by using any means available to them, at any time: there is no application process and no orderly progression through a structured system.

No "queue". Understand?

 

It`s mind boggling that anyone could balls up such simple facts. If the combined powers of your comprehension / addressing issues was petrol, you wouldn`t have enough to drive an ant`s gocart around a pin head.

 

My post is all fact.

Prove me wrong.

Do your best champ, we're all watching.

Go ahead, prove any of it wrong.

 

Come on sweety, I gave you what you wanted.

The "queue" is an orderly process that can be easily tracked. Not an actual line, but a systematic process starting off with an application process.

Now, you have to show me that such a thing exists for asylum seekers.

Then, you must show that boat people jump that "queue".

Everyone is waiting . This is your time to shine.

 

You are playing silly little word games, wasting time. Anyone with any sense can see it. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

No, I'm not. And everybody can see that I'm playing fair.

Now, I'll give you another chance.

How about YOU define what the "queue" is and then show us all how boat people are jumping it?

No word games. Nothing tricky.

YOU get to define what the "queue" is.

So, come on: explain how boat people jump the "queue", as defined by YOU.

All waiting ...

 

aussiefree2ride has proven that he doesn't have the balls to argue this point, so it's up to you now.

Could you please:

a) define "queue", according to your own understanding of the word in this context (and yes, we all know it doesn't mean an actual line of people along the footpath)

b) explain exactly how the asylum seekers jump the queue

c) tell us all what name should be used to describe them, if not "asylum seekers"


Thank you


EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention.

No mention of "Blind Freddy" or any insults or anything like that please.

Just take a look at my questions (that are asked in good faith) and do your best to answer them honestly, according to your own beliefs.

 

UM, you are just going around in silly little circles, wasting everyone`s time. Your trivia doesn`t address any of the real issues, blind Moses can see that your debating, and comprehension skills leave everything to be desired. While you play your puerile little word games, people are dying at sea in their quest to get onto the big money

 

Please define "queue" as you see it, and explain how boat people are jumping it.

Thank you.

 

Nobody is disagreeing with that. Nobody has ever said it's a physical line of people.

Perhaps you didn't read this post:

Did you read it? Can you understand what it says?
Can we move on now to the question?

And now all you need to do is explain how an asylum seeker gets on your "queue" (remembering that it's not an actual physical queue/line of people).

What is the application process, and how are boat people jumping it?

This is a very simple question that you seem incapable of answering, or just unwilling.

 

Agreed, there are 'doers' and 'dreamers' in this world. While the dreamers chase their tails, the real world just keeps turning. The doers try to prevent, and solve problems, the dreamers just keep on dreaming, people keep on drowning.

 

'Asylum seekers are not "illegal" '

"Firstly, they are not necessarily queue jumpers as many having fled from countries where no such queues exist.

The real queue jumpers could be considered the ones who arrive by plane from wealthy western countries where the queues do exist and then apply for residency.

Secondly, the people heading for our coastline on leaky, overcrowded boats – fleeing destinations you and I would pay good money not to visit – are not "illegal" immigrants.

Australia is signatory to an international agreement under which it is indeed permissible to go to another country and apply for refugee status.

Legally speaking, such arrivals are deemed "unlawful non-citizens", at least until (in most cases) a bridging visa is issued while their application is processed, thus allowing them to remain in the country until that process is completed."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/asylum-seekers-are-not-illegal/story-e6frerdf-1225847081703

 

Could you point me in the direction of the queue please?

I need your wisdom to show me exactly where it is.

We all realise that it is not an actual physical line of people, so that's been sorted.

Now all we need is for you to prove everyone wrong and show us exactly where the queue is.

So, are you going to answer the question?

 

Oh no, absolutely not. I'm willing to have my political views changed.

I really want to see the queue. I'm not refusing to look at any evidence you provide. I will accept it all. The only problem is, thus far you've produced none.

All I need is for you to show me where it is (yes, I'm blind but I have faith that you can help me).

Once you do that I'll admit that it exists and you will win the argument.

So, I ask again: could you please show me where the queue is (no, not a physical line of people - we all know that).

 

Oh please, how to miss the point and hinge your argument on the one angle they use to get into the country. Please, do you really think that is a counterargument?

United Nations’ Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime;
People Smuggling;
The procurement, in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit, of the illegal entry of a person into a State Party of which the person is not a national or a permanent resident. (Article 3)

People smuggling is a crime, and the asylum seekers are paying the people smugglers to conduct this illegal activity. Why is that difficult to understand or do I have something wrong?

The asylum seekers are using their wealth to skip legal immigration systems, whether they are real refugee's or not, to enter the country by illegal means (as outlined above). Currently Australia doesnt penalize them once they arrive because they have no proof they paid to get onto the boat and most of the time the people smugglers have long gone from the boat. The REALITY is they've paid money to criminals to queue jump the poorer refugees who cant use criminal people smuggling networks. The only time the LAW can catch them is within Indonesia but that doesnt mean it is not happening and it doesnt mean we should reward them by giving them refugee status - unless they came direct from their homelands of persecution.

 

As I said before Uncle Meat; Refugee's are accepted through a immigration system, and the progression through that system represents a queue.

 

You have something wrong.

The people smugglers are breaking the law by accepting the money.

Asylum seekers, paying the smugglers, are not breaking the law.

Fail.

 

You are, once again, confusing refugees with asylum seekers.

Asylum seekers - those who have not yet been granted refugee status - do not have an asylum seeker system to progress through. No queue.

 

The reality is there are no queues for asylum seekers, and boat people are not illegal.

 

Your wrong me thinks. Both refugee's and asylum seekers would have systems of processing to go through. Progression through those systems represents a queue. It might not be completely linear/serial, but in the most part it would endeavor to operate that way.

Doesnt Australia have only so many refugee spots allocated within its immigration policy, and don't they get used up by the asylum seekers whom are found to met refugee classification, and dont they then reduce the spots available for other refugees to enter Australia?

 

You said it wasnt illegal, and I think I showed you that it is. Reposting a news paper article which fails at argueing my point doesnt mean that much to me or the argument. Fact is people smuggling is illegal, and these boat people are paying criminals to conduct a crime.

 

No one is talking about punishing the asylum seekers for paying the people smugglers. The asylum seekers are committing any crimes. The people smugglers are. There is a difference, and I believe that has already been explained, a few pages back.

Someone gave you an idea of what they meant, by saying that selling pornography is actually illegal, but buying it is not.

 

There is no orderly application procedure for getting into the processing system (i.e. refugee processing).

Thus, there is no intitial queue to jump for asylum seekers.

That's correct.

But that's not queue jumping either: that's a quota system.