 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| David wrote: | | Carr, Abbott and Morrison can all go die in a hole. Absolute filth of the highest order. |
David,
I have always said that it is the left who are the most intolerant and bigoted people. Statements like this merely reinforce that perception.
A bit disappointing coming from you as I have always held you as being above the fray from some of the more rabid people who post on VPT.
To call those people filth ( and that is to include all of the ALP as well as they sent back hundreds of economic refugees) because they have a different view from you reflects poorly on yourself.
It is as bad as accusing the Greens of murder for the 1200 people who have died at sea due to the policy change they were a part of.
This article presents a nice balance. Whilst you may take a different position, it in no way justifies calling people filth who take an opposite position from you on what is a very complex problem with no easy solution.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/sailing-into-new-storm/story-e6frg6z6-1226984773023 |
|
|
|
 |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
TBF, I have taken both sides in this debate before, and I understand the argument that encouraging unsolicited boat arrivals may cause more net harm than good to the people who make these trips. I also understand the fact of borders and the impossibility of allowing unrestricted access to the mainland without some means of regulating entry.
What I can never abide by is doing the following:
1) Using this issue as a means of exploiting and capitalising upon xenophobic/racist fears and prejudices.
2) Keeping these people in indefinite detention in inhumane conditions.
3) Refusing to resettle those found to be genuine refugees, as law requires.
4) Adopting a policy of military-style secrecy in order to restrict journalists' ability to report on this.
5) And, lastly, returning genuine refugees to the very place from which they have fled, thus actively colluding in any future persecution they may face.
This is not "tough but fair" policy. This is outright brutality. To be angry at this situation—and the heartless fascists who are responsible for it—does not make me "bigoted", and it does not reflect poorly on me. On the contrary, I would say that smug, apathetic acceptance of barbarism reflects very much more poorly on you and everyone else who is not distressed by how our government is treating people in its care. No decent person should tolerate it.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ A post of outstanding quality. Well spoken, David!
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David,
As I said to call people filth because they do not agree with your way of doing things reflects poorly on you.
Pandering to xenophobic prejuduces etc. give me a break. Did you not read what Bob Carr said? He said that those returned were not geniune refugees but econmic refugees. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | TBF, I have taken both sides in this debate before, and I understand the argument that encouraging unsolicited boat arrivals may cause more net harm than good to the people who make these trips. I also understand the fact of borders and the impossibility of allowing unrestricted access to the mainland without some means of regulating entry.
What I can never abide by is doing the following:
1) Using this issue as a means of exploiting and capitalising upon xenophobic/racist fears and prejudices.
2) Keeping these people in indefinite detention in inhumane conditions.
3) Refusing to resettle those found to be genuine refugees, as law requires.
4) Adopting a policy of military-style secrecy in order to restrict journalists' ability to report on this.
5) And, lastly, returning genuine refugees to the very place from which they have fled, thus actively colluding in any future persecution they may face.
This is not "tough but fair" policy. This is outright brutality. To be angry at this situation—and the heartless fascists who are responsible for it—does not make me "bigoted", and it does not reflect poorly on me. On the contrary, I would say that smug, apathetic acceptance of barbarism reflects very much more poorly on you and everyone else who is not distressed by how our government is treating people in its care. No decent person should tolerate it. |
Well said David.
Not filth of the highest order though how about "Moore Filth" of the highest order (might have been before your time).  
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough†Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | TBF, I have taken both sides in this debate before, and I understand the argument that encouraging unsolicited boat arrivals may cause more net harm than good to the people who make these trips. I also understand the fact of borders and the impossibility of allowing unrestricted access to the mainland without some means of regulating entry.
|
but you fundamentally still don't agree with them. You've argued that we should be able to take unlimited numbers of refugees based on this being a big enough country to support them and we can all afford to take a cut in our standard of living to help them out.
So any argument you make is coming from that space. Not an area that many would agree with.
| Quote: |
What I can never abide by is doing the following:
1) Using this issue as a means of exploiting and capitalising upon xenophobic/racist fears and prejudices.
|
That's only happening with people already that way inclined. The supporters of the boat people regularly use emotional blackmail against the people who don't agree with them to overcome facts and logical argument, both are equally as distasteful.
| Quote: |
2) Keeping these people in indefinite detention in inhumane conditions.
|
Better conditions than what most genuine refugees have had to cope with and hardly inhumane. Free food, clothing, shelter, medical attention, entertainment ..............ask a somalian or sudanese in a refugee camp if he'd swap places with someone in one of our detention camps.
| Quote: |
3) Refusing to resettle those found to be genuine refugees, as law requires.
|
What law?
| Quote: |
4) Adopting a policy of military-style secrecy in order to restrict journalists' ability to report on this.
|
In order to prevent the people smugglers getting news, to create uncertainty among the community of people who are considering getting on one of those boats, and to get the subject out of the media which is the opposite of what you accused them of doing in point 1.
| Quote: |
5) And, lastly, returning genuine refugees to the very place from which they have fled, thus actively colluding in any future persecution they may face.
|
Who said they were genuine refugees? That claim has not been assessed. Who said they faced any persecution? The governments are in a better position to judge the merits of these things than you or I. Bob Carr (who I personally think is a tool but, hey, Jules hand picked him for foreign minister so he must have something going for him) obviously doesn't believe they face persecution and the Australian Government must agree, or they've had discussions with the Sri Lankan government. Don't know, but your assumptions betray your feelings on the topic.
| Quote: |
This is not "tough but fair" policy. This is outright brutality.
|
I disagree. It's harsh, but sometimes you need to be harsh in order to send the message that saves others lives. As soon as the government weakens it's stance that sends out signals of encouragement to the people smugglers.
| Quote: |
To be angry at this situation—and the heartless fascists who are responsible for it—does not make me "bigoted", and it does not reflect poorly on me.
|
Agreed. Basically what it shows at you being angry is that you're a person who (IMO) is passionate about your beliefs but is ruled more by emotion than logic.
| Quote: |
On the contrary, I would say that smug, apathetic acceptance of barbarism reflects very much more poorly on you and everyone else who is not distressed by how our government is treating people in its care. No decent person should tolerate it. |
That's an emotive value judgement and an opinion. You're welcome to hold it, I disagree.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Stui magpie wrote: |
but you fundamentally still don't agree with them. You've argued that we should be able to take unlimited numbers of refugees based on this being a big enough country to support them and we can all afford to take a cut in our standard of living to help them out.
So any argument you make is coming from that space. Not an area that many would agree with. |
That's not actually true. That (dramatically increasing our refugee intake) was a radical proposal and I acknowledge it as such. Generally, when it comes to this topic and most others, I try to stay in the here and now and the boundaries of mainstream discourse. What that means is that I'm not demanding we throw the borders open tomorrow or even necessarily stop using detention centres. I just want the issue to be dealt a) with some humanity (which means housing detainees in conditions that would suit a minimum standard of living here, not those that are just "better than Somalia"); b) with some efficiency (remember when "processing time" was still a thing? Now the approach seems to be "lock them up and throw away the key"); c) with some responsible public discourse (stop pandering to ignorant boofheads who think boat people are coming to rape their daughters and live off their taxpayer money); and d) with some transparency—which, contrary to what Morrison and his khaki sidekicks would have you believe, is not exactly going to jeopardise our national security. And, finally, I want us to abide by our international legal obligations, which means that genuine refugees need to be accepted and resettled here.
Why is none of this happening? Because this whole project isn't just about providing an adequate deterrent to people risking their lives at sea—as if Abbott and co. actually give a shit about that anyway—and making sure that asylum seekers are dealt with as efficiently and compassionately as possible. If it were, they would be doing everything I describe above. It's about making our border a fortress and telling the prejudiced and small-minded that the invading hordes are being treated as harshly as possible. It may happen before they even reach our borders, and we may not be able to see them behind the barbed wire fences, but let us never forget that there is a human cost.
I don't buy the "cruel to be kind" angle, because how can you possibly look at the current government and think "kindness" is on the agenda here? Did I miss their raft of compassionate budget measures? Did I miss the election ads where they said "we will take a more compassionate approach to the asylum seeker issue and save boat people's lives"? No, I can only recall "stop the boats". With little red arrows on a map to show where the undesirables were jetting in from.
You say that I'm taking an overly emotional approach to this (funny, I've usually been accused of the exact opposite). So tell me: what is a rational-minded person to do when he or she suspects his government is committing acts of brutality against people in its care? Say "it's all good, they probably know what they're doing"? I wonder how many atrocities in the past have been passively accepted by people who thought complaining wasn't "rational".
The government isn't doing this because they have to, or because they are morally obliged to, or because they simply have no other choice. They're doing it because it'll win them a few extra seats in Western Sydney. I find that—and the complacency of the majority of Australians who are passively accepting these policies—horrifying.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Fri Jul 11, 2014 9:27 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| That makes a lot of sense to me, now that you explain it. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David, I get where you're coming from. I don't ascribe evil intentions to politicians but I don't give (any of) them big ticks for being noble either.
Regardless of their motives, stopping people coming in by boat is a good thing. Those people are risking their lives in unsafe vessels run by profiteering scum. They dump their papers before getting on the boat so doing background checks once they're intercepted takes much longer than it should.
Dealing with the boat people cost us a shitpile of money that could be far better used dealing with the asylum seekers who are sitting in resettlement camps. Those poor bastards sit there waiting while we all play out a sideshow over people who can afford to pay a people smuggler.
The number of boats coming has dropped significantly. What doesn't get any media are the people coming in as refugees through legitimate channels.
Funny thing that you bag the people of western sydney, there's a lot of ex refugees settled out there.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | David, I get where you're coming from. I don't ascribe evil intentions to politicians but I don't give (any of) them big ticks for being noble either.
Regardless of their motives, stopping people coming in by boat is a good thing. Those people are risking their lives in unsafe vessels run by profiteering scum. They dump their papers before getting on the boat so doing background checks once they're intercepted takes much longer than it should.
Dealing with the boat people cost us a shitpile of money that could be far better used dealing with the asylum seekers who are sitting in resettlement camps. Those poor bastards sit there waiting while we all play out a sideshow over people who can afford to pay a people smuggler.
The number of boats coming has dropped significantly. What doesn't get any media are the people coming in as refugees through legitimate channels.
Funny thing that you bag the people of western sydney, there's a lot of ex refugees settled out there. |
Well said Stui.
Also read somewhere that due to the reduced number of boat arrivals, our humanitarian intake from genuine refugee camps have increased.
Hence not only are less people dying on the seas, more refugees are being taken out from refugee camps.
Maybe Abbott and Morrison should get the Nobel prize  |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yeah, just don't tell the Norwegians about what's happened to our foreign aid budget.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thebaldfacts wrote: | | Also read somewhere that due to the reduced number of boat arrivals, our humanitarian intake from genuine refugee camps have increased. Hence not only are less people dying on the seas, more refugees are being taken out from refugee camps. |
Really?! This is what I have been calling for for years, but it's not the sort of thing Abbott's mob do. In every single other department, Abbott has taken the narrow-minded, selfish, short-term and nasty option - slashing the guts out of foreign aid is just one example - so it would be very surprising to see them fail to do the selfish, nasty thing on this count too. We need two things before we can believe such an outlandish claim:
1: a link to a reputable source
2: evidence that this isn't just Abbott cooking the books and lying about it again. Abbott is a past-master at this deception game, remember. He loves nothing better than stealing $100 from you on the quiet and then giving $10 back at a national televised press conference. For example, his devious sham of "increasing" medical research on the back of such massive cuts to the science and health budgets that his "increase" is swamped by the decreases. And the "increase" isn't going to happen for almost a decade while the cuts are here-and-now fact. And the funding for the "increase" is tied to the $7 doctor tax which probably isn't going to get through parliament anyway.
What I'm saying here is that you have to be very, very careful with Abbott's numbers: he typically does things like slashing refugee intake in one program by (say) 35,000 per year and increasing intake in another program by 5000 over five years (i.e., a 34,000 PA cut) and crowing in the headlines about the huge "boost" in refugee numbers.
So: we need a reputable source, and we need some confidence that it's a real number. Over to you.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^
I wouldn't get too excited there. I'm pretty sure that the cap on the total refugee intake has been in place for a while (may have even been in place with Krudd, not sure) so that we only take in a max number each year regardless of where they come from.
So, if they aint coming by boat, we take more people from the camps. Total number the same. basic math, nothing earth shattering or worthy of praise.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Considering how few were coming by boat already, I guess we're not talking a notable increase.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
King Malta 
RIP Flip
Joined: 24 Mar 2008
Location: Gettin' Wiggy
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Well said David and Tannin, quality posts from you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
