Australian Concentration Camps

You can go on and on about the difference in Australian attitudes towards legal and illegal immigrants... and they won't get it. You can go on and on about the reality of the financial status of most of these "refugees"... and they won't get it. You can go on and on about how the media blows conditions in holding facilities out of proportion, and about how the illegals themselves "stage" conditions... and they won't get it.
Click to expand...
PRECISELY!

Anyone who thinks Australia is xenophobic, I have a challenge for you. Visit Australia's cities. You will find that Australia is NOT xenophobic. Almost every person is an immigrant. This includes Asians, American, Indian, POLISH (1/2 myself), Italian, French, Swedish, Iranian, so on and on. You can sit back and hurl mud at what you THINK is Australia, but you are only hurling mud at a strawman. Australia is known as a multicultural country.
Why are these 'illegal aliens' locked up? Not because of the alien bit. 99% of people in this country are an 'alien'. My mother is an immigrant.
They are locked up because they are here ILLEGALLY!!! Why do people keep attacking Australia, although they don't have a bloody clue about what the hell they are crapping on about??
Our so-called 'xenophobic' country allows people to travel here and find a new life, if they do so LEGALLY.

That is what this is all about. People who SNEAK IN are BREAKING THE LAW. And they are NOT REAL REFUGEES.
Simple mathematical equation, folks:

Breaking law by sneaking into country + Not a real refugee = CRIMINAL!
 
fascist pigs
Click to expand...
*looks blankly at spookz*

Attention all Australians!
Don't even waste your precious time responding to spookz, he/she/it is not worth it. Let him/her/it believe what he/she/it wants. Trying to reason with some people is like trying to reason with a creationist (aka. a brick wall).
 
I was just kidding with that last post, I'm actually from australia and against just letting any stinkass into our country, I am not, however, against stirring you up mountainhare:D

Yes america is more lenient with its immigrants, and? The great part about being a new nation is you can observe and learn from the mistakes other nations made before the human-species knew better.

A good thing about television, global communication and travel is we can see whats going on around the world. Each country that comes about is another "trial" after oh so many errors. I notice in this city alone that very careful planning goes into every little thing and I can just tell that if we hadn't heard the horror stories of histories blunders we would be making them ourselves. But, we aren't. We take everything into consideration. Best of all environmental awareness comes into play with every expansion.

I live in a city where one second you will be in a busseling central business district the next you will be driving in a road through a huge forest and then out then you'll be back in what looks like a big city again. From the air you can see that it is extremely spread out with little pockets of civilisation scattered all over the place but with just as many protected natural areas as well. I think its close to a utopia. Its perfect for every organism involved.
We are developing at a stage in human history when we know almost exactly how the world works and we can work towards minimising the damage on its complex, intricate and delicate systems.

Granted we started off as poorly as everyone else but we never got the chance to do too much damage and now we know better.
We can only assume what damage the flagrant clearing of gigantic amounts of natural habitat during the development of americas great cities caused on the eco-system. Undoubtedly many species went extinct from that and we still can't be sure the long term effects of those losses won't be disastrous.
During the development of our cities special care is taken to keep natural habitats in check, having gaps in the spread out cities to make what seems like hundreds of little cities in a forest. But the forest remains.

One thing that makes huge spread out cities impossible is over population. Thats a problem we are stopping before it gets started which is the only logical thing to do while aquiring the knowledge we as a species have. We know over-population destroys areas like nothing else, thanks for the heads up india, now we aren't going to make that mistake. The well being of some immigrants hardly seems important in comparison.
If that sounds "low" to you or whatever than too bad, I'm just glad my country agrees with me.

What a futile exercise it would be to create another shithole on earth all for the convenience of some damn refugees...
 
stop the hate

The demonisation of asylum seekers proceeds apace with the new assertion by Ministers and trumpeted all around Australia that we don't want people in Australia who would sew their children's lips together.

This is part of a consistent pattern of demonising through untruths and half-truths so that as Australians we can justify treating asylum seekers as less than human. If they are sub-human, they do not require of us respect and compassion.

First asylum seekers were demonised as 'queue jumpers', when in fact there is no queue, certainly not in Afghanistan or Iraq where most of the asylum seekers come from. With corruption rampant, few asylum seekers believe that processing in Pakistan will be fair. Refugee waves are by their nature chaotic. It is a lottery who is selected for resettlement. And asylum seekers know it.

Second, we were told that these unworthy people were buying their way into Australia. If I had been a father in Afghanistan, with my wife and family, particularly daughters, and threatened by the Taliban, civil war and famine, I would have sold what property I had to pay a 'people smuggler' if I thought it would get one or two of my children away to freedom and safety. Desperate people do desperate things. Many of the refugees who escaped Nazism and came to Australia, paid people-smugglers.

Thirdly, we were told after September 11 by Ministers and talk-back hosts that these asylum seekers might be terrorists. There is absolutely no evidence of this. If there are criminals amongst any group seeking to enter Australia, they should be identified and quickly deported. But why demonise and smear a whole group of some of the most vulnerable, defenceless and needy people on this earth.

Fourthly, we were told by Ministers just before the last election that these people could not possibly be accepted, let alone welcomed into Australia, because they were so devoid of humanity that they would throw their children into the sea. We now know that this was a fabrication.

Fifthly, the Prime Minister and Minister for Immigration say that asylum seekers in Woomera are blackmailers because they are trying to exploit the government's generosity and compassion. Is it so shameful to hope that Australian Ministers might respond to a desperate human cry for help?

John Menadue


Welcoming the Vulnerable?

Debunking the Myths about Asylum Seekers

Debunking More Myths about Asylum Seekers

Deported to Death

sciforums-Australia / Illegal Immigrants

sciforums.com - Detention centres for illegal...

sciforums.com - Australia / Immigration

sciforums.com - I want to kill these punks
 
Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
The well being of some immigrants hardly seems important in comparison.
If that sounds "low" to you or whatever than too bad, I'm just glad my country agrees with me.
Click to expand...

So, you plead no-contest to my charges of Xenophobia, then? You fear that outsiders will distroy the ballance of your culturaly and moraly superior nation?
 
Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
I think its close to a utopia. Its perfect for every organism involved.
We are developing at a stage in human history when we know almost exactly how the world works and we can work towards minimising the damage on its complex, intricate and delicate systems.
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't only water that is consumed in huge quantities in Australia. In the following table, Australia's consumption of petrol, meat, oil and calories are compared with the average for the developed and developing nations of the world. It is the high rate of energy (petrol, meat, oil equivalents) consumption that means Australia has the 3rd largest ecological footprint (The US of A and Canada beat us in this race). The ecological footprint is a measure of the amount of resources required to maintain a lifestyle. We can express this as a land area equivalent.

  • <li>Globally there are about 6 billion people.
    <li>Globally there are about 10 billion acres of productive land.
    <li>That means we are all entitled to about 1.7 hectares of this productive land (that is, the ecological footprint of each person should be 1.7 ha) to sustain our lifestyle.
    <li>The global average ecological footprint is about 2.8 ha. Australia's footprint is about 8 ha.
    <li>Thus, our Australian lifestyle takes almost 5 times more resources (expressed as a land area equivalent) than an equal distribution of those resources would deem appropriate.
Basically, our addiction to an energy intensive lifestyle, with land management practices that include using million year-old water to grow highly inappropriate crops in this hot and dry land, means we have to confront what we do, how we do it and where we do it

http://www.iwerm.uts.edu.au/docs/The Australian Dream - a summary.pdf

*pukes in disgust :D

Finally, let's not forget our own home grown boomers and boosters, who have been a power in Australia, and especially Victoria, since the 1890s. Many of them are deeply concerned that our numbers aren't growing fast enough. These groups have become vastly more vocal since I last spoke on this program on population issues a couple of years ago. They've formed groups called, perhaps rather presumptuously, the Committee for Melbourne and the Committee for Sydney. These are regularly heard demanding that we aim for some massive population increase, and even roping in the odd compliant former PM to speak for them.

Take Australia for instance, where only a quarter of our rainforest is left. And no, it wasn't all destroyed long ago when we had a much smaller population. That's one of those self-serving myths. Most of it was destroyed recently. Yet urban expansion goes on, relentless in rainforest areas south of Brisbane. And the Mayor of Brisbane demands we push our population up, doubling or tripling it as soon as possible, and glibly assures us this will do no harm if we all agree to consume just a little bit less. If this is the situation in a First World country, think how tough it is in the Third World.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s19661.htm
 
Last edited:
Ok, "3rd largest ecological footprint" is a decieving phrase, all it means is the people that do live here live comfortably. If there were many of us than it would be an ecological problem but there aren't. You mention brisbane, I live in brisbane, I don't know what the mayor wants and sometimes it seems environmental groups end up having more say than the mayor does anyway. My friend is studying architechture and the biggest thing they go on about is environmental awareness with city planning. Brisbane may very well expand but when it expands it really expands, an expansion means another huge nature reserve, everytime. This city is so many square miles(a shitload) with a population of 1.something million. In reality those 1 point whatever million leave tiny baby footprints, compared to america which is just one big footbrint with tiny little spaces between the toes where bears try to make a living.

All this "ecological footprint" just reiterates what good planning it is to limit the number of immigrants. Why? Because its not like we will force immigrants to live less comfortably than us is it? So this ecological footprint will quickly become a problem if too many people suddenly pile in.

And I might just add that there most definately is no shortage of immigrants here anyway. My last post was wishful thinking really, in most areas(in brisbane) 4 out of 7 people you come across either can't speak english at all or not very well. In some areas 7 out of 7 people can't speak english and the street signs are in japanese. Melbourne has the second highest population of greeks in the world after athens and in any capital city you won't find a non-immigrant taxi driver or convenience store clerk, and besides immigrants there are people like the guy who owns my apartment block, he's japanese, living in fiji and he owns 50+ apartments in this city alone.

I'd say we are more multicultural than most places, which is fine but we can't hap-hazardly let millions of people come here(english, pakistani, whatever) because we are actually making an effort to create a world first... a pleasant country.
Billions of human beings aren't compatible with a pleasant country.
 
so its just politicians and their inflammatory rhetoric yes? throw in a few xenophobic groups and orgs and everything gets blown outta proportion yes? shit heats up during elections yes?
 
Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
In reality those 1 point whatever million leave tiny baby footprints, compared to america which is just one big footbrint with tiny little spaces between the toes where bears try to make a living.
Click to expand...

Take a look at a population density map of the United states, or just take a vacation and drive across it yourself. This nation is full of a lot of nothing in most places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top