Australia/New Zealand Forums 100% Free Online Dating

Australia is their country of choice. When you are a refugee, you don't choose where you want to go.

They're treating it like it's some kind of contiki tour. Pick your destination.

They should apply for refugee status in the first safe country that they come across, not the country of their choice.

These people want to migrate to Australia but don't want to go through proper channels. They are queue jumpers, not genuine asylum seekers.

WE ARE A SIGNATURE TO THE GENEVA CONVENTION ON REFUGEES, INDONESIA ISNT..........

EVER HEARD OF THE VOYAGE OF THE DAMNED?????????

THIS IS WHAT CAUSED THE UN TO BRING THE RIGHTS OF REFUGEES INTO FORCE......HERE TIS......

Hitler's propaganda ministry and the Nazi Party conceived a propaganda exercise which would demonstrate that Germany was not alone in its territorial exclusionary hostility towards Jews as a permanent minority within the political economy of their nation.
The Nazis wanted to prove the “civilized world” agreed with their assertion that Jews constituted a “hidden hand” of influence on national and economic affairs. They meant to show that no other Western country would receive Jews as refugees.

On the surface, it would appear that the Nazis were allowing the Jewish refugees a new life in Havana. However, the Nazis were aware of rising Western anti-Semitism, and correctly surmised that Jews traveling on tourist visas (not immigrant visas, which none of the potential host countries would likely have issued them) would not be able to enter Cuba, since they were clearly political and social refugees. Furthermore, once they had been refused entry by Cuba and other Atlantic nations, the world would be forced to admit that there was, as the Nazis claimed, a “Jewish problem,” which Germany was trying to resolve “humanely.”

Since not one of the countries of the North Atlantic basin would allow the Jewish refugees entry, these countries could not morally object when Nazi Germany dealt with its own Jewish population as it saw fit.

St. Louis sailed from Hamburg in May 1939, carrying one non-Jewish and 936 (mainly German) Jewish refugees seeking asylum from Nazi persecution.

As expected, on the ship’s arrival in Cuba, the Cuban government under Federico Laredo Brú refused the passengers both entry as tourists or political asylum. This prompted a near mutiny. Two passengers attempted suicide and dozens more threatened to do the same. However, 29 of the refugees did manage to disembark at Havana.

On June 4, 1939, the St. Louis was also refused permission to land her passengers under orders from President Roosevelt as the ship waited between Florida and Cuba.
The St. Louis then tried to enter Canada but was denied permission as well.

Captain Gustav Schroeder, the commander of the ship, was a non-Jewish German and an anti-Nazi who went to great lengths to assure dignified treatment for his passengers, arranging for Jewish religious services and commanding his crew to treat his refugee passengers as they would any other customers of the cruise line. As the situation of the vessel deteriorated, he personally negotiated and even schemed to find them a safe haven (for instance, at one point he formulated plans to intentionally wreck the ship on the British coast to force the passengers to be taken as refugees). He refused to return the ship to Germany until all of the passngers had been given entry to some other country.
The ship returned to Europe, first stopping in the United Kingdom, where 288 of the passengers disembarked. After much negotiation and pressure from Schroeder, the remaining 619 passengers disembarked at Antwerp; 224 were accepted by France, 214 by Belgium, and 181 into the Netherlands. They were thus safe from Hitler’s persecution until the German invasions of these countries. The ship without any passengers returned to Hamburg and amazingly survived the war.
By using the survival rates for Jews in the various countries, Thomas and Morgan-Witts estimated that about 180 of the St. Louis refugees in France, plus 152 of those in Belgium and 60 of those in Holland survived the Holocaust, giving a total of roughly 709 survivors and 227 slain of the original 936 Jewish refugees.
Later, more detailed research by Scott Miller and Sarah Ogilvie of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has given a slightly higher total of deaths:
Of the 620 St. Louis passengers who returned to continental Europe, we determined that eighty-seven were able to emigrate before Germany invaded western Europe on May 10, 1940. Two hundred and fifty-four passengers in Belgium, France and the Netherlands after that date died during the Holocaust. Most of these people were murdered in the killing centers of Auschwitz and Sóbibor; the rest died in internment camps, in hiding or attempting to evade the Nazis. Three hundred sixty-five of the 620 passengers who returned to continental Europe survived the war.
Captain Schroeder himself was later awarded the Order of Merit by the Federal Republic of Germany and was named as one of the Righteous Among the Nations at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Israel in recognition of his heroism in attempting to rescue his passengers.
THIS IS WHY THE GENEVA CONENTION (NUMBER 4) WAS CALLED UPON TO PROTECT REFUGEES..........AND THIS IS WHY WE ARE A SIGNATURE TO IT

THEY CANT........

INDONESIA DOESNT ACCEPT REFUGEES!!!!!!!!! FFS!!!!!!!

HAVE A LOOK AT MY POSTS ABOVE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THEY DONT ACCEPT REFUGEES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So you're a refugee, fleeing your country in fear... and you're going to go to a country that doesn't accept refugees?

These people could go to any number of UN refugee convention signatory countries that are closer to their country of origin... but they choose to go through Indonesia with the final destination of their contiki tour being Australia.

Even though there are over 140 signatory countries to the 1951 UN convention on refugees, these people choose Australia because it is affluent... AND, all you have to do is turn up on a boat.

who could blame them. I'd choose Australia too!

cumin soon night all

I cant help being diplomatic

oh & right too cant help that either ....

Yeah, but when you are escaping persecution, you don't trek half way around the world to your country of choice. You cross a border into ANY safe country and claim asylum.

I'd prefer to see a million refugees sitting patiently in camps (and being properly processed} come here rather than one boat load of queue jumpers, who in my opinion are nothing more than economic refugees abusing our asylum seeker laws.

we have a rather small amount of refugee intake than other countries~~~~

4 Number of asylum applications recognised in Australia and Like Countries, 1994-2003

US..........902,543
GERMANY.....528,022
UK..........264,397
CANADA......239,260
AUSTRALIA...126,003
SWEDEN......112,167
ITALY.......81,372
DENMARK.....69,858
NZ..........10,354
FRANCE......5745

DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED ON ILLEGALS WHO OVERSTAY THERE VISAS.....THE NUMBER IS TRIPLE THAT, AND THE MOST OF THEM COME FROM 'WESTERNIZED' COUNTRIES....BUT THATS OK...COS THEY LOOK LIKE US

most of the countries surrounding where the asylum seekers are fleeing either do not accept refugees or are at war with their neighbour, from which the refugee is fleeing......

thus the saying, out of the frypan into the fire.......

you guys are the worst offenders....but its ok.....you look like us......

Just heard this from someone tonight at work, she said was on one of the current affair shows...

Looks and sounds bloody horrible..............

What the hell has visa over-stayers got to do with queue jumpers turning up on boats?... and these people are getting paid by centrelink while we process their claims.

I don't care if they look like us or not. We should only be taking refugees who have gone through the right channels and are languishing in some UNHCR camp!

The way things are now, we're basically telling the world that you can circumvent our immigration rules simply by turning up on a boat and claiming asylum.

Torpedo the boats, and fly in the UNHCR processed and certified refugees.

too tired to read all this now.. but I will get back to this one

Kabul to... (UN refugee signatory countries)

China..... 3,500km
Turkey.... 3,700km
Bulgaria.. 4,000km
Greece.... 4,000km
Finland... 4,250km

yadda
yadda
yadda....

Australia.. 8,300km

There's quite a few SAFE places a LOT closer to their point of origin that they could seek asylum.

Yeah but they dont have Bondi beach !!!!!

funny how you call china a 'safe place'.........

these countries are signatory to the un treaty, but china i know does not take in refugees.....turkey has alot of iranian refugees but here is this........

Turkey: Failure to provide protection puts refugee lives at risk, says new Amnesty report

Posted: 22 April 2009

'If we didn't give money then they beat us. They used our money to send us back to Afghanistan.' - Afghan asylum-seeker.

People arriving at Turkey's borders in search of asylum are putting their lives at risk every day because the Turkish authorities fail to provide them with international protection, Amnesty International said in a report published today (22 April).

Turkey is the only state and signatory to the UN Refugee Convention which, in effect, does not recognise nationals of countries outside the Council of Europe as refugees. As a result, an increasing number of people in need of protection are denied it.

The report, 'Stranded: Refugees in Turkey denied protection', reveals how the Turkish authorities persist in forcibly returning people to countries where they are at risk of serious human rights abuses.

In April 2008, Amnesty International was informed about an Iraqi family which was under arrest in southern Turkey after fleeing Baghdad. Police officers denied them the opportunity to apply for asylum despite a request being made by the UNHCR on their behalf and even refused to admit that the family was in detention. The family was forcibly returned to Iraq despite fears for their lives.

in bulgaria they need their citizenship papers from their country of origin (can be hard when said regime of that country has stolen them) and this...(it basically says if he has made an attempt to leave his own country without a permit to do so, then he can be refused refugee status)

13. he has made an attempt to exit the country through the border without a permit of the respective bodies of the authority or by a permit, but not through the places determined for that and regarding him the conditions of art.