Shut-up! Greens

[Rorschach]

Asylum self-harm ends after family travel ban
The Australian
February 6, 2016 12:00AM
Dennis Shanahan
Political Editor
Canberra

The number of asylum-seekers on Nauru harming themselves plummeted to zero three months after Immigration Minister Peter Dutton stopped family members from being allowed to travel to Australia to accompany a sick or injured person.

Concerns grew within the government last year that the high level of self-harm on Nauru might be linked to asylum-seekers seeking a flight to Australia for medical treatment and the oppor­tunity for all family members to appeal for refugee status or ­residency.

There were also departmental concerns that children on Nauru might have been copying adults performing self-harm or being ­injured as part of an attempt to get to Australia.

Late last year, Mr Dutton ­instructed the Immigration ­Department to bring only the person needing medical treatment to Australia, not the whole family, unless there were ­“extenuating circumstances”.

In the three months after the virtual ban on family members was introduced in September, there was a dramatic fall in self-inflicted injuries.

In January last year, there were 15 threats of self-harm by asylum-seekers on Nauru and 14 self-­inflicted injuries and in May there were seven threats and eight incidents of self-harm, representing 2.4 per cent of the asylum-seeker population.

But in October, the month after the new policy, there were only one threat and seven self-inflicted injuries.

By the following month, this had dropped to two threats and two incidents of self-harm.

In December, there was only one threat of self-harm and no self-inflicted injuries.

The Immigration Minister said this week the bulk of the 267 people who came to Australia from Nauru in connection with medical treatment were family members who did not require treatment.

On Wednesday, the High Court rejected an attempt from the people in Australia who had come from the offshore pro­cess­ing centre in Nauru, including 37 babies, to remain in Australia.

The asylum-seekers are ­mostly Iranians, Sri Lankans, ­Syrians and Afghans.

They include more than 70 children, about 37 of whom were born in Australia, and more than a dozen women who had ­allegedly suffered serious sexual assaults or harassment on Nauru.

The High Court ruled that the processing of asylum-seekers on Nauru was legal and constitutional, and gave the power to the government to send them all back to Nauru.

Mr Dutton said the government would “look at the individual cases” of returning people but would not “put children into harm’s way”. He said he aimed to have no children in detention, and criticised refugee advocates for encouraging failed asylum-seekers not to accept resettlement packages to return home.

“We want to provide support to these people,” Mr Dutton said.

“If they don’t want to go back to Nauru, we’re happy to provide support to return them to their country of origin.”

Mr Dutton imposed the policy under which only those requiring medical assistance are sent to Australia in September after concern self-harm was a way of getting to Australia and appealing for residency. Mr Dutton has instructed the department to improve medical and mental health facilities on Nauru and to find alternatives to Australia, including Papua New Guinea, to enable quicker treatment and remove incentives for self-harm.

Only complex cases would be brought to Australia.

Mr Dutton said now that the High Court had ruled in the government’s favour on offshore processing, cases for return would be considered individually “once the medical assistance has been provided”.

“We can make arrangements for those people to go back to Nauru, or preferably we’ll make arrangements for them to go back to their country of origin and provide financial support for that to happen,” he said.

So all the stuff from Hanson-Young et al is a load of guff and they are being played by these people yet again. When will The Greens and the rest of the PC progressive bleeding heart brigade wake up to themselves and stop being sucked in by these people who choose to come here by illegal means and try to game the system and the Australian people?

[mantra]

Stop blaming the Greens. Doctors, teachers, politicians and a good proportion of the country think Nauru is a hell hole regardless of their political persuasion. These refugees are being used as a deterrent for others and it seems to be working, but it's a bad solution. If they weren't here for genuine reasons - don't you think they would choose to go back to their own country rather than stay in Nauru? It's obvious they've fled from a worse situation.

Remember - Rudd, a lefty, implemented this Nauru solution - so blame or credit can't be apportioned to any one party. I would think the majority of people wanted the boats to stop. It's just a nasty way of stopping them, but for lack of any other solution - we have to live with it. This doesn't make it right though.

[Rorschach]

you are kidding right?
Of course the Greens and especially the likes of Hanson-DUMB, Ludlum and Bandt should pull their empty heads is and STFU!
Talk about Morons of the first degree.
You think the Greens aren't populated by progressive PC hand wringing bleeding hearts? You think none of those are clergy or Drs etc...
A good portion of the country?
Most Australians by a long chalk accept the governments border policy, so does Labor BTW. Not the empty headed Greens though. They should STFU mantra they are the raving looney party.

As for illegals having children while in detention, you think perhaps they do it to try and sway the authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia. Of course they do.
As for children being in detention you think perhaps they were dragged around the world to help sway authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia? Yes to that too.
Now lets assume then that their caring parents who put their lives at risk really do love them and cant bear to be apart from them... then YES mantra their place should be in detention with their parents not separated from them. This was the decision of their parents to come here via illegal means and in many cases to come here on spurious grounds then refuse to go back once their status has been determined. The UN Protocol is flawed and we should withdraw from it... unless someone like DUMB or LUDDITE cares to look at it sensibly and put forward some sensible amendments. Which they are waaaay too dumb to do. Ever.

[Rorschach]

Compassionate Left’s inconvenient truth of no more deaths at sea
The Australian
February 6, 2016 12:00AM
Chris Kenny
Associate Editor (National Affairs)

Those who have been wrong on border protection all along don’t want to go gentle into the night but instead rage against reality. In the wake of this week’s High Court decision they are shrill again — pontificating, trumpeting their virtue, vilifying others and offering only more chaos.

It is nauseating. People who eschew the sanctimony and search for ways through — Scott Morrison, Peter Dutton, even Richard Marles — are targeted with vile abuse from those like Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young whose only contributions are to undermine solutions, stir trouble and encourage uncertainty.

A front page of The Age this week showed pictures of refugee and asylum-seeker babies with the tabloid headline, “Babies bound for ‘hell’.” Apart from being emotive, this is misleading and demeaning towards the people of Nauru, not to mention the Australians working there to care for asylum-seekers and refugees.

It is only three months since I was on Nauru, where the unavoidable ocean views provide false hope for refugees — there is nothing stopping them buying a boat and sailing for the horizon. But the ocean is vast, Nauru’s isolation is extraordinary, and should they ever find landfall their statelessness would follow them. Similarly, the refugee advocates torment the asylum-seekers and refugees with false hope of dramatic policy changes. They promise that protests, stunts and even contrived medical trips to Australia will force the government to back down.

Talking with refugees on the island, those who believe such tactics can work are noticeably more unsettled and anxious. The minority who accept they will never reach Australia are still uncertain and concerned, of course, but seem a little more purposeful in considering alternatives.

The so-called compassionate Left have learned nothing in two decades of border trauma and tragedy. Even with boats dashed on the rocks of Christmas Island and unfolding tumult in Europe, they reject any lessons.

These people — the compassionistas — are epitomised by Hanson-Young and other advocates who campaigned for open borders yet wipe their hands of the terrible consequences.

Having seen more than 50,000 people, including thousands of children, channelled through detention centres as the people-smugglers profited from their illegal trade and more than a thousand people drowned at sea, they now agitate again to weaken our border protection regime.

They are happy to use any emotional device and will throw around claims of rape, abuse and even torture, without evidence and with no regard for the Nauruan and Papua New Guinean people they vilify.

They win unquestioning endorsement and a platform for transparent moral posturing from the ABC, Fairfax and the press gallery — the love media. They deride mainstream Australians by framing a wise understanding of the importance of border security to the integrity of our generous immigration system as some sort of racist panic.

The Guardian’s Katharine Murphy typified this attitude when she tweeted this week that we live in a “political culture that sees votes in responding to asylum claims with offshore prisons”.

“Our prejudices and fears create this toxic debate,” she went on. This is the distorted and demeaning view of the populace from the rarefied atmosphere of Canberra.

The Ten Network and Radio National’s Paul Bongiorno tweeted, “Let’s drop the bull shit not allowing deaths at sea equals compassion.”

The deaths happened. They have stopped. This is a fact. It is not the only fact but it is an important one which, apparently, is inconvenient for some.

Clearly many campaigners use this issue to set themselves apart as the moral and intellectual superiors of their compatriots. It might just as well reveal the opposite.

Having ended the people-smuggling trade, the Coalition has been able to lift the nation’s refugee intake to record levels, including by taking in 12,000 people from the Syrian debacle. It is working on the large backlog of asylum-seekers and refugees awaiting resolution in our nation.

The clear and pressing priority in this diabolically difficult policy area is to find proper and permanent homes for the more than 2000 asylum-seekers and refugees in Nauru and Manus Island. It is the stunts and sanctimony of the compassionistas that has precluded the most attractive resolution.

On my return from Nauru last October — amid vicious lies and abuse directed at me by advocates for daring to report the reality of conditions on the island — I spoke to senior people in government, opposition and even a leading refugee advocate about finding another way.

It is clear many of the people stuck on Nauru would make model citizens. So now that the boats have been stopped, perhaps there was a way to bring them to our country without sending a green light to people-smugglers.

A conditional visa, perhaps, or arrangements to settle in designated areas to work towards bridging visas or residency if certain conditions were met? But it was clear the government and the opposition have tried to consider every option.

They are aware of the myriad problems, such as not advantaging anyone over the 30,000 asylum-seekers on bridging visas already waiting for processing while living in our communities.

But the greatest problem with resettlement here is the one created by the critics of strong border protection. Campaigning against the reimposition of offshore processing from 2009 onwards, Labor, Greens and refugee advocates were quick to deride the Coalition’s earlier success. Most of those sent to Nauru ended up in Australia anyway, they exaggerated (about 30 per cent went home and 30 per cent were resettled elsewhere, while about 40 per cent came, quietly, to Australia).

This posturing was an act of policy vandalism — seeking to undermine the deterrence of offshore processing, when they should have welcomed the fact the deterrence worked even with a humane outcome for the people involved.

What this means now is that any people resettled from Nauru to Australia will be trumpeted internationally as a monumental failure in our border protection regime. The activists have created a situation where backdoor settlement here would undo the success of the policy. It is a terrible conundrum.

Conditions on Nauru are not “hell” and strictly speaking, there is no detention. (Manus Island would be much tougher and I have not been there.) On Nauru refugees and asylum-seekers, in many ways, have better living conditions than the locals. The provision of food, shelter, schooling, healthcare and a monthly stipend, together with a benign climate, make for relative comfort.

But on this tiny, featureless island, the sense of isolation is overwhelming. There is no surprise that the refugees — now mostly living in settlements around the island, freely working and living alongside Nauruans — are desperate to leave.

It is a purgatory in the Pacific; limbo at latitude zero. Each day there is part of their life lost. To end the torment they need resettlement options fast. Only with the finding of third country options, or the repatriation of those willing to go home, will this long wait end.

[mantra]

you are kidding right?
Of course the Greens and especially the likes of Hanson-DUMB, Ludlum and Bandt should pull their empty heads is and STFU!
Talk about Morons of the first degree.
You think the Greens aren't populated by progressive PC hand wringing bleeding hearts? You think none of those are clergy or Drs etc...
A good portion of the country?
Most Australians by a long chalk accept the governments border policy, so does Labor BTW. Not the empty headed Greens though. They should STFU mantra they are the raving looney party.

Of course most Australians accept the closed border policy, but it doesn't mean they like the way it's being implemented. The Greens can be vocal when it comes to human rights. Their views are more ideological than practical, but they have no influence to do anything about it except to remind us that children are suffering on our doorstep. We can't even look after our own properly so how do we look after anyone else without seriously compromising even further our own declining standards.

Our resources are limited regardless of the perception the rest of the world has of us that we are a wealthy country.

As for illegals having children while in detention, you think perhaps they do it to try and sway the authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia. Of course they do.
As for children being in detention you think perhaps they were dragged around the world to help sway authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia? Yes to that too.

I'm not denying that, but it isn't the fault of these children that they were born. You and I both know that the children on Manus and Nauru will eventually be bought here and what sort of burden will they be to us then? They won't even have had an education and will probably be costly and dangerous after being raised under such hostile conditions. We're still paying out compensation to those refugees caught up in the Pacific solution. What will this next lot cost us?

Now lets assume then that their caring parents who put their lives at risk really do love them and cant bear to be apart from them... then YES mantra their place should be in detention with their parents not separated from them. This was the decision of their parents to come here via illegal means and in many cases to come here on spurious grounds then refuse to go back once their status has been determined.

Most of these people would be declared genuine refugees so they have fled from a terrifying life that you and I couldn't even imagine. It is the instinct of most parents to try and give their children a safe and happy life and that's why they take risks.

The UN Protocol is flawed and we should withdraw from it... unless someone like DUMB or LUDDITE cares to look at it sensibly and put forward some sensible amendments. Which they are waaaay too dumb to do. Ever.

No-one can put forward any sensible amendments, because we're in a dilemma. It's black or white and there doesn't seem to be a middle ground.

[skippy]

If we had the same closed border policy we do now seventy years ago the country would be seen as antisemitic. If the refugees attempting to come to Australia now were white Christians would they be treated in a different manner?

[Rorschach]

So you are saying all Australians even those of various ethnicities are racist eh Skippy... don't be a total wanker like the rest of The Greens.

Most Australians even those that have been vilified as racist have stated they don't care where you come from as long as when you are here you become Australian.
Personally I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with that.
Only The Greens and their stupid rabid supporters do.

[Rorschach]

you are kidding right?
Of course the Greens and especially the likes of Hanson-DUMB, Ludlum and Bandt should pull their empty heads is and STFU!
Talk about Morons of the first degree.
You think the Greens aren't populated by progressive PC hand wringing bleeding hearts? You think none of those are clergy or Drs etc...
A good portion of the country?
Most Australians by a long chalk accept the governments border policy, so does Labor BTW. Not the empty headed Greens though. They should STFU mantra they are the raving looney party.

Of course most Australians accept the closed border policy, its hardly closed mantra, just to criminals... but it doesn't mean they like the way it's being implemented. I do... care to suggest another way? No... nor do the Greens except they want totally open borders The Greens can be vocal when it comes to human rights. The Greens are idiots... everyone has a right except us.
Their views are more ideological than practical, another reason not to vote for them but they have no influence to do anything about it except to remind us that children are suffering on our doorstep. Then they can do that without me paying for them. We can't even look after our own properly so how do we look after anyone else without seriously compromising even further our own declining standards. Then stop voting for them.

Our resources are limited regardless of the perception the rest of the world has of us that we are a wealthy country.

As for illegals having children while in detention, you think perhaps they do it to try and sway the authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia. Of course they do.
As for children being in detention you think perhaps they were dragged around the world to help sway authorities to be allowed to stay in Australia? Yes to that too.

I'm not denying that, but it isn't the fault of these children that they were born. No its not and they are not our responsibility either just like the rest of the children in the world are not. You and I both know that the children on Manus and Nauru will eventually be bought here and what sort of burden will they be to us then? I don't and I'm not sure there are any children on Manus. They won't even have had an education and will probably be costly and dangerous after being raised under such hostile conditions. We're still paying out compensation to those refugees caught up in the Pacific solution. What will this next lot cost us? Really... please post some facts to back you up then.

Now lets assume then that their caring parents who put their lives at risk really do love them and cant bear to be apart from them... then YES mantra their place should be in detention with their parents not separated from them. This was the decision of their parents to come here via illegal means and in many cases to come here on spurious grounds then refuse to go back once their status has been determined.

Most of these people would be declared genuine refugees so they have fled from a terrifying life that you and I couldn't even imagine. That's untrue. It is the instinct of most parents to try and give their children a safe and happy life and that's why they take risks. The reason they breed in detention is to get out of detention.

The UN Protocol is flawed and we should withdraw from it... unless someone like DUMB or LUDDITE cares to look at it sensibly and put forward some sensible amendments. Which they are waaaay too dumb to do. Ever.

No-one can put forward any sensible amendments, because we're in a dilemma. It's black or white and there doesn't seem to be a middle ground. Bullshit mantra, todays world is not the world they were drawn up in it was based on saving the Jews fleeing Nazi persecution etc... Muslims don't assimilate they should only be allowed to migrate to Muslim countries. They are a threat to the rest of us. Most are economic refugees that lie cheat and pay criminals, these are criminal actions they should be prosecuted as criminals and returned if found not to be genuine. All non-refugees should be immediately deported and accepted back by the country they left. Nothing hard about covering that with amendments. There would be a lot less so called refugees in the world.

[skippy]

So you are saying all Australians even those of various ethnicities are racist eh Skippy... don't be a total wanker like the rest of The Greens.

Most Australians even those that have been vilified as racist have stated they don't care where you come from as long as when you are here you become Australian.
Personally I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with that.
Only The Greens and their stupid rabid supporters do.

No,I am asking if we had these laws in the 1940s would we be seen as antisemitic? I also asked if these refugees were white Christians would we treat them the same?
It's not until we all ask ourself those questions in an honest manner that we can reasonably judge the rules applied to refugees seeking asylum now.
My answers would be yes we would be seen as antisemitic. Yes I would treat them differently if they were white Christians , but I'm not pretending to be anything, I don't like Muslim culture.
I believe our refugee laws are racist but I'm not saying if that is good or bad just stating facts.

[Rorschach]

here's one for you Skippy... I did address what you said.
I don't like you apparently think most Australians are racist. I certainly wasn't brought up to be racist. It is wrong and dumb as a belief.
I do recognize race though not like some deniers.
My point for you then is this and its something the dumber Greens don't get.
RACE does not equal CULTURE
Oh and when you state some facts I'll acknowledge them