The term 'illegal asylum seekers' is an oxymoron. According to the Migration Act, there is only a distinction between 'lawful non-citizens'(with visa) and 'unlawful non-citizens'(without visa). Unlawful doesn't mean illegal, as it is not a crime to arrive in Australia without a visa, whether by boat, air, parachute, spaceship, or catapult.

According to Kerry Murphy, lawyer and academic specialising in migration law, the possession of a valid visa is irrelevant to a person's claim of asylum. "Whether someone has a visa or not is not relevant for refugee status," Mr Murphy said. "At most, having a valid passport and visa may give rise to adverse inferences about whether someone has a well founded fear of persecution."

As a signatory to this Convention, Australia is obliged to recognise all asylum seekers as refugees until such time as it can decide otherwise. However, even if Australia denies refugee status to an asylum seeker, he/she is still not 'illegal', as Australia can only confirm refugee status, not establish it. The fear of persecution, defined by the Convention, is not confirmed or denied during the interview, but instead is solely "as perceived by the claimant and as expressed by the claimant."

http://webdiary.com.au/cms/?q=node/2809

culldav wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 5:40pm:


Great. The idiot is going to keep repeating itself over and over now because it has nothing new to say.

I've already explained to you, moron, that when people are stuck between a rock and a hard place they make decisions. Sometimes these are difficult decisions.  But don't try and judge when you have never been previewed to any situation that is life threatening, or even begins to threaten your way of life.  And don't judge when you are completely void of any actual thinking on the matter.

It seems that you are so out of touch with people that the only thing still making you human is your appearance.

http://webdiary.com.au/cms/?q=node/2809

The use of correct terminology is extremely important. When asked why it matters how we refer to asylum seekers, Ms Gauthier replied, "Until a court establishes a crime has been committed, you can't pass judgement over any person's legality." Ms Gauthier was very clear on the necessity for proper reporting of asylum seekers. "It's about affording due process to everyone, especially considering our obligations to asylum seekers under international and domestic law."

The Australian Human Rights Commission estimates that 82-91% of all asylum seekers arriving in Australia are confirmed as refugees. So why the use of the term 'illegal' to describe them? Debate on asylum seekers is encouraged, but let's keep the debate informed and accurate. Isn't it the least we can do?


...............................................................................

Informed debate would be nice for a change.

Just ONE Example for the idiot nuff:

Quote:


http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eap/119046.htm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 5:48pm:



Maybe....or it could be that you just can't score, but I wouldn't think a fine fellow like you would have that problem.   

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 5:52pm:



Well, apart from them ruining the feeling, I don't have a problem with condoms.  I do find it odd people 'making the choice' not to have kids, but that's a topic for another time and place.

Asylum-seekers who come by boat are not illegal immigrants.

The Migration Act 1958 allows for entry to Australia without a visa for the purpose of seeking asylum.

Most asylum-seekers arriving here by boat are found to be refugees, having experienced similar threats, torture and trauma to those now living in camps in many countries.

Mr Sheridan appears to ignore the situations from which asylum-seekers flee, the persecution in their home countries and the many barriers to effective protection for asylum-seekers in Southeast Asia.

I know of no one who doesn't want the flow of boats carrying asylum-seekers to Australia to stop.

The difference is that some just want persecuted people to go away and bother some other nation, while others are exploring how Australia can help expand alternatives through practical and financial support to countries of first asylum and through supporting refugee resettlement.

Paul Power, CEO, Refugee Council of Australia, Surry Hills, NSW

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/boatpeople-not-illegal/story-fn558i...

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 10:46am:

There's no point arguing with white trash.

They're born trash and their instinctive need is to inflict suffering on an underclass (or perceived underclass) lower than their own.

They're under-educated and morally bankrupt.. That's their cultural inheritance. They cannot ascend or be saved from themselves. Every country must endure their own version. Ours is the likes of this poster.