You may have seen Greg Hunt on Insiders this morning (27 May). If not, watch it on Iview. He simply did not answer questions about “indefinite detention”. Coalition MPs are simply not being honest about the issue of people seeking asylum. They won’t acknowledge that they are deliberately running a system of indefinite detention of people they call “illegal” but who do not commit ANY offence by coming to Australia seeking to be protected from persecution.
The Coalition justify their deliberate, intentional cruelty by saying they are worried about people drowning in their attempt to reach safety. (Watch Greg Hunt retreat to this excuse). It’s a lie. If they are so worried about people drowning, why punish the ones who don’t drown? Why deny us any information about the safety of people on boats that are turned back (by OUR armed services? Why not worry about the people who drown in their attempt to reach Europe rather than Australia? Why not worry about the people who do not try to escape persecution and are killed by their persecutors?
It’s time for all of us to write to our Federal MP (of whichever major party). Make sure your letters are actual letters: paper, envelope etc, not emails. Consider writing in the following terms:
“Dear xxx
I am a voter in your electorate.
Do you think asylum seekers are “illegal”?
If so, what offence do they commit?
Yours Faithfully…”
An alternative (or follow up) letter:
“Dear xxx
I am a voter in your electorate.
Are you concerned about boat-people drowning?
If so, do you think we should punish those who do not drown?
Yours Faithfully…”
Try it. They will not give you an honest answer. If they ignore you, or send a press release drafted by a staffer, write again, along the following lines:
“Dear xxx
I am still a voter in your electorate. Thank you for responding to my letter.
It did not answer my questions. Here they are again…
Yours Faithfully…”
Keep the letters as short as possible: most of them have a limited attention span.
Don’t try to persuade them: they aren’t listening to you any more, even though they are paid to be your representative.
I will do it. All my MPs are Nationals (mine is Mark Coulton) but i will write this very day.
Mine’s David Gillespie a former doctor so doing no harm may not apply anymore
But he’s in parliament and unless he is an independent he will be doing what his party tells him.
And you should also consider writing to the candidate for the opposite party.
The problem is their are too many unconscious boofheads voting selfishly, with little appreciation for all creatures great and small.
We should share the answers we receive for comparison and further analysis.
I wish people would do this, but very sadly, I think most Australians support this barbaric action; which is why it is policy. 😭
Give it a go anyway
I am in Greg Hunts electorate. I have visited him and he told me he is sympathetic to the issue. That was some twelve years ago. Greg helped me rescue a Lombok asylum seeker by sending the many letters I sent him, including one signed by Julian Burnside, others by doctors and prominent people directly to the then NZ Minister of Immigration. Nowadays, Greg has stopped returning my emails regarding current treatment of asylum seekers and refugees. He knows I do not vote for him. I need to choose another politician to email, though I have emailed to most of them already.
Done
Fantastic!
LNP Stop using excuses. You say you want to stop people drowning at sea. But why do you punish those Refugees that survive & keep them years in indefinate detention?
I’ve just written to my local MP (again), The Prime Minister, Peter Dutton, and all Victorian Senators. How dare Greg Hunt as Minister for Health, claim to be concerned about people’s well-being, yet not condemn what Australia has done to people seeking asylum. It is becoming almost as fatal to be in detention as it is to risk your life on a leaky boat – the odds are not so very different any longer – work out the percentages and be shocked.
Good on you Jan
Would love to but in my case it’s a waste of time; the PM is my local member and he/his electoral office stopped answering critical emails years ago.
Hey: give it a go anyway!
Sadly I am in Dutton’s electorate.i have no voice in his electorate.
JB has already acknowledged on his website that the breakdown of the detention system, which he is fomenting here and elsewhere, will result in uncontrolled, largely Islamic immigration of 25,000 per annum.
I put it to you that this “well-intentioned” idea could only be championed by people who are totally ignorant of Islam’s utter incompatibility with Australian values laws and social mores.
Should mass immigration/open borders “policies” be predicated on total ignorance of the ideology which is being imported?
Should any far-reaching government policy be predicated on ignorance?
I challenge Julian Burnside to post an article, or series of articles, explaining how Islamic ideology is in any way compatible and even beneficial to Australian society.
No platitudes or personal anecdotes; just facts on what Islam actually teaches and the observed ramifications thereof.
Your demand for facts and not platitudes or anecdotes ignores the reality of the experience of asylum seekers/refugees in our community and excludes many elements pertinent to the discussion.
To start with, as you acknowledge, not all asylum seekers are Muslim but, they are all humans and most are fleeing persecution, torture etc and are recognized as legitimate refugees. As far as I know, the Muslim community is not one homogenous cohort. There is considerable diversity and many, like many Christians, do not subscribe to a literal interpretation of their faith and many of those seeking asylum have been persecuted by other Muslims. The refugees with whom I have had first hand experience ( anecdotal, I know, but lived real life experiences) with, many of whom are now long term residents and in a number of cases have completed tertiary studies are positively contributing members of our society and their religious beliefs are a private matter. Where is the evidence that asylum seekers and refugees in general are somehow importing all these incompatible values to Australian society.? Do we ban all Christians or Jews for example simply because a small minority follow outlandish beliefs incompatible with a modern society? I have not seen any evidence that boat arrivals have done anything but contribute positively to the community. As an Atheist, I could mount an argument against fundamentalist and cult like Christianity ( think Exclusive Bretheren etc) and the brain washing by stealth of children in our public school system by such programs as the National School Chaplaincy Program which has its Chaplains almost exclusively recruited through Access Ministries. This is totally at odds with my view and that of 78% of the Australian population that there should be a clear separation between church and state. How is teaching that evolution is false and that the world was created in 6 days ( as argued by a politician on Q and A when arguing against Richard Dawkins) be consistent with Australian values etc which happens in a number of fundamentalist Christian schools? As an Atheist, I am appalled at the subtle but steadfast intent some Christians are trying to undermine our society. We can see this with their submissions to the Ruddock Review in response to the passing of marriage equality ( The Canberra Times, yesterday has an excellent piece highlighting how a number of the submissions by Christian groups strikes at the heart of a number of our central tenets and that the review has effectively opened the ‘Pandora’sBox) My point is, it hardly seems to me that any group has a monopoly on incompatibility with ‘Australian laws, values and social mores. Are you suggesting we only somehow ban people of the Islamic faith who arrive as asylum seekers or no people of Islamic faith can settle at all despite the reality, that like migrants from other countries, they have been arriving and settling here since at least the start of the 20th Century? We already have foods, music, dances, literature etc that originate from predominantly Muslim countries just as we have similar rich cultural elements from many European and Asian countries which when combined provide us with the rich tapestry which is Australia. Another consideration given the allegation of incompatibility with our laws etc is that my reading and understanding of criminal statistics ( Aust Institute of Criminology) places asylum seekers and refugees well down in percentile terms of offenders of all categories of crime. Surerly, if they are in conflict with our laws, values andcmires this would show up in criminal behaviour and reportable data? Other statistics indicate that refugees/asylum seekers when settled, given access to education etc actually make very positive contributions to the society within which they reside. Recent statements by Peter Shergold, Chancellor of the University of Western Sydney
( 29/5/18) substantiates the value of supporting asylum seekers/refugees in obtaining university qualifications and their positive contribution to society in general to the extent that the university’s offering specially subsidised places to assist given that many cannot access education because then they loose other forms of financial support which effectively kicks them into menial jobs). There are ample examples of positive contributions in regional country locations around Australia. ( eg Shepparton). It also seems to me that even if we had a legitimate reason to not accept people of the Muslim faith, which I contend, we don’t, how we manage such a situation should still reflect common decency and not treat fellow human beings in such an appalling manner.
Whether we agree or disagree about the impact people of the Muslim faith have on Australia and the compatibility or otherwise of their beliefs etc that does not somehow mean we can behave like a bunch of utter barbarians towards those seeking our help. The way we have managed the whole asylum seeker issue is nothing short of dismal and is recognized as such in the International community. I have been challenged about it when overseas. Overwhelming evidence exists from ex workers, doctors, various agencies that have visited the detention centres that the conditions are disgusting and the treatment inhumane. I also wonder why it is only boat arrivals that are demonised and not the many refugees from quite a few countries ( eg the recent African athletes, some of whom are Muslims) and asylum seekers that arrive by plane, many on legitimate visas and then seek asylum or refugee status under visa 866??
I have read pretty extensively on these issues and also read historical pieces where, for example, at the turn of the 20th Century there was a lot of concern expressed through local papers and behaviours by locals, that the influx of Irish Catholics in particular, was going to cause destabilise and create a major breakdown in society and then, in the1930s, particularly in WA there was a real fear that Italian migrants were going to dislocate society and a number of businesses and homes were torched. Finally, we should not forget the fear that gripped Australia at the end of the Vietnam war when large numbers of boat arrivals came to our shores. Thirty years on the Vietnamese community is part and parcel of Australian culture and way of life and many wonder what all the fuss was about but initially, there was real fear among certain quarters in Australia that this was going to ‘end the world’ as we know it. Utter crap.
Worst case scenario according to your figures: 25,000 Muslims per annum, i.e .001 or 1 in a 1000 of the population ( assuming it stayed at approx 25 million although current estimates have it at over 40 million by about 2040 or thereabouts), hardly seems like a ‘flood’ to cause concern?? You are concerned about what Islam actually teaches. Fair enough but I am equally concerned what some Christianity is also teaching. Some of the extreme versions of Islam are concerning, particularly the Wahhabism brand but where is the evidence that the majority or, even a significant minority of Muslims, let alone refugees are following a tradition that is radical and incompatible with the Australian way of life? We know that there are always extremists of any belief system and these need to be monitored etc and responded to when they conflict with the mainstream ( which is an amalgam of many cultures anyway) but to simply ‘heap’ all Muslims or all Christians into some kind of anti society sect is simplistic and unhelpful in terms of resolving what we want Australia to be like.
I know, not the response you wanted but, the issue isn’t simple and to assume that all Muslims, even the majority are intent on destabilising the country etc is a giant leap of fate. All societies and cultures change and with 1,000,000 Chinese Australians, I suggest their influence will be more significant in terms of influencing Australian laws, mores and values than the comparatively small and very diverse Muslim population entering Australia via all avenues.
John,
Do you think that Australia should import people from the following, overlapping cohorts?
– 99% of Afghan Muslims “favour making sharia law the official law of the land”(Q79a)
– 84% of Afghan Muslims “favour stoning people who commit adultery”(Q92d)
– 81% of Afghan Muslims “favour punishments like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery”(Q92c)
– 79% of Afghan Muslims “favour the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion”(Q92b)
– 61% of Afghan Muslims say that both Muslims and non-Muslims should be subject to sharia law(Q81)
(‘The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society’, Pew Research Forum)
Do you think that they are “are following a tradition that is radical and incompatible with the Australian way of life” or are they simply following mainstream Islam?
Do you think Australia should import any of the estimated 500-600 million Muslims worldwide who “favour the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion”?
Where do you draw the line between mainstream Islam and extremism?
Should Australia import “extremists”?
Was prophet Mohammed, Islam’s perfect example, an extremist?
‘The Messenger of Allah said, “If someone changes his religion – cut off his head!” ‘
Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik 36.18.15
‘The Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” ‘
Sunan Ibn Majah 2535
‘The Prophet said, “If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.” ‘
Sahih Bukhari 4:52:260
‘according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” ‘
Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57
“A Jew became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle… Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. ”
Sahih Bukhari 9:84:58, 9:89:271
“Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters unbelief― except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith― but such as open their breast to unbelief― on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.”
Quran 16:106
Islam’s absolute prohibition on apostasy is codified in Islamic law:
o8.0 Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief and the worst.
o8.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.
o8.2 if he refuses (to repent), he is immediately killed.
o8.4 There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (since it is killing someone who deserves to die).
o1.2 (3) killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences
f1.3 Someone raised among Muslims who denies (Islam) thereby becomes an unbeliever and is executed for his unbelief
o8.7 (Among the things that entail apostasy from Islam are):
– (3) to speak words that imply unbelief, e.g. “Allah is the third of three,” [i.e. become a Christian]
– (4) to revile Allah or His messenger;
– (5) to deny the existence of Allah;
– (7) to deny any verse of the Koran;
– (14) to deny the obligatory character of something which… is part of Islam;
– (16) to revile the religion of Islam;
– (20) or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world
‘Umdat as-Salik wa ‘Uddat an-Nasik
[Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper]
A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law by Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al-Misri
I absolutely agree. The example of Vietnamese refugees in the 70s shows us how successfully refugees can be integrated into our country, contribute and enhance both our culture and economics. The same with Europeans escaping the ravages after WW11. People don’t go to that much trouble to escape their own homeland unless staying is absolutely untenable. Look at the people returning to their cities after the devastation of ISIS. People want to be home not to travel the world looking for sanctuary unless there is no alternative. The current immigration policies on refugees in Australia are cruel and unwarranted.
I agree with Julian Burnside. I studied this problem months ago on the internet concerning the detention centre on Nauru Island.
There is absolutely no reason to keep people in detention on that island or on Manus Island. It seems the government are unable to, collectively, come up with a proper and moral solution.
Get those detainees out of both centers and bring them to Australia; that will repair our reputation with the rest of the western nations.
We then ‘mothball’ those detention centers and make it known to the world that illegal immigrants by boats in our waters will be stopped and interned in those centers. An agreement with the governments of Nauru and Manus be made securing their co-operation in reopening the detention facilities if needed. I firmly believe that the detention centers alone and empty will be a deterrent to any future boats.
Done. Member for Bonner Ross Vasta. I have shared this with my larger family network.