horsefeathers

and what prevents a "socialist" (god, do you even know the meaning of that term, or is it used just to label a person with a differing belief? - similar to being called a watermelon, i suppose) from being a Christian?? Or Moslem, for that matter. Nice argument, shame about the facts.....

well,suppose you could always try the Murdoch press

Ahhh ft, I think you must have a long straggly beard and live under a bridge........ Either that, or a fishing rod with hundreds of hooks baited with crap to catch the unsuspecting

ahhhrrrrrrrr, that be me moniker - don't wear it out with overuse

cant WAIT to see the moderator's response to this :)

No metalman, A strongly held opinion does not make you, or others an ignorant patriot, nor was anyone called that. The patriot comment is directed more at the politicians and opinion leaders such as our favourite radio shock jocks, who lie and distort, and claim that any contrary opinion to theirs is unpatriotic. These are the so called patriots....

Well, the term "ILLEGAL" immigrants is a term coined by our newly minted Liberal coalition government - ther really is no such thing in legislation when applying it to refugees. And of course, they have NO licence to freely and with no consequence break our laws - no one has that right. Look - if you agree with the premise that they shouldnt be paid, that's fine - Take that up with your local federal member, and become a more participatory member of our democracy. I am not arguing a position for or against - I am trying to show the depths our "leaders" will take us to, and ask people to become informed, before blindly repeating political speak from our masters, or rehashing urban myths.

The actual "illegal immigrant" debate is so politicised, that no one wants to let the truth get in the way. Is the problem the fact that the "illegals" are wearing "desert garb", or that their numbers are so large as to represent a significant danger to our lifestyle? Or is it perhaps our political leaders (and I do use that term rather cautiously), by focusing on a highly visible group (gee, wonder who used those tactics just prior to the Second World War??) want to simply point score, and lead us by the nose to their point of view by inflaming and distorting facts, simply to win votes, and truth be damned. When you accuse people of wanting to open our borders to anyone, just pull back a bit and look at the actual numbers... The figures may surprise you. Nor should you assume that simply arguing for a truth can be constitued as taking a position on an issue. Where do our migrants come from? Despite many changes to Australia’s immigration program, the United Kingdom still tops the list of arrivals, with 123,600 arriving in the last 5 years, continuing to represent around 15% of Australia’s migration intake. The UK migration alone is almost twice the total humanitarian stream and about ten times the number of asylum seekers arriving by boat. The UK is closely followed by India (114,000) and China (111,000), then it’s a long way back to the next two countries, the Philippines (43,000) and South Africa (41,000). So, shouldnt we be going all ballistic over the huge number of UK arrivals???(and remember, they are as guilty of "taking our jobs" as the next immigrant) I get so annoyed with this debate, when simple reason and thoughtful analysis is automatically assumed to be "evil", or even anti-Australian (whatever the hell that means). Politicians throughout the ages have distorted facts to suit their purposes. Have your opinion by all means, but form it after getting the correct facts, not the nonsense peddled by politicians. Remember, as Samuel Johnson once said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"

ahhhh, another NASTY urban myth.... First of all, refugees are not illegal immigrants. It has never been illegal in Australia to arrive on shore without a visa seeking asylum. In fact it’s one of the rights within the UN’s declarations on refugees which Australia helped to write. When an asylum seeker arrives in Australia, they do not get any Centrelink benefits. While their status is being processed, and if they meet certain criteria, they can be eligible for financial support from the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme, administered through the Red Cross. This amount is 89% of the basic Centrelink allowance. This means approximately $405.84 per fortnight – over $260 less than a pensioner. Once an asylum seeker is recognised as a genuine refugee, after a long and highly scrutinized process, they are given permanent residency and are then entitled to the same Centrelink, schooling and health benefits as anyone else. No more, no less. The normal Centrelink welfare payment is $456 per fortnight, for a refugee with permanent residency and an Australian-born person. A pensioner in Australia receives $671.90. Over $200 more each fortnight. Even with family/parenting benefits, a refugee’s benefits would still be less than a pensioner’s income. For an asylum seeker to qualify for any payment under the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme, they must have lodged an application for a visa 6 months before, not be in detention, and not get any other payment or benefit.

But, neglecting to mention that the human chromosone 2 is almost certainly a fused copy of 2 adjacent ape chromosones, is either sloppy thinking, or intellectual dishonesty - you choose.