The issue centers on a population of about 2,500 people who sought asylum in Australia but were diverted to facilities off that country’s coast at Nauru and Manus Island in Papua New Guinea. Deplorable conditions at those sites prompted intervention from the United Nations and a pledge from the United States to accept about half of those refugees, provided they passed U.S. security screening.
Here's my question though. Why were these refugees in detainment camps?
Here's my question though. What is the subtext of your question? Cuz it sounds like you might be suggesting that there is a good reason they are there.
Here's my question though. Why were these refugees in detainment camps?
Here's my question though. What is the subtext of your question? Cuz it sounds like you might be suggesting that there is a good reason they are there.
I have no idea why they are there. That's why I asked? I know they are seeking asylum from their own countries, but that's about it.
I did read the article, but I still don't understand how the UN forced them there or any of the history. Was just curious if someone had an answer.
"I do not have the ability to think rationally 90% of the time and I also change my mind at the drop of a hat".
Also, just so there's no question here. I'm totally opposed to any kind of immigration ban and am getting more and more scared by the day by our dwindling world relations.
"I do not have the ability to think rationally 90% of the time and I also change my mind at the drop of a hat".
When asylum seekers reach Australia by boat, they are not held in Australia while their claims are processed.
Instead, they are sent to an offshore processing centre. Currently Australia has one such centre on the Pacific island nation of Nauru and another on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea.
Even if these asylum seekers are found to be refugees, they are not allowed to be settled in Australia. They may be settled in Nauru or Papua New Guinea, and four were settled in Cambodia at a reported cost of A$55m (£28m, $42m).
Rights group say conditions in the PNG and Nauru camps are totally inadequate, citing poor hygiene, cramped conditions, unrelenting heat and a lack of facilities.
Well since the deal was already in place, I'm pretty sure Trump will have to honor it regardless of how he personally feels. He can't overturn everything, I mean he wants to, but he can't. I also read a lot of his order hold no weight because they are so non specific that they don't actually do anything and they are being used more as a way to get attention. I'm not sure if that's true or not, it's just something I read last night. It makes sense because he is an attention whore.
"I do not have the ability to think rationally 90% of the time and I also change my mind at the drop of a hat".
Australian immigration policy is fucked. We may not be well equipped to deal with large numbers but the way these people are used to 'set an example' is filthy.
The Trump administration can insult our shitty government all they want, but refusing resettlement of genuine asylum seekers who have been detained in deplorable conditions for years by further vilifying them is equally filthy.