Hard News: Fabrication and humanity
102 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Don't even get me started on countries who deport gays to Iran.
Fortunately, from the RSAA's database, we don't seem to do that.
-
Russell: no, it's not an automatic death sentence, but it is a risk, and there is significant persecution. And that's why we should be granting these people protection.
-
Don't even get me started on countries who deport gays to Iran.
Fortunately, from the RSAA's database, we don't seem to do that.
Which, of course, is a bad thing according to certain wingnut blog commenters.
-
I'm of a view that anyone who tries as hard as people like Zoui and this dude to stay here they must really want to. For God's sake, its not like we are so special that we want to be sealing ourselves off from the world a la the USA or Australia, so we can fearfully peer through the venetian blinds at the border looking for Al Qaeda's football on the lawn all the bloody time.
Surely the easiest solution is to have a mechanism where people who really want to stay but don't qualify are made to sign a seven year agreement to a) stay out of all trouble with the law and b) are not allowed access to welfare like the dole for the seven years, at the end of which they get automatic residency. To me people with that sort of energy and persistence are the exactly the "huddled masses" we need in N.Z. At least Ali Panah seems to appreciate the place, which is more than can be said for many of the born-here emigrants who have left the country to become little more than economic mercenaries.
And besides, after a 53 day hunger strike Mr. Panah would have no difficulty finding work with any number of modelling agencies as a nutritional advisor.
-
Meanwhile, Sydney goes into lockdown for the visit of an American president.
Compare and contrast the APEC security procedures in Sydney with what happened in Auckland in 1999.
Yeah, the world has become a different place in those eight years, but I really enjoyed all the Secret Service guys, the out-of-town cops shipped in, the roadblocks and other organised chaos in Auckland' CBD. I could walk from my flat on K Road to work on Federal Street without fear.
But perhaps as the Australian goverment hasn't yet managed to suffer a terrorism attack on Australian soil, it is settling for second best and trying to at least look like a viable terrorist target.
-
The irony is that when Bush came here, to the land Howard once described as a front in the war on terror, there was little sense of a lockdown. Sure there were the armoured cars, a retinue at the airport, and the roads were closed as he passed, but the most obvious effect on the island was the very short term crackdown on pirate DVDs and software.
Compare and contrast the APEC security procedures in Sydney with what happened in Auckland in 1999.
And a couple of years later I was able to very briefly chat, as did many others, to Clinton outside my record shop in High Street.
Can you imagine the current incumbent being able to do so anywhere in the world in 2010.......
-
But perhaps as the Australian goverment hasn't yet managed to suffer a terrorism attack on Australian soil, it is settling for second best and trying to at least look like a viable terrorist target.
I don't know if they would go as far as to wish an attack as such, but Howard certainly gives the impression of wanting to be seen as a proper target in his lust to be regarded as one of the major players.
-
Russell: no, it's not an automatic death sentence, but it is a risk, and there is significant persecution. And that's why we should be granting these people protection.
Along with applicants from Burma, China, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, North Korea, Eritrea, Sudan and Vietnam? Those are the other countries on the US State Dept's most recent "Countries of Particular Concern".
I was actually surprised at how many countries do deport homosexuals back to Iran.
-
Don't even get me started on countries who deport gays to Iran.
Fortunately, from the RSAA's database, we don't seem to do that.
Quite right, I/S - we just make sure make sure their queer-killers have plenty of butter to put on their toast and nice wooly socks. And apparently free speech at home can go fuck itself too.
While I take your point, it seems (like so much else) there's a direct inverse relationship between how much noise New Zealand is willing to make about human rights abuses, and the perpetrator's position of the trade league table.
-
To me people with that sort of energy and persistence are the exactly the "huddled masses" we need in N.Z.
In sentiment, I don't disagree. Panah even has skills, as a drainlayer. But, again, under the system we've got, Panah was found to have no credibility. And I can't see the political will for change to that system coming from anywhere.
-
Mark,
Totally off-topic Russell, but is quoting Wikipedia for authority a very good idea when you can generally find more reliable primary sources? It seems to be what everyone does these days when I suggest that it is pretty unreliable (I also refer to your recent Listener column re wikiscanner in this regard).
-
Along with applicants from Burma, China, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, North Korea, Eritrea, Sudan and Vietnam? Those are the other countries on the US State Dept's most recent "Countries of Particular Concern".
Yes. Either we stand for human rights, or we don't. If people face a significant risk of persecution due to their religious or political beliefs, or their race or social status, then we should grant them refuge. Anything else is failing in our duty as human beings.
And for those who raise the prospect of being "swamped", this country is not a full lifeboat, and we are not going to have to throw anybody overboard in order to make space. We do not face tremendous influxes of refugees, and given the difficulties of travelling here, nor are we ever likely to (except perhaps from Australia when they run out of water).
This issue is about generousity and simple human decency. Unfortunately, the public rhetoric is dominated by the ungenerous and indecent competing to be increasingly vicious in an effort not be a "soft touch" (i.e. decent human beings). And their xenophobia and hatred shames all of us.
-
Mark: that's why I went straight to Amnesty International, though the US State Department country report on Iran is also an interesting read...
-
I just wanted to say that if another minister says, of some putative refugee "he can go to a third country" or "he arrived with dodgy documentation" as if that has any relevence to their refugee status, well, I'll get grumpy again.
-
Totally off-topic Russell, but is quoting Wikipedia for authority a very good idea when you can generally find more reliable primary sources? It seems to be what everyone does these days when I suggest that it is pretty unreliable (I also refer to your recent Listener column re wikiscanner in this regard).
Let's not be too hard on Wikipedia. It was fit for purpose in this case, and you get to be able to assess the quality of an article (having a look at the History and Talk is a good idea). And I did look at half a dozen other sources, which didn't differ markedly.
-
Is there a way with Wikipedia to link to a particular edit? Then at least there would be some permanency to what you are linking to.
-
Yes. Either we stand for human rights, or we don't. If people face a significant risk of persecution due to their religious or political beliefs, or their race or social status, then we should grant them refuge. Anything else is failing in our duty as human beings.
I guess we're down to what constitutes a significant risk and how that should be proved. The RSAA found Panah's evidence that he was at risk to be fabricated. What evidence should it have acted on?
-
Is there a way with Wikipedia to link to a particular edit? Then at least there would be some permanency to what you are linking to.
Yes, that's easy enough to do. OTOH, the Christianity in Iran and LGBT Rights in Iran articles seem to both have their historical shiftfights, but both seem quite stable now.
-
Then again, you miss any improvements that happen subsequently. But it would be useful if you are 'quoting' Wiki.
And I have to applaud them again. I've just spent 3 frustrating days proving to myself that a particular line of development I was following was a dead end. I went onto Wikipedia to see if there were alternatives, and found straight away the answer that it took me 3 days to work out myself, and some useful alternatives. In my defence for the stupidity of not having looked earlier, the last time I looked was not that long ago, and Wiki had about 1/20th of the detail on this topic that it does now. So it's growing fast, and for uncontroversial topics (and this one was uncontroversial, highly technical and specific), it's as good an overview as any text. In fact it seems to be written by the same people.
Controversial topics are a different matter, then it really pays to read the edits and do some other checking. But that aside it's still the best starting point to begin to understand something you don't already, it lets you know the issues and the broad overview. Which is why it seems to come up as the #1 hit for most searches in Google now. Clearly the internet in it's Googlized wisdom has found Wikipedia to be the first link of choice. It's an amazing achievement in the time it's taken them. Most other organizations would labour for years to get to the first page of Google for highly specific keywords relating to their business. Wikipedia ranks ahead of all of them because everyone links to it.
So ragging on linking to it is ragging on the whole internet.
-
WH,
This issue is about generousity and simple human decency. Unfortunately, the public rhetoric is dominated by the ungenerous and indecent competing to be increasingly vicious in an effort not be a "soft touch" (i.e. decent human beings). And their xenophobia and hatred shames all of us.
I disagree. The problem is that people don't have a great deal of confidence in the integrity (or even the intrinsic value) of the refugee system, populated as it is by people who do not share their views.
-
I guess we're down to what constitutes a significant risk and how that should be proved. The RSAA found Panah's evidence that he was at risk to be fabricated. What evidence should it have acted on?
Reports by Amnesty International and other NGOs of the religious situation in Iran. And if the RSAA found that that didn't meet the level of persecution required for refugee status, the government should have allowed temporary protection regardless.
-
I disagree. The problem is that people don't have a great deal of confidence in the integrity (or even the intrinsic value) of the refugee system, populated as it is by people who do not share their views.
Translation: the majority of New Zealanders are vicious xenophobes who do not give a rat's arse about human rights.
I think we should reject that characterisation, andactually try and live up to our own fine opinion of ourselves.
-
WH,
Translation: the majority of New Zealanders are vicious xenophobes who do not give a rat's arse about human rights.
I think they would disagree with your conception of what respecting human rights requires.
Speaking only for myself, I would rather give $10 to helping a third world country develop (you know, to people who can't afford air fares) than give $1 to a refugee. That's at least in part because I don't respect the decision making processes of our refugee tribunals.
Without wanting to be patronising, I admire your compassion, I/S.
-
their historical shiftfights
in an age of history and cultural wars, that term might well have some great relevance.
-
word about the internet is that things in Iran might be changing sometime soon.
But seriously, there are many many refugees wanting to come to NZ who abide by the UN established process. One can feel a lot of sympathy for Panah but his dishonsty has to be compared with all those others who are just as, or even more, desperate who play by the rules.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.