|A polite 'no'|
ABC-2002-07-18 reports: Britain has rejected an application for asylum by two
young escapees from the Woomera Detention Centre. The two brothers, aged 12
and 13, had spent most of the day inside the British Consulate in Melbourne
The boys (having already failed in their refugee application in Australia)
were appealing as refugees because of
oppression in Australia, and presumably were appealing on the grounds
of mistreatment by Australia.
Eric Vadarlis, their lawyer, was the same lawyer who championed the cause of the
Tampagees late last year. It's not hard to see why he is working for nothing -
lawyers are supposed to smart, but he is incapable of thinking more than one move ahead.
There were only two possible outcomes from this move.
- The UK procrastinates for a while and then approves their application.
- The UK procrastinates for a while and then rejects their application.
Either way Ruddock wins. Lets consider why:
If the UK approves their application, then every escaped refugee will
suddenly appear at consulates around Australia. The consulates will get real crowded
real quickly, and the UK will have to pay to move them all to England, and let
them stay there. Australia is not China, and wouldn't forcibly stop people from
entering a foreign country's embassy against the wishes of that country. I can
see Phil ('this-way-folks') Ruddock personally driving bus-loads full of Woomera
rejectees to the British High Commission and Canberra, and saying - "OK guys,
if you walk straight to the front door, you'll never see Woomera again".
If the UK rejects their application, they then can't criticize Australia's
treatment of asylum seekers. This would not only be out-and-out hypocritical,
but would probably give cause for challenge in a UK court of appeal.
But the most hilarious thing is that the same applies to every other country
in the world. Any country which now criticizes Australia's treatment of asylum
seekers is leaving themselves open to an embassy invasion in Australia.
Perhaps Australia should get all the inmates at Woomera and drive them to
the Norwegian embassy in Canberra so they can all claim asylum? Perhaps the
Norwegians would then be less inclined to throw Tampa Tantrums and take the moral high-ground at
It's a bit like the bar-room scene in Star Wars where Obi-wan delivers a
decisive blow, and everyone in the bar immediately returns to mumbling
incoherently into their drinks. Sargent (I-know-nothing) Schultz would be proud.
Of course the background to all this is that Australia, far from being made
an international pariah predicted by the left, is obviously the envy of the
rest of Europe. While a few lefties tried to sink the knife into Johnny
(we-will-decide) Howard on his recent European trip, most just wanted to
know how we were dealing with the problem.
"Well guys, unlike you, we have a real big moat around our fortress. Too bad for you
that you don't have one too eh?"
Of course England has a big moat as well. It's not as big as Australia's,
but it's served them well over the last 1000 years or so. But weren't these the
guys who invented the moat? What ever possessed them to dig a tunnel under it?