world

Australia says its citizens exempt from U.S. travel ban

9 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2017 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

9 Comments
Login to comment

In November, Canberra negotiated a “one-off” deal with the outgoing Obama administration to settle an unspecified number of the 1,600 boatpeople Australia held in offshore processing centers in Nauru and Papua New Guinea.

If I remember well, Turnbull agreed to take on Central American refugees instead, is it still on?

Oz has often been accused of 'cherry picking' when it comes to refugees. Basically if you're Christian or at least non-Muslim you're welcome/tolerated, otherwise try good old Europe or North America.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The Australian government is a disgrace. Another having its reputation disgraced by right wing governments. No wonder there is such a terrorist problem in Australia today. You reap what you sow. The idiotic thing is that there is probably more of a terrorist threat to the US from an Australian or a Brit (both given brown nose passes), than there is from an Iraqi, Iranian, Somalian etc.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

While Prime Minister Turnbull is correct in as far it is his responsibility to do what he can for Australians, Australian Prime Ministers of his ilk have a decades-long tradition of grovelling to the United States. But, now, claiming to be protecting the interests of Australians makes him sound like he is channeling his inner-Trump.

Grovelling to Obama is one thing, but grovelling to Trump - good luck with that strategy.

Rather I think it is time to get up and stand up.

ANd all this time the refugees in Australia's care but kept out of Australia in a blown-out expensive -

Australia pays US$459 for each day a person is kept in detention, compared with $224 in the US and just $134 in Canada and Austria https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/oct/01/australian-immigration-detention-costs-double-that-of-us-and-europe-report

morally and legally insidious off-shore program done on the basis that the refugees are not really in Australia, all outside of the umbrella of the UNHCR.

Many of us have a voice and even some power. Many of the refugees have none of that, and not even a future.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@inkochi,

I was going to ask you but I read the article first. Perhaps they should move the detention centers to a cheaper place.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The idiotic thing is that there is probably more of a terrorist threat to the US from an Australian or a Brit (both given brown nose passes), than there is from an Iraqi, Iranian, Somalian etc.

I'm not so sure about that.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"Canberra has refused to criticise U.S. President Donald Trump’s anti-immigration policies"

As opposed to U.S. liberals, lol. Wait a dang minute - These aren't anti-immigration policies, they're take back control of our border and improve immigration policies. Get it straight!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

TigersTokyoDome, No wonder there is such a terrorist problem in Australia today.

Muslim refugees friendly Germany has more terrorist attacks than Australia. Germany has two problems now. First one was Islamic terrorists entered Germany as refugee and another problem was Muslim rapists and petty criminals are among the refugees. Merkel’s policy doesn’t work. She thought the Muslim terrorists will leave Germany alone if Germany has taken Muslim refugees from Syria.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

36 people per day are shot to death in the US. So, over 360 people have been shot to death since Trump's inauguration.

No American has ever been killed by a refugee from the seven countries in this executive order.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The thing is that while the officials in the US government responsible for dealing with other governments may read the Executive Order and the directives that way, it doesn't mean that the Immigration officers at the US airports do. And while things are sort of getting sorted out, with who is and is not being refused by rote, who is and is not being refused at the officers whim, and who is and is not being refused with documented and substantiated evidence becoming standardized from airport to airport, it is subject to change at any moment either by a judge's ruling, the official bureaucratic directives coming out, or political directives from the Legislature or Executive branches.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites