Refugee Numbers

November 29th, 2007 at 1:11 pm by David Farrar

No Right Turn compares our refugee numbers with Australia and finds that they take in far more per capita than NZ.  He says that the Immigration Service is in denial with their claim NZ has a high refugee rate per capita.

I wondered who was correct, so I went to the UNHCR website and pulled out the latest stats on actual refugees over the last year for each country, and compared it to their population.  I pulled out the main European countries.

refugees.JPG

This does show us towards the bottom end.  Now one has to be aware of certain factors in each country.  For example Germany does not take many legal refugees but has millions of illegal immigrants or economic refugees, so they probably feel they more than do their bit.

I generally support an increase in our refugee quota, but with a couple of disclaimers:

  1. We need to remain vigilant against fake refugees, bogus asylym seekers etc.  These queue jumpers take the places of genuine refugees who have been judged by UNHCR as needing refuge.
  2. We should use some common sense in accepting refugees, who are most likely to do well in NZ.
Tags:

63 Responses to “Refugee Numbers”

  1. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    We should use some common sense in accepting refugees, who are most likely to do well in NZ.

    David, you’re starting to sound like Annette King!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Mike S (231 comments) says:

    Hmm, refugees by definition are always going to require a lot of support before they integrate. It is important to bear in mind they are not the same as immigrants. You can’t really cherry-pick them “OK, you’re a world-class biologist but your 2 daughters were gang-raped and have HIV. We’ll take you but not them” It doesn’t work that way.

    Refugees are coming from situations that are so hellish most of us can’t even begin to imagine what they are like e.g. Rwanda, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq.

    The great liberal Westminster tradition that our parliamentary democracy comes from has always stressed liberty – and England was seen as a beacon of liberty for people oppressed by stagnant European autocracies for centuries. That’s a tradition I hope we keep up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. MajorBloodnok (361 comments) says:

    Are there any conditions on refugee entry, such as “if you are found guilty of a [significant] crime, it is almost certain that you will be required to leave NZ”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Johnboy (15,602 comments) says:

    Interesting observation Mike S regarding Westminster tradition. It would appear that that may soon be a thing of the past as it does not figure in Sharia law. I suspect the home of liberty, equality and fraternity are now wishing they had not been quite so fraternal with their muslim refugees.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Chuck Bird (4,774 comments) says:

    Mike, so you think it is reasonable to allow in HIV+ refugees?

    HIV+ refugees have infected New Zealanders.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    Good to see you advocating we do more to help those msot in need in the world. Could you link to your UNHCR data source? I can’t navigate around their stupid database.

    Couple of notes:

    ‘queue-jumpers’, thsoe who seek aslum directly from a country rather than going through UNHCR do not take the place of UNHCR refugees – we have an agreement with UNHCR to take a fixed number each year, irrespective of any other refugees we accept.

    you can’t cheerypick whcih countries to include economic refugees for – our pacific island quotas could be seen in much the same light.

    Most developed countries take an agreed number of UNHCR refugees each year – I recalll ours was 750 and has been revised up to 850.

    We can’t cherry pick refugees we want because- a) someone’s got to take them b) they often come in families.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    MajorBloodnok – where would they go?

    Johnboy – you’re confusing the Westminster tradition and French republicanism. You’re overstating the size of the muslim, let alone fundementalist muslim, population in France. Also, you’re being racist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Kimble (4,417 comments) says:

    Sam, refugees arent the most in need, those that cannot get onto the refugee radar would be.

    Queue jumpers do affect the public perception of refugees and may lead to less support for the official program than otherwise would be.

    And France does have a muslim youth problem, if you accept riots requiring 1000 police, dozens of cars being set alight during quiet times, no go areas in main cities for police and white frenchmen, to be a problem. But these louts aren’t refugees.

    Islam isnt a race.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Reg (544 comments) says:

    It’s interesting to note that it is countries founded on the Christian tradition that are;
    a) Prosperous enough to attract refugees,
    and
    b) Compassionate enough to accept them.

    I think it is important -if not politically correct- to debate the consequences of diluting the Christian component of our society by the intake of refugees from Islamic countries to the point that the values that attracted and accepted the haven seekers in the first place are threated by numerical growth of the new arrivals.

    I believe DPF’s second point is valid.

    If we are given the choice of excepting refugees from a “hell on earth” scenario in Christian Zimbabwe or Islamic Somalia it would indeed be common sense to select the group that wouldn’t be demanding the imposition of”Sharia Law” in a generations time.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Kimble (4,417 comments) says:

    There would be nothing wrong with Islam, if its followers ignored as much of their religions actual teachings as Christians do theirs.

    Think of religion like the movie Star Wars. If you enjoyed Star Wars, then fine. If you bought the toys for your kids, fine. If you watch it at least once a year, fine. If you live your life by the teachings of Yoda, if you call yourself a Jedi and your kids padawans, if you dress up like a Storm Trooper to go to the release of the new dvd at your local Kmart, if you refuse to accept the plain awfulness of Jar Jar Binks, if you once got into a fistfight over an assertion that the relationship between C3PO and R2D2 was faintly homosexual, if you write fan-fiction on the interweb about Chewbaccas kids, then that is not fine.

    See, religion is fine, as long as you dont take it too seriously.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. PaulL (5,986 comments) says:

    I’m interested that after years of evil Howard and his xenophobic outlook, that Australia rates so highly. Perhaps he wasn’t as evil as some suggest?

    I wouldn’t at all restrict islamic immigrants. The simple fact of their migration makes them more tolerant than those who stayed behind. Immigration by its very nature tends to involve the motivated and ambitious people moving – the emigrants we lose are some of our best people, the immigrants we receive are some of the best people whereever they came from (and likely to become some of our best people).

    I believe that being relatively open to new people coming in will lead to those people in turn respecting what we have gifted them, and to them in turn supporting others in the future. Perhaps stupidly idealistic, but I believe it nonetheless.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Flip Flop John (1 comment) says:

    Gee Reg, that view doesn’t sound very Christian. I don’t think Christ ever said it was going to be easy to be tolerant, non-judgemental or to turn the other cheek to your enemies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    “It’s interesting to note that it is countries founded on the Christian tradition that are;
    a) Prosperous enough to attract refugees,
    and
    b) Compassionate enough to accept them.”

    You have a very selective knowledge (or lack of knowledge) of the world if you believe the only countries that meet a), or b) or both of them are ‘Christian’ countries.

    “I think it is important -if not politically correct- to debate the consequences of diluting the Christian component of our society by the intake of refugees from Islamic countries to the point that the values that attracted and accepted the haven seekers in the first place are threated by numerical growth of the new arrivals.”

    Historically the greatest threat to a particular christian group has been another christian group. So, using your reasoning, we would be better off stopping presbyterians coming into the country. Of course I’m sure we should find that silly because all Christians get along just fine now. So if you look at the largest non-Christian group taking over the country (who incidentally are 3,500% larger than the Islamic population) it’s those with no religion. So I’m sure you now support only allowing those who are religious to enter the country, and perhaps we should force all the non-religious to start going to church.

    The reason this isn’t debated isn’t because it’s not politically correct, it is because it is stupid, and only justified by xenophobia, not facts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Kimble (4,417 comments) says:

    “Perhaps he wasn’t as evil as some suggest?”

    Of course he wasn’t. What he did do by insisting upon mandatory detention of asylum seekers, was to greatly reduce the number of people taking a leaky boat to Darwin. And therefore he reduced the number of people dying when those boats sunk.

    Australia is no longer a push-over for illegal immigration, but that doesnt mean it is a xenophobic hate-land as the Left loves to portray it. Its doors are open to a large number of legal refugees.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Johnboy (15,602 comments) says:

    Sam Dixon Says:

    “Johnboy – you’re confusing the Westminster tradition and French republicanism. You’re overstating the size of the muslim, let alone fundementalist muslim, population in France. Also, you’re being racist.”

    Sorry Sambo I forgot I h-a-v-e t-o w-r-i-t-e v-e-r-y c-l-e-a-r-l-y f-o-r
    l-a-b-o-u-r-i-t-e-s. I meant the Westminster Tradition of Merrie Olde England and what is happening there and the current riots in France.

    I thought most readers of average intelligence would realise that without every i being dotted and t crossed. Also unlike you I have never written a union manifesto hence do not possess your literary skills.

    Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways I will, like Mark Prebble, impose a penalty on my self and say silently through clenched teeth Labour good —- National bad. No F*** it. I cant bring myself to sink that low.

    If returning with equal ardour the same type of love, affection and tolerance that our Muslim friends show to all other religious beliefs is racist then I freely admit to it.

    BTW Sambo is not racist and I think Golliwogs are allowed again or so the lady on the Antiques Roadshow said last night.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Adam Smith (890 comments) says:

    I agree with PaulL. Islam is of itself not the problem, as with many religions it is the interpretation placed upon ‘teachings’ by those who hold themselves out as teachers/priests etc.

    We may regard Sharia Law as inappropriate, the Taliban as abhorrent but let us not forget the Inquisition, the Romans practice of crucifixion, those lovely Christian Nazis, the holy Ku Klux Klan, etc etc. The issue is not religion but the way in which fanatics interpret the teachings to support their own warped view. I mean it was not Communism which killed people, but Stalin, Beria et al. Indeed Communism to many was a much a religion as Islam, Christianity or Judaism.

    I have lived and worked in a number of places with people of many faiths.

    I sincerely believe that a country, especially a society such as NZ, which in many respects is insular and inclined to a superiority complex, benefits from immigration.

    However, all parties need to learn to understand and respect one another.

    It is worth remembering that much of Western civilisation resulted from the readiness with which the Moors of Spain (Muslims) shared their knowledge and culture with the barbarians of Europe. Unfortunately whilst the West moved forward, much of the Islamic world regressed and became dominated by relatively backward and isolated tribal societies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    Now I get it DPF!

    When I read your “We should use some common sense in accepting refugees, who are most likely to do well in NZ” I thought you meant like people with qualifications and without social problems.

    Then I got confused when all the bigots started going on about the Islamic peril.

    I had totally missed the dogwhistle!

    Well done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Reg (544 comments) says:

    Paul I think you might be getting my point.

    Which countries are these Islamic -and other- refugees literally dieing to get into?
    1. USA- headed by that terrible “evil” George Bush.
    2. Australia- until recently led by “nasty” John Howard.
    3. Virtually every other Western Country populated by the infidel “people of the book”

    And why?

    Because these nations subscribe to a value system that has allowed them to prosper and taught them the importance of care and compassion towards those less fortunate than themselves.

    What I’m saying is; if we have the choice of who we can take, isn’t it prudent to give priority to those from a cultural background that subscribes to similar values as us.
    Otherwise we could find that a generation down the track our society has changed to such an extent that:
    a) people no longer want to come here and
    b)A culture has gained the ascendancy that rejects the necessity of assisting the helpless.

    Refugees are often very motivated people and it was of note that a number of those in the recent anti-EFB marches were escapees from oppressive regimes and were protesting against a movement towards tyranny tending towards what they had had to flee from. Such activity shows the positive benefits that well adjusted refugees can add to our community.
    These people add their own dimension to NZ society.
    But all refugees must accept that the culture that sheltered them in their time of need only came to their aid because of the values inherent in that culture, and that these values need to be cherished and defended not despised and incrementally eroded.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Reg (544 comments) says:

    Be shakey:
    You seem to be sure of yourself although you don’t like debating with me because I’m “Xenophobic”.

    Could you name 1 or 2 countries whose dominant culture isn’t based on a Christian tradition that accept -willingly- a large number of refugees.

    By the way I don’t hate foreigners, I just want to preserve a value system that will continue to help the needy for generations to come!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Reg (544 comments) says:

    Adam Smith:
    Good point about the Moors, but I don’t think you could say they were the dominant religious influence on Western society?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    Why should we take any refugees? If people are going to come into New Zealand they should come in on our terms.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Well, well, well. Agree with Nick C. Our (liberal leftist) media has spent years painting Howard as a Xenophobic creep. The truth, of course, is the exact opposite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    Could you name 1 or 2 countries whose dominant culture isn’t based on a Christian tradition that accept -willingly- a large number of refugees.

    Norway has a strong non-christian tradition, it is debatable whether christianity is the basis of the ‘dominant culture’. The Netherlands is identified as ‘one of the more secular nations of the world’. “Belgium is a largely secular country”. Thats just from glancing through a few of those listed above.

    Interestingly, although these countries have at least some Christian influence, this was usually forced on them as their religious beliefs were suppressed by force from outside Christian groups or nations.

    I think it could just as easily be argued (and in my opinion more convincingly) that the reason these countries accept so many refugees is their strong humanist traditions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. ghostwhowalks (389 comments) says:

    Didnt we finally allow Achmed Zoaui in as a ‘refugee’, only after he was first a queue jumper. And 3 months later he bought in 6 members of his family. So is that one refugee or seven ??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Reg (544 comments) says:

    Nick and Phil;
    I believe we should take some refugees, but for reasons given above, we should be able to be selective based on our long term national interest.

    I mean just imagine if in 30 years time we were trapped in this by now impoverished country, languishing under the Darren Hughes led dictatorship of the politariat and nobody would take us!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. ghostwhowalks (389 comments) says:

    Just a quick check , Switzerland only takes 1500 refugees from abroad per year.
    Of course being a land locked country in Europe they are inundated by economic refugees from eastern europe and the middle east etc.
    It seems the numbers include those who get some sort of temporary residency while the application is being considered.
    I cant see that many for Australia being strictly correct either. Unless it includes family of refugees

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    When we talking about countries based on a Christian tradition secularism is irrelivent BeShakey. Despite the secular policies of today these countries have all been ruled by Christian influences for hundreds of years, and this influence runs much deeper then government policy.

    With the exeption of Australia its quite clear that all the countries at the top end of the scale are run by Bleeding Heart Liberals with extreme ideologys. e.g. in switserland herion is a free perscription drug, euthenasia is legal and they dont even have a standing army!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Norway has a strong non-Christian tradition? Are you talking about the Vikings (ancient history) or secularisation/apostasy (recent)?

    The Netherlands and Belgium, likewise, secularisation/apostasy.

    So what countries today have benevolent “humanist” traditions like the taking in of refugees, that were not FIRST, Christian nations? Where in the world has a non-Christian nation developed anything like benevolent humanism? In fact, where else in the world is the dominant religion allowing itself to be displaced by humanism or anything else, without an extremely bloody and murderous fight?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    Good point reg, although I would stay a join a resistance movement!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    You’re right Reg, we shouldn’t forget the plight of the refugee. It’s a conveniently forgotten fact, that for most of the 1930′s the Nazis allowed Jews to leave, but other countries wouldn’t let them IN.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Kimble (4,417 comments) says:

    “When I read your “We should use some common sense in accepting refugees, who are most likely to do well in NZ” I thought you meant like people with qualifications and without social problems.”

    Sam Dixon once again tries to play the man rather than the ball, but this time he goes one better by playing the man without the ball!

    He lasted two comments before slipping into his old habits.

    Repeat after me Sam, “DPF is not responsible for what others say in comments, or for their interpretation of what he says in his posts”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. BeShakey (405 comments) says:

    So what countries today have benevolent “humanist” traditions like the taking in of refugees, that were not FIRST, Christian nations?

    You misinterpreted the point I was trying to make. I’m not an expert on the history of humanism but my understanding is that it is a strong tradition in christian countries. I didn’t make a claim about which came first, I would suspect you are right that few if any countries with strong humanist traditions weren’t christian first. The point I was making is that this is a competing reason for the make up of the countries on the list.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Are Kiwi’s going to need refugee & asylum status in the long term future.

    Are we a dying race, a minority in our own country.

    Is this why Helen Clark feels no need to impress the herd.

    Is this why Australia is so reluctant to asorb us, because we are becoming the new Muslim state of the Pacific with the blessing of the state.

    Is the Labour govt by declaring us a secular nation actually perpertrating a handover of the nation to foreign interests.

    Maori will be the only original inhabitants to remain in large numbers because this is all they have and all they love.

    Europeans will go where Europeans are. That is the only loyalty they have.
    If they have to flee an encroaching cultural/religious take over who’s to blame them.

    If this scenario actually pans out it will be because of a traitorous govt who took away our rights to speak out against them. Foreigners will never have to worry because they will be the favoured. They will become the leaders. They will become the policy makers. The priviliges they already have speaks volumes.

    Helen Clark denies the NZ flag, she denies the queen, she WILL deny the people!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Johnboy (15,602 comments) says:

    Reg Says:

    “I mean just imagine if in 30 years time we were trapped in this by now impoverished country, languishing under the Darren Hughes led dictatorship of the politariat and nobody would take us!”

    No sweat Reg albinos stand out like dogsballs in the scrub even a Tame Iti trained terrorist sniper could spot him!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    I have to say, it isnt long before New Zealand is a racial mesh of Asians, Maori, Pasific islanders and a few remaining Europeans. We will have no national identity and just be a few islands in the pasific.

    Call me a bigot if you must but ask your self, is this desireable?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Reg (544 comments) says:

    No good BeShakey
    Your agument is flawed.
    Norway – Strong Lutheran tradition with Established Church
    Netherlands – Calvinist and Catholic
    Belgium – Mainly Catholic

    Good try, Humanism in these countries only developed because of the tolerance necessary for the varying religious communities to live in peace following the Reformation allowed it.

    An don’t try an tell me that Norway has a non-Christian tradition.
    The religious and cultural bases for these societies you have named are undeniably Christian.
    They are secular in the sense that no one denomination or religion is given preference in the eyes of the Law and no doubt many no longer attend Church BUT the Cultural base of these Nations is the Christian Tradition.
    Have another go Shakey!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. david c (254 comments) says:

    “It isnt long before New Zealand is a racial mesh of Asians, Maori, Pasific islanders and a few remaining Europeans. We will have no national identity and just be a few islands in the pasific.

    Call me a bigot if you must but ask your self, is this desireable?”

    Ok, you’re a bigot. What do you mean by ‘national identity’? Do you mean ‘racial purity’?

    I for one would be happy for us to be a “racial mesh” because we could learn a lot from different cultures, they can help better us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Reg (544 comments) says:

    To me the race is irrelevant but the cultural/religious background of refugees needs to taken into account.
    I also agree with John Howard that respect for the culture of the host country should be a prerequisite for all immigrants and i believe that compulsory citizenship courses could be useful to impart the responsibilities that living in a democracy entails.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    NickC – “Call me a bigot”

    only to happy to do so.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. gd (2,286 comments) says:

    Reg I think you are a little unfair to the Muslim countries.Look at all the Westerners flocking to get into these countries just dieing to live under Sharia Law and embrace the wise teachings of the Koran whilst throwing off the shackles of Christianity that have bound them for so long.

    Crazy Clark and Sullen Cullen are fearful that the best and brightest Kiwis will head not to Australia but to the Muslim countries hence she is encouraging Muslims to come to NZ to avoid the exodus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    I don’t know if it counts as link whoring when you link to a relevant article… but over at kiwiblogblog they see right through you Davey. http://kiwiblogblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/when-all-youve-got-is-a-hammer/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. david c (254 comments) says:

    GD I think you’re overestimating the influence Christianity is having on people’s decisions to immigrate or not…

    Very few nations are actually run by a Christian doctrine…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Adam Smith (890 comments) says:

    Reg Says:

    November 29th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
    Adam Smith:
    Good point about the Moors, but I don’t think you could say they were the dominant religious influence on Western society?

    Sorry, Reg what I was seeking to say was that having made their significant contribution, the Moors/Arabs essentially stagnated from a developmental point of view so that much of the Islamic world regressed and became dominated by relatively backward and isolated tribal societies.
    I did not mean they were the dominant influence, but a very significant force especially as regards science, mathematics as well as linguistically.

    david c Says:

    November 29th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
    “It isnt long before New Zealand is a racial mesh of Asians, Maori, Pasific islanders and a few remaining Europeans. We will have no national identity and just be a few islands in the pasific.

    Call me a bigot if you must but ask your self, is this desireable?”

    Ok, you’re a bigot. What do you mean by ‘national identity’? Do you mean ‘racial purity’?

    I for one would be happy for us to be a “racial mesh” because we could learn a lot from different cultures, they can help better us.

    Likewise David. This country is already a ‘mesh’. We all are products of diverse backgrounds and cultures. There is nothing wrong with that. The truly disturbing comment is the phrase ‘a few remaining Europeans’. If ever there was a code for White Man’s rule this is it.

    So Nick C. you are as you describe yourself a bigot. No doubt you thought South Africa under apartheid was paradise on earth. You and your ilk truly are the White Man’s burden.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. david c (254 comments) says:

    Beautifully said Adam

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    wow,,

    I didn’t think my previous post would be savaged, but not even criticised.

    I’m scaring myself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. david c (254 comments) says:

    Noone likes a troll hinamanu

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. PaulL (5,986 comments) says:

    Sam: yes it is link whoring when you write the article yourself, and then come over here and post a link saying “over at KBB they see right through you” and then write something you already wrote here, and was wrong when you wrote it here. Personally, I’d add another 10 demerits for the whoring, and 50 for being such a dumb fuck that you don’t understand why that is a problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Reg (544 comments) says:

    yes sorry gd:
    Perhaps those 35,000 a year were heading off to play real life Tag games in happy Afghanistan, or were seeking shelter from skin cancer under the burquas of Iran, or were wanting to start a womens rights party in Saudi Arabia.
    Maybe the were wanting to start a new life in the Socialist Utopia of North Korea or were hoping to loose weight under the dietary regime practiced in Sudan.
    But I suspect not.
    My guess is they were going to that wretched country with a xenophobic Christian PM called Howard to flagellate themselves with Tax Cuts and surplus wages. Gluttons for punishment aren’t they!
    But now Rudds in charge maybe things will improve and thy will have the pleasure of learning Mandarin!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Sam Dixon (630 comments) says:

    PaulL – so which of kbb’s half dozen writers am I? All of them? Tin hat time my friend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “Noone likes a troll hinamanu”

    From you David, I live and learn.

    I think I’ve finally silenced Cacofinix.
    he gave me his terms of surrender today.

    if he keeps his word I will be appeased

    If not I will never let him rest again,,,,, forever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. PaulL (5,986 comments) says:

    Fuck only knows Sam. There aren’t authors on the posts so far as I can see. The post basically repeated your words, it added nothing. Either you wrote it, or one of your friends retyped your words from here. That is hardly “over at KBB they see right though you.” It is “over at KBB they repeated something I said over here, so now I’ll link to it and it sounds like it has authority.” It doesn’t, and I’d still give you the 50 points for being a dumb fuck.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    PauLl,,

    since you’re dispensing justice with demerit points, can you tell us how many demerits gets a suspension.

    This has not been explained in the demerits section.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. PaulL (5,986 comments) says:

    My recollection was 100 points got a suspension and reset the points. It was a binary system – 1 day first suspension, 2 days second and so on. DPF: would probably be useful to put that in the demerit section.

    But honestly, if you have to ask doesn’t it indicate you should modify your behaviour? I would have thought any demerits at all was a problem, rather than people trying to work out how many they have left and what they can get away with. Sam brought up the demerit question, not me – it isn’t some sort of bizzare fetish that I have.

    But hey, what do I know. If I was able to actually give demerit points I’d probably have to think harder before dispensing them!! But surely I’m not alone in thinking that Sam must be either as thick as two short planks, or deliberately playing dumb about whether his links have relevance? It isn’t that complicated is it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “over at kiwiblogblog they see right through you Davey”

    Hahaha, thanks for the laff you arrogant dipshit. The insufferable whining self congratulating halfwits at KBB wouldn’t know if someone was up them with an armful of chairs. They are the most narrow ignorant shallow bunch of losers with a blog, and to suggest that Mr. Farrar or anyone should actually take their wet useless leftist blather seriously is just hilarious.

    That’s if there is actually more than one of them. The posts I’ve bothered reading are so busy smugly telling each other how wonderful they are, its likely they’re all the same narcissistic uneducated commie dimbulb.

    Intolerant. Anti freedom of expression. Unintelligent. Smug. Insipid. The most pathetic aspect tho is their attempts to be intimidating, as per Dixon’s pathetic utterance above. People will express their views on immigration on Kiwiblog whether the powerless but self important little totalitarians on KBB like it or not. If you object so much to what you read here, I suggest you fuck off and read somewhere else. Pitiful small minded children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Peter2715626 (24 comments) says:

    I always ask a question, these refugees that come from poor countries where average salary is fifty bucks a week, how can they afford air tickets to come to New Zealand for them and for their families????

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Rex Widerstrom (5,330 comments) says:

    Major Bloodnock: The general rule in most Western countries is that if you commit a serious enough crime (and that varies greatly between countries) as anything less than a citizen, you’re deported at the end of your sentence. If you’re a citizen they’re struck with you unless the Minister revokes your citizenship.

    That led to a man who’d lived in Australia since he was a toddler, but never been granted citizenship, being deported to some East European country where he had no known relatives and didn’t even speak the language (I can’t recall the exact details at present, it was sometime last year I think) after he committed a crime. He slept on the steps of the Australian Embassy till the Ambassador helped repatriate him.

    The overall debate is fascinating… as someone who once authored a speech widely regarded as xenophobic and co-authored a policy roundly decried as such by an outraged media, DPF has pretty much summed up that policy in two neat paragraphs: more genuine refugees (the number at the time was a pathetic 750) and more immigrants prepared to make a genuine contribution (defined as being more than buying an expensive piece of real estate, grabbing their NZ passport and sodding off back “home”).

    But because it didn’t propose putting out the welcome mat for anyone and everyone – and because it was a convenient straw man to flog the bejeezus out of – the hyenas started howling.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    People, calling me a bigot came with a condition: You had to ask yourself a question. Did anyone actually do that???

    Lets look at a list of countries where they have serious problems because they have two large competing racial groups, or tention because of large racial majoritys:
    Australia
    Iraq
    Fiji
    Also many countries in Europe including: France, Germany, The Neatherlands, Britian

    All of these countries without fail have massive problems with ethnic tention. It is human nature to identify with those who are similar in apperance to you. Im not trying to be a racist but it is a fact that competing ethinic groups causes ethnic tention. To say that we can learn from the diversity of other cultures is a gymic, and it completly ignores the potential problems of such arangements.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. gee90 (92 comments) says:

    “It is human nature to identify with those who are similar in apperance to you”

    Baldies?

    It’s not human nature at all. It might be yours, I don’t know.

    The world’s nations *are* diverse. Religious, linguistic, tribal, ethnic diversity is the norm in every single country … except one. That’s North Korea. (It used to be two, but Iceland has a growing immigrant population now). The most successful nation on earth is the USA – the very essence of diversity.

    Asia-Pacific, Europe, the Americas, Africa, everywhere. It’s not just a question of diversity being “good” or “bad” – it just IS. It’s a historical, geographical fact.

    If you don’t believe that, then list the nations that don’t have significant minorities. Apart from North Korea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. IdiotSavant (88 comments) says:

    Dammit. I was planning to do a followup sometime with these numbers, and I’ve just had my thunder stolen :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Aw, C’MON Nick C, does Australia have thousands of rioting Muslim youths overturning cars and setting fire to them, clashes in which dozens of police get injured, huge ghettos where even the cops don’t dare to go, and regular hate murders of Jews? Say what you like about Australia, Howard’s government was on the right track in insisting that immigrants assimilate.

    An interesting thing I picked up from reading “Under the shade of swords” by Sally Neighbour, was that the Muslim immigrant community in Australia was not a fertile recruiting ground for extremist organisations, and that the people recruited for terror operations by them tended to have names like Jack Roche and David Thomas and David Hicks – warped products of liberal leftist cultural selfloathing. The Muslims themselves tended to appreciate the land in which they lived too much to want to attack it. Unlike in France, Britain, Spain, Sweden, etc, etc

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. thehawkreturns (162 comments) says:

    Havn’t you been to the UK or even continental Europe?

    It is a Muslim paradise. The white man, along with his Western traditions is in retreat and the dark ages of religious bigotry, racism, sexual inequality
    and dictatorship are drawing near.

    Does NZ have to repeat every stupid mistake Europe makes, just 30 years later?

    Let the (mainly economic, as far as I can see) refugees stay in or go back to there OWN countries and fight for their freedoms as my ancestors in Europe did over the last 2000 years. Taking refugees is dumb and ultimately causes MORE suffering for those left behind.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “Is this why Australia is so reluctant to asorb us, because we are becoming the new Muslim state of the Pacific with the blessing of the state.

    Is the Labour govt by declaring us a secular nation actually perpertrating a handover of the nation to foreign interests. ”

    I see my post was bang on what you’ve known for 30 yrs hawk.

    Tis a fearful thing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. GNZ (228 comments) says:

    > The most successful nation on earth is the USA

    I’m not sure which planet you have been living on for the last 50 years but Japan and S. Korea and China (not diverse, go there and have a look around) have given a total economic hiding to USA / UK / France (diverse). The USA is only successful if you call slashing your economy to much less than half of what it was in relative terms in 50 years a success, rather like NZ has been a ‘success’ in the last 50 odd years by rocketing from about somewhere around second to somewhere around second to last in the OECD.

    Not saying that diversity is fatal but I think if you did a regression it would almost certainly come out as a negative related to growth – in fact I’m pretty sure someone did that research (one of many factors of course) a few years ago and I read the paper.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.