Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

After Amal got permanent residence from out of the blue in November 2005 she was allowed to travel to Iran to see her family and decided to stop in Indonesia first to trace her footsteps and try and find some answers to what happened to them in Indonesia and why.

She was refused entry. An Australian resident on an Australian document was refused entry in Indonesia yet the embassy in Australia issued her a valid visa.

Could the fact that the architect of the appalling relex was our ambassador to Indonesia at the time have something to do with it? She was not only denied entry but put on a plane, with cancer, and sent to Singapore and then onto Amman, Jordan.

Why was she denied only in Indonesia?

The people they call illegal immigrants in the whole of Europe are nothing to do with refugees. As for this law, it is a grotesque breach of human rights no matter how you cut it.

I have just wept all the way through HOPE - I would advise you to wander off and see it, Dylan, and remember you are talking about human beings - not a stupid phrase used to describe what we think we shouldn't have.

Anyone interested in immigration and detention regimes in Australia might also be interested in the new 'return directive' that has just been approved by the European Parliament.

The new directive seeks to set common rules across the Union for dealing with the problem of irregular migrants (including 'economic refugees', illegal migrants and trafficked persons) as well as people who overstay their visa.

The EU Observer summarises the new directive thus:

It will be up to EU member states' governments to decide whether to deport the immigrants or regularise them. But in most cases they will be given two options – to return home voluntarily or face deportation.

Those who refuse to go voluntarily could be forcefully removed and banned from coming back to EU territory for five years.

In addition, the same individuals could be detained for up to 18 months in some circumstances – a time-limit which exceeds that of most EU states.

France24 suggests it will affect approximately 12 million illegal residents across the EU. It does not affect asylum seekers or genuine refugees.

Attacking the new directive are the usual IGO and NGO groups, including the UN who "attacked the new laws as not providing sufficient protection for the 'vulnerable'." Amnesty International was also critical, arguing:

...an excessive period of detention of up to 1.5 years as well as an EU-wide re-entry ban for those forcibly returned, risks lowering existing standards...and sets an extremely bad example to other regions in the world.

Latin American countries have also been critical of the new directive.

On the whole, however, the new directive seems rather popular amongst the Europeans. It was agreed to by all of the Interior Ministers of the Member States and passed by the European Parliament with a clear majority (even if the approx. 100 MEP's who abstained are included). There was coverage of the criticism by some NGOs on the TV news here this morning but it seems a rather popular move overall.

Michael de Angelos: "The Labor Party must be planning retribution and there is so much to choose from – simply getting at the truth is going to destroy a few careers over the next few years."

Didn't the government just put him forward for the highest possible Australian award? The continual punishment (international speaking tours and awards) must be just heartbreaking for him. Next week, in a fit of rage, Mr Rudd, may give him the title Duke, and a fifty acre manor.

Finally the ALP are moving to have a full enquiry into detention with alternatives at the top of the list.

How many more years can we destroy human beings like Amal and call it border protection?

I still believe the Liberal Party is suffering from hubris and is in a state of shock over the loss of the election and Howard from his own seat.

Their actions in Parliament are risible and Nelson is just an embarrassment. Along with News Ltd's pathetic beat-ups of the great 2008 Iguana Scandal (not!) and their seemingly endless attempts to treat Rudd as almost not the legitimate leader of the country, Denis Shanahan has to date three times declared Rudd’s reputation is shot. I don't know who these journos think their audience are or whether they are in denial as well.

The Labor Party must be planning retribution and there is so much to choose from – simply getting at the truth is going to destroy a few careers over the next few years.

I'm positive many of Howard's most appalling actions, like this one, are not going to be forgotten. The tide is turning. People should seek out the Youtube video of a Bill O'Reilly producer attempting to ambush the PBS broadcaster Bill Moyers (the US right call PBS a "socialist" channel that gives succour to the "enemy"). It backfires spectacularly with Moyers just repeating over and over Rupert Murdoch's claim that the Iraq War would lead to oil costing only $20 a barrel.

Every God awful thing has happened over the past 11 years is going to be revealed and the truth of the SIEV-X will be one of them.

Take it from me as relayed from my wife ( the clairvoyant). Howard is in for hell during his retirement as all his lies unravel. I think we are on record on Webdiary at least two years ago as saying Howard would go down in flames and leave his party in tatters.

With the senate being told that 135 of my lost people will have to be compensated.... and the stories continue.

Webdiary's first piece on SIEV-X, Cover-up or stuff-up? was published on 28 May 2002. Webdiary followed the story in its early days when there was virtually no media interest, the govenrment's spin machine having successfully painted citizen investigator Tony Kevin as unreliable and the suggestion of governmnent culpability in action or inaction fantastical or even treasonous. Webdiary thus became a discussion point for the story, as I followed it up here and in the hard copy SMH and Sun Herald. I got into a lot of trouble over this story, as did anyone who took an interest. To track the development of this story through the media, see Webdiary's 2002 Pandora archive at http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/21852/20021022-0000/www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/webdiary/index.html

from May 28 to October 3's SIEV-X: One year on. And see SIEV-X: Another Howard lie, another official cover-up (22 May 2003) for Marg Hutton's account of how she became the record keeper of the SIEV-X saga.

Interesting isnt it.

Tucked away at an indi  blogsite is an intro to a realife story involving real life people and what happens to real people in the real world.  Could be  Darfur,  Burma, dozens of places right now, if its the time factor bothers you.  Stories seldom told and poorly understood.

Why?

Was just at  SMH web site and their idea of a story is ( complete with mugshot of parrots beak of offending party):

"SJP'S frock faux pas fury" .

"Sarah  Jessica Parker blurts after "unique" dress for film premiere turns out to be second hand".

This is only one of dozens of rubbish efforts, like the one just above, where  Noami Campbell waffles on that    Yves  st. Laurent : "...  made me!" and a whole heap of other sludge through the SMH. online edition.

No (sigh) not on a crusade, just the same, tell me you can't see a problem somewhere in all of this.

Hi Marilyn. Ah, SIEV-X, one of the defining stories of the Howard era, and a milestone in Webdiary's history. I'll go to the Brisbane opening, 19 June. With bells on!

Congratulations, Marilyn. You dedicated your time and passion and love to victims of our boat people policy for many years, and you've seen movement your way in this great, big, diverse nation. Well done, girl.