Discussion:
Libs drop the Pacific Solution
(too old to reply)
David Moss
2009-04-17 02:48:32 UTC
Permalink
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
m***@hotmail.com
2009-04-17 02:51:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
What's wrong with controlling your nation's border?
olde.sault
2009-04-17 10:21:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
What's wrong with controlling your nation's border?
Nothing at all wrong with protecting one's country from gate crashers.

Let us remember that asylum seekers, who pay smugglers thousands of
dollars, are not exactly on the breadline also, that Australia is not
a jump and a hop from wherever they come.

Political refugees should get priority but not someone who just wants
a better lifestyle. We can't make room for all so it is fairer to stop
this traffic..

Are our lefties completely mad?

OS
HD
2009-04-17 11:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
What's wrong with controlling your nation's border?
Nothing at all wrong with protecting one's country from gate crashers.

Let us remember that asylum seekers, who pay smugglers thousands of
dollars, are not exactly on the breadline also, that Australia is not
a jump and a hop from wherever they come.

Political refugees should get priority but not someone who just wants
a better lifestyle. We can't make room for all so it is fairer to stop
this traffic..

Are our lefties completely mad?

OS

Was John Howard completely mad?
After spending a fortune to send them to Nauru most of them were found to be
genuine refugees.
By the way, the Jews paid thousands of Dollars to people smugglers to get
them across Europe.
Sir Kevin Rudd
2009-04-17 11:22:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by olde.sault
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
What's wrong with controlling your nation's border?
Nothing at all wrong with protecting one's country from gate crashers.
Let us remember that asylum seekers, who pay smugglers thousands of
dollars, are not exactly on the breadline also, that Australia is not
a jump and a hop from wherever they come.
Political refugees should get priority but not someone who just wants
a better lifestyle. We can't make room for all so it is fairer to stop
this traffic..
Are our lefties completely mad?
OS
Was John Howard completely mad?
After spending a fortune to send them to Nauru most of them were found to
be genuine refugees.
By the way, the Jews paid thousands of Dollars to people smugglers to get
them across Europe.
They stopped being genuine refugee's the second they left Afghanistan.

After passing through several countries, they are now economic migrants. How
anyone can deny this reality is beyond me!
HD
2009-04-17 12:20:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by olde.sault
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
What's wrong with controlling your nation's border?
Nothing at all wrong with protecting one's country from gate crashers.
Let us remember that asylum seekers, who pay smugglers thousands of
dollars, are not exactly on the breadline also, that Australia is not
a jump and a hop from wherever they come.
Political refugees should get priority but not someone who just wants
a better lifestyle. We can't make room for all so it is fairer to stop
this traffic..
Are our lefties completely mad?
OS
Was John Howard completely mad?
After spending a fortune to send them to Nauru most of them were found to
be genuine refugees.
By the way, the Jews paid thousands of Dollars to people smugglers to get
them across Europe.
They stopped being genuine refugee's the second they left Afghanistan.
After passing through several countries, they are now economic migrants.
How anyone can deny this reality is beyond me!
If Simon Rushdie were an Afghanistan national, which Islamic country would
be safe for him?
Were Jews who had fled to a Austria no longer refugees?
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps around the
world?
Why were the Russians and Jugoslaves classified as refugees when we got them
from Germany?
s***@gmail.com
2009-04-17 12:28:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
If Simon Rushdie were an Afghanistan national, which Islamic country would
be safe for him?
If all refugees from Islamic countries are required to admit in
writing that Muhamed was an illiterate psychopathic paedophile, then I
have no objection to admitting them as genuine refugees.
Of course, if we subsequently catch them attending a mosque, we must
deport them forthwith.
Post by HD
Were Jews who had fled to a Austria no longer refugees?
No, they were largely dead.
Post by HD
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps around the
world?
Because we ask the UNHCR to send us the real refugees waiting at the
front of the queue through our refugee resettlement program.
Post by HD
Why were the Russians and Jugoslaves classified as refugees when we got them
from Germany?
Because that was the specific intent of the 1952 UN Convention on
refugees - and NOT intended to help cheats, sneaks and criminals to
pay people-smugglers to help them arrive in Australia illegally, thus
bypassing the refugee resettlement program.
HD
2009-04-17 12:47:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by HD
If Simon Rushdie were an Afghanistan national, which Islamic country would
be safe for him?
If all refugees from Islamic countries are required to admit in
writing that Muhamed was an illiterate psychopathic paedophile, then I
have no objection to admitting them as genuine refugees.
Of course, if we subsequently catch them attending a mosque, we must
deport them forthwith.
Post by HD
Were Jews who had fled to a Austria no longer refugees?
No, they were largely dead.
Post by HD
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps around the
world?
Because we ask the UNHCR to send us the real refugees waiting at the
front of the queue through our refugee resettlement program.
Post by HD
Why were the Russians and Jugoslaves classified as refugees when we got them
from Germany?
Because that was the specific intent of the 1952 UN Convention on
refugees - and NOT intended to help cheats, sneaks and criminals to
pay people-smugglers to help them arrive in Australia illegally, thus
bypassing the refugee resettlement program.
Okay, who has a list of refugees, how long is that list, who is at the top
of the list and how long have they been on that list?
David Moss
2009-04-17 13:00:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps
around the world?
Because they register with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees
at the first opportunity. This contrasts with the queue jumpers who turn up
in Australia, who tend to burn their papers to hide their route.
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
HD
2009-04-17 13:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
Post by HD
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps
around the world?
Because they register with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees
at the first opportunity. This contrasts with the queue jumpers who turn up
in Australia, who tend to burn their papers to hide their route.
After they register, how many generation will it take before they get
resettled?
Post by David Moss
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
David Moss
2009-04-17 14:23:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
Post by David Moss
Post by HD
Why do we classifie as refugees people we get from refugee camps
around the world?
Because they register with the United Nations High Commission for
Refugees at the first opportunity. This contrasts with the queue
jumpers who turn up
in Australia, who tend to burn their papers to hide their route.
After they register, how many generation will it take before they get
resettled?
Depends how many people jump the queue and take up scarce humanitarian
immigration places.
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
kangarooistan
2009-04-18 01:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
After they register, how many generation will it take before they get
resettled?
Refugees detained for over 12 months will most likely NEVER be able to
work and end up costing several million dollars each and their
children only slightly better

Refugees detained for a few weeks are mostly gainfully employed within
months and add several million to the economy as do their mostly
university educated kids

Detaining refugees is not only dumb its very very very expensive way
to win a few low IQ red neck votes

The difference between the two groups is about 4 million dollars EACH
refugee

Aussie taxpayers sure are slow learners

They take the most productive members of the imigrants , as refugees
are on average the brightest ones , and destroy them before
releasing them as damaged goods to sit on welfare for life

kanga
=====

Thanks Spatan , seems you are right , sailors were involved not
soldiers , not that it makes much difference to me , they are all ADF
personel ,

Pedantic s is not worth my time , but if thats what really matters to
you , them I pity you mate , our taxes being used to incinerate
unarmed refugees is murder and the ADF personnel involved will be
exposed in due time , like the recent case in Iraq , it takes time for
military people to tell the truth , we have many witness and pics and
phone audio to collate and compare with witness statements , the truth
WILL come out

ADF lit the fire and as usual will try and deny it , but we can catch
many accomplices and lairs the longer it goes on , we could bag lots
of racist scum out of this, like the recent case in Iraq

Mayo also testified that Hatley instigated the plan and that he and
Leahy volunteered to help kill the detainees.

Leahy was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
Mayo was sentenced to 35 years with the possibility of parole.

Leahy and Hatley were also accused of killing another detainee in
January of 2007.

Two more soldiers pleaded guilty in the case, one to conspiracy to
commit premeditated murder and the other to accessory to murder, and
were sentenced to prison last year.

I will try and be more careful

kanga
=======
Soldier's lawyer says no evidence of Iraq slayings
The Associated Press - ‎Apr 14, 2009‎
At a US Army court-martial for Master Sgt. John Hatley, David Court
questioned many soldiers, several of whom insisted they had not seen
anyone shot dead, ...
.
US soldier pleads not guilty at court-martial

By GEORGE FREY – 4 days ago

VILSECK, Germany (AP) — The lawyer for a U.S. Army soldier accused of
masterminding the execution of four bound and blindfolded Iraqi
prisoners in 2007
.
Mayo also testified that Hatley instigated the plan and that he and
Leahy volunteered to help kill the detainees.

Leahy was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
Mayo was sentenced to 35 years with the possibility of parole.

Leahy and Hatley were also accused of killing another detainee in
January of 2007.

Two more soldiers pleaded guilty in the case, one to conspiracy to
commit premeditated murder and the other to accessory to murder, and
were sentenced to prison last year.
A REFUGEE advocate has questioned claims that the boat carrying asylum-
seekers was deliberately set alight by those on board.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A REFUGEE advocate has questioned claims that the boat carrying asylum-
seekers was deliberately set alight by those on board.

Navy and police are investigating an explosion aboard a boat carrying
asylum-seekers that killed three people and injured dozens more near
Ashmore Reef off northwestern Australia yesterday.

Two asylum-seekers are still missing.

Pamela Kerr, campaign coordinator of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
in Melbourne, says once the navy boat pulled up alongside the boat
carrying the asylum-seekers, those onboard would have known they were
going to be processed.

"I asked a friend of mine about this ... an Iraqi man, and he said to
me, 'Do Australians think we're stupid, that we would put our own
engines to fire?'''

"He said, 'We are not stupid. If we wanted to stop the engine we would
put sugar in it,''' Ms Kerr told ABC Radio.

There was evidence of a worrying "hysteria'' that was not backed by
past experience, she said.

"I'm afraid there is a disconnect between the Liberal rhetoric of they
(set fire to) their boats and the facts on the ground, the statistics.

"I cannot imagine that these people would deliberately set their boat
on fire, while they are on the boat.''
Story
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25346229-26103,00.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy and police are investigating an explosion aboard a boat carrying
asylum-seekers that killed three people and injured dozens more near
Ashmore Reef off northwestern Australia yesterday.

Two asylum-seekers are still missing.

Pamela Kerr, campaign coordinator of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
in Melbourne, says once the navy boat pulled up alongside the boat
carrying the asylum-seekers, those onboard would have known they were
going to be processed.

"I asked a friend of mine about this ... an Iraqi man, and he said to
me, 'Do Australians think we're stupid, that we would put our own
engines to fire?'''

"He said, 'We are not stupid. If we wanted to stop the engine we would
put sugar in it,''' Ms Kerr told ABC Radio.

There was evidence of a worrying "hysteria'' that was not backed by
past experience, she said.

"I'm afraid there is a disconnect between the Liberal rhetoric of they
(set fire to) their boats and the facts on the ground, the statistics.

"I cannot imagine that these people would deliberately set their boat
on fire, while they are on the boat.''
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200111/s413188.htm
kangarooistan
2009-04-18 02:46:51 UTC
Permalink
.
Post by HD
After they register, how many generation will it take before they get
resettled?
Refugees detained for over 12 months will most likely NEVER be able
to
work and end up costing several million dollars each and their
children only slightly better

Refugees detained for a few weeks are mostly gainfully employed
within
months and add several million to the economy as do their mostly
university educated kids

Detaining refugees is not only dumb its very very very expensive way
to win a few  low IQ red neck votes

The difference between the two groups is about 4 million dollars EACH
refugee

Aussie taxpayers sure are slow learners

They take the most productive members of the imigrants , as refugees
are on average the brightest ones  ,  and destroy them before
releasing them as damaged goods to sit on welfare for life

kanga
=====
Thanks Spatan , seems you are right , sailors were involved not
soldiers , not that it makes much difference to me , they are all ADF
personel ,

Pedantic s is not worth my time , but if thats what really matters to
you , them I pity you mate , our taxes being used to incinerate
unarmed refugees is murder and the ADF personnel involved will be
exposed in due time , like the recent case in Iraq , it takes time for
military people to tell the truth , we have many witness and pics and
phone audio to collate and compare with witness statements , the truth
WILL come out

ADF lit the fire and as usual will try and deny it , but we can catch
many accomplices and lairs the longer it goes on , we could bag lots
of racist scum out of this, like the recent case in Iraq

Mayo also testified that Hatley instigated the plan and that he and
Leahy volunteered to help kill the detainees.

Leahy was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
Mayo was sentenced to 35 years with the possibility of parole.

Leahy and Hatley were also accused of killing another detainee in
January of 2007.

Two more soldiers pleaded guilty in the case, one to conspiracy to
commit premeditated murder and the other to accessory to murder, and
were sentenced to prison last year.

I will try and be more careful

kanga
=======
Soldier's lawyer says no evidence of Iraq slayings
The Associated Press - ‎Apr 14, 2009‎
At a US Army court-martial for Master Sgt. John Hatley, David Court
questioned many soldiers, several of whom insisted they had not seen
anyone shot dead, ...
.
US soldier pleads not guilty at court-martial

By GEORGE FREY – 4 days ago

VILSECK, Germany (AP) — The lawyer for a U.S. Army soldier accused of
masterminding the execution of four bound and blindfolded Iraqi
prisoners in 2007
.
Mayo also testified that Hatley instigated the plan and that he and
Leahy volunteered to help kill the detainees.

Leahy was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
Mayo was sentenced to 35 years with the possibility of parole.

Leahy and Hatley were also accused of killing another detainee in
January of 2007.

Two more soldiers pleaded guilty in the case, one to conspiracy to
commit premeditated murder and the other to accessory to murder, and
were sentenced to prison last year.
A REFUGEE advocate has questioned claims that the boat carrying asylum-
seekers was deliberately set alight by those on board.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A REFUGEE advocate has questioned claims that the boat carrying asylum-
seekers was deliberately set alight by those on board.

Navy and police are investigating an explosion aboard a boat carrying
asylum-seekers that killed three people and injured dozens more near
Ashmore Reef off northwestern Australia yesterday.

Two asylum-seekers are still missing.

Pamela Kerr, campaign coordinator of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
in Melbourne, says once the navy boat pulled up alongside the boat
carrying the asylum-seekers, those onboard would have known they were
going to be processed.

"I asked a friend of mine about this ... an Iraqi man, and he said to
me, 'Do Australians think we're stupid, that we would put our own
engines to fire?'''

"He said, 'We are not stupid. If we wanted to stop the engine we would
put sugar in it,''' Ms Kerr told ABC Radio.

There was evidence of a worrying "hysteria'' that was not backed by
past experience, she said.

"I'm afraid there is a disconnect between the Liberal rhetoric of they
(set fire to) their boats and the facts on the ground, the statistics.

"I cannot imagine that these people would deliberately set their boat
on fire, while they are on the boat.''
Story
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25346229-26103,00.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy and police are investigating an explosion aboard a boat carrying
asylum-seekers that killed three people and injured dozens more near
Ashmore Reef off northwestern Australia yesterday.

Two asylum-seekers are still missing.

Pamela Kerr, campaign coordinator of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
in Melbourne, says once the navy boat pulled up alongside the boat
carrying the asylum-seekers, those onboard would have known they were
going to be processed.

"I asked a friend of mine about this ... an Iraqi man, and he said to
me, 'Do Australians think we're stupid, that we would put our own
engines to fire?'''

"He said, 'We are not stupid. If we wanted to stop the engine we would
put sugar in it,''' Ms Kerr told ABC Radio.

There was evidence of a worrying "hysteria'' that was not backed by
past experience, she said.

"I'm afraid there is a disconnect between the Liberal rhetoric of they
(set fire to) their boats and the facts on the ground, the statistics.

"I cannot imagine that these people would deliberately set their boat
on fire, while they are on the boat.''
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200111/s413188.htm
Peter Webb
2009-04-17 05:57:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?

If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
olde.sault
2009-04-17 06:19:41 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.

Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.

Didn't that make sense?

OS
HD
2009-04-17 06:28:09 UTC
Permalink
"olde.sault" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:2bff9d4d-3b38-42d7-8600-***@q33g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.

Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.

Didn't that make sense?

Didn't that send the message that the Liberals did get soft with boat
people?



OS
B J Foster
2009-04-17 10:27:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
Post by HD
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
OS
Sir Kevin Rudd
2009-04-17 10:30:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by B J Foster
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
We didn't start the War in Afghanistan, we are there to clean up the
Americans mess.
B J Foster
2009-04-17 12:07:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by B J Foster
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
We didn't start the War in Afghanistan, we are there to clean up the
Americans mess.
You've got it wrong - as usual
olde.sault
2009-04-17 19:43:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by B J Foster
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
Post by HD
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
OS- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I thought the war was to contain terrorism that seems to be nesting in
Afghanistan. I can't see that honest Afghans were that comfortable
anyway, and if we, Aussies are the enemy, why in bloody hell are they
heading here for a haven?

Sounds like Leftie logic.

OS
HD
2009-04-18 01:46:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by B J Foster
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
Post by HD
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
OS- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I thought the war was to contain terrorism that seems to be nesting in
Afghanistan. I can't see that honest Afghans were that comfortable
anyway, and if we, Aussies are the enemy, why in bloody hell are they
heading here for a haven?

Sounds like Leftie logic.

OS

Not to good at understanding, are you?
If we treat Afghan refugees like shit, will their relatives in Afghanistan
hate us for that?
regn.pickford
2009-04-24 21:44:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by olde.sault
Post by B J Foster
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
I don't have any problem with the Pacific solution, but I question the
sanity of people who start a war at one end of the world and lock up
refugees at the other.
Post by HD
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
OS- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I thought the war was to contain terrorism that seems to be nesting in
Afghanistan. I can't see that honest Afghans were that comfortable
anyway, and if we, Aussies are the enemy, why in bloody hell are they
heading here for a haven?
Sounds like Leftie logic.
OS
Not to good at understanding, are you?
If we treat Afghan refugees like shit, will their relatives in Afghanistan
hate us for that?
go here

http://www.personalworldmap.org/

select `New Delhi` to be the centre of your world map

set time for 15 hours and cost 1000 Euros

Zoom in

Every bloody Muzzie country in the world is closer to these shitholes than
Australia.
Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
2009-04-18 02:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
Nothing makes sense to the lying leftie labour shills except the commie manifesto.
--
http://youtu.be/_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.

"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
HD
2009-04-18 03:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
Nothing makes sense to the lying leftie labour shills except the commie manifesto.
So you claim that the Labor party is a communist party.
Go and see your doctor at the nearest mental hospital.
Post by Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
--
http://youtu.be/_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the
governor general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
Sunny
2009-04-18 05:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
Post by Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
Post by HD
On Apr 16, 10:57 pm, "Peter Webb"
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
It seems that, according to David, everything Libs do has to be wrong.
Thanks to the Lib. policy, there were less boat customers and that is
why Nauru had been closed.
Didn't that make sense?
Nothing makes sense to the lying leftie labour shills except the commie manifesto.
So you claim that the Labor party is a communist party.
Go and see your doctor at the nearest mental hospital.
The ALP still has a strong Communist smell.
By the early 1950's Industrial groups had almost curbed the communist
power in the unions.
In 1954 Dr Evatt's failure to become Prime Minister prompted him to make
malicious attacks on unionists active in the industrial groups and, in an
astonishing switch, the ALP began supporting the communists, sponsoring
"unity tickets" in trade union ballots.

Affiliated unions coming under Communist Party control were then able to
dictate ALP policy in critical areas, including foreign affairs and
defence.

The ALP then proceeded to expel any ALP officials, members,
parliamentarians and trade unionists, who objected to Communist Party
designs to infiltrate trade unions and gain control of the ALP. The
unlawful expelling of members resulted in the "Split"

This ultimately led to the formation of the DLP.
Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
2009-04-18 02:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Webb
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
So?
If Nauru has been closed down because its not needed any more, great. I
don't think it was ever intended as a permanent solution, and I see no
reason he should be squirming.
The lying leftie labour shills are lying again. He wasn't squirming.
--

- KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.

"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
Doug Jewell
2009-04-17 09:03:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
They should ditch the Indian Ocean solution too. A Red Sea
Solution would be a much better idea.
--
Have you ever noticed that all legal documents need to be
completed in black or blue pen, but we vote in pencil?
m***@gmail.com
2009-04-17 11:58:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jewell
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
They should ditch the Indian Ocean solution too. A Red Sea
Solution would be a much better idea.
Nah, best would be a HMAS Collins-class solution.
Peter Jason
2009-04-17 23:01:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@gmail.com
Post by Doug Jewell
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable
squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution.
The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution
available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
They should ditch the Indian Ocean solution too. A Red
Sea
Solution would be a much better idea.
Nah, best would be a HMAS Collins-class solution.
Napalm is permanent though.
kangarooistan
2009-04-19 02:39:20 UTC
Permalink
Why should other countries pay for Aussies soldiers war crimes

Why does Australia get the refugees from the white christians wars and
over breeding and poverty , then scream when the next victims or
their families , of the wars created by white christians arrive in
the decades after their wars end

Millions of white christians arrived illegally mostly as refugees from
poverty or wars or oppression , for over 200 years in australia ,
and to hear them now complain about illegal immigrant refugees from
wars they created in Iraq and Afghanistan and Palestine is beyond
belief , its laughable


Are white people all Hypocrites or what
.
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=BH2&q=Australian+graves+gaza&btnG=Search&meta=
#
Israel shelled UK war graves in Gaza - Telegraph
20 Jan 2009 ... Israeli shelling has caused heavy damage to the
Commonwealth war graves in Gaza City, where British and over 2000
Australian soldiers are buried in Gaza cemetery...
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4299569/Israel-shelled-UK-war-graves-in-Gaza.html
- Similar pages -
#

CWGC :: Cemetery Details
During the Second World War, Gaza was an Australian hospital base 2000
Aussies buried in Gaza strip
www.cwgc.org/search/cemetery_details.aspx?cemetery=71701&mode=1 - 16k
- Cached - Similar pages -
#
Australian war graves damage in Gaza - Military Photos
Australian war graves damage in Gaza General Discussion.
www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=151019 - 50k - Cached -
Similar pages -
#
Australian soldiers' graves damaged in Gaza - Analysis
The Federal Government will consider asking either Israel or the
Palestinians to pay for damage to Australian war graves.

Several million refugees will need to flee Iraq and Afghanistan once
the western troops pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan , all the
collaborators and their families will eventually arrive in the western
countries that created the problems over the next few decades

Same as in all wars , once the war ends the flow of refugees increase
for decades , as the collaborators who assisted the invasion and
occupation are identified , they and their families are forced to
flee , several millions at least will arrive in Australia as happened
after WW1 andWW2 and Vietnam once the war ends millions will arrive
from both Iraq and Afghanistan and in time from Israel when Palestine
is eventually returned, and in time peace returns to the world

kanga
======
Sir Kevin Rudd
2009-04-17 09:30:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill doing
up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay someone else to
take them with that option on the table?

However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal rights
and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views on these
issues?
HD
2009-04-17 11:14:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay someone
else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views on
these issues?
Anyone sentenced to dead should have the right to appeal.
Sir Kevin Rudd
2009-04-17 13:18:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay someone
else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views on
these issues?
Anyone sentenced to dead should have the right to appeal.
What about someone on a family holiday from Indonesia?
Gordon Levi
2009-04-17 14:01:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill doing
up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay someone else to
take them with that option on the table?
The whole point of the Pacific solution was to deny asylum seekers
appeal rights because they are not subject to Australian law. If Nauru
or PNG is processing the asylum seekers we can also blame them for
inhuman treatment including putting children in prison with severely
disturbed adults.
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa,
The TPV was a sham intended to influence retarded voters. It was never
going to be possible to deport refugees after three years in
Australia.
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Appeal rights
and Mum and Kids out of detention policy.
In that case you have to favour the Pacific solution.
David Moss
2009-04-17 14:03:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming,
finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The
reason given was because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution
available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views
on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas Island
until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals if they
prove to be bona-fide refugees, and a Herc ride home if they don't.

Conditions on Christmas Island are infinitely better for men, women and
children than that of people waiting in the queue they try to jump by
coming here without permission.

Loading Image...

If they disagree, take them to the overseas refugee camp of their choice.

One of the better ones can be viewed at:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4412052351457972720

Or perhaps if they read the story of life in the Barlonyo camp in Uganda,
they might prefer to go there:

"BELOW: This is a mother of five children. The LRA came to abduct the
children. When one child cried please stop beating my mother, the mother
was ordered to kill her own child—after being forced to have sex with six
LRA soldiers in the presence of all her five children... so that they do
not kill the other four children, killing ordered by the commander. Those
four children were abducted."
(Loading Image...)

In short, turning up uninvited should preclude any chance whatsoever of
entering Australia as a temporary or permanent resident. Forever.

That is my queue jumper policy in a nutshell.
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
s***@gmail.com
2009-04-17 14:27:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
In short, turning up uninvited should preclude any chance whatsoever of
entering Australia as a temporary or permanent resident. Forever.
That is my queue jumper policy in a nutshell.
Your policy is not only spot-on but also so self-evidently logical
that it defies belief our government hasn't figured it for themselves.
Gordon Levi
2009-04-17 14:43:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming,
finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The
reason given was because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution
available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views
on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas Island
until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals if they
prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia to do
this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we revoke our
international agreement?
Post by David Moss
and a Herc ride home if they don't.
That is what happens now although the Department generally chooses
Qantas over the RAAF.
David Moss
2009-04-17 23:17:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming,
finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The
reason given was because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution
available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150 Mill
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views
on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas Island
until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals if they
prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia to do
this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we revoke our
international agreement?
Not at all, I'm suggesting we rirerously enforce Article 31.

"Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their
illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a
territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of
article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization,
provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and
show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such
refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such
restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is
regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The
Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all
the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
and a Herc ride home if they don't.
That is what happens now although the Department generally chooses
Qantas over the RAAF.
I'd use the RAAF for the statement such use would make.
Also, RAAF air crew are better equipped to handle unwilling passengers
and any other passengers on the aircraft are unlikely to be unduly upset
by antisocial in-flight behaviour.
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Gordon Levi
2009-04-19 16:47:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming,
finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The
reason given was because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution
available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150
Mill
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa, Appeal
rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are your views
on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas Island
until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals if they
prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia to do
this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we revoke our
international agreement?
Not at all, I'm suggesting we rirerously enforce Article 31.
"Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their
illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a
territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of
article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization,
provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and
show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.
That is the clause that is used to justify imprisoning asylum seekers.
It merely states the circumstances under which punitive action is
_not_ permitted.
Post by David Moss
2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such
refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such
restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is
regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The
Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all
the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country."
Their status in Australia _is_ regularised once they acquire refugee
status. Are you really suggesting that, once an asylum seeker is
classified as a refugee, we should insist they go somewhere else?

Perhaps you would like to introduce a variant of the Pacific solution
and pay Nauru to take them as immigrants.
David Moss
2009-04-19 23:30:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable
squirming, finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific
Solution. The reason given was because there was now an Indian
Ocean Solution available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150
Mill
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa,
Appeal rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are
your views on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas
Island until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals
if they prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia to
do this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we revoke our
international agreement?
Not at all, I'm suggesting we rirerously enforce Article 31.
"Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of
their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from
a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of
article 1, enter or are present in their territory without
authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.
That is the clause that is used to justify imprisoning asylum seekers.
It merely states the circumstances under which punitive action is
_not_ permitted.
Indeed. Did you note the part where A31 says:
"coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was
threatened in the sense of article 1"?

Since all the unauthorised arrivals transit through safe intermediary
countries, A31 allows us to restrict their movement
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such
refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such
restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country
is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The
Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and
all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another
country."
Their status in Australia _is_ regularised once they acquire refugee
status. Are you really suggesting that, once an asylum seeker is
classified as a refugee, we should insist they go somewhere else?
I suggest that their status can not be regularised so long as they are
being held under A31(1) for illegally arriving from a place where they
did not have a bona-fide fear of death or persecution.
Post by Gordon Levi
Perhaps you would like to introduce a variant of the Pacific solution
and pay Nauru to take them as immigrants.
I think holding them at Christmas Island until they made it to the head
of the UNHCR queue for migration to a fourth country would be sufficient
deterrant to other unauthorised migrants.

Having announced such policy the first boatload to test our resolve would
get what they deserved: safety with no additional benefits.
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
HD
2009-04-21 07:53:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable
squirming, finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific
Solution. The reason given was because there was now an Indian
Ocean Solution available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150
Mill
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa,
Appeal rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are
your views on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas
Island until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised arrivals
if they prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia to
do this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we revoke our
international agreement?
Not at all, I'm suggesting we rirerously enforce Article 31.
"Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of
their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from
a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of
article 1, enter or are present in their territory without
authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.
That is the clause that is used to justify imprisoning asylum seekers.
It merely states the circumstances under which punitive action is
_not_ permitted.
"coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was
threatened in the sense of article 1"?
Since all the unauthorised arrivals transit through safe intermediary
countries, A31 allows us to restrict their movement
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such
refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such
restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country
is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The
Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and
all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another
country."
Their status in Australia _is_ regularised once they acquire refugee
status. Are you really suggesting that, once an asylum seeker is
classified as a refugee, we should insist they go somewhere else?
I suggest that their status can not be regularised so long as they are
being held under A31(1) for illegally arriving from a place where they
did not have a bona-fide fear of death or persecution.
Post by Gordon Levi
Perhaps you would like to introduce a variant of the Pacific solution
and pay Nauru to take them as immigrants.
I think holding them at Christmas Island until they made it to the head
of the UNHCR queue for migration to a fourth country would be sufficient
deterrant to other unauthorised migrants.
Having announced such policy the first boatload to test our resolve would
get what they deserved: safety with no additional benefits.
So how many millions can you accomodate on Christmas Island for the next 30
years or longer?
Post by David Moss
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
David Moss
2009-04-24 07:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by HD
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable
squirming, finally announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific
Solution. The reason given was because there was now an Indian
Ocean Solution available to process asylum seekers offshore!
I agree with Labor on using Christmas Island as Howard spent $150
Mill
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
Post by Sir Kevin Rudd
doing up the detention centre there. Why the fuck would you pay
someone else to take them with that option on the table?
However I think Labor fucked up badly dropping the Temp Visa,
Appeal rights and Mum and Kids out of detention policy. What are
your views on these issues?
I agree. My policy would be to offer a safe refuge on Christmas
Island until a third country agreed to accept unauthorised
arrivals if they prove to be bona-fide refugees,
Article 44 of the "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees"
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm> allows Australia
to do this with one years notice. Are you advocating that we
revoke our international agreement?
Not at all, I'm suggesting we rirerously enforce Article 31.
"Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of
their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly
from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the
sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without
authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.
That is the clause that is used to justify imprisoning asylum
seekers. It merely states the circumstances under which punitive
action is _not_ permitted.
"coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was
threatened in the sense of article 1"?
Since all the unauthorised arrivals transit through safe intermediary
countries, A31 allows us to restrict their movement
Post by Gordon Levi
Post by David Moss
2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such
refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such
restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country
is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The
Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and
all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another
country."
Their status in Australia _is_ regularised once they acquire refugee
status. Are you really suggesting that, once an asylum seeker is
classified as a refugee, we should insist they go somewhere else?
I suggest that their status can not be regularised so long as they
are being held under A31(1) for illegally arriving from a place where
they did not have a bona-fide fear of death or persecution.
Post by Gordon Levi
Perhaps you would like to introduce a variant of the Pacific
solution and pay Nauru to take them as immigrants.
I think holding them at Christmas Island until they made it to the
head of the UNHCR queue for migration to a fourth country would be
sufficient deterrant to other unauthorised migrants.
Having announced such policy the first boatload to test our resolve
would get what they deserved: safety with no additional benefits.
So how many millions can you accomodate on Christmas Island for the
next 30 years or longer?
I'd say only a few hundred would be needed as an example before queue
jumpers got the message Australia was not a valid destination.

Australia has a very generous humanitarian immigration program, which I
support 100%.

Queue jumpers take places that ought to go to people who do the right
thing. Given a choice I'd send every queue jumper back and justify it by
creating an opening for two bona-fide refugees who've done the right
thing for every one we send back.

What could be fairer than that?
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
kangarooistan
2009-04-17 09:31:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Spending a billion dollars to create thousands of traumatized refugees
that will NEVER be able to work is a waste of taxpayers money

Why take helthy young refugees and turn them into life long
liabilities

Instead of them adding several million to the economy like former
refugees , after paying to torture and torment them for several
years , they end up costing several million dollars in health care
hospital and prison costs , EACH

There will be several million arrive sooner or later as ALL christian
and ALL collaborators and ALL their extended families will ALL sooner
or later arrive from Iraq and Afghanistan and Sudan and Israel

Howards war against Islam was DOOMED from the start
After wasting billions on unwinnable wars , taxpayers must now pay for
their crimes as well as their stupidity

kanga
======
Aussie soldiers set fire to Refugees Boat off Australia , kills
refugees , dozens hospitalized

White christian Australian Soldiers are no better than the Jewish or
USA soldiers who trained them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Monash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_MacArthur



— An explosion and fire aboard a refugee boat being escorted to a
detention center by Australia's navy has killed up to three people,
police and the government said.

The cause of the blast was unclear, and police speculated it may have
originated in the engine compartment.

Refugees claim Racist Australian soldiers deliberately set fire to
the vessel to send a warning to the several million refugees heading
for Australia from Iraq and Afghanistan , as the troops withdraw from
Iraq and Afghanistan, and all collaborators and their large families
MUST flee ASAP , several million collaborators , all christians ,
and their families , will be forced to flee to Australia when the
west loses the wars against Islam

Initial Reports indicate the fire was deliberately lit by racist
Australian soldiers , the refugees know that after they arrive at
Ashmore Reef , they are taken to Christmas Island to be processed and
get their papers , they know they are going to get refugee status once
safely on Ashmore reef like over 90% of the thousands before them

WHY would they be upset at being taken to Christmas Island as that is
WHY they land at Ashmore Reef
.
http://images.google.com.au/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hl=en&q=cronulla+riots&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

The small boat carrying 49 mostly christian refugees was intercepted
by the navy Wednesday in the Indian Ocean , and was under escort
Thursday to the remote Australian territory of Christmas Island,
where the government processes refugee applicants, when the racist
Aussie soldiers set fire to the vessel .

Police in Western Australia state said three people were believed
dead and two missing, but the Home Affairs Ministry gave no numbers
and said it was in the process of confirming details.

Many seriously wounded refugees are arriving at hospitals with
reports of grave concern the government will try and deny
responsibility , with soldiers pretending the refugees killed
themselves like the propaganda spread in Iraq
.


"Border protection agencies have reported there has been an explosion
or serious fire on board this vessel," Home Affairs Minister Bob
Debus said in a statement. "There are reports from personnel on the
scene that this incident has resulted in fatalities, serious injuries
and that a number of occupants of the vessel are missing."

He said two navy patrol boats were providing assistance following the
incident near Ashmore Reef, in the Timor Sea about 520 miles (840
kilometers) from the northernmost state capital, Darwin.

Media will pretend the refugees set themselves on fire EXACTLY like
the media LIED for racist former PM John Howard , about refugees
throwing their children into the sea to win the elections with support
from within the Australian military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_overboard_affair
See also: Australian federal election, 2001

The Children Overboard affair was an Australian political controversy
involving public allegations by Howard government ministers in October
2001, in the lead-up to a federal election, that sea-faring asylum
seekers had thrown children overboard in a presumed ploy to secure
rescue and passage to Australia.
.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"The government's first priority is to address the immediate
situation and to ensure the safety of life at sea," Debus said.

Media spin will aim to protect Australian soldiers but the truth is
plain for all to see , as we all know what aussies are really like ,
they have a very very dark past and they simply can never change
their spots


http://images.google.com.au/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hl=en&q=cronulla+riots&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

Earlier, police Sgt. Greg Lambert in Western Australia, the state
nearest to the area where the boat was intercepted on Wednesday, said
it was believed that three people were killed and two were missing.

MANY BURN VICTIMS

Surviving Refugees were boarded onto the two navy vessels and were
being taken to Darwin for treatment, Western Australia Police
Assistant Commissioner John McRoberts told Fairfax Radio.

It was the sixth boat this year to legally enter Australian waters
carrying asylum seekers.

Now the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are clearly being lost by the
western armies , several million Iraqi and Afghans who assisted the
invading armies must find new homes

Australia does not want to accept responsibility for its war
crimes , and is desperate to send a clear message to all those
Iraqi and Afghans who helped them invade Afghanistan and Iraq ,
they are not welcome in Australia

Many know far too much about what really happened in Iraq and
Afghanistan to be permitted to enter Australia and tell the truth to
dumb Aussie public

A very clear message sent to all refugees they best not rely on
Australian navy and should land on the mainland in future instead of
heading for Ashmore Reef or Christmas Island

Its now very very clear that the Australian military is infiltrated
with racist psychopaths , Again

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Opinion/A-journey-into-Downers-dark-past/2005/05/31/1117305617682.html


Usually aussies take the refugees off the boats before burning them ,
and let the racist aussies slowly torture the refugees to death in
POW camps , or bash them to death in the streets
http://images.google.com.au/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hl=en&q=cronulla+riots&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

Australian soldiers have a very long history of killing unarmed POW ,

and hypocritical support of those helping jewish refugees creating
heroes out of Schindler while calling others people smugglers those
helping non white refugees come to australia

Most white aussies themselves are economic refugees , and many others
came from war or political unrest , but only white people need apply ,
thousands arrive every year by plane and simply fill in a form at the
airport
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Opinion/A-journey-into-Downers-dark-past/2005/05/31/1117305617682.html
.
Hundreds of Thousands of unarmed native peoples massacred free from
any fear of liability for nearly 200 years , many help as respected
pioneers and land " owners " were mass murderers with many witness
but no fear of criticism or legal action
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_indigenous_Australians

Hundreds of unarmed Japanese POWs were massacred at Cowra , and made
look like a breakout to hide the warcrimes committed by Aussie
soldiers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowra_breakout
.
And Aussies hold a war criminal called Breaker Morant up as a national
hero for shooting unarmed POWs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_martial_of_Breaker_Morant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowra_breakout
.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Opinion/A-journey-into-Downers-dark-past/2005/05/31/1117305617682.html
.
regn.pickford
2009-04-24 22:14:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moss
On Q&A last night the Lib panellist, after considerable squirming, finally
announced the Libs had dropped the Pacific Solution. The reason given was
because there was now an Indian Ocean Solution available to process asylum
seekers offshore!
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resourcehttp://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Spending a billion dollars to create thousands of traumatized refugees
that will NEVER be able to work is a waste of taxpayers money
Why take helthy young refugees and turn them into life long
liabilities
Instead of them adding several million to the economy like former
refugees , after paying to torture and torment them for several
years , they end up costing several million dollars in health care
hospital and prison costs , EACH
There will be several million arrive sooner or later as ALL christian
and ALL collaborators and ALL their extended families will ALL sooner
or later arrive from Iraq and Afghanistan and Sudan and Israel
Howards war against Islam was DOOMED from the start
After wasting billions on unwinnable wars , taxpayers must now pay for
their crimes as well as their stupidity
We can take a leaf out the White Australia Policy and simply close
Mosques including all Islamic social centres. Worked very effectively
back in 1910ish. The Moslem population went into freefall.
No bloodshed, just a determination to keep out incompatable cultures.

We can also close Islamic Schools and include Islamic groups
with the new anti Bikie gang laws to prevent them from congregating
and planning the further destruction of our culture and slaughter of
innocents.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...