# Asylum-seekers 'dead, missing' in explosion on way to Christmas Island



## Solly (16 April 2009)

"THIRTY-FOUR suspected asylum-seekers injured in an explosion aboard their boat off the Western Australian northwest coast will be taken to Australian hospitals for treatment."


http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25341744-421,00.html

If they are genuinely seeking asylum, fleeing persecution and are willing to travel half way around the world and take unbelievable risks to maybe one day be "Australian" how can we deny these people a "fair go"......?


----------



## Bobby (16 April 2009)

Solly said:


> "
> If they are genuinely seeking asylum, fleeing persecution and are willing to travel half way around the world and take unbelievable risks to maybe one day be "Australian" how can we deny these people a "fair go"......?




Stuff them !  :321:


----------



## waza1960 (16 April 2009)

Why should these people get a fair go?  They are jumping the queue ahead a people just as deserving who are going through the proper channels. So the labor party ridiculed the Coalition  government policy on border control for years but so far I see Krudds approach as a total disaster i.e increases in boat numbers reaching our shores with all the inherent risks to the alleged refugees and to our own Navy personnel and then kicking out Aussies out of hospital beds (Broome)to make way for these people and the smugglers make a nice profit also and the best the government can do is put the minister on TV and say we are talking to Indonesia to change their laws what a joke


----------



## pilots (16 April 2009)

Solly said:


> "THIRTY-FOUR suspected asylum-seekers injured in an explosion aboard their boat off the Western Australian northwest coast will be taken to Australian hospitals for treatment."
> 
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25341744-421,00.html
> ...





Solly, Little Johnny had them under control, now we have hey big spender in charge, and we are over run with low life. I will welcome any one here, as long as they come in the proper way.
Tell me this, they have the money to travel around the world to get here, WHY not do it the proper way.


----------



## numbercruncher (16 April 2009)

Dammit, more pressure for our struggling Hospital system ....


----------



## noco (16 April 2009)

Solly said:


> "THIRTY-FOUR suspected asylum-seekers injured in an explosion aboard their boat off the Western Australian northwest coast will be taken to Australian hospitals for treatment."
> 
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25341744-421,00.html
> ...




Looks like children overboard again, only its real this time.

I would like to know how many others meet a watery grave trying to get here.

We will never know! Mr Rudd has blood on his hands by relaxing the laws.


----------



## Julia (16 April 2009)

Solly, not a lot of support so far for these people.  And if indeed it does turn out to be true that they have sabotaged their own vessel by pouring petrol over it and igniting, injuring Australian Navy personnel in the process, you can bet your life any shred of sympathy that may have existed for them will evaporate pretty quickly, including mine.

The Howard government had this under good control,maybe were too rigid in some instances, but looks like under Rudd we will be back to the previous times of being overrun by would be immigrants to take advantage of our generous health care and social security.  

But no worries, we don't mind paying more taxes to look after these people.
Never mind those who are dutifully applying for a place here under the established system.


----------



## nunthewiser (16 April 2009)

I suppose suggesting that we blow them outta the water when they enter our territorys would be deemed as inapropriate?


----------



## Happy (17 April 2009)

waza1960 said:


> Why should these people get a fair go?  They are jumping the queue ahead a people just as deserving who are going through the proper channels. So the labor party ridiculed the Coalition  government policy on border control for years but so far I see Krudds approach as a total disaster i.e increases in boat numbers reaching our shores with all the inherent risks to the alleged refugees and to our own Navy personnel and then kicking out Aussies out of hospital beds (Broome)to make way for these people and the smugglers make a nice profit also and the best the government can do is put the minister on TV and say we are talking to Indonesia to change their laws what a joke





If anything we should make it harder to migrate to Australia especially for queue jumpers.

They can be anybody including the bad guys. 
If they come form Indonesia, our minister should talk to Indonesia how to send them back and put them through correct immigration channels.


----------



## derty (17 April 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> I suppose suggesting that we blow them outta the water when they enter our territorys would be deemed as inapropriate?



I think if you did you would get a standing ovation from the crowd here.

May you all never face situations so dire that you spend all you have and risk the life of yourself and your family to escape.


----------



## metric (17 April 2009)

Solly said:


> "THIRTY-FOUR suspected asylum-seekers injured in an explosion aboard their boat off the Western Australian northwest coast will be taken to Australian hospitals for treatment."
> 
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25341744-421,00.html
> ...




mate, there is a que. these people are que jumpers. they pay big money to get on those boats.......


----------



## Surly (17 April 2009)

derty said:


> I think if you did you would get a standing ovation from the crowd here.
> 
> May you all never face situations so dire that you spend all you have and risk the life of yourself and your family to escape.




Derty,

If the situation was that dire perhaps they would of escaped to a nearby country not one thousands of kms away. They head here as we are a soft target and a preferred place to live not the next safest port of refuge.

AFAIK Afghanistan is a land locked country, so they have crossed borders to get here.

cheers
Surly


----------



## kitehigh (17 April 2009)

Surly said:


> Derty,
> 
> If the situation was that dire perhaps they would of escaped to a nearby country not one thousands of kms away. They head here as we are a soft target and a preferred place to live not the next safest port of refuge.
> 
> ...




Well said Surly, it is a know fact that they cross many countries before making the final push onto Australia.  We are known as a soft country that has great social security and people smugglers advertise these facts to the would be refugee.

If it was up to the screaming left they would just throw open the doors and soon we would have 100's of thousands of these social refugees flooding into the country.  You only have to look at the UK to see how things have turned out after unchecked immigration.


----------



## Gspot (17 April 2009)

Helicopters and planes seaching and airlifting to hospitals in Perth etc for serious emergencies.
That is alot of dollars and resources spent on illegal immigrants that us good taxpayers fork out, while our aged Australian (taxpayers their whole life) must be asked to wait longer for their own surgery.
When the world is festering with so many humans and not much else, I have alot of other ways to spend our tax dollars.


----------



## Calliope (17 April 2009)

John Howard's statement; "We're going to decide who comes to Australia and the circumstances in which they come", was greeted with shock and horror by the powerful Australian migrant lobby groups.

Apparently their preference is that the people smugglers will decide who comes here, and the lobby groups will use all Australia's legal processes to ensure that when they get here, they will stay here.


----------



## Buster (17 April 2009)

Hey Noco,



noco said:


> Looks like children overboard again, only its real this time.




I think I've covered this many times before.. so, sorry to those that have had to listen to me waffle before..

Children overboard DID happen people.. It was real last time.. just talk to anyone that was serving upon HMAS ADELAIDE at the time.. 

And this is not the first time that the boat people have set their boats alight.. It's what they do. As soon as they see a Warrie on the horizon they go about disabling their vessel, often they hole it so it begins to sink, sometimes they torch the engine room.  Maritime law dictates that they must be assisted/rescued.  

A RAN Warship is considered 'Australian territory'.. so, they sink/torch their vessel, get rescued by a Warrie.. Bingo! They made it to Australia..

Consider this.. What would you do if you'd traveled half way round the globe (with your kids), there is a warship on the horizon steaming toward you, and the skipper of your vessel has just torched the engine room?

Dunno about you, but I'd tip you'd ditch the kids and yourself into the pi**  to escape the flames.. 

Don't take much imagination, does it?

Cheers,

Buster.


----------



## Buster (17 April 2009)

kitehigh said:


> If it was up to the screaming left they would just throw open the doors and soon we would have 100's of thousands of these social refugees flooding into the country.  You only have to look at the UK to see how things have turned out after unchecked immigration.




Ha ha.. No mate, you just need to look at WA.. I find it incredible the number of Brits I've met recently who have migrated here in order to escape the UK 'as the hordes have 'destroyed' the country'.. they all warn to get hot on immigration..

Shame Enoch (Powell) didn't get a run, things would be very different today I'm sure.. popular with the people, but the other pollies thought him too big for his boots and ousted him.. It seems everyone has 20/20 vision in hindsight..    

Check here for Enochs 'River of Blood' speech..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivers_of_Blood_speech

Regards,

Buster


----------



## robandcoll (17 April 2009)

Conveys of 10 ambulances with police escort to Royal Perth Hospital. The queues will be long and out the door tonight at emergency.  Footage seemed to only show adult males. Now why doesnt that surprise me.


----------



## Julia (17 April 2009)

Buster said:


> And this is not the first time that the boat people have set their boats alight.. It's what they do. As soon as they see a Warrie on the horizon they go about disabling their vessel, often they hole it so it begins to sink, sometimes they torch the engine room.  Maritime law dictates that they must be assisted/rescued.



Well, if they did indeed sabotage their vessel (and we don't actually know that yet, to be politically correct), they seem to have rather got it wrong, don't they, considering three are dead, two missing, and many so seriously injured that they are unlikely to survive.  And amongst those who will survive serious burns, they are pretty unlikely to recover to the extent they can enjoy a life in our oh so hospitable country.

In the meantime, I hope someone is keeping tabs on the expenses incurred in the rescue, the medical evacuations, the land transfers, and the extensive medical costs/ongoing rehabilitation.

And then there is the fact that some of our own Navy personnel have been injured in the course of doing their duty.

Meantime, Australians who have been on medical waiting lists for years will again be pushed further back in the queue.

It seems the Indonesians today foiled an apparent further attempt by people smugglers to send another boatload to Australia.  

Might be good to have an understanding with Indonesia that:

(a) asylum seekers departing Indonesian shores will on reaching Australian waters be despatched smartly back to Indonesia,

(b) wouldn't the Iraquis and Afghanis be more, um, comfortable in Indonesia anyway, given their religion and culture are the same?

Except, of course, that Indonesia doesn't offer the same level of medical care and social security that Australia does.


----------



## Buster (17 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Well, if they did indeed sabotage their vessel (and we don't actually know that yet, to be politically correct), they seem to have rather got it wrong, don't they, considering three are dead, two missing, and many so seriously injured that they are unlikely to survive.  And amongst those who will survive serious burns, they are pretty unlikely to recover to the extent they can enjoy a life in our oh so hospitable country.




Julia, I'll put my next years wage on it.. Not trying to be cocky, just trying to 'explain' how they think.. It's a very different mentality to what most of 'us' would consider 'rational'.. Hence they find themselves bobbing around in a leaky wreck (and thats another point, they don't use 'good' vessels for this sort of trip, as it is generally a one way deployment). Not sure how much time you've spent up top, but life is VERY cheap in many of the Asian countries.. OH&S isn't one of their strong points either..  

I've spent many many months, on more than a few occasions, 'hanging' around Xmas Is in support of operation RELEX.. I guess I'm speaking from experience.. Oddly some find it hard to accept..  It'll be interesting to see how the media twist it for some political gain, as they did with the children overboard.  Oh, and they may find this country more hospitable if they played by the rules..  



Julia said:


> then there is the fact that some of our own Navy personnel have been injured in the course of doing their duty.




Hmm.. not sure where you are going with that, but if you're suggesting that it is of little concern to me I can assure you that it is my foremost concern.. These Guys and Gals, sadly, don't get enough recognition for what they do day in day out.. Having spent in excess of 25 years in the RAN (and only recently discharged) I guess I can speak from experience on this too. I certainly hope our troops are not seriously hurt..

What annoys me the most is that 'real' warships stopped patrolling up north last Sep/Nov due to fuel costs.. The patrol boats took over (it could be argued that it was intended for them to commence operations as they came on line) however, they don't really have the capability to do it right.  No smears on the professionalism of these guys in any way, it's just a matter of numbers.  A FFH/FFG has a complement of 150 -200 troops, a Patrol boat is lucky to have a fifth of that number, so a boarding party taken from the crew of a patrol boat significantly affects the ability of that boat to function..

K Rudd has to answer some hard questions regarding the softening of policy in my opinion.. Hopefully the Australian populace will start asking them..

I may be mistaken, but after rereading you post a few times I cant help but feel from the 'tone' of your post you don't share my view and find my attitude less than 'tasteful'..   No drama's, we don't agree on this particular subject.. But we can still be friends, can't we.. 

Regards,

Buster


----------



## Julia (17 April 2009)

Buster said:


> Julia, I'll put my next years wage on it.. Not trying to be cocky, just trying to 'explain' how they think.. It's a very different mentality to what most of 'us' would consider 'rational'.. Hence they find themselves bobbing around in a leaky wreck (and thats another point, they don't use 'good' vessels for this sort of trip, as it is generally a one way deployment). Not sure how much time you've spent up top, but life is VERY cheap in many of the Asian countries.. OH&S isn't one of their strong points either..
> 
> I've spent many many months, on more than a few occasions, 'hanging' around Xmas Is in support of operation RELEX.. I guess I'm speaking from experience.. Oddly some find it hard to accept..  It'll be interesting to see how the media twist it for some political gain, as they did with the children overboard.  Oh, and they may find this country more hospitable if they played by the rules..
> 
> ...




Buster, I can't imagine why you'd imagine from my post that I don't agree with you.  Maybe you don't get my "tone" of irony, even sarcasm towards the motives of these so called asylum seekers.

And why on earth would you not think I have every concern for our Navy personnel???  That was the point of my mentioning them, as any injuries they may have sustained seem to have been given almost no media attention.

Maybe read my remarks again.  The Rudd government's softening of border protection/rights of asylum seekers has seen this considerable increase in boats coming to Australia.  I found it nauseating to listen to Rudd on "PM" this evening saying 'how tough he would be on these lowest of the low people smugglers'.

Yeah, right.


----------



## Buster (17 April 2009)

Hey Julia,



Julia said:


> Buster, I can't imagine why..




Oops..  PM sent..

Regards,

Buster.


----------



## Underpants Gnome (17 April 2009)

There are some truly disgusting attitudes in this thread. It's unbelievable how quick people are to judge and condemn people they've never met and know nothing about. But I guess it's easy to do that from your comfortable homes, where you can sit around and talk **** on forums and not have to think about the real world around you.

Buster - That's a great story. Obviously you and your HMAS Adelaide mates are privvy to information that wasn't made available during the senate inquiry. Maybe you should provide some evidence, then you might have some credibility instead of being just another crackpot on the internet ranting to anyone who'll listen.

Julia - The only reason they might feel uncomfortable is because of the ignorant, hateful locals they're sure to encounter over here. Pro tip: the culture in SE Asia and the Middle East is not 'the same'.

robandcoll - How about we hear the full story (from the beginning) from everyone on that boat, and from the people they're supposedly cutting in front of in the line, then decide who's more in need of medical treatment?

Get a clue







Disclaimer: not a KRudd supporter, it's just a very appropriate image


----------



## Buster (17 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> There are some truly disgusting attitudes in this thread. It's unbelievable how quick people are to judge and condemn people they've never met and know nothing about. But I guess it's easy to do that from your comfortable homes, where you can sit around and talk **** on forums and not have to think about the real world around you.




Almost as easy as keeping your head in the sand mate.. 



Underpants Gnome said:


> That's a great story. Obviously you and your HMAS Adelaide mates are privvy to information that wasn't made available during the senate inquiry. Maybe you should provide some evidence, then you might have some credibility instead of being just another crackpot on the internet ranting to anyone who'll listen.




Ha ha.. Not sure WHO the senate inquiry talked to, certainly not me or anyone else I know barring Norm (the skipper) and he got slapped into place real early in the piece for reasons unknown. Same bone with the NEWCASTLE incident, despite volunteering my information.. They only want hear what the want to hear mate..

I do know, from you know actually being there, that Alexander Downer was briefed, by fellow internet crackpots that actually witnessed little adults (aka children) bobbing around in the water, and witness to ADELAIDE crew members jumping over the side to aid said little adults, of the events sometime later.

Whilst your handing out all the advice matey, you might like to take some on yourself.. A 'Pro tip' that you can call your very own..   Join the Puss buddy, do some time up there and you just might find that the 'holier than thou' perspective may change..

Ahh, if only we could all live life though the little goggle box on the wall.. 

Regards,

Buster


----------



## robandcoll (18 April 2009)

> robandcoll - How about we hear the full story (from the beginning) from everyone on that boat, and from the people they're supposedly cutting in front of in the line, then decide who's more in need of medical treatment?




Underpants - Just  go down to emergency at any Perth hospital and you will understand what I mean. 

Its not a disgusting attitude - just saying it as I see it. Should be more of it.


----------



## Julia (18 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> Julia - The only reason they might feel uncomfortable is because of the ignorant, hateful locals they're sure to encounter over here. Pro tip: the culture in SE Asia and the Middle East is not 'the same'.



They are all Muslim countries.  Australia is (so far) not.


----------



## noco (18 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Buster, I can't imagine why you'd imagine from my post that I don't agree with you.  Maybe you don't get my "tone" of irony, even sarcasm towards the motives of these so called asylum seekers.
> 
> And why on earth would you not think I have every concern for our Navy personnel???  That was the point of my mentioning them, as any injuries they may have sustained seem to have been given almost no media attention.
> 
> ...




Julia, the Australian Federal Police warned KRUDD his Government had  gone too soft on boarder control montha ago and he has tkaen no notice.

He has the audacity to front up to the media this morning on Austar 601 stating these people smugglers should rot in hell. Isn't that the "pot callind the kettle Black" when he is the one at fault. He has blood on his hands.


----------



## Calliope (18 April 2009)

Mr Rudd's tirade against the people smugglers has a hollow ring to it. Our Border Protection people appear to be working hand-in-glove with the smugglers.

The smugglers bring the illegals into Australian waters and then our people take over and bring them to their destination. The smugglers advise their clients to disable their boat before being transferred to our boats to prevent them being turned around. But for some unknown reason we don't do that anyway. We take them where they want to  go.

Our Border Protection forces are not protecting our borders they are facilitating illegal entry. The illegals know that once they reach Australian  jurisdiction they very rarely get sent back.


----------



## Underpants Gnome (18 April 2009)

Morning all, I was expecting to have my head bitten off for those comments, seems I got off easy   Cheers.





Buster said:


> Almost as easy as keeping your head in the sand mate..




Sure, if keeping your head in the sand means attempting to understand both sides of the story to come up with a fair conclusion. Yeah I guess that's almost as easy as posting on a forum.




Buster said:


> Ha ha.. Not sure WHO the senate inquiry talked to, certainly not me or anyone else I know barring Norm (the skipper) and he got slapped into place real early in the piece for reasons unknown. Same bone with the NEWCASTLE incident, despite volunteering my information.. They only want hear what the want to hear mate..
> 
> I do know, from you know actually being there, that Alexander Downer was briefed, by fellow internet crackpots that actually witnessed little adults (aka children) bobbing around in the water, and witness to ADELAIDE crew members jumping over the side to aid said little adults, of the events sometime later.




You seem to have misunderstood - I asked for evidence, not more of the same stories. In any case it's moot, because even if what you're saying is 100% true it doesn't change my opinion on the matter. Unless you've been in such a dire and desperate situation yourself you're in no position to judge.



Buster said:


> Whilst your handing out all the advice matey, you might like to take some on yourself.. A 'Pro tip' that you can call your very own..   Join the Puss buddy, do some time up there and you just might find that the 'holier than thou' perspective may change..



Sorry, don't swing that way 




robandcoll said:


> Underpants - Just  go down to emergency at any Perth hospital and you will understand what I mean.
> 
> Its not a disgusting attitude - just saying it as I see it. Should be more of it.



The 'disgusting attitude' was more a general comment, not directed at you specifically. Perth's a bit far away for me to travel (~5 hours by plane then 10 years back in time ha ha) so you'll have to clue me in.



Julia said:


> They are all Muslim countries.  Australia is (so far) not.



You mentioned religion and culture, and I only commented on the culture part as I'm well aware that they're both Islamic countries. Australia (and Indonesia I think you'll find) has this crazy concept of religious freedom so we actually 'tolerate' people of any religion. Fancy that.

By and large people from all cultures are accepted here, except maybe by people operating under the misguided notion that we're being overrun by immigrants...


----------



## moXJO (18 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> By and large people from all cultures are accepted here, except maybe by people operating under the misguided notion that we're being overrun by immigrants...





Last time I checked our immigration levels are at the highest it has ever been. I am fine with people seeking a better life through legal channels. It actually benefits the country in the long run.

But illegal immigration is another story. And as far as the consequences of opening the flood gates. You don't have to look much further then London and peoples reactions there 

If however they retrained these people into productive members of Australian society. Using some of the vast amount of money they must spend on border control. I would probably have less of a problem. I don't doubt there are probably good people on these boats. But they won't be winning any fans by coming in the way they are.

Your first post went a bit far. Personally involved somehow?


----------



## Underpants Gnome (18 April 2009)

moXJO said:


> Last time I checked our immigration levels are at the highest it has ever been. I am fine with people seeking a better life through legal channels. It actually benefits the country in the long run.




That's a far cry from being 'overrun', which makes it sound like a plague or something.



moXJO said:


> But illegal immigration is another story. And as far as the consequences of opening the flood gates. You don't have to look much further then London and peoples reactions there




Did you click the link in my first post? Seeking asylum is not illegal.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...tralian/comments/asylum_seekers_not_illegal2/



moXJO said:


> If however they retrained these people into productive members of Australian society. Using some of the vast amount of money they must spend on border control. I would probably have less of a problem. I don't doubt there are probably good people on these boats. But they won't be winning any fans by coming in the way they are.



They're fighting to survive, not competing on Australian Idol.



moXJO said:


> Your first post went a bit far. Personally involved somehow?



No, not involved at all, and I don't think I went too far. Just not impressed with a bunch of people making ill-informed remarks, digging the boot into another group of people who don't have a voice here.

I don't mean to offend but I'm not going to hold back on expressing my views.

Cheers


----------



## Julia (18 April 2009)

Underpants you seem to be confusing illegal immigrants with migrants who go with the rules and apply to come here in an orderly fashion.

I don't think any of us have said we are against immigration - difference stops a country from becoming insular and complacent.

Of course we can understand the desire of Afghanis and Iraquis etc to escape their own countries, but why in particular Australia, probably one of the furthest away places they can aim for?

Why not simply stop once they reach Indonesia?

Btw I suspect you are not really interested in a genuine discussion but rather have set out to stir.


----------



## moXJO (18 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> Did you click the link in my first post? Seeking asylum is not illegal



Why not go through legal channels instead of paying their way to get smuggled in.





Underpants Gnome said:


> They're fighting to survive.



If that were the case why travel so far at such a great expense.  




Underpants Gnome said:


> No, not involved at all, and I don't think I went too far. Just not impressed with a bunch of people making ill-informed remarks, digging the boot into another group of people who don't have a voice here.
> 
> I don't mean to offend but I'm not going to hold back on expressing my views.
> 
> Cheers




Fair enough, we always need an opposing point of view to keep us in check.
But what is your personal opinion of what should be done when dealing with these boat people?


----------



## Underpants Gnome (18 April 2009)

Hi Julia,

I'm not sure why you think that; is it because I disagree with the general consensus here? I feel I've put more effort into qualifying my arguments than most in this thread so I'm almost a little bit insulted by that. But it's Saturday, I'm in a good mood, got a beer in my hand, so I'll let it slide 

Anyway, I don't know how many times I have to point out that there's nothing illegal about what these boat people have done.

"Under international law anyone is entitled to apply for refugee asylum if they are escaping persecution, and Australia, as a signatory to the 1951 United Nations Convention Regarding the Status of Refugees, has an obligation to consider their claim."

http://www.aeufederal.org.au/Campaigns/Myths.pdf

As for why they don't stop in Indonesia, it's because they're not able to gain lawful residence there, so they can't legally work and won't be afforded any human rights.

"Indonesia is not signatory to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees nor to the 1967 Protocol; neither does it have any legislative framework for the protection of refugees."

http://www.unhcr.org.au/UNHCR-protlegal-EPIndonesia.shtml

You might also be interested to know that Iraq and Pakistan take in many refugees from Afghanistan (http://www.ruralaustraliansforrefugees.org/). Of course the Taliban have strong links there so if they're out to get you you're probably not safe in those places, although I can't back that up with evidence to say that's part of the reason that some find their way here.

There is no queue to line up in because Australia has no diplomatic representation in the countries they're coming from (http://www.ruralaustraliansforrefugees.org/ - also mentioned in a link I posted earlier). I find your notion of leaving a war-torn country in an "orderly fashion" laughable.

Over 95% or arrivals come by air (http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090417-A-Crikey-index-Refugees-the-real-story.html), so why is there such concern for the tiny minority of boat arrivals?

Cheers.


----------



## derty (18 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> Over 95% or arrivals come by air (http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090417-A-Crikey-index-Refugees-the-real-story.html), so why is there such concern for the tiny minority of boat arrivals?.




That is very interesting. It all seems like a bit of a storm in a tea cup when you look at the figures. Just another media frenzy that has continued on from Howard's assimilation of Pauline Hanson's policies. No doubt Rudd, being the popularist he is, will see the outcry from the general public that we are being over run by boat people and continue the hard line to appease the masses. Hot air and politics.

The off shore detainment on the cost alone basis is a bad idea if you want to be highlighting the waste of taxpayer dollars, especially when looked at in comparison to the amount that fly into the country. At least the boat people are applying for asylum which is more than can be said for the almost 50,000 that had overstayed their visas in June 2005 and remained in the country ILLEGALLY. 

Interesting to see that during the whole Vietnamese boat people saga only 1000 people arrived by boat, which pales in comparison to the 137,000 Vietnamese that were allowed to immigrate officially through refugee camps. 

As I said, a storm in a tea cup.


----------



## Buster (18 April 2009)

Hey Undies..



Underpants Gnome said:


> Sure, if keeping your head in the sand means attempting to understand both sides of the story to come up with a fair conclusion. Yeah I guess that's almost as easy as posting on a forum.




I guess that what you really meant to say in your first post.. 



Underpants Gnome said:


> seem to have misunderstood - I asked for evidence, not more of the same stories.




Ha ha.. Oh well, if nothing else you've got something to tell the kids at bedtime tonight..   What sort of evidence do you expect to be produced within a forum like this?



Underpants Gnome said:


> Unless you've been in such a dire and desperate situation yourself you're in no position to judge.




No?  I think I do.. but, as an Internet Crackpot I cant produce the evidence required, so I guess we should just dismiss the notion.. BTW how do we produce judges then?  You know local court jusdge, supreme court etc.. do they have to commit numerous crimes in  in order for them to be qualified to judge?? 




Underpants Gnome said:


> Sorry, don't swing that way



  Sadly, I expected a response similar to this.. But, I guess someone has to endure the hardship of paper cuts and ink stains of the shirt pockets..  

Bottom line, I've no problem with race or culture.. I've visited many countries and cultures (as you would expect in the >25 years in the Navy) and have always been made extremely welcome by the general public.  This is a courtesy I'm more that happy to extend to our anyone that comes here.. via the correct channels of course..

I can certainly understand why people from some of these countries risk life and limb to escape their current environs.. but to accept blindly that they are all genuine asylum seekers is ridiculous.. its a carefully orchestrated business that allows some people to make swags (well, relative to their normal income anyway) of cash, and in many different countries..  It requires risk on the part of the 'paying' passengers, but also risk to others that have to become involved, as demonstrated very recently.

No matter what 'percentage' they make up it should be stopped, as it was when Howard took the hard line.. it came to a halt veeerry rapidly.  I supported the previous policy, and have no qualms admitting it, feel free to call me what you will..  Disgusting maybe in your book, but meh, I can live with that.. 

My view' based on 'my personal experience' is that many 'asylum seekers' are simply seeking a better way of life rather than escaping persecution of some type.. But then I cant produce any quantifiable evidence of that for you, so you should simply dismiss it as fallicy.. 

I guess the numbers will be sorted by the immigration mob, who, themselves,  will be hard pressed trying to determine who is who and what is what as they wont have much evidence to go on either..  The benefit of doubt will surely favour those arriving on the boat..

Anyone got the numbers from the TAMPA BAY by chance.. would be interesting to break them down..

Cheers,

Buster


----------



## kitehigh (18 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> There are some truly disgusting attitudes in this thread. It's unbelievable how quick people are to judge and condemn people they've never met and know nothing about. But I guess it's easy to do that from your comfortable homes, where you can sit around and talk **** on forums and not have to think about the real world around you.




Disgusting attitudes in your opinion.

By the way my attitude comes from personally dealing with these people so I think I can safely say I have more experience than you in this regard.

So keep believing in your own little dream world if it makes you sleep better at night.  I know my comments won't change your beliefs, but I take offense that you were quick to dismiss peoples attitudes off hand simply because they are opposite to your own.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 April 2009)

wiki link said:
			
		

> The lead international agency coordinating refugee protection is the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which counted *8,400,000 refugees worldwide* at the beginning of 2006.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee

I hate que jumpers and have little sympathy for them.


----------



## helicart (18 April 2009)

I am a health professional and have friends who worked in the detention centres, and I have cared for SAS troops who have worked in Afghanistan. 

The bleeding heart volvo socialists who would have every citizen from a third country come and live in Australia are a sad indictment of the ignorance and lack of education of so many Australians......and the matter is only compounded in our schools and universities where a Marxist agenda has highjacked common sense and real world information on such issues as illegal migrants. 

Some of my views follow. 

- for developed world middle class welfare state citizens to believe all people from around the world deserve a lifestyle like ours is naive in the extreme. 

- for the same citizens to want 3rd worlders to come and live in Australia is racist and patronizing......because this attitude holds that other nations, races, and cultures don't have the intelligence or determination to create a free market democracy in their own countries....and they all need to come and get some "she'll be right mate" "we're all equal here mate" Aussie happy go lucky air headed friendliness.....when in fact, this attitude reveals nothing more than how socially, financially, and globally ignorant its believers are.

- most Afghans do not have the wealth to afford the trip to Australia. The ones who can afford it are often of dubious character, many having played a significant role in opium production and distribution, and belong to Afghani mafia type organizations. 

- several of the illegal migrants that Leftists insist on calling asylum seekers, were carrying 15-20 kg of gold around their waists when initially detained by the RAN. That's an enormous amount of wealth for an Afghani.

- Australian bleeding hearts continue to make illogical presumptions in blindly accepting these people are "asylum seekers".......Afghanis have asylum and refuge as soon as they cross the boarder into Pakistan. If they choose to cross through 5 more countries and attempt an illegal entry into Australia, they are nothing but economic opportunist queue jumpers, presumably with criminal connections in Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

Many Australians need to put their lattes down, spend less money at the mall, and get over to the third world to see how the real world functions....they might also benefit from socializing with our defence forces.


----------



## Bobby (18 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I am a health professional and have friends who worked in the detention centres, and I have cared for SAS troops who have worked in Afghanistan.
> 
> The bleeding heart volvo socialists who would have every citizen from a third country come and live in Australia are a sad indictment of the ignorance and lack of education of so many Australians......and the matter is only compounded in our schools and universities where a Marxist agenda has highjacked common sense and real world information on such issues as illegal migrants.
> 
> ...




*Well said !*
look forward to more of your posts


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (18 April 2009)

Calliope said:


> Mr Rudd's tirade against the people smugglers has a hollow ring to it. Our Border Protection people appear to be working hand-in-glove with the smugglers.
> 
> The smugglers bring the illegals into Australian waters and then our people take over and bring them to their destination. The smugglers advise their clients to disable their boat before being transferred to our boats to prevent them being turned around. But for some unknown reason we don't do that anyway. We take them where they want to  go.
> 
> Our Border Protection forces are not protecting our borders they are facilitating illegal entry. The illegals know that once they reach Australian  jurisdiction they very rarely get sent back.




Some points have been raised about the facilitation of illegal immigration. 

The illegals fly to Indonesia and then take a boat across the water to the land of the leftie idealists who believe it is their charge to save the world. Not to say uncaring is the way, quite the contrary. What about the airlines? Without the illegal immigration racket going on how many afghani's would be visiting Indonesia? Seriously. Not many at all. 

Australians are being taken for a big ride.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (18 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I am a health professional and have friends who worked in the detention centres, and I have cared for SAS troops who have worked in Afghanistan.
> 
> The bleeding heart volvo socialists who would have every citizen from a third country come and live in Australia are a sad indictment of the ignorance and lack of education of so many Australians......and the matter is only compounded in our schools and universities where a Marxist agenda has highjacked common sense and real world information on such issues as illegal migrants.
> 
> ...




I agree, very well put indeed.


----------



## Bobby (18 April 2009)

Did you know Afghan's enjoy the torture of animals for entertainment legally , what sort of humans or society do this  ?  = Sicko's    .

Want proof bleeding hearts ?


----------



## Calliope (19 April 2009)

Our welcoming committee (aka Border Protection Command) is preparing to intercept another boatload of illegals and escort them to their destination. 

Prior to the explosion our people were doing everything to make the previous  arrivals feel at home;



> Commander Learoyd said that, up until he received the signal, the passengers in the vessel had not shown any signs of agitation.
> 
> "Absolutely not," he said. "I was in control of the vessel for approximately 24 hours. And during that time the people in that vessel were calm and appreciative of the support we provided, particularly during the evening when we provided close support. None of the people on board that vessel at the time showed any concern. We fed the people three meals and indeed fed them breakfast and gave them water in the morning.
> 
> "And the people on board at that time were all calm and very appreciative of our support."


----------



## Julia (19 April 2009)

Bobby said:


> Did you know Afghan's enjoy the torture of animals for entertainment legally , what sort of humans or society do this  ?  = Sicko's    .
> 
> Want proof bleeding hearts ?



Please don't post any pictures of animal torture.  Or descriptions of it.


----------



## pilots (19 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I am a health professional and have friends who worked in the detention centres, and I have cared for SAS troops who have worked in Afghanistan.
> 
> The bleeding heart volvo socialists who would have every citizen from a third country come and live in Australia are a sad indictment of the ignorance and lack of education of so many Australians......and the matter is only compounded in our schools and universities where a Marxist agenda has highjacked common sense and real world information on such issues as illegal migrants.
> 
> ...




Helilaet, O how the bleating harts will hate you, you must never tell the truth when talking about this.
Your post has to be one of the best I have read, well done.


----------



## Bobby (19 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Please don't post any pictures of animal torture.  Or descriptions of it.




Ok Julia .


----------



## Underpants Gnome (19 April 2009)

moXJO - I propose that for every person arriving here by boat, we throw one lawyer into the ocean. This solves 2 problems! Seriously though I don't know enough about the entire situation to make any suggestions.

Buster - you make some very good points. I'm not saying you have to back up every single statement, it'd just be nice to see *some* verifiable facts in this thread, and come on, you were making a pretty big statement 

We don't blindly accept that all are genuine asylum seekers. Don't we still have a mandatory detention policy?

kitehigh - That's interesting. In what capacity have you been involved?

So_Cynical - It's spelt 'queue' and the concept has been discussed many times in this thread already. Please try to keep up.

helicart - I'm a macchiato man. 'Marxist' - lol. I didn't say everyone deserves the lifestyle we have here, it'd just be nice to, you know, not be beaten for cheering too loud at the soccer, or wear jeans if you felt like it. Nice characterisation of Afghani migrants as wealthy criminals BTW. Not sure where you're getting that from, but please, feel free to continue spreading fear and hatred towards these people. Or maybe you could put down your XXXX and go visit the 3rd world for yourself?

Bobby - I look forward to more of *your* excellent posts! And, I also hear that Afghans eat babies! OMG!!1one


----------



## helicart (19 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> helicart - Nice characterisation of Afghani migrants as wealthy criminals BTW. Not sure where you're getting that from, but please, feel free to continue spreading fear and hatred towards these people. Or maybe you could put down your XXXX and go visit the 3rd world for yourself?




UG, 

what's your 3rd world experience? 

I told you where I am getting my info from. On what grounds do you base your strong opinion on the matter?

Am I spreading fear and hatred? I am not afraid and I don't hate Afghanis per se. Your view is typical of the leisure class whose reality is a hip and manicured or bitumened urbania....a view that doesn't have the subtlety or experience to discriminate between what is a genuine refugee crisis and economic opportunism. It is a view that divides people into either : 

- likeminded pollyanna feel good middle class soft bellied lounge lizards who are heavily burdened with guilt, inferiority, and existential angst for not having passed through adequate rites of passage into manhood.

- rednecks. 

I suggest you spend less time proving your manhood by shouting the loudest at the soccer and do something for Australia that requires true balls, and join the defence forces or army reserve. You mightn't go through life as afraid and apologetic then.


----------



## Julia (19 April 2009)

It was confirmed on ABC Radio News this evening that the asylum seekers did spread petrol over their vessel .
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/19/2546806.htm

Extract from the above article:



> Senior Government sources have confirmed to the ABC that asylum seekers on board a boat that exploded last week had doused the deck with petrol as a threatened act of sabotage.
> 
> The Government says it will not comment on what caused Thursday's fatal blast while a police investigation is underway.
> 
> But the ABC has been told the asylum seekers doused the boat in petrol to try and force the navy to let them land in Australia and not turn them back to Indonesia


----------



## kitehigh (20 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> moXJO - I propose that for every person arriving here by boat, we throw one lawyer into the ocean. This solves 2 problems! Seriously though I don't know enough about the entire situation to make any suggestions.




Great Idea, now we are talking..



Underpants Gnome said:


> We don't blindly accept that all are genuine asylum seekers. Don't we still have a mandatory detention policy?




Yes we do, but its not cheap to maintain and for every illegal that jumps the queue it cost more tax payer money.



Underpants Gnome said:


> kitehigh - That's interesting. In what capacity have you been involved?



Interdiction. 

Some good comments by Helicart, he/she obviously knows a lot also on this subject.


----------



## Underpants Gnome (20 April 2009)

Hey Heli,

Bugger all, to be honest. I've spent some time in central China and Indonesia (mostly Java) where 'some time' is measured in weeks. But I don't think that directly influences my opinion, and I reject the idea that having a personal involvement somehow makes you more 'right' - if anything it makes you more biased and unable to see the situation objectively.

You have a fantastic way with words (I'm not being sarcastic here), it's a pity you use that ability to sling insults based on tired old stereotypes. And that seems to be your entire argument.

But anyway, being as wise and worldy as you claim to be, would you care to explain to me why people with access to such enormous wealth* would go through an ordeal like this, instead of flying comfortably in on a 747?

* I think you may have messed up your calculations when you said 15-20kg of gold; according to http://rudhar.com/e-gold/en/watevalu.stm that would be very difficult to carry


----------



## robandcoll (20 April 2009)

thought I would drop back in with my two bobs worth again. UG - experience in life can not be replaced. I once lived in a coastal town in South of WA and in 1998 -99  some 100+ Afgan refugees were settled there and intergrated into the local community. At one stage some of them looked like being deported from Australia as their birthplace was questionable wether it was Afghanistan or Pakistan. Pakistan birth would not qualify as a refugee. There was some rallying in the community etc with church groups and people that had a devotion to keeping them in the community. My young bloke even went to school and played sport with the kids and hung out with them. Long story cut short. They gained their right and status to stay as citizens. Within a week most have moved on to the Eastern States.

They had the community support and employment but as soon as it was official they packed up and moved on.

*cavaet emptor*


----------



## Julia (20 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> would you care to explain to me why people with access to such enormous wealth* would go through an ordeal like this, instead of flying comfortably in on a 747?



This actually is a point I've wondered about.   Why don't the asylum seekers simply buy an air ticket to Australia ?   It wouldn't cost as much as the price they've been paying the smugglers.
Presumably it's because entry via airports is pretty closely scrutinised and they would be smartly turned around without (presumably) passports and visas?


----------



## Underpants Gnome (20 April 2009)

'evening robandcoll,

If anything, I think that kind of supports what I'm saying. Because of that experience your judgement might be clouded and maybe you're tarring all refugees with the same brush (whether you realise it or not). It's also possible they had plans to move on from the beginning but there would have been no point if there was a chance of being deported soon.

And that's what I took issue with in the first place - people making instant judgement calls based on their own prejudices before any of the facts were even made clear.

All this in a country that supposedly supports the principles of innocent until proven guilty, and a 'fair go' for all.

Julia - they'd probably have trouble with the metal detectors carrying all that gold!


----------



## pilots (20 April 2009)

Julia said:


> This actually is a point I've wondered about.   Why don't the asylum seekers simply buy an air ticket to Australia ?   It wouldn't cost as much as the price they've been paying the smugglers.
> Presumably it's because entry via airports is pretty closely scrutinised and they would be smartly turned around without (presumably) passports and visas?




This is my point, they are NOT ACCEPTABLE, I am retired and to see my tax's been spent on people thats wounds are self inflicted make my blood boil.


----------



## kitehigh (20 April 2009)

Julia said:


> This actually is a point I've wondered about.   Why don't the asylum seekers simply buy an air ticket to Australia ?   It wouldn't cost as much as the price they've been paying the smugglers.
> Presumably it's because entry via airports is pretty closely scrutinised and they would be smartly turned around without (presumably) passports and visas?




Because they have to organize a visa prior to arrival and they wouldn't be allowed to board the plane to Australia without one.  Australia has some of the toughest restrictions when it comes to issuing visa's especially if you are applying from a high risk country.  (eg Afghanistan,Pakistan and any other 3rd world country)


----------



## helicart (20 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> Hey Heli,
> 
> Bugger all, to be honest. I've spent some time in central China and Indonesia (mostly Java) where 'some time' is measured in weeks. But I don't think that directly influences my opinion, and I reject the idea that having a personal involvement somehow makes you more 'right' - if anything it makes you more biased and unable to see the situation objectively.
> 
> ...




I said 10-15kg UG. and the guys were wearing it in tailored cloth belts around their waists.......their heavy burden was such that it had worn away the skin around their iliac crests, anterior and posterior superior iliac spines, and they had developed ulcerated tropical infections on same. 


Anyway, I have a book to get back to writing......and need to prepare for NYSE opening.


----------



## disarray (20 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I said 10-15kg UG. and the guys were wearing it in tailored cloth belts around their waists.......their heavy burden was such that it had worn away the skin around their iliac crests, anterior and posterior superior iliac spines, and they had developed ulcerated tropical infections on same.




sounds like a good piracy opportunity going begging.


----------



## helicart (20 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I said 10-15kg UG. and the guys were wearing it in tailored cloth belts around their waists.......their heavy burden was such that it had worn away the skin around their iliac crests, anterior and posterior superior iliac spines, and they had developed ulcerated tropical infections on same.





sorry, I did say 15-20kg above. Some of the guys also wore figure of 8 shoulder harnesses.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> 'evening robandcoll,
> 
> If anything, I think that kind of supports what I'm saying. *Because of that experience your judgement might be clouded *and maybe you're tarring all refugees with the same brush (whether you realise it or not). It's also possible they had plans to move on from the beginning but there would have been no point if there was a chance of being deported soon.
> 
> ...




If you saw a Lion in the park and said "watchout it's dangerous" would you be biased and prejudiced to that animal?


----------



## Happy (21 April 2009)

> From ABC, 20 Feb. 09
> GOVT 'MAY BE LIABLE' FOR BOAT BLAST COMPENSATION
> 
> A human rights lawyer says the Federal Government could be liable to pay compensation to the families of those killed and injured after the Ashmore Reef asylum boat explosion.
> ...




I can only compare it to publican being responsible for patron’s intoxication and liable for damages drunk patron causes.

Well done Mr Barnes, Australia is country of milk and honey and must be milked to the max.


----------



## helicart (21 April 2009)

Happy said:


> I can only compare it to publican being responsible for patron’s intoxication and liable for damages drunk patron causes.
> 
> Well done Mr Barnes, Australia is country of milk and honey and must be milked to the max.




The Barnesy's of the world are only concerned about fuzzy rights......

their business is not to concern themselves with the fact that, for every active right, there is an active obligation imposed on others.

Whether that active obligation is just or not, is not Mr Barne's concern. 

Which is why the law is an ass.....especially when carried out by obese elites who couldn't tell you what the median wage is.


----------



## Calliope (21 April 2009)

helicart said:


> The Barnesy's of the world are only concerned about fuzzy rights......
> 
> their business is not to concern themselves with the fact that, for every active right, there is an active obligation imposed on others.
> 
> ...




Even without the human rights activists buying into it the Australian taxpayer is up for a huge bill to clean up the mess caused by these illegal immigrants, and after the wash up we will be left with a boatload of undesirables. 

All that money could be better spent on migrants who are already here who have worked hard to assimilate and are now among the first to lose their jobs in the recession.

Anyone watching Four Corners last night would have been touched by the plight of women who have lost their jobs in Woollongong. The majority of the women losing their jobs at Bonds clothing factory, came from Macedonia years ago. These women could speak very little English and clothing factory work answered their needs. They were good workers, they settled in well and the factory was like an extended family to them.

No they are out of work and have little prospect of finding work. In fact there is no work in Woollongong anyway. Mealy mouthed politicians visit and make promises they never keep.

Rudd's policy should be no more migrants (legal or illegal) until we have work for those already here.


----------



## helicart (21 April 2009)

Calliope said:


> Rudd's policy should be no more migrants (legal or illegal) until we have work for those already here.




what bugs me is Rudd's strongest trait is as a lying furtive propagandist.....
and he won't stop at gagging the navy and border patrol.....he and dkhed advisor Lachlan Harris will snow the media on what is going on up north.....


----------



## Calliope (21 April 2009)

We bend over backwards to make illegals happy, but there is no satisfying some people;


> Emergency crews called to violent protest at detention centre
> AAPApril 21, 2009 09:53am+-PrintEmailShare
> THE Department of Immigration and Citizenship still does not know what triggered a violent protest by illegal Chinese immigrants at Maribyrnong Immigration Detention Centre in Melbourne's west.
> About 20 detainees went on a destructive spree, wrecking furniture at the centre in Hampstead Road about 8pm (AEST) yesterday.
> ...




In the absence of any other complains we can only assume they were disappointed with the furniture. Which was probably made in China.


----------



## Taltan (21 April 2009)

Why don't we kill 2 birds with one stone and start a french styled Australian foreign legion. Anyone who likes can join our army for 5 years and then move to Australia. This would allow us to:-

1. To withdraw Australians from Iraq and Ahfganistan by replacing them with this new army. This would also destroy the will of the Taliban as they could no longer claim Western casualties. 
2. Increase our troop numbers to protect our borders
3. Ensure new immigrants have served Australia (5 years army service is definately worthy of citizenship)


----------



## kitehigh (21 April 2009)

Taltan said:


> Why don't we kill 2 birds with one stone and start a french styled Australian foreign legion. Anyone who likes can join our army for 5 years and then move to Australia. This would allow us to:-
> 
> 1. To withdraw Australians from Iraq and Ahfganistan by replacing them with this new army. This would also destroy the will of the Taliban as they could no longer claim Western casualties.
> 2. Increase our troop numbers to protect our borders
> 3. Ensure new immigrants have served Australia (5 years army service is definately worthy of citizenship)




Taltan if you were to ask any of the Special Forces troops serving in Afghanistan you would be hard pressed to find one that wants to them to be withdrawn.  Most of our troops have already been withdrawn from Iraq.

I think the US runs a similar program where if you sign up for the military you can fast track your citizenship.  But I am pretty sure they have to have a green card to start with.

Yes the lawyers like Barnesy's would be happy to milk the system dry all the while lining their own pockets.


----------



## Underpants Gnome (21 April 2009)

Hi helicart, don't have time to respond to your whole post but I will say you make far, far too many assumptions and generalisations about me. Oh, and IIRC I provided some factual sources on page 2 which is more than you've bothered to do. You skipped right over that and ranted about our Marxist education system instead . I wouldn't mind a source showing the link between asylum seekers and massive amounts of gold, wouldn't hurt your credibility.

Is it a book of fiction you're writing? Sorry couldn't resist   But if it's half as entertaining as your posts I'll buy a copy.

It's Snake Pliskin - LOL, that's a terrible analogy, are you a /b/tard by any chance?

That Barnsey guy can get ****ed. How the hell are the Navy/govt. liable for what happened? Compensation my ****.


----------



## helicart (21 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> Hi helicart, don't have time to respond to your whole post but I will say you make far, far too many assumptions and generalisations about me. Oh, and IIRC I provided some factual sources on page 2 which is more than you've bothered to do. You skipped right over that and ranted about our Marxist education system instead . I wouldn't mind a source showing the link between asylum seekers and massive amounts of gold, wouldn't hurt your credibility.




UG, when you grow up into a daddy gnome, and come out from the dark, underneath the mushroom you live under, you will realize there are people who think they know better than you....politicians, judges, boards of directors, public servants, etc etc.......they make laws to withhold information from you because they don't think you are mature and intelligent enough to "handle the truth"...........

the information I have passed on comes from people who would be put in jail for revealing it to the public via the media. but you discover this when you come out from under your familiar mushroom, and meet other gnomes with beards and wrinkles....gnomes from the defence forces who have served time in Afghanistan or Vietnam, or had first hand experience in detention camps.

So unfortunately, I am going to have to let you live with your smug preconceptions.....because I can't give you a convenient literature reference or a url to sway your mind from its comfortable closed mindset nor your bottom from its cushioned comfort in a cosy armchair.

Though I might add that if you want to play with the adults, then you read up on the history of the Hazara and other tribes within Afghanistan, as I asked in my previous post to you.



As for my book, it is written for you and your friends......... the title is 

*"How To Leave Home Without Your Mother"*


----------



## Julia (22 April 2009)

Do we have some sort of moral obligation towards asylum seekers from Iraq and Afghanistan, given our participation in the so called coalition of the willing which wreaked destruction on these countries?


----------



## helicart (22 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Do we have some sort of moral obligation towards asylum seekers from Iraq and Afghanistan, given our participation in the so called coalition of the willing which wreaked destruction on these countries?




I agree we shouldn't be there at all........like the US, we'll go insolvent if we try to sort out every country's problems. 

Anyone with strong emotions about Afghanistan and illegal migrants should read up on the place. There's been conflict there for at least a thousand years.  The Shiite Hazaras, orginally from Persia, get slapped around by the Sunnis any time scarcity of resources cycles upwards. There would be a lot less Hazara now if the West hadn't been involved.

The popn of Afghanistan is around 33 million....10% of those are Hazara....3.3 million....It is a bit naively gullible to believe 3.3. million Hazara can't look after the few hundred of their own who say they need asylum in Australia. 

Finally, why do you call them asylum seekers? They have asylum once they enter Pakistan and Iran, where there are established and successful Hazara communities. The ones that spend the big bucks coming over here are trying to fast track into a developed welfare state. they have a long history of trying to scam their way into developed nations where the currency is strong and pay good compared to home. Once in, they set up remittance economies, where they send a great portion of their under taxed black market  earnings back to Afghanistan. 

Some Hazara also get involved in developed nations as drug distributors for Afghanistan's primary export, heroin. 

Aussies are being snowed by liberal progressive soft headedness, in govt and in the media. To rely on the ABC, SBS, or commercial media, and even the education system, for your views on the world, is to become an uncritical mind controlled drone. Everyone will do themselves a favour by being conscious of that.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (22 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I agree we shouldn't be there at all........like the US, we'll go insolvent if we try to sort out every country's problems.
> 
> Anyone with strong emotions about Afghanistan and illegal migrants should read up on the place. There's been conflict there for at least a thousand years.  The Shiite Hazaras, orginally from Persia, get slapped around by the Sunnis any time scarcity of resources cycles upwards. There would be a lot less Hazara now if the West hadn't been involved.
> 
> ...



Another good post filled with facts. 

The western guilt syndrome is prevalent among those who should know better.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (22 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Do we have some sort of moral obligation towards asylum seekers from Iraq and Afghanistan, given our participation in the so called coalition of the willing which wreaked destruction on these countries?




Julia,

It's the internal bickering of religious zealots that has wreaked destruction in those countries for centuries.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (22 April 2009)

Underpants Gnome said:


> It's Snake Pliskin - LOL, that's a terrible analogy, are you a /b/tard by any chance?



Should Barnsey be taking up the Lion's case?

Feel free to elaborate on that abusive cowardice word you chose to unspell.


----------



## helicart (22 April 2009)

Snake, with a name like that, are you ex defence forces or did you just enjoy the movie?


----------



## badger41 (22 April 2009)

Reports indicate that the boat was diesel-powered (as most Asian boats are). As diesel fuel does not explode, and these people are said to have poured petrol around the boat, looks like some pre-planning went on .


----------



## nunthewiser (22 April 2009)

New bunch arrested nr Barrow island of WA coast today 


pity they didnt listen to that bloke that said blow em out the water the first time i say


----------



## Underpants Gnome (22 April 2009)

Snake - not an insult, nor a misspelling, but you answered my question. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.

Heli - sorry, didn't get to respond to your point about the Hazara. I've done quite a bit of reading about their history earlier this year, prompted by a book I read (can't remember the name, it was fiction) so while I'm by no means an expert, I'm not completely ignorant.


----------



## Julia (22 April 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Julia,
> 
> It's the internal bickering of religious zealots that has wreaked destruction in those countries for centuries.



Completely acknowledged, Snake.  And I am not a supporter of allowing these people into Australia.  But the bombing of both these countries has ruined infrastructure and fostered an increase amongst the warring factions plus suicide bombers etc.   Before GWB with our kind assistance bombed the hell out of Iraq (not sure about Afghanistan) they had a reasonably civilised life there if you avoided Saddam and his ilk.

Helicart:  why do I call them asylum seekers?  What would you like me to call them?  Illegal immigrants?  OK, I'm fine with that.  I probably just used the term asylum seekers because that is how they are most commonly referred to.  I don't think it's all that important.  If they feel they are religiously persecuted I'd imagine it's reasonably appropriate for them to 'seek asylum'.

I don't think we know yet the stated reasons for the currently hospitalised people's attempting to come here.  Religious persecution by the Taliban was stated by the bunch which were intercepted in Indonesia.

Are you saying they are not persecuted in Afghanistan?  (and please it would be good if you just answer the question without attempting to paint me as a left wing refugee advocate which I'm not.)   

My previous post raised the point that the invasion by the West of both Iraq and Afghanistan has caused the deterioration of living conditions in both countries.  Under Saddam, e.g. Iraquis had to tread carefully, but the country was largely functional, they had consistent electricity, water supply, education, etc and did not have to fear being blown up every time they left their homes.

The reasons offered by GWB - and supported by our own government at the time and apparently still supported with respect to Afghanistan - for invading both these countries is complete bull**** imo.   In Iraq there were no weapons of mass destruction - though this was later swept under the carpet and replaced by the apparent messianic zeal to bring democracy to the Middle East.

If Middle East countries are not attracted to democracy, then I don't think it's any of our business.   It was a completely spurious rationale for being over there.

I'm simply attempting to tread an objective path in this discussion.  I don't want these people in Australia, but at the same time I can appreciate what hell their lives must be in their home countries, and at least part of this misery has been contributed by the US, Australia et al.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Helicart:  why do I call them asylum seekers?  What would you like me to call them?  Illegal immigrants?  OK, I'm fine with that.  I probably just used the term asylum seekers because that is how they are most commonly referred to.  I don't think it's all that important.  If they feel they are religiously persecuted I'd imagine it's reasonably appropriate for them to 'seek asylum'.
> 
> Then you haven't appreciated anything I said above about the total fallacy of Afghanis travelling as far as Australia to claim asylum....and there's no real point in me engaging you further on the matter.
> 
> ...




The lives of most of the world are hell compared to yours Julia. 
 
Your opinions demonstrate a superficial populist anti American interpretation of recent history in Iraq and Afghanistan and the repressive violent threat of extremist Islamism, not only to non Islamist democracies, but to moderate Islamists everywhere. 

Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, Al Queda's ongoing destructive destablization of Iraq, Afghanistan's history (feudal kings, communist revolution, Russia's  muderous invasion, mujahideen and civil war, taliban and Sharia law) need to be understood to engage meaningfully on these matters.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (23 April 2009)

helicart said:


> Snake, with a name like that, are you ex defence forces or did you just enjoy the movie?



Helicart,
No, but I love the two movies which Snake Pliskin is in. It's a really cool name I think.


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 April 2009)

Can anyone on this thread confirm or deny that the refugees identity papers eg. passports, birth certificates etc... were not consumed by the fire resulting from the explosion on the vessel they were chartered on?


----------



## Julia (23 April 2009)

helicart said:


> The lives of most of the world are hell compared to yours Julia.




Could be a bit of an overstatement.




> Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, Al Queda's ongoing destructive destablization of Iraq, Afghanistan's history (feudal kings, communist revolution, Russia's  muderous invasion, mujahideen and civil war, taliban and Sharia law) need to be understood to engage meaningfully on these matters.



None of the above were the stated reasons for the presence of the 'coalition of the willing' in either country.  

Are you saying you supported the invasion of both countries, and likewise support our continued presence ?  Do you think the war in Afghanistan is winnable?


----------



## Calliope (23 April 2009)

The 32 Sri Lankan illegal immigrants apprehended off Barrow Island are just the forerunner of a deluge of Tamil Tigers fleeing from the Sri Lankan government forces. In Sri Lanka they are regarded as terrorists. 

I have little doubt that they will eventually be granted asylum here  rather than be returned to face justice. They will join the growing band of Tamil dissidents already here attempting to carry on their divisive activities.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Could be a bit of an overstatement.
> 
> Ask any defence force personnel who have been there.....
> 
> ...




You'll need to post an understanding of the political history of Afghanistan since at least 1980 before I'll debate the matter further with you. 

While you at it, you better report back on the consequences of extremist Islamic control of Afghanistan on Pakistan and control of its nuclear weaponry. The attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in India by extremist elements is the tip of an iceberg you would do well to get a grip on.


----------



## Julia (23 April 2009)

They were simple questions, helicart.  The history wasn't offered as any part of reason for invading either Afghanistan or Iraq.  With Iraq it was because they were declared to be holding weapons of mass destruction and with Afghanistan GWB asserted he was 'going to get Bin Laden'.

Btw, I'm not - as you previously asserted - anti-American.  Just anti-war.  So don't draw unreasonable conclusions.  Ditto asserting my life is better than most of the rest of the world.  You don't know anything about what my life is like.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

Julia said:


> They were simple questions, helicart.  The history wasn't offered as any part of reason for invading either Afghanistan or Iraq.  With Iraq it was because they were declared to be holding weapons of mass destruction and with Afghanistan GWB asserted he was 'going to get Bin Laden'.
> 
> Btw, I'm not - as you previously asserted - anti-American.  Just anti-war.  So don't draw unreasonable conclusions.  Ditto asserting my life is better than most of the rest of the world.  You don't know anything about what my life is like.




Re your life, sorry, I was unaware it is so bad you have been driven to seek political and economic asylum outside Australia.

So this anti-war stance you have....how many provisos do you have on that, or is it carte blanche? If carte blanche then you must also be anti-self defence in any form.....otherwise, the anti-war cliche is just a quaint but vacuous and lacking in substance identifier you label yourself with to gain favour with other dreamy idealists..... I am surprised you are at home on the puter rather than out throwing shoes at Anzacs this morning.

If Afghanistan was invaded to get one man, then why do your anti war liberal progressive heroes Obama, Rudd, Brown, and other socialist govts support an ongoing presence there? 

As I said, you need to understand the issues more deeply than portrayed by left leaning media whose intent is to lampoon conservatives, dumb down the issues, and get feel good 'head in the sand' govt into power.


----------



## derty (23 April 2009)

Helicart, you write with eloquence and it appears from experience. Some of your points I agree with, some I do not. 

However, your apparent necessity to demean through gross generalisations anyone who presents a view or question counter to your held ideologies is not necessary and lessens the value of what you have to say.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

derty said:


> Helicart, you write with eloquence and it appears from experience. Some of your points I agree with, some I do not.
> 
> However, your apparent necessity to demean through gross generalisations anyone who presents a view or question counter to your held ideologies is not necessary and lessens the value of what you have to say.




derty, thanks for the backhander. unfortunately, you are expressing a bias against me, in not demonstrating the subtlety to note my antagonists demean my posts by 
A: repetitively retorting to my elaborated and time intensive posts, with the same generalist PC rhetoric I get every night on the news.
B: the prolific use of non sequiturs, and other logical fallacies such as post hoc ergo propter hoc.

I am yet to see signs that those who wish to demean my views have bothered to deepen their understanding of issues they have strong opinions about, specifically Julia and GnomeBoy.

Well might you consider my posts demeaning to my antagonists, as I equally consider their posts demeaning and disrespectful to those we charge with responsibility for our national security (govt and the defence forces), who don't have the quaint convenient and delusional luxury of an anti-war anti-panty 'she'll be right mate, the future can sort itself out' Darwinian survival disadvantage.


----------



## Julia (23 April 2009)

Julia said:


> Do we have some sort of moral obligation towards asylum seekers from Iraq and Afghanistan, given our participation in the so called coalition of the willing which wreaked destruction on these countries?






helicart said:


> I agree we shouldn't be there at all........like the US, we'll go insolvent if we try to sort out every country's problems.



helicart, my apologies.   I overlooked that you had already answered the question.


----------



## mayk (23 April 2009)

helicart said:


> You'll need to post an understanding of the political history of Afghanistan since at least 1980 before I'll debate the matter further with you.
> 
> While you at it, you better report back on the consequences of extremist Islamic control of Afghanistan on Pakistan and control of its nuclear weaponry. The attack on the *Sri Lankan cricket team in India* by extremist elements is the tip of an iceberg you would do well to get a grip on.





Helicart, never let facts get in the way of a good story? 


P.S. I hope it is a technical error. I do enjoy your posts.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

mayk said:


> Helicart, never get facts get in the way of a good story?
> 
> 
> P.S. I hope it is a technical error. I do enjoy your posts.





Whoops....my mistake.....I confused attacks on the Mumbai Taj and the Sri Lankan Cricket team.


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

Some news on the latest from Afghanistan....even though Australia has troops over there, the Aust media rarely report the bigger picture. This story gives some credence to the desire of the Taliban and other extremist Islamics to take hold of Pakistan. This is a serious concern to  democracies especially India....because Al Queda and supporters would then have access to plutonium to make dirty bombs, let alone 55 nuclear warheads.... It has been suggested Iran has postponed its own nuclear weapon development in preference to fund subversive operations aimed at placing an Al Queda sympathetic govt in Pakistan.....

Meanwhile the Obama administration is funding Pakistan to the tune of 1.5B usd per year to take on these insurgents....ineffectively. 

A short quote by Hillary Clinton from one of the articles 
_
"Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, testifying for the first time before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the "existential threat" posed by Taliban extremists in Pakistan should not be underestimated, painting the picture of a nuclear-armed state that is in danger of collapsing.

"Pakistan poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of Americans and the world," said Clinton, who asserted that the Pakistani government is "basically abdicating to the Taliban and to the extremists" with the cease-fire, which was approved by Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari."_ 

And let's not forget Hilary is no conservative Hawk. 

If Pakistan falls, the world will change very very quickly. POG will go over 2000USD very quckly imho. and you can be certain there will be a Coalition of the Willing tax imposed on all democracies to deal with the situation....though if the west waits until Taliban sympathizers control military assets, it will be too late. The plutonium will be taken out to Iran and Afghanistan hideouts and the West will be at risk of terrorist attacks that will make 911 look like a Sunday picnic. 

I am sure some of you are aware of Nassim Taleb's Black Swan events.....this is a biggie.....Scroll back through your charts and have a look what happened to the indices on 11/9/01, and then again in the hours after the London transit bombings. 


http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/04/taliban_flex_muscles.php
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/04/23/us_fears_taliban_gains_in_pakistan/


----------



## helicart (23 April 2009)

Something to make Aussies think about the pitfalls of Muslim migrants coming to Australia in numbers too large to integrate in a timely manner. 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0327/p04s01-woeu.html


----------



## mayk (23 April 2009)

helicart said:


> Some news on the latest from Afghanistan....even though Australia has troops over there, the Aust media rarely report the bigger picture. This story gives some credence to the desire of the Taliban and other extremist Islamics to take hold of Pakistan. This is a serious concern to  democracies especially India....because Al Queda and supporters would then have access to plutonium to make dirty bombs, let alone 55 nuclear warheads.... It has been suggested Iran has postponed its own nuclear weapon development in preference to fund subversive operations aimed at placing an Al Queda sympathetic govt in Pakistan.....
> 
> Meanwhile the Obama administration is funding Pakistan to the tune of 1.5B usd per year to take on these insurgents....ineffectively.
> 
> ...




Hahaha!

This is paranoia! 

First, Pakistan's Nuclear technology is not based on Plutonium, a simple Google search can reveal that. But you were busy connoting a story to scare people, again never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Second, Taliban are not the existential threat as reported by the media. It is a strategy (although stupid) of making the west coughing up the money, so that it can prop up its army and bureaucracy, which is creating this whole charade.

Third, Iran and Pakistan are not friends, just neighbors, and that too bitter ones (again shiite and sunni rivalry at play here). 

Fourth, If in the end shiit does hit the fan, US must have planned to secure the nukes. Or buy them off. Seeing how greedy they are I don't think they would mind selling them off to US...

Lastly, Creating paranoid scenarios is the quickest way to try to shoot up the price of gold (at least in your head and justify hanging on to your GOLD) and trying to connect the dots might lead to only more dots, as not explained by Dr. Taleb.


----------



## mayk (23 April 2009)

helicart said:


> Something to make Aussies think about the pitfalls of Muslim migrants coming to Australia in numbers too large to integrate in a timely manner.
> 
> http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0327/p04s01-woeu.html



But you would agree to keep the Tamils?


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> Hahaha!
> 
> This is paranoia! Classic case of that too! Stop smoking what ever you are smoking...
> 
> ...




.........how much GOLD have I got MayK? 

for anyone else reading this, there's enough legitimate resources on the net confirming the threat is real.....even though MayK couldn't find them, and decided to make it up on the cannabis resin assisted fly.....


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> But you would agree to keep the Tamils?




I was happy pre Rudd Mayk.....and you're happy to put up all Hazara and Tamils at your place? as they're all persecuted in your books...maybe you and Barnesy can lease a P&O liner and help them over for visa and asylum seeker processing....save them the stress of dealing with Rudd's scumbag low life new pubic enemy no.1 'People Smugglers'

and hey, I hear Iran can't handle anymore than the 2 million afghanis refugees it has accepted over the years. better go fetch them too.....life would be a bitch there huh? better bring em out here..... I mean otherwise how are you going to retain your smug moral superiority and righteous indignation....


----------



## disarray (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> First, Pakistan's Nuclear technology is not based on Plutonium, a simple Google search can reveal that. But you were busy connoting a story to scare people, again never let the facts get in the way of a good story.




a simple google search begs to differ.



			
				wiki said:
			
		

> In the mid 1980s, Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission began to pursue Plutonium production capabilities. Consequently Pakistan built the 40-50 MW (megawatt, thermal) Khushab Research Reactor at Joharabad, and in April 1998, Pakistan announced that the nuclear reactor was operational.
> 
> In late 2006, the US Institute for Science and International Security released intelligence reports and imagery showing the construction of a new plutonium reactor at the Khushab nuclear site. The reactor is deemed to be large enough to produce enough plutonium to facilitate the creation of as much as "40 to 50 nuclear weapons a year." The New York Times carried the story with the insight that this would be Pakistan's third plutonium reactor, signalling a shift to dual-stream development, with Plutonium-based devices supplementing the nation's existing HEU stream to atomic warheads.






			
				mayk said:
			
		

> Second, Taliban are not the existential threat as reported by the media. It is a strategy (although stupid) of making the west coughing up the money, so that it can prop up its army and bureaucracy, which is creating this whole charade.




and you base this on what? 



			
				mayk said:
			
		

> Third, Iran and Pakistan are not friends, just neighbors, and that too bitter ones (again shiite and sunni rivalry at play here).




sunni and shia muslims will fight the infidel first before turning back upon each other. in 2007 iran and saudi arabia held a summit with ahmadinejad coming home and saying ...



			
				President Ahmadinejad of Iran said:
			
		

> "Both Iran and Saudi Arabia are aware of the enemies' conspiracies. We decided to take measures to confront such plots. Hopefully, this will strengthen Muslim countries against oppressive pressure by the imperialist front."






			
				mayk said:
			
		

> Fourth, If in the end shiit does hit the fan, US must have planned to secure the nukes. Or buy them off. Seeing how greedy they are I don't think they would mind selling them off to US...




i have heard of quite a few contingencies the US may have planned in the event of pakistan losing control of their nuclear arsenal. bunker buster strikes, suicide commando squads and so on. i'm sure israel would also let the nukes fly before they let the radicals get their hands on the pakistani stockpile.



			
				mayk said:
			
		

> Lastly, Creating paranoid scenarios is the quickest way to try to shoot up the price of gold (at least in your head and justify hanging on to your GOLD) and trying to connect the dots might lead to only more dots, as not explained by Dr. Taleb.




it doesn't seem overly paranoid to me. given the current state of the country pakistan may very well collapse, and given the current state of the global economy it may very well have severe economic repercussions.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> Taliban are not the existential threat as reported by the media. It is a strategy (although stupid) of making the west coughing up the money, so that it can prop up its army and bureaucracy, which is creating this whole charade.



Are you talking about the current regime in Afghanistan? Are they creating a charade to make the west believe in order to stay in the area? Is this what you mean? It 's not clear in your post what you were stating. 

If so, what about Paskistan?


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

disarray said:


> a simple google search begs to differ.




As per you selective "pick and choose" style of mis-information you must have forgotten to read that all nukes of Pakistan are based on HEU.



> The U.S.-based Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) estimates that Pakistan has built 24–48 (Highly Enriched Uranium) HEU-based nuclear warheads with HEU reserves for 30-52 additional warheads.[9][10]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

The nuclear plants used for power generation might be  based on Plutonium. But the simple fact is current available devices are based on Uranium, ask any expert on nuclear war heads and he will tell you that.



disarray said:


> and you base this on what?




Because of recent history. When they get a continuous supply of money as per Bush Administration given to Musharaf, there were not that much fuss. Now that there is no money coming in, they have created this "huge monster", which is about to engulf Pakistan. 

Are you saying that Pakistan Army with 7-largest military (by quantity not quality) in the world is not able to fight 5-20 thousand loosely connected Talibans? It is all about money and weapons they are trying to get passed through  the American congress, on the basis that if they don't do it Pakistan will collapse soon. It is all a media charade. You will know soon, when the money start tickling in it will all be "under-control".


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

helicart said:


> I was happy pre Rudd Mayk.....and you're happy to put up all Hazara and Tamils at your place? as they're all persecuted in your books...maybe you and Barnesy can lease a P&O liner and help them over for visa and asylum seeker processing....save them the stress of dealing with Rudd's scumbag low life new pubic enemy no.1 'People Smugglers'
> 
> and hey, I hear Iran can't handle anymore than the 2 million afghanis refugees it has accepted over the years. better go fetch them too.....life would be a bitch there huh? better bring em out here..... I mean otherwise how are you going to retain your smug moral superiority and righteous indignation....




No, I was just stress testing your thesis which you postulated at the start of this thread that Afghanis can seek Asylum in Pakistan or Iran, and only the rich can come here to take advantage of Australian system. I can see some reasoning here. 

But Tamils, according to you should be legitimate asylum cases, because of the current war in Sri Lanka and Australia being their first destination.

Of course I will support that any person coming to Australia should be tested as a valid asylum seeker, and if found otherwise should be sent back on his boat. No need to even fly them back, if they can come by boat, they can leave by boat...

Again, where have I stated anything about taking in the refugees? Oh yes in you paranoid world, anyone who disagrees with you must be supporting the intake. Typical "with us or against us" mentality, inherited from your spiritual leader.


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Are you talking about the current regime in Afghanistan? Are they creating a charade to make the west believe in order to stay in the area? Is this what you mean? It 's not clear in your post what you were stating.
> 
> If so, what about Paskistan?




I am talking about Pakistan, not Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a lost cause,  their tribal system is not ready for "freedom and democracy" exported by America. 

Give the Taliban some share in power and you might see peace there, at least for a short time. Till they again start fighting over a sheep (and I kid you not!). Employ the Iraq strategy of isolating the sunni insurgency from AQ and then give them some share in power and peace will follow. 


The problem with Afghanistan is that it is a land-locked  strategic country. Which can be used by America for keeping an eye on Pakistan, China, Russia, Iran and India. Now why would America ever want to leave such a strategic place...


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> Because of recent history. When they get a continuous supply of money as per Bush Administration given to Musharaf, there were not that much fuss. Now that there is no money coming in, they have created this "huge monster", which is about to engulf Pakistan.
> 
> Are you saying that Pakistan Army with 7-largest military (by quantity not quality) in the world is not able to fight 5-20 thousand loosely connected Talibans? It is all about money and weapons they are trying to get passed through  the American congress, on the basis that if they don't do it Pakistan will collapse soon. It is all a media charade. You will know soon, when the money start tickling in it will all be "under-control".




So your view is that the US, Japan, and all the other countries throwing money at Pakistan are too stupid to realize the game plays of the murderers of Benazir Bhutto.....the situation isn't as amenable to dumbing down to your quaint level of understanding Mayk. It isn't just a matter of 5-20k of loosely connected opium farmers....it is a struggle against manipulative  extremists who exploit the poor and desperate throughout Pakistan and the middle east, to carry out insurgent operations......this isn't just a war against the Taliban, it is a war against manipulators like Al Queda who manipulate the minds of young Muslims everywhere to die doing their bidding, and are discarded like pawns on a chess board.


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> Of course I will support that any person coming to Australia should be tested as a valid asylum seeker, and if found otherwise should be sent back on his boat. No need to even fly them back, if they can come by boat, they can leave by boat...
> 
> hahahahha....carte blanche slap the back of my head thick.....that's the thing with you smugly indignant holier than any God types....you haven't got the subtelty of mind to realize how totally unhinged and ungrounded your morally superior 'Alice in Hoochland' ideals are.
> 
> ...




where did you say anything about taking in the refugees????? how about reading your first paragraph above, you sad twisted little boy....now go back to futzing with your linux box and learning how to use google......hahahahha


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

helicart said:


> where did you say anything about taking in the refugees????? how about reading your first paragraph above, you sad twisted little boy....now go back to futzing with your linux box and learning how to use google......hahahahha




Well, in a linear mind, not clogged by the "Commies are about to get you" paranoia, sequence is important. On the timeline, you accused me of supporting the intake of refugees before that post. 

If there are laws and procedures in place and they are being followed, what is your problem? If you really want to do something, call your local MP and tell them about your dissatisfaction. Posting here won't win you any laurels.


P.S.  By taking in the refugees I meant without any proper legal work, in my previous post.


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

helicart said:


> So your view is that the US, Japan, and all the other countries throwing money at Pakistan are too stupid to realize the game plays of the murderers of Benazir Bhutto.....the situation isn't as amenable to dumbing down to your quaint level of understanding Mayk. It isn't just a matter of 5-20k of loosely connected opium farmers....it is a struggle against manipulative  extremists who exploit the poor and desperate throughout Pakistan and the middle east, to carry out insurgent operations......this isn't just a war against the Taliban, it is a war against manipulators like Al Queda who manipulate the minds of young Muslims everywhere to die doing their bidding, and are discarded like pawns on a chess board.





I agree the class struggle, and an intelligent manipulation by extremist elements for their political gain. But I also think a bigger game is played in that region than people realize. Pakistan is trying to exploit that situation to gain some military and economic favors, which is really stupid. Because as they say if you play with fire you get burned. Now the playing part seems to be over for Pakistan.

 A more proper approach to tackle AQ would be to form an UN elite force, capable of operating in any part of the world where AQ is present. It would make more sense than trying to occupy the whole region in the name of "providing security". As they say, whoever wants to trade freedom for security, deserves neither.


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> P.S.  By taking in the refugees I meant without any proper legal work, in my previous post.




hey, I have my own perpetual fresh daily supply of premium grade laurels.........no guilt driven sycophantic fawning for world adoration in this little black duck....

gawd, you just keep digging a deeper hole.....so how exactly does an Australian new graduate lawyer, under the paternal guidance of 'Barnsey, Dollar Signs in the Eyes Marr, and Associates', prove that a bloke from Afghanistan who just got off the boat, actually had his life threatened more than any of the 3.3 million Hazara who *weren't* compelled to leave town?????

Hey, maybe Rudd can employ a member of the Taliban to come over here and argue the case for the defence.......I can see it now.....Marr in all his melodramatic existential angst, shouting and spitting to the judge and jury, that this man's life is at risk if we unconscionably send him back to Afghanistan.....we can't do it in all good conscience your honour.....

The Taliban man will say, We never threatened to kill him.....we only threatened to beat him if he shaved..........

Marr will turn around and screaaammmmmm "Your Honour, how can we possibly let this man return to a country that does not grant the fundamental human right of shaving....I say this man before you, his wellbeing is at risk, if he is sent back to Afghanistan...."

hahahahhahahehehehehhehehohohoohoh.......I gotta go for a moment Mayk....point percy at the pommy porcelain, shake hands with the wife's best friend.....but thanks for the entertainment......and look forward to having a few more laughs.....

which Linux dist are you using btw?


----------



## mayk (24 April 2009)

helicart said:


> hey, I have my own perpetual fresh daily supply of premium grade laurels.........no guilt driven sycophantic fawning for world adoration in this little black duck....
> 
> gawd, you just keep digging a deeper hole.....so how exactly does an Australian new graduate lawyer, under the paternal guidance of 'Barnsey, Dollar Signs in the Eyes Marr, and Associates', prove that a bloke from Afghanistan who just got off the boat, actually had his life threatened more than any of the 3.3 million Hazara who *weren't* compelled to leave town?????
> 
> ...




First of all they cannot hire expensive lawyers, most of them would be the do-goody, hippy enough-space-for-all-of-us sort of fella you despise. So dollar in the eye question is out.

Second, let the judge decide. Stop being one.

Linux, mostly Fedora.


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

mayk said:


> First of all they cannot hire expensive lawyers, most of them would be the do-goody, hippy enough-space-for-all-of-us sort of fella you despise. So dollar in the eye question is out.
> 
> Second, let the judge decide. Stop being one.
> 
> Linux, mostly Fedora.




But Mayk, lawyers have native rat cunning....and not just any rat.....they've got more front than a fat black rat with a gold tooth.

The Marrs and Barnse's of the world aren't interested in being in court every day......nooooooo....what they want is to set a few precedents with a few court appearances, then get back to the office, set up a few asylum seeking tick the box templates, put em on the web, then bill the govt a grand or so for each application processed......it is all about passive income for ageing booomers like Marr.....that leaves him time for free advertising with regular contra appearances with the 'get on the bleeding heart bandwagon' brigade at SBS.....you know.....Tony Jones and Jenny Brockie

OK, I gotta meeting with my personal trainer.....be back this arvo...


----------



## -Bevo- (24 April 2009)

*Rudd's policies encourage would-be asylum seeker*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/24/2551337.htm

Hope Rudd has some spare beds at his place, sounds like the detention centres will be over flowing in no time.


----------



## helicart (24 April 2009)

-Bevo- said:


> *Rudd's policies encourage would-be asylum seeker*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/24/2551337.htm
> 
> Hope Rudd has some spare beds at his place, sounds like the detention centres will be over flowing in no time.




This highlights how Chairman Rude ties himself up in knots when he deceives the electorate in order to impose his dream, born of an inadequate personality, on us...

- firstly he acknowledges global instability is on the rise and that is increasing asylum seekers....

- then he acknowledges there is a rumour mill out there encouraging people to come to the land of milk, honey, and Rudd's welfare. 


Then, what does he do in the face of that......relaxes treatment of boat people and cuts funding of border security....hahahahahhaa.....

idiot....

I've hated the wax eater since he canned the Wolfdene Dam to appease greenies, and left SE Qld with a water crisis that will go on for decades..


----------

