# Is it the governments fault people are stuck in Beirut?



## twojacks28 (20 July 2006)

I have to say that I feel sorry for those who are stuck in the middle of this war. However what I am sick of hearing is all those Australians there complaining that we are not doing enough to bring them home. I have little sympathy for those who choose to holiday in dangerous places. Especially when the tension between these groups has been building up for years. The reason I am sick of hearing these people complaining is beacause we are on the other side of the earth. Have they not thought that it will takes days if not a week to get to them? Have they thought that it is difficult to suddenly fly planes and helicopters to an airport which has been blown up? 

Anyone else agree?


----------



## visual (20 July 2006)

Funny you should say that,because Lyndal Sachs Australias ambassador said almost exactly that,the government informs people of the danger of these places yet people go anyway and then they expect the government to rescue them,my interpretation. Also the other thing thats becoming apparent is our small size.Canada was able to gazumpe (?)Australia,as in the ferry that was double booked,presumably as a bigger country they got priority or were able to pay more who knows,so its not just distance that seems to be making a difference.


----------



## twojacks28 (20 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Funny you should say that,because Lyndal Sachs Australias ambassador said almost exactly that,the government informs people of the danger of these places yet people go anyway and then they expect the government to rescue them,my interpretation.Also the other thing thats becoming apparent is our small size.Canada was able to gazumpe (?)Australia,as in the ferry that was double booked,presumably as a bigger country they got priority or were able to pay more who knows,so its not just distance ,that seems to be making a difference.




thats funny I honestly didn't know he said that! I cant believe that so many of the stranded are saying that downer and howard should resign because there to slow to act! they are the stupid ones going to a country in the middle of a war!


----------



## visual (20 July 2006)

twojacks28 said:
			
		

> thats funny I honestly didn't know he said that! I cant believe that so many of the stranded are saying that downer and howard should resign because there to slow to act! they are the stupid ones going to a country in the middle of a war!




Two Jacks,Lyndal is a woman : 
anyway it was a very quick comment on ABC news ,not surprising many journalists didnt pick it up,you`d hardly want to be seen to be holding people responsable for their own actions.ooops,


----------



## twojacks28 (20 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Two Jacks,Lyndal is a woman :
> anyway it was a very quick comment on ABC news ,not surprising many journalists didnt pick it up,you`d hardly want to be seen to be holding people responsable for their own actions.ooops,




haha oops I actully meant woman. yeah I don't think anybody would want to be held responsible!


----------



## carmo (20 July 2006)

We need to look at dual citizenship, there should be no such thing.


----------



## sam76 (20 July 2006)

carmo said:
			
		

> We need to look at dual citizenship, there should be no such thing.




I like this idea.


----------



## twojacks28 (20 July 2006)

would some other peoplewho are voting like to comment on there reasons.


----------



## sam76 (20 July 2006)

twojacks28 said:
			
		

> would some other peoplewho are voting like to comment on there reasons.




you guys seem to be saying it pretty well. 

short answer; you holiday/visit relatives  in a dangerous place with simmering tensions and against government advice  - you have to expect delays if violence erupts.

no point risking more aussie lives to save a few idiots.


----------



## sam76 (20 July 2006)

sam76 said:
			
		

> you guys seem to be saying it pretty well.
> 
> short answer; you holiday/visit relatives  in a dangerous place with simmering tensions and against government advice  - you have to expect delays if violence erupts.
> 
> no point risking more aussie lives to save a few idiots.




Of course there are a few exceptions to this rule.


----------



## twojacks28 (20 July 2006)

sam76 said:
			
		

> you guys seem to be saying it pretty well.
> 
> short answer; you holiday/visit relatives  in a dangerous place with simmering tensions and against government advice  - you have to expect delays if violence erupts.
> 
> no point risking more aussie lives to save a few idiots.




hmm you said it very weel sam.

MIT would you like to comment on why you said it is the governments fault?


----------



## wayneL (20 July 2006)

carmo said:
			
		

> We need to look at dual citizenship, there should be no such thing.




why?


----------



## YELNATS (20 July 2006)

carmo said:
			
		

> We need to look at dual citizenship, there should be no such thing.




You are right, it's the crux of the problem. When they declare their allegiance to Australia, they should renounce all other citizenships. As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the Aust govt spending my hard-earned on rescuing these fools, without any mandate.

YN


----------



## wayneL (20 July 2006)

YELNATS said:
			
		

> You are right, it's the crux of the problem. When they declare their allegiance to Australia, they should renounce all other citizenships. As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the Aust govt spending my hard-earned on rescuing these fools, without any mandate.
> 
> YN




Hang on!

Is the government is being asked to rescue Australian visitors to Lebonon, or Australian citizens who are residents of Lebonon.

Let's get clear about that.


----------



## RodC (20 July 2006)

YELNATS said:
			
		

> You are right, it's the crux of the problem. When they declare their allegiance to Australia, they should renounce all other citizenships. As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the Aust govt spending my hard-earned on rescuing these fools, without any mandate.
> 
> YN




These people are also taxpayers. The Australian government is certainly not responsible for them being stuck there. but the government certainly does have a responsibility to do their best for Australians wherever they are.


----------



## warney (20 July 2006)

YELNATS said:
			
		

> You are right, it's the crux of the problem. When they declare their allegiance to Australia, they should renounce all other citizenships. As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the Aust govt spending my hard-earned on rescuing these fools, without any mandate.
> 
> YN



could the government be compensated through individuals travel insurance? 
this way if you choose to go into insecure enviroments insurance companys could cover this through increased premiums according to risk.


----------



## YELNATS (20 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Hang on!
> 
> Is the government is being asked to rescue Australian visitors to Lebonon, or Australian citizens who are residents of Lebonon.
> 
> Let's get clear about that.




Precisely, that's the problem, probably a bit of both, it's a grey area about as clear as mud. The govt can't win. 

Why should some people be able to claim multiple citizenship when the rest of us born and lived here all our lives cannot. It doesn't make sense. You're either 100% Aussie or you're not.

Regards. YN.


----------



## RodC (20 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Funny you should say that,because Lyndal Sachs Australias ambassador said almost exactly that,the government informs people of the danger of these places yet people go anyway and then they expect the government to rescue them,my interpretation. Also the other thing thats becoming apparent is our small size.Canada was able to gazumpe (?)Australia,as in the ferry that was double booked,presumably as a bigger country they got priority or were able to pay more who knows,so its not just distance that seems to be making a difference.




Size of the country is irrelevant. If Canada gazumped us it's because their diplomats/government did a better job than ours did.  

The US had 6 warships evacuating their citizens, if we couldn't get ours there when why couldn't our Govt get some space on the US (or British) ships? The "coalition of the willing" obviously doesn't count for much.


----------



## carmo (20 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> why?



Can I ask why there should be dual citizenship? And can you be loyal to two countries?


----------



## wayneL (20 July 2006)

carmo said:
			
		

> Can I ask why there should be dual citizenship? And can you be loyal to two countries?




Well, I haven't got an answer to my question yet, but I'm happy to answer.

I have thre citizenships

1/ Canadian - I was born there. No one can remove this as fact

2/ British _ Which I have a legal right to because of my ancestry. No one can remove this as a fact

3/ Australian - Because I live here. No one can revove this fact.

These are merely political divisions, and I am a human being first. Therefore my loyalty is to the the family of man, wherever they are.

I have received no particular favour from any of these countries, in excess to what I have contributed. Therefore my "loyalty" is contingent upon those countries to do the right thing in my eyes.

Now if someone can answer my question?


----------



## visual (20 July 2006)

RodC said:
			
		

> Size of the country is irrelevant. If Canada gazumped us it's because their diplomats/government did a better job than ours did.
> 
> The US had 6 warships evacuating their citizens, if we couldn't get ours there when why couldn't our Govt get some space on the US (or British) ships? The "coalition of the willing" obviously doesn't count for much.




Of course size matters,why do you think Australia relies so heavily on America.
In this instance perhaps the Canadians held more sway.Remember people dont actually know about Australia,this is the first thing you learn overseas. Maybe the Americans and the British actually wanted to save their own people first.Remember this is politics we are talking about.


----------



## Julia (20 July 2006)

I think much of the criticism directed at the Australian government has been unjust, and agree with those who have pointed out the foolhardiness of holidaying in an area which is fraught with tension at the best of times.
I wouldn't think of going to that part of the world in a fit.
Most of those I've seen on television complaining about their predicament appear to be Lebanese Australians who have gone back to visit their family and are now expecting the Australian government to not only assist their escape but that of their resident Lebanese relatives as well.  I absolutely cannot see that we should be responsible for the latter.

At the same time, I can only begin to imagine how fear, extremely hot temperatures, lack of water and food, and travelling long distances in uncomfortable conditions, possibly being bombed on the way, would prompt me to take a less than objective view of the situation and what I expected someone, anyone, to do about it.

We're pretty swift to complain about all the niggly things we don't like about living in Australia, but a few nights of looking at the television footage of this current conflict make me feel pretty grateful to be here.

Julia


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Well, I haven't got an answer to my question yet, but I'm happy to answer.
> 
> I have thre citizenships
> 
> ...





Sounds like a citizenship of convenience.

Yes we are humans, but one needs to fit in somewhere. 

The collective makes the country.


----------



## visual (21 July 2006)

YELNATS said:
			
		

> You are right, it's the crux of the problem. When they declare their allegiance to Australia, they should renounce all other citizenships. As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the Aust govt spending my hard-earned on rescuing these fools, without any mandate.
> 
> YN





Althought in all fairness Australia also had to rescue, presumably single citizenship Australians from Bali too.The same warning existed then as well.Sometimes you just cant protect people from themselves.


----------



## visual (21 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Well, I haven't got an answer to my question yet, but I'm happy to answer.
> 
> I have thre citizenships
> 
> ...




Wayne,please dont get all huffy  but should there be a war say in Australia,are you going to be one of these people who makes full use of his other citizenship.
Just curious,you know I love you.  : (just joking)


----------



## wayneL (21 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Wayne,please dont get all huffy  but should there be a war say in Australia,are you going to be one of these people who makes full use of his other citizenship.
> Just curious,you know I love you.  : (just joking)




It would depend on the war. If I believed in the justness of the war, of course I would defend Australia. However, our government decided to play international chess games, such as the situation in the Mid East, I would tell them to get stuffed.

However, if the west were embroiled in a serious war, it wouldn't matter for me as those three countries are all allies. To me there is no great cultural conflict between my citizenships, and that's something I am quite happy about as I would unlikely be conflicted in that regard.

Ultimately, to me, it is about principles, morals, and beliefs, rather than citizenship.

Cheers


----------



## carmo (21 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Well, I haven't got an answer to my question yet, but I'm happy to answer.
> 
> I have thre citizenships
> 
> ...



If Canada, Britian and Australia were in conflict who would you support? So my answer is you cannot be loyal to two countries.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 July 2006)

I like the fact that Australia allows dual citizenship. We don't make new citizens renounce loyalties to the countries they came from and why should we? It shows that we are grown up and decent. Renouncing loyalties would only affect decent people in any case as they are the ones who would be most hurt renouncing their, for instance, Irish loyalties. I don't think it achieves anything in any case as it is only words and won't stop some being upset should their home country be attacked. 

I personally would find it very hard for instance to have to renounce Australia to become a US citizen to gain a green card.   

I have no pity for those who reside in Australia, live for twenty years and never bother to get full Australian citizenship and cry when they have trouble getting back into Australia. This has happened to US and Polish friends of mine. 

I do get a little jealous however of the people who have dual passports, as I am a 6th generation Australian on all sides and so don't have any relatives to visit overseas, do not enjoy the abilty of speaking a second language and cannot enjoy the advantages of foreign passports (which are few because the Aussie passports appear to be welcome everywhere).


----------



## Mumbank (21 July 2006)

IMHO I do not think it is the Govt's fault people are stuck - heck they are there knowing the risks.  I do however think they should be doing all they can to get them out and to my mind they are doing just that.  However, every country is trying to evacuate their citizens and so the outbidding happens.  As it turned out that ferry never arrived anyway.  

I think in the heat of the moment and under the stress they are under people blame anyone (in fact if my ex-husband was there it would be MY fault!!) except themselves for their predicament.  

I think the Govt is doing all they can, but without the airport, it is always going to be difficult to evacuate people quickly and the limited resources for getting them out are going to go to the highest bidder and those with best contacts. 

Anyhow I hope they get out safely and think carefully about going back.

Does dual or multi citizenship mean you are entitled to Age Pensions from all governments (assuming you meet the criteria)?  There seems to be a lot of people who have Aussie pensions sent o/s and o/s pensions coming here from  various countries.    I certainly don't agree with this scenario.


----------



## wabbit (21 July 2006)

In my last job, my old boss had a concept that we always had to apply before making any decision; it was called the "60 Minutes Test"

The crux of the Rule was, "How will 60 Minutes report on your decision?"  No matter what you do, the media will always tell you, you are wrong, especially if you are the Government or work for the Government (like I used to).

--

We have heard it mentioned in a previous post that the people in the Middle East should have been given room in a US/UK warship.  Imagine the 60 Minutes report should an Australian warship that happened to be in the vicinity rescued some Indonesians (our closest neighbour) or some Kiwis (our worst enemies – go Wallabies) in lieu of some Australians who were left standing on the docks?  Imaging you are now a US citizen watching your space on your country's warship being taken up by an Aussie?  You cannot have it both ways.

Why are these people there in the first place?  The Government warnings about NON-ESSENTIAL to travel to this area of the world have been out for decades.  Should Australians choose to ignore these, the Government should relinquish their responsibility to go and get them out of their own stupidity.  Those people who have legitimate and pressing reasons to be in the area should be rescued by whatever means available.  Visiting your family is NOT essential travel; building hospitals, aid work, hostage negotiation and mediation may be considered as essential travel.  Even if we all agree on this, how will 60 Minutes report on it?  Australians left stranded?  How much will the Government spend to save idiots from themselves?  (Remember Tony Bullimore (sp?) and the French yachtswoman? )  After the fact, the media follow-up story will always be about how much it cost.

We have seen recently that another Australian was reporting missing/injured/? in the latest tsunami to hit Java, but what was he/she doing there?  There is still a travel advisory warning out for all of Indonesia.  What?  The terrorists won't strike a third time?  That's what people thought before, wasn't it?  Lightning doesn't strike twice?  Tsunamis only occur at Christmas?  Terrorist act or tsunamis, the warning said don't go there.  If the sign said, "HOT – Don't Touch!" and you touch it and get wet paint on your hands, who do you blame?  The painter for posting the wrong sign?  Either way, the sign said, "Don't Touch!"

We have seen them interviewed at the airport; says the holiday traveller, "I am not afraid of the trouble in (insert country here)" and then as soon as brown-stuff hits the rotating machinery, they are the first ones crying for the Government to spend buckets of money AND RISK THE LIVES OF THE RESCUERS to go and get them from their own stupidity.  Imagine this 60 Minutes report, "An airman was killed today when the chopper he was flying crashed in (country)…"  The first question in the 60 Minutes BOI will be, "Why were they there?"  Was the job they were doing really necessary?

There has also been discussion about dual (multi) citizenship.  Some people are hedging their bets on their "nationality" so when they go the British Consulate in (insert trouble spot) and they are closed, they can then go the Australian Consulate, then the (whatever) Consulate.  Being a multi-citizen might be likened to being multi-religious, hedging your bets so when you get to Heaven you have a better than even chance of going to the right one! (Apparently, there are many?!)  My partner holds two passports (much to my chagrin), one Oz and one Pom.  She says she keeps the Pommy passport because 1) it looks nicer than the Oz passport, and 2) when we travel she is more certain the UK Government can get her out of a 'pickle' than the GOA.

Citizenship, for many, is not just about loyalty to a country or flag; they see it as insurance.  Isn't it strange then, that in just about all the countries in the world that Australia allows dual-citizenship with, it is illegal to hold more than one insurance policy for the same insured property?  Wait until 60 Minutes figures that one out!

Someone else mentioned travel insurance, asking if the Government could be compensated to recover their costs of the rescue mission.  I ask, should it not be the insurance companies taking the risks to get the people out and burdening the costs in the first place?  That's what insurance is about isn't it?  Burdening responsibility for the insured?  Why isn't 60 Minutes going after the insurance companies who are more than willing to collect the money when all is going well and not pay it out or act or help out when the brown is on the fan?  Imagine the next 60 Minutes report when the Government sues the small travel insurance agency for the multi-millions it cost to recover the stranded folk from the overseas trouble spot?  "Government bullies!" will be the cry.  "Government beats up on small business"  You can imagine the viewing on the next Sunday night.

--

Now all this may seem a bit cynical, but it what was that kept me from making decisions that I couldn't justify.

We all know 60 Minutes is a reputable, fair and even broadcaster of all the facts from both sides of the argument, and never takes sides, so if you can be honest with yourself and answer all their questioning without looking like you have something to hide or be afraid of, then you have made a right decision.  If you cannot, or you work for the Government, then it doesn't matter what you do or what you have done, you will always be wrong in the 60 Minutes Test.

If more people took the time to perform this simple test before they ignored travel advisories and went to these troubled areas, or made other dubious decisions, there would be no need to have these discussions!

As my Dad used to tell me, "Stand up straight and be accountable!"

Caveat Emptor!


----------



## Hopefulone (21 July 2006)

The problem is that these people are supporters of the terrorist group which has caused this problem in the first place.  It was quiet interesting watching current affair and this dual nationals complaining about the Australian government not doing anything.  The best was to come when they openly supported the actions of Hezabolah as doing the right thing for them in attacking Israel.  

Where is the Lebanese Army in all this drama.  haven't seen one report of them doing anything.

Do thr right thing for the country and it will do the right thing for you.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 July 2006)

wabbit said:
			
		

> We all know 60 Minutes is a reputable, fair and even broadcaster of all the facts from both sides of the argument, and never takes sides.
> QUOTE]
> 
> Taking the piss right?


----------



## Rafa (21 July 2006)

Hopefulone said:
			
		

> Where is the Lebanese Army in all this drama.  haven't seen one report of them doing anything.
> 
> Do thr right thing for the country and it will do the right thing for you.




Don't think Lebanon have an army of note... Remember this is country that has only just rebuilt itself...


Is it the Govt's fault... Ofcourse NOT... I have the same opinon whether you are Shapelle Corby or the Bali 9.... I hope most of you others do too...


Dual Citizens.... before we bag it too much, the vast amount of dual citizens are Europeans, and in particular British... claiming pensions all over the place...

so, it not just a lebanese thing...!


----------



## wabbit (21 July 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Taking the piss right?




No Knobby I am deadly serious.... NOT!!!

AHAHAHAHAHA


The media (esp 60 seconds, thats about how long I watch for, it takes me that long to find the remote control) are about as accurate, honest and fair as taxation laws.  They suck!


----------



## mit (21 July 2006)

twojacks28 said:
			
		

> hmm you said it very weel sam.
> 
> MIT would you like to comment on why you said it is the governments fault?




Sorry I didn't didn't have time to comment yesterday. I think that for evacuating people from Lebanon the government is doing the best that they can. What I don't think the government is doing is to lean on the Israelies enough to stop shelling so the non combatants can get out of Lebanon. It seems as though they are asking politely rather than demanding. 

MIT


----------



## visual (21 July 2006)

Mit,we are but a small small country,whats Australia going to do if Australia demands and Israel says no.What,not trade with them,or what?
Australia is doing the best that it can,remember these people are using Australia to save themselves,today for the first time a lebanese stood there and said exactly that,lebanese first but lives in Australia,hmmmmm.Personally I would`ve got that guy and said sorry mate,no room,althought I`m not sure but he was speaking from the safety of Cyprus.


----------



## wayneL (21 July 2006)

carmo said:
			
		

> If Canada, Britian and Australia were in conflict who would you support? So my answer is you cannot be loyal to two countries.




carmo.

Question: What is this concept of "country" you are proposing we be loyal to?

e.g. What if I lived in a place called Trakehnen? At various times during the last 100 years, it has been part of Prussia, Germany and Poland. Which of these should I have been loyal to? 

What exactly is a country and why should we be loyal to it? In what way should we be loyal? What if I don't agree with my "country's" actions? What if my "country" had treated me poorly?

Cheers


----------



## mit (21 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Mit,we are but a small small country,whats Australia going to do if Australia demands and Israel says no.What,not trade with them,or what?
> Australia is doing the best that it can,remember these people are using Australia to save themselves,today for the first time a lebanese stood there and said exactly that,lebanese first but lives in Australia,hmmmmm.Personally I would`ve got that guy and said sorry mate,no room,althought I`m not sure but he was speaking from the safety of Cyprus.




Small country but it doesn't mean we can't speak out loud, maybe move our US chums if they don't think that 

To me to hear our Foreign Minister to say that Israel has the right to "Defend" itself by bombing another country that contains a lot of Australians tells me that Australians are expendable where politics are concerned. 

It's not just sourthern Lebanon that is being attacked, the Israelis lobbed a couple of rockets into the Christian area of Beruit because it thought some drilling equipment was some weaponry.  

There is a lot of generalising about Lebanese here, probably the same generalising that went on about Italians and Greeks 20 years ago. Most Lebanese I know are gentle people and are happy to call themselves Australian. 

If they go to Lebanon to visit family does that mean that they are traitors to Australia? 

MIT


----------



## wabbit (21 July 2006)

... and more to the story, from my local radio...

According to the local radio news, some Australians who have been safely evacuated to Turkey(?) want the Government to get them all the way to Australia!  (I thought everyone was taken to Cyprus?)

Its not enough that the Govenment manages to extracate these people from the trouble they got into themselves, but they now want us (the taxpayers) to pay for their entire trip home!

Hopefully the Govt will hold firm and charge them for the operation....

The online media is saying this : http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19862650-29277,00.html

Which media do we believe?


----------



## visual (21 July 2006)

mit said:
			
		

> Small country but it doesn't mean we can't speak out loud, maybe move our US chums if they don't think that
> 
> To me to hear our Foreign Minister to say that Israel has the right to "Defend" itself by bombing another country that contains a lot of Australians tells me that Australians are expendable where politics are concerned.
> 
> ...




Mit,I think you`ll find Italians and Greeks worked hard,and didnt try and change Australia according to what they thought was right,change it they did because they like other groups congregated and by sheer numbers alone they created change,such as in the food we eat,and how we socialise ect.They didnt impose their views on Australia.That there would be a lot of nice and gentle Lebanese is indisputable but however ther seems to be a bigger number who arent.Also not many lebanese seem to be saying too much against hesbollah ,but plenty about Australia.   ,when they go and visit their family they are informed of the danger in that area,so why go,it means that they know they could be facing problems,wheres their b plan?Israel is at war,with hesbollah ,whats to say that should they allow people to get out,their own kidnapped soldiers wouldnt be smuggled out,these are all things to consider.And by the way it has always being power equals size.Australia doesnt think Israel is doing anything wrong,nor her allies,so who to shout to?


----------



## twojacks28 (21 July 2006)

one of th emain problems is that australia doesn't have enough buying power with the ports and boats. the boats are being rented out to the people with the biggest pockets! 

Also mit what happens once australia has spoken out? they are not going to suddenly stop the bombings. it will do nothing if we ask them to stop


----------



## Buster (21 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Question: What is this concept of "country" you are proposing we be loyal to?
> 
> e.g. What if I lived in a place called Trakehnen? At various times during the last 100 years, it has been part of Prussia, Germany and Poland. Which of these should I have been loyal to?
> 
> ...




Dunno Wayne, I would have thought that you of all people (after all you have three citizenships apparently) would have the answer to your questions.. If not, what advantage do _you_ receive from having differing nationality citizenships???

I'd assume if one of your countries treated you poorly, you probably wouldn't give a rat’s bum about your allegiance to that flag.. and if you don't agree with (one of) your countries actions, renounce your citizenship.. 

IMHO Dual citizenship is simply 'fence sitting'..   

Now if these civilians have dual citizenship (and I would expect that to be a majority) then get the Lebanese government to look after them, surely they have just as much 'responsibility' as the Australian government.. 

I do, however, look forward to seeing all those 'Lebanese Australians' (specifically the Sydney Chapters) that are 'outraged' streaming into our diminishing Defence Force to do their bit.  Unleash them on the streets in their 'other' country, from what I saw of the recent rioting through the streets of Sydney they should be able to do a half decent job..  If nothing else it gives them a sensational opportunity to display their loyalties to both countries.. Hmmm.. Yeah, didn't think so.. 

I doubt many of you realise what commitments the Australian military have on their plate at the minute, but we are stretched to the limit (I believe we are over committed) and I think we simply don’t have the resources to send anything.. So, I wouldn't be holding my breath for a military option.. And I for one wouldn't agree with my countries actions if it decides to send me (as part of the Defence Force) to pick up these boobs, but hey I swore an oath when I became an Australian and when I joined the Defence Force, so I will have to go..

Hey, didn't you swear an Oath??

The government does have obligations to it's citizens, but I don't know what people expect with the current situation, it seems that they are certainly trying to resolve the problem & I can tell you there will be lots of people behind closed doors working long long hours..

Cheers,

Buster.


----------



## wayneL (21 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Hey, didn't you swear an Oath??




No, I am an Oz citizen by virtue of my parents becoming citizens. But I would have become a citizen anyway... what's this oath?


----------



## cuttlefish (21 July 2006)

RodC said:
			
		

> If Canada gazumped us it's because their diplomats/government did a better job than ours did.




that'd be a first   lol


----------



## Buster (22 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> No, I am an Oz citizen by virtue of my parents becoming citizens. But I would have become a citizen anyway... what's this oath?



Here's a copy of the one I took..

Oath of Allegiance.  I, A. B., renouncing all other allegiance, swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Australia, Her heirs and successors according to law, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Australia and fulfil my duties as an Australian citizen.

Cheers,

Buster


----------



## wayneL (22 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Here's a copy of the one I took..
> 
> Oath of Allegiance.  I, A. B., renouncing all other allegiance, swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Australia, Her heirs and successors according to law, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Australia and fulfil my duties as an Australian citizen.
> 
> ...




Right! So it is to the Queen and not country that we are loyal to?

Great, It's the same for each of the three countries I am a citizen of. So no potential conflict for me. That is actually quite comforting. 

Cheers


----------



## visual (22 July 2006)

Hmmmmmmmm now the government is bringing them home at our expense,I`m wondering will they have to sign some kind of agreement to be responsable for their own escape ,when eventually this happens again and they will need to be evacuated,again  

Talking about the dual citizens here.


----------



## blinkybill (23 July 2006)

No it's not the government's fault Aussies are stuck in Beirut but I do think that it is the governmnet's responsibility to get at least it's citizens out of there as quickly and as safely possible *at the government's expense*.

I have no problem with my taxes going towards helping to rescue other fellow citizens when they need it most.


----------



## dreilly (23 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Lyndal Sachs Australias ambassador said almost exactly that,the government informs people of the danger of these places yet people go anyway and then they expect the government to rescue them,my interpretation..




the last time the DFAT issued a warning against travel to lebanon was the end of the civil war, 1990. Your argument is flawed, though i doubt this will get through. 

i have family in lebanon at the moment. so i say to you people watching CNN on your big screen plasma's doling out your two bit advice to STFU.


----------



## visual (23 July 2006)

dreilly said:
			
		

> the last time the DFAT issued a warning against travel to lebanon was the end of the civil war, 1990. Your argument is flawed, though i doubt this will get through.
> 
> i have family in lebanon at the moment. so i say to you people watching CNN on your big screen plasma's doling out your two bit advice to STFU.




So the ambassador is lying  so is the government,except for you,you are the one telling the truth.
hezbollah is regarded as a terorrist organisation,who is know to operate among the people, how better to hide,they have been creating propblems for a long time,suicide bombings are the norm,but the government doesnt issue warnings for people heading to the south of lebanon,ok.you must be right


----------



## visual (23 July 2006)

dreilly said:
			
		

> the last time the DFAT issued a warning against travel to lebanon was the end of the civil war, 1990. Your argument is flawed, though i doubt this will get through.
> 
> i have family in lebanon at the moment. so i say to you people watching CNN on your big screen plasma's doling out your two bit advice to STFU.




http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Lebanon
Read that dreilly,
also take note of how women should behave in lebanon,and how we should behave so as not to cause offence,hmmm maybe lebanese who come here should take a leaf out of their own book when they come here or anywhere else,also note the the lebanese government doesn`t aknowledge dual citizenship,so to all who whinged get a grip and stop being ignorant,and be grateful .ok thats my rant for the night.


----------



## wayneL (23 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/Lebanon
> Read that dreilly,
> also take note of how women should behave in lebanon,and how we should behave so as not to cause offence,hmmm maybe lebanese who come here should take a leaf out of their own book when they come here or anywhere else,also note the the lebanese government doesn`t aknowledge dual citizenship,so to all who whinged get a grip and stop being ignorant,and be grateful .ok thats my rant for the night.




Visual,

That advise was only issued subsequent to the commencement of hostilities. We need to find out if there was a travel warning prior to July 14.


----------



## visual (23 July 2006)

This advice has been reviewed and reissued. It contains new information in the Summary and on Safety and Security: Civil Unrest/Political Tension 

Wayne please note this at the top of the warning,plus if you read all the way through you will see that the warning especially for women is a general one,also the advice for the dual nationalities is also what applies in general.
I agree it would have been good to find the one before this, however the impression I get is that the first bit has been updated but everything else is as it always has been.


----------



## wayneL (23 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> This advice has been reviewed and reissued. It contains new information in the Summary and on Safety and Security: Civil Unrest/Political Tension
> 
> Wayne please note this at the top of the warning,plus if you read all the way through you will see that the warning especially for women is a general one,also the advice for the dual nationalities is also what applies in general.
> I agree it would have been good to find the one before this, however the impression I get is that the first bit has been updated but everything else is as it always has been.




The advise is dated 23 July. This one is an update from July 14 I believe.

What was before that?


----------



## visual (23 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> The advise is dated 23 July. This one is an update from July 14 I believe.
> 
> What was before that?




Wayne as I said it would be good to be able to find all the old ones but I havent been able to find them,plus in the heading it clearly said which bits were updated so to my mind all the other bits stayed the same.


----------



## dreilly (24 July 2006)

you cant find them because they dont exist. I know this as i have collegues who work for DFAT. 

visual, get your facts right before you start on with one of your self righteous "rants" , that and pull your f....g head in.


----------



## visual (24 July 2006)

dreilly said:
			
		

> you cant find them because they dont exist. I know this as i have collegues who work for DFAT.
> 
> visual, get your facts right before you start on with one of your self righteous "rants" , that and pull your f....g head in.




dreilly,goodness you have collegues at dfat  yet you are totally ignorant,and on top of that you are quick to get personal and act like a total moron.Lebanon does not recognise dual citizenship did you friends at fdat tell you that? instead of raving you should get a life and learn some english,maybe even the ability to read and make you own decisions so that when the proverbial hits the fan we dont have to pay to get you and you family out of it.


----------



## visual (24 July 2006)

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/...s-rights/2006/07/23/1153593209660.html?page=2

A little off topic but still relevant I think.Lebanon is mentioned as well,


----------



## Happy (24 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Visual,
> 
> That advise was only issued subsequent to the commencement of hostilities. We need to find out if there was a travel warning prior to July 14.




My post has nothing to do with official warnings, but one could know from general media alone, that Israel was unsafe due to suicide bombers, and that Israel attacked militants with rockets, and there were civilian casualties.

So really this is no brainer, and anybody visiting region should take this into account and not go there or at least not expect everybody else pay for their lack of concern of their own safety.


----------



## Julia (24 July 2006)

Happy said:
			
		

> My post has nothing to do with official warnings, but one could know from general media alone, that Israel was unsafe due to suicide bombers, and that Israel attacked militants with rockets, and there were civilian casualties.
> 
> So really this is no brainer, and anybody visiting region should take this into account and not go there or at least not expect everybody else pay for their lack of concern of their own safety.




Agree entirely, Happy.  I am just so tired of people refusing to take responsibility for their own actions and then expecting the government and us as taxpayers to get them out of their predictable mess.

Julia


----------



## happytrader (24 July 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Agree entirely, Happy.  I am just so tired of people refusing to take responsibility for their own actions and then expecting the government and us as taxpayers to get them out of their predictable mess.
> 
> Julia




Thoroughly agree Happy and Julia, There are just too many children getting around in adult bodies looking around for pseudo mummies and daddies to make it better. Responsibility, whats that?

Cheers
Happytrader


----------



## Prospector (24 July 2006)

Hmm, have arrived back today from Sabah, a Malaysian state on Borneo.  Perfectly safe, idyllic, beachfront resorts.  Yet there is a DO NOT GO on the smarttraveller website!

So it isnt just a matter of saying the Govt says dont go - this time last year  bombs in London, yet who would say dont go!


----------



## twojacks28 (24 July 2006)

the fact is people if you go over there and ignore the warning signs because you think it wont happen to you then you are an idiot! why would you go to a place which is in the middle of a conflict? it frustrates me so much when people think that we will pay for there ticket home when they are the ignorant ones who went there in the first place!


----------



## Happy (24 July 2006)

twojacks28 said:
			
		

> the fact is people if you go over there and ignore the warning signs because you think it wont happen to you then you are an idiot! why would you go to a place which is in the middle of a conflict? it frustrates me so much when people think that we will pay for there ticket home when they are the ignorant ones who went there in the first place!






> From ABC 24 Jul 2006
> 
> John Howard says the people returning to Australian have only goodwill towards the Government.
> "I think some of the comments made last week by certain community leaders were totally unfair and totally unjustified, and completely over the top in their criticism of what the Australian Government was doing," Mr Howard said. ]




Well we did anyway.


----------



## Rafa (24 July 2006)

hmmm.... 

besides travelling locally... can't think of one place that is safe to travel...

I was in Portugal for the Europeans Championship (soccer) in 2004, month after the Madrid train bombings... plenty of travel advisories around... 


heck... i pay my taxes, I am entitled to get rescued if things hit the fan!

Now... I am more than happy to not pay taxes and contribute to society... and then I will be more than happy to make my own way out of a mess...


ok... that was jest....


what i am getting at is... you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.... calm down, take a few deep breaths and stop the whinging.... we are turning into a bunch of POMS here...! anyone would think we are living on the poverty line here... struggling to survive and have nothing to give...


As a general rule, i agree that everyone should take responsibility for their own actions.... however, i am happy to show some compassion and some humanity in this instance...


these people need our help to get out of a soup... they are visiting family and got caught up in a problem not of their making.... lets help them... nearly all of them had nothing but praise for the govt's efforts once they got back to Oz.... sure they might have been some complaints when that ferry was turned back... but now that they have had a time to think about, they recognise the govt did a good job... and are happy...

we should be happy too that they are back safe...




it seems the more we have, the more selfish we all become...


----------



## Prospector (24 July 2006)

twojacks28 said:
			
		

> the fact is people if you go over there and ignore the warning signs because you think it wont happen to you then you are an idiot! why would you go to a place which is in the middle of a conflict? it frustrates me so much when people think that we will pay for there ticket home when they are the ignorant ones who went there in the first place!




From what I heard today (assuming the media is correct : ) then the rescued people will be required to reimburse the government for their rescue.

And even if they werent required to pay, well, so what!  I'm with Rafa here - we cannot dictate where our taxes are spent, I would prefer not to pay the huge medical expenses of people who smoke!  We rescue stupid sailors who are ill equipped to sail around the world.  These people were visiting their family - gosh, if you were in London when the bombs went off, or Bali, etc etc - wouldnt you expect the Government to lend a hand?


----------



## The Mint Man (24 July 2006)

> Is it the governments fault people are stuck in Beirut?



theres nothing to discuss here IMO.
Simple answer is NO.

PS: and the poll agrees with me


----------



## The Mint Man (24 July 2006)

Prospector said:
			
		

> From what I heard today (assuming the media is correct : ) then the rescued people will be required to reimburse the government for their rescue.




got a link to this?
what I heared was - People that are Australians but have been living there may have to pay, the rest wont.


----------



## Prospector (24 July 2006)

I voted no on this but this doesnt mean that the Government shouldnt help out.  Is it the Government's fault that people are hurt in car crashes yet they pay their cost in Public Hospitals?  Is it the Government's fault that people smoke?  Is it the Government's fault that people need education?


----------



## Prospector (24 July 2006)

The Mint Man said:
			
		

> got a link to this?
> what I heared was - People that are Australians but have been living there may have to pay, the rest wont.




Nope - on the TV report.  Channel 10.


----------



## twojacks28 (24 July 2006)

I hear what your all saying but in a way this is different. we didnt know about london bombings before they happened. howevere this conflict in the middle east has been going on for ages and has recently become worse. What im not happy about is those that go over there during this period when they no there is conflict etc going on. I don't care about bali and london they are different situations.


----------



## Rafa (24 July 2006)

prospector is spot on... we bloody pay for a lot of idiots out there... and i don't beleive we should...!!! thats why mintman, the votes are in favour....

its not the govt's fault... but it doesnt me they shouldn't try to help...
but this is a humanitarian crisis... 

far out, you only need to see the faces of the rescued as they arrived back in sydney, and hear their praise for australia to see that this is doing a world of good...


hope they don't meet any of you grumpy lot demanding their money back...


----------



## visual (24 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> prospector is spot on... we bloody pay for a lot of idiots out there... and i don't beleive we should...!!! thats why mintman, the votes are in favour....
> 
> its not the govt's fault... but it doesnt me they shouldn't try to help...
> but this is a humanitarian crisis...
> ...





Rafa and yet this is the puzzling part,they are all grateful,yet after the  cronulla riots and at other times whenever even moderate muslims have been interviewed on television thay have always made clear their loyalty for Lebanon .And by the way  this is the part I cant get past,the fact that they are telling us what we want to hear.Look I`ve no problems with the humanitarian aspect of the operation,but a lot of these people were residents of Lebanon with an Australian citizenship ,and frankly I feel as though they are using Australia`s generosity in their time of need.
A part of me wants to believe that they will now accept that they just have to mingle and trust people,Muslims Christian Jews who cares .


----------



## Rafa (25 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Rafa and yet this is the puzzling part,they are all grateful,yet after the  cronulla riots and at other times whenever even moderate muslims have been interviewed on television thay have always made clear their loyalty for Lebanon .And by the way  this is the part I cant get past,the fact that they are telling us what we want to hear. Look I`ve no problems with the humanitarian aspect of the operation,but a lot of these people were residents of Lebanon with an Australian citizenship ,and frankly I feel as though they are using Australia`s generosity in their time of need.
> A part of me wants to believe that they will now accept that they just have to mingle and trust people,Muslims Christian Jews who cares .




Yes, i know what you saying Visual...
I have similar doubts...

However, to me the reaction of the of the people at the airport is more indicative of me than the comments that were being circulated in the media prior to the rescue... 

Its really hard to say whether the comments portrayed in the media (esp commercial media), regardless of what they are, are really representative of the general public... most of the time its just comments, without hearing the question the person commenting was asked in the first place... and blown out of all proportion!

Ones answer can vary significantly depending on the question asked...

Also, the media like beating up the Aus Govt... so off course they are going to look for controversial statements.... and times when they have stuffed up... Imagine if they didn't find a single person to complain about the delay in rescuing people... they would not have a story!

I don't trust commercial media at all....

That is why, to me the spontaneos responses for the returning folk said a lot more to me that the numerous media reports prior... They were asked clearly to critisise the Aust Govt at the airport... and not one of them did... !


To me, that suggests we have once again been suckered in by sensationalist media beat up!


----------



## Happy (25 July 2006)

Racism, second class citizenship, skin colour are trump cards often used to gag and intimidate.

Many fall for it and oblige.


----------



## The Mint Man (25 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> prospector is spot on... we bloody pay for a lot of idiots out there... and i don't beleive we should...!!! thats why mintman, the votes are in favour....
> 
> its not the govt's fault... but it doesnt me they shouldn't try to help...
> but this is a humanitarian crisis...
> ...



 
I hope that last comment (or the post in general) isnt directed towards Prospector or myself in particular. 
If so I suggest you read our post (above) back again. We were just repeating what we had heared through media sources. They were not statements nor were they put accross as such.


----------



## Rafa (25 July 2006)

The Mint Man said:
			
		

> I hope that last comment (or the post in general) isnt directed towards Prospector or myself in particular.





Certainly wasn't directed Prospector...
dunno about you tho     


Kidding... it was general statement... imagining the joy of being safely returned to Australia, being tempered by someone demanding they now pay up!


What my post said was that I agree that the govt shouldn’t be held responsible for the people who get themselves in trouble... but in this instance, i am happy for taxpayer dollars to be spent rescuing these people from what is an un-imaginable situation... mainly thru no fault of their own...  something i would never want to be in!

As prospector rightly said, and i quote...


> I voted no on this but this doesnt mean that the Government shouldnt help out. Is it the Government's fault that people are hurt in car crashes yet they pay their cost in Public Hospitals? Is it the Government's fault that people smoke? Is it the Government's fault that people need education?


----------



## The Mint Man (25 July 2006)

no probs.



> What my post said was that I agree that the govt shouldn’t be held responsible for the people who get themselves in trouble... but in this instance, i am happy for taxpayer dollars to be spent rescuing these people from what is an un-imaginable situation... mainly thru no fault of their own... something i would never want to be in!



yah, I agree with that.


----------



## Stan 101 (25 July 2006)

I see no problem with the government getting tourists to safety if it doesn't put other lives at risk. I think rightly that Australians on assignment in foreign countries should be transported to safety in times of trouble before all others, but for people heading to lands of uncertainty on their own free will should think themselves lucky they have been saved. There are no certainties in life; often it is unfair.

cheers,


----------



## Julia (25 July 2006)

We've all been discussing this in a completely objective and uninvolved way because we are not personally affected as far as I can see from reading this thread.

But then on tonight's news there was the heartbreaking sight of a woman being boarded onto a small rescue boat but there was no room for her children who were pictured (aged about 8 and 11) on the dock while she screamed from the boat.  I don't know how this happened, but it appeared she would have boarded the boat expecting her children to follow, but then was told there was no room and the boat took off leaving the children behind.

So much personal tragedy, loss of life and horrific injuries while the political game players watch in comfort which is devoid of personal risk.

Julia


----------



## visual (25 July 2006)

Julia,
wasn`t that heartbreaking,
I just couldnt believe my eyes those poor children left behind,I mean how much room could two little bodies take.


----------



## warney (25 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Julia,
> wasn`t that heartbreaking,
> I just couldnt believe my eyes those poor children left behind,I mean how much room could two little bodies take.



i didnt see it,would the kids be transported on the next boat out to the same ship? excuse my ignorance but i am interested


----------



## visual (26 July 2006)

warney said:
			
		

> i didnt see it,would the kids be transported on the next boat out to the same ship? excuse my ignorance but i am interested




They said ,they would try,but imagine the trauma especially for the younger boy he looked about 5 ,Julia thinks he was a little older but still,I cant even imagine what horror those two little boys wouldve felt at that moment.


----------



## warney (26 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> They said ,they would try,but imagine the trauma especially for the younger boy he looked about 5 ,Julia thinks he was a little older but still,I cant even imagine what horror those two little boys wouldve felt at that moment.



i know if i was the parent i would get back off the boat to be back with my kids,jump off and swim if i had to. i would not be separated unless they were going first,and even then it would be very hard. i feel for these people.


----------



## visual (26 July 2006)

Warney,I said exactly that to my husband,even though I dont know how to swim.


----------



## warney (26 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Warney,I said exactly that to my husband,even though I dont know how to swim.



believe me you would instinctively react as it was happenning to avoid being separated. i wonder if it was women and children first? or every man for himself?


----------



## Prospector (26 July 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> But then on tonight's news there was the heartbreaking sight of a woman being boarded onto a small rescue boat but there was no room for her children who were pictured (aged about 8 and 11) on the dock while she screamed from the boat.
> 
> Julia





If the situation is as you have described, then yes, this was heartbreaking and should not have happened.  But I got the impression that she was leaving behind adult 'children' - by her age, and while this is still very distressing, it does occur.  In fact, if they were children as you feel they were, then the 'authorities' should never have taken their mother.

Last night we saw Condeleeza beaming for the cameras around the table of Israeli then Palestine leaders.  OK, she has to be polite but her smile was much too big for the tragedy unfolding.


----------



## visual (26 July 2006)

Prospector,   Definetely the cameras were beaming on two lonely title boys on the edge of the port ,but now I`m thinking that maybe it was a set up by the media,they were the only people around there seemed no one around,I dont know I`m really hoping that no one in their right mind would leave two kids by themselves ,one of the little boys was absolutely distressed


----------



## Rafa (26 July 2006)

i watched the footage twice... SBS and ABC... 
The boys were left back with thier lebanese grand dad i beleive...


its still distressing, but certainly not as bad...


----------



## Julia (26 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> i watched the footage twice... SBS and ABC...
> The boys were left back with thier lebanese grand dad i beleive...
> 
> 
> its still distressing, but certainly not as bad...




Thanks for that, Rafa.  At least that removes the vision I've been having of these two little kids being simply left alone on the dock which is how it looked on the footage I saw.

But at the same time, there will in fact be many orphaned children in Lebanon now.  And then today the Israelis have killed several UN Observers who were at a clearly identified United Nations post.  How are they going to explain that to their fans?

Julia


----------



## Rafa (26 July 2006)

(this is more a post suited for the  WWIII....)
but to follow on your point Julia... 

I think we all know that the real villians in the peace are Iran / Syria...

If Israel were serious about securing their long term future, those are the countries that need to be tackled... and I am sure, they would have had the backing of most of the world, including the rest of the Arab states, to do that...

Israels activities in lebanon, including the red cross convoy bombing, now the UN  watchpost bombing... means they are not doing themselves any favours!

Same like Gorge Bush and the US.... the had all the support they could possibly want to rout out Al Quaeda.... But no, they go and attack IRAQ to install a democracy... All that has achieved is make Iran more powerfull...!

IDIOTS!!!

Maybe the US and Israel have a grand plan that will free the world of radicals.... maybe.... i certainly hope they do....  but at this point of time, i don't see it...


----------



## twojacks28 (27 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> (this is more a post suited for the  WWIII....)
> but to follow on your point Julia...
> 
> I think we all know that the real villians in the peace are Iran / Syria...
> ...




would you like to explain how iran is more powerful now as a result of iraq?


----------



## Rafa (27 July 2006)

here's my take on it... (i may be wrong...)

Iran and Iraq, were the two superpowers of the middle east so to speak...

Iran - Iraq waged a war against each other... Historical reasons... maybe Oil was involved, don't really know....  Iran backed by Russia, Iraq by the US... for control over the region...

Iraq (a majority shia but ruled by sunni's), along with Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc have always been a pro US axis... (atleast at a govt level)

Iran, Syria (majority sunni, but rules by shias)... formed the Russia supported axis in the middle east...


Together the balance held... Shia vs Sunni... Iran couldn't do much with Iraq sitting there....

With Iraq now being made a democracy.... have voted in, naturally, a Shia govt... who are pro Iran... Iran now, for all intents and purposes, have eradicated its natural enemy number 1.... Iraq....

Next stop on the rank... Israel...

Once Israel goes, then the rest of the Arab sunni kingdoms will be swallowed up pretty quickly...


Hence, i beleive they are now stronger...

Iran have have encouraged Hezbulla and Hamas to attack... probing at their only remaining powerful enemy... Israel, in my opinion have taken the bait...

Israel damaging Hezbulla is doing nothing to damamge Iran... Not only that, by their indicrimate slaugter of Lebanon, they are turning world opinion against them...

Iran's present rulers, in my opinion, are sitting back laughing...

Iran needs to sorted out ASAP!


----------



## visual (28 July 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> We've all been discussing this in a completely objective and uninvolved way because we are not personally affected as far as I can see from reading this thread.
> 
> But then on tonight's news there was the heartbreaking sight of a woman being boarded onto a small rescue boat but there was no room for her children who were pictured (aged about 8 and 11) on the dock while she screamed from the boat.  I don't know how this happened, but it appeared she would have boarded the boat expecting her children to follow, but then was told there was no room and the boat took off leaving the children behind.
> 
> ...




Julia,further to this story,
the boys are still waiting to be rescued,apparently the mother has got their passports so that means that they are turned away from the rescue boats because they dont have the right paperwork.
Today ABC reported that they were left behind with their father,the mother ended up in Denmark.Talk about a stuff up.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> here's my take on it... (i may be wrong...)
> 
> Iran and Iraq, were the two superpowers of the middle east so to speak...
> 
> ...




George's genius looks better in his plan to conquer Iraq. (not)


----------



## Knobby22 (28 July 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Julia,further to this story,
> the boys are still waiting to be rescued,apparently the mother has got their passports so that means that they are turned away from the rescue boats because they dont have the right paperwork.
> Today ABC reported that they were left behind with their father,the mother ended up in Denmark.Talk about a stuff up.




Thanks Mum!


----------



## Judd (28 July 2006)

Probably totally off topic but the other day was having a discussion with a friend of our family over a game of chess.  My family is catholic and his faith is muslim.

Result of discussion was that:

Given that jews and arabs both stem from the same genitic stock it is sad that it is essentially a religious war.

Both the Koran and the Tora - as does the Bible - preach tolerance of other religions.

All these faiths have Abraham as their source.

The conflict has elements of the Protestant/Catholics schisms

It is about a scramble for power without the least concern for people

And, bloody Hell, as if the general Lebonese/Israeli family gives a toss about anything except the welfare of their family and children.

PS:  My friend won the game with a discovered check.  Bugger.


----------



## Rafa (28 July 2006)

Judd said:
			
		

> It is about a scramble for power without the least concern for people
> 
> And, bloody Hell, as if the general Lebonese/Israeli family gives a toss about anything except the welfare of their family and children.





Spot on...
Got nothing to do with religion, every thing to do with human quest for power...
Its simply ancient tribes and sects fighting each other...


religion, families, children, ordinary people are all victims in war...

But they question is.... How do you stop these crazy warmongering zealots...???


----------



## wayneL (28 July 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> S
> But they question is.... How do you stop these crazy warmongering zealots...???




My opinion:

The average schlepper should become far more cynical of their own government. People are far to beholden to propaganda all dressed up as patriotism. 

We know politicians are pathological liars, yet believe every word they say in times of war. 

Ask the tough questions, keep the bastids honest!


----------



## Bobby (28 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> My opinion:
> 
> The average schlepper should become far more cynical of their own government. People are far to beholden to propaganda all dressed up as patriotism.
> 
> ...




Hello Wayne',

Schlepper , what a interesting choice of word, ( bait set    ).

Question for you, What happens to those that ask The Tough Questions in  lands that don't have democracy ?

Have fun
Bob.


----------



## Prospector (29 July 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Wayne',
> 
> Question for you, What happens to those that ask The Tough Questions in  lands that don't have democracy ?
> 
> Bob.




Or even in those countries that do have democracy.  Remember before the Iraq invasion there were demonstrations where hundreds of thousands of every day mums dads and grandparents marched in every state against invading Iraq?  Johhny called us ignorant and stupid.

When Johnny went to Ireland this year, several of the Politicians turned their backs on him or refused to be in Parliament when he addressed it because of his stance on Iraq.  He said those politican were exercising their freedom of speech    Pity he cant be as tolerant of his own people!

With all the focus on Israel at the moment the atrocities in Baghdad are being unreported yet 100 people a day are dying because of the civil war that 'people' refuse to call a civil war.  What will it take for the US to come clean about it all


----------



## Buster (30 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Right! So it is to the Queen and not country that we are loyal to?
> 
> Great, It's the same for each of the three countries I am a citizen of. So no potential conflict for me. That is actually quite comforting.



Hmmm.. You obviously failed to notice the numerous references to Australia..

It seems the the US have had a similar experience with thier Lebonese Americans.. check this blokes opinion out..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n149EkLUxY&NR

Cheers,

Buster


----------



## twojacks28 (30 July 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Wayne',
> 
> Schlepper , what a interesting choice of word, ( bait set    ).
> 
> ...





I can tell you what will happen to them! they will never be seen again!


----------



## wayneL (30 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Hmmm.. You obviously failed to notice the numerous references to Australia..
> 
> Buster




Dear Buster

This the oath you posted



> Oath of Allegiance. I, A. B., renouncing all other allegiance, swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Australia, Her heirs and successors according to law, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Australia and fulfil my duties as an Australian citizen.




I would like to inform you that I in fact do uphold, not only the letter of the law, but also the spirit of the law. I also try to be a model citizen, by trying only to edify the community I live in.

I am a better citizen than many who are born here.

Your implication to the contrary is absolutely disgraceful.


----------



## wayneL (30 July 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Wayne',
> 
> Schlepper , what a interesting choice of word, ( bait set    ).




Quite intentional, if not obtuse.  <edit: there are differing meanings to this word depending where you come from. In SoCal where I learnt the word, it means an average working person >



			
				Bobby said:
			
		

> Question for you, What happens to those that ask The Tough Questions in  lands that don't have democracy ?
> 
> Have fun
> Bob.




It is a good question. It is also a good question even IN a democracy. With our new "terrorist" legislation in place, it is now possible for the Australian governent to legaly make people "disappear", as twojacks has pointed out is the case in other countries. 

The government need only apply a liberal definition to the word "sedition" (the definition of which remains purposefully nebulous) and anyone asking tough questions could start disappearing in our very own democracy.

A good citizen should be pro-active in discussing and challenging laws, to determine whether those laws are good or bad, or need re-writing/improving.

Most "citizens" only seem to be focused on making as much money as possible for themselves and F### everyone else.

BTW, there has been only one attempt at describing what a country is; what is it that we have alliegence to and why. 

That attempt was described as "the collective". (a bit vague to have an alliegence to as far as I am concerned)

Any others?


----------



## Buster (30 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> I would like to inform you that I in fact do uphold, not only the letter of the law, but also the spirit of the law. I also try to be a model citizen, by trying only to edify the community I live in.



Congrats!! I take it you agree that numerous references to Australia do exist within the Oath of Allegience [posted previously].. Your reply suggested that you were having a bit of trouble recognising the word 'Australia' within it.. 

In regards to edifying the community, do you mean uplifting and improving the physical community in which you live or the enlightenment you provide this forum community when you post your words of wisdom?



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> I am a better citizen than many who are born here.



Again, good for you matey, and if it's any consolation, so am I..  However, I fail to see, as I have already pointed out, how you can maintain various 'citizenships' given the differing requirements of each.. I experienced this mindset some time ago in the US.. I'm an African American, I'm an Irish American.. no you're not mate, you are one or the other.. 

A classic case just recently with the 'tradegy' of the Australian citizen killed whilst serving in the defence force of another country..  Why, I wonder, was he not serving in our Defence force if he is truley a citizen of Australia?

I liken it to a posting I had a little while back now, where the ship's messes were divided into smoking and non smoking messes.. I posted on as a non smoker, however there were no bunks available in the non smoking mess so I had to live in the smokers mess.  Why?  Because even the smokers didn't want to live in the smoke stinking mess, so they lived in the non smokers mess

Australia is a great place to live, so we'll live here and take what we can get.. Go home to the motherland and serve my country, but it's a bit of sheitehole so I'll be heading back after fulfilling my duty to my 'real' flag. 

I'm wondering if you think that our government should bear some responsibility for his death?  Should his parents be compensated by the Australian taxpayer?

God forbid he should take responibility for his actions..  And same bone the Australian 'tourists' who expected to be evacuated from Lebanon at anybody (citizens of convienience) elses expense..



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Your implication to the contrary is absolutely disgraceful.




Laughable.. Perhaps Wayne you would be good enough to quote the said ' absolutely disgraceful implications' I have made in regards to your moral/legal standing and character.

Have a good lie down before responding..

Cheers,

Buster.


----------



## wayneL (30 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Congrats!! I take it you agree that numerous references to Australia do exist within the Oath of Allegience [posted previously].. Your reply suggested that you were having a bit of trouble recognising the word 'Australia' within it..
> 
> In regards to edifying the community, do you mean uplifting and improving the physical community in which you live or the enlightenment you provide this forum community when you post your words of wisdom?
> 
> ...




I don't need to lie down. I am not agitated, as you clearly are. And I don't need to point out the obvious aspersion you cast.... oh, and satire requires a certain skill to pull off successfully, otherwise it just looks like dummy spitting and/or thinly veiled personal insults.

I don't know why you bring the guy killed over there in to arguement? What has that got to do with me? Though I agree that he is responsible for his own actions. Nothing to do with Oz at all.

As I have asked twice now, what is this concept of country? You are undoubtedly, judging by your comment, a nationalist. You should be very clear on this.

Is it the government?
The community?
The Land?
The culture?
The economy?
All of the above?

I don't think many people are very clear on this. 

As I pointed out before, I have legitimate inalienable links to the countries I have citizenships to. I am citizens of those other countries automatically. Should I renounce those citizenships? I have no arguement with those countries. 

It all seems a bit tribalistic this "alliegence" business. 

Another question. Why do people get so polarized and vitriolic in political discussions? It's just discussion ferchrissake. I suggest it is because most peoples views are not there own. They are programmed into place by propaganda from vested interestes. Hence the aggro when views are questioned; they cannot be backed up with any sort of logic.

Anyways, its all just a bit of banter.

Cheers


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (30 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Hmmm.. You obviously failed to notice the numerous references to Australia..
> 
> It seems the the US have had a similar experience with thier Lebonese Americans.. check this blokes opinion out..
> 
> ...




Buster 
Good link there!


----------



## Buster (30 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> I don't need to lie down. I am not agitated, as you clearly are. And I don't need to point out the obvious aspersion you cast.... oh, and satire requires a certain skill to pull off successfully, otherwise it just looks like dummy spitting and/or thinly veiled personal insults.



Please, point out the obvious aspersion I cast.. I'm starting to wonder you know about the 'if the shoe fits' theory.. It seems you're not entirely comfortable with this discussion and you are reading a little too much into previous comments..  Appreciate you are able to recognise satire/sarcasm.. 



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> I don't know why you bring the guy killed over there in to arguement? What has that got to do with me? Though I agree that he is responsible for his own actions. Nothing to do with Oz at all.



Well, I thought it illustrated nicely the fact that you cannot sit on the fence.. It seems this fellow, despite being an Australian citizen, felt his allegiance was to his homeland..  I don't agree that as a citizen for one country you can fight for another..  By doing so you make a decision as to where your allegiance lies..

What has that got to do with you?  Other than the fact that you have multiple citizenships, not a lot. I wasn't aware that this thread was about you.. 



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> As I have asked twice now, what is this concept of country?  You should be very clear on this.
> 
> Is it the government?
> The community?
> ...



IMHO, It has to be all of the above plus some.. clear enough..  



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> As I pointed out before, I have legitimate inalienable links to the countries I have citizenships to. I am citizens of those other countries automatically. Should I renounce those citizenships? I have no arguement with those countries.



And as already posted, I do not question the fact that you have multiple citizenships.. I do have to wonder though why you cannot answer the above question that you have posed.  If not, what is the point of having more than one..  what advantage do you receive from having differing nationality citizenships, other than demanding action from a government if another is unable to help you out? 



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> You are undoubtedly, judging by your comment, a nationalist.



Been called many things over the years, however that's a first.. (and the first time I've ever laughed out loud whilst reading a forum post..)



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> It all seems a bit tribalistic this "alliegence" business.



Yep, I'm tipping that would be the intent..



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Another question. Why do people get so polarized and vitriolic in political discussions?



Umm.. probably because it's my opinion (be it right or wrong) and I am one, therefore one opinion so it follows that it surely must be polarised.. In regards to people getting vitriolic during political discussions, sorry mate, can't help you out there.. I've not noticed.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> I suggest it is because most peoples views are not there own. They are programmed into place by propaganda from vested interestes.



Rest assured Wayne my views are most definitely mine.. I'm particularly good at reading between the lines, so to speak..



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Hence the aggro when views are questioned; they cannot be backed up with any sort of logic. ?



Where's the Aggro? And where are the questioned views?? You have not yet responded to a single question that I have posted, rather you simply issue general and dismissive statements.  



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Anyways, its all just a bit of banter.



Ahhh, it is.. it is.. I'd suggest, if you wish to discuss this further, going to PM as it seems to be straying from topic.

Cheers

Buster


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> Ahhh, it is.. it is.. I'd suggest, if you wish to discuss this further, going to PM as it seems to be straying from topic.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Buster




You wish to save yourself from further embarrassment?



> nationalist
> 
> adj : devotion to the interests or culture of a particular nation including promoting the interests of one country over those of others; "nationalist aspirations"; "minor nationalistic differences" [syn: nationalistic] n 1: one who loves and defends his or her country [syn: patriot] 2: an advocate of national independence of or a strong national government




You deny this?/\

As for being dismissive? err.... yes, guilty as charged. I get that way when irrelevancies are introduced to a discussion.

We have different views on citizenship. It seems those views may never converge. So be it. 

As to the question of the advantage of having multiple citizenships? I am free to live in any of those counties that I choose. Also I am free to live anywhere within the EU. Why shouldn't I retain that advantage?

I might live in the EU for a while.... see the world. is there anything criminal in that?

Ciao


----------



## Buster (31 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> You wish to save yourself from further embarrassment?
> 
> As for being dismissive? err.... yes, guilty as charged. I get that way when irrelevancies are introduced to a discussion.



Hmmm.. Further illustrates my point that you seem unwilling to respond to the questions that I have posted, rather you simply issue general and dismissive statements. Amusingly, you then maintain my posts are irrelevant. Somewhat ironic don't you think?



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> You deny this?
> 
> nationalist
> 
> adj : devotion to the interests or culture of a particular nation including promoting the interests of one country over those of others; "nationalist aspirations"; "minor nationalistic differences" [syn: nationalistic] n 1: one who loves and defends his or her country [syn: patriot] 2: an advocate of national independence of or a strong national government



Wayne, it's a definition.. what's to deny?

If you are asking I apply the definition to myself and consider if I conform then you got me, specifically with 'defends his or her country'.. As I'm a member of the Australian Defence Force I guess that would be a given.. I'm a nationalist!!

Althoughhhh.. 'promoting the interests of one country over those of others' is an interesting one.. As a member of Australian military I have served in the Middle East ejecting Iraq from Kuwait in the early 90's, and then protected Iraq assets from dissidents in more recent times in order for the country to get back on its feet. So am I for or against Iraq?  I have also served in East Timor and the Solomon's during their times of 'need'..  Certainly not promoting Australia's interest over theirs..  

And then 'an advocate of national independence'.. as you already know, I took an Oath to the 'Queen of Australia' amongst other things.. I would have thought a 'nationalist' would seek the end of the monarchy in Australia??

I don't think I could be 'labelled' anything in particular just quietly.. But you decide..



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> We have different views on citizenship. It seems those views may never converge. So be it.



Yup..



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> As to the question of the advantage of having multiple citizenships? I am free to live in any of those counties that I choose. Also I am free to live anywhere within the EU. Why shouldn't I retain that advantage?
> 
> I might live in the EU for a while.... see the world. is there anything criminal in that?



Alrighty then, we seem to be getting somewhere. Your concept of citizenship is wether or not you hold a particular passport and where you can live if you so choose.. nothing to do with the government/community/land/culture/economy or all of these points.

I don't suppose there is any point asking you to quote where I suggested that there was anything 'criminal' associated with multiple citizenships.. you've responded to so few of my questions it's fair to say not.

BTW, you don't live in the EU, you simply exist.. The only place you can truly 'Live' is Australia..  (read it again Wayne, you may detect the subtle humour..)

Anyway, not wishing to embarrass myself further, and getting back to the 'Non Wayne or Buster' topic, have a look at this article  

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/07/30/1154198005962.html

Ask yourself if he has Dual Citizenship. Looks like he is keen to 'programme' peoples opinions with his very own 'propaganda' which I would suggest he has a 'vested interest'..  See Wayne, you've enlightened me, indeed you continue to edify this community.

Cheers,

Buster.


----------



## canny (31 July 2006)

I can't be bothered to read all the posts as I'm getting tired!!! (and it looks like it might be a **** fight in here!!)
Just thought you may be interested to read this excerpt from a Canadian Newspaper about their 'citizens' in Lebanon.

I'll add that I tthink our Government has done very well under the circumstances, and our Lebanese Australians or Australian tourists that we got out have been quite admirable in their praise of the government.

(Below May also be a reason on the travel thread that I said I wasn't too concerned about visiting USA/ Canada!!)




> *The Edmonton Journal*
> Aw, the boat ride was too long, was it? And you say it was too hot?
> There was no doctor on board, either? And the departure was
> delayed. And the port was chaotic. And too little food and water had been laid in.
> ...


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2006)

Buster said:
			
		

> BTW, you don't live in the EU, you simply exist.. The only place you can truly 'Live' is Australia..  (read it again Wayne, you may detect the subtle humour..)




Your goal was to amuse, you have indeed done so. It is good that we amuse each other. 

Thank you for clarifying your position further. I understand your views better and accept them for what they are.

Still divergent with mine, but there you go. I wonder if mine are likewise accepted?



			
				Buster said:
			
		

> ....that you seem unwilling to respond to the questions that I have posted




Not unwilling at all. But I note not many of my questions are ever answered either. I don't expect answers most times. Many questions are designed to make people think, rather that elicit an actual response. It is often difficult to detect which is which.

If you have questions you particularly would like a respose to, I'll always respond to questions politely asked.

Cheers


----------



## Buster (31 July 2006)

canny said:
			
		

> I can't be bothered to read all the posts as I'm getting tired!!! (and it looks like it might be a **** fight in here!!).



Yeah, sorry about that.. I did try to take it offline, but alas..



			
				canny said:
			
		

> Just thought you may be interested to read this excerpt from a Canadian Newspaper about their 'citizens' in Lebanon.



A good read.. Interestingly, it seems very few of the lebonese are indeed 'just' lebonese.. convieniently they appear to be Lebonese Australian/Canadian/British..  

I particularly like the paragraph



> And yes it does matter that many of those complaining are Canadians of convenience. They hold Canadian passports, but have dual citizenship in Lebanon and have not been much interested in Canada for years until their real home country started getting dangerous.



My sentiments exactly..



			
				canny said:
			
		

> I'll add that I tthink our Government has done very well under the circumstances...



Concur..

Regards,

Buster.


----------



## Bobby (31 July 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Quite intentional, if not obtuse.  <edit: there are differing meanings to this word depending where you come from. In SoCal where I learnt the word, it means an average working person >
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hello Wayne,

I thought your reply had merit , I do differ from you, but do like variance   

As for your last question : alliegence starts with family then tribes , clans etc,
On & on till borders are recognized .

Your inner quest maybe is what alliegence should or will effect you, at what point or why it could do so, or why it can.  

Take care
Bob.


----------



## nelly (1 August 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Wayne,
> 
> I thought your reply had merit , I do differ from you, but do like variance
> 
> ...




4 wot it is worth [which shouldn't b more than a few pence] I AGREE family is the most u consider...then stretch it from there...as far as the HEART goes...then reality!!!!
cheerful always...


----------

