Asylum immigrants - Green Light

[Knobby22]

As I said in an earlier post, there is a difference between turning people back to from whence they came as opposed to sending them to a new destination.
They entered Indonesia of their own free will, to send them back isn't disadvataging them. Just emphasising the futility of going there in the first place.
It is completely different to taking them in and shipping them off to somewhere else. I'm a bit suprised with your take on it Julia, if you fail to see the difference, most of the electorate will.

A flawed Malaysia deal would surely be better than losing more lives.

Abbott could say he would change it as soon as he was elected to a scheme of his choosing.

As with the Greens, they like Abbott can say they have not shifted and their "principles" are intact.

When the next boat sinks and children die, the politicians whether they be Green, Red or Blue can cry as much as they like but nothing will wipe the blood from their hands.

I have nothing but disgust for them and all those who defend them.

Only Oakshott and Xenaphon will have clean consciousnesses.

 

[MrBurns]

I'm fed up with the media running the line "both sides of politics" are to blame.

All the Libs want is to send people where there is some protection, is that a big ask ?

Gilard wont agree because that would be a backdown and she blames Abbott ?????

What a farce, she wasted a whole day yesterday putting a proposition to the Senate she KNEW wouldn't pass just so she could try to lay blame on Abbott, then form another committee.

The Libs are right not to agree to Malaysia, sending kids to a country where there is no protection in place is not on.

Gillard and her muppets are beyond contempt.

 

[Knobby22]

The Libs are right not to agree to Malaysia, sending kids to a country where there is no protection in place is not on.

The "high moral ground" looks like an ivory tower from a child's watery grave.

 

[sptrawler]

The "high moral ground" looks like an ivory tower from a child's watery grave.

Again the discussion is all about Abbotts position, if his stance is wrong does it follow that you think Gillards position is correct? I am sure if it was discovered that the refugees that were sent to Malaysia were being treated inhumanely, you would be jumping up and down about that as well. The changes that Abbott is asking for arn't detrimental, if he was taking Gillards position and Gillard his, everyone would be screaming blue murder.
I get the lmpression this has become a game of trying to get Abbott to do a back flip, well best of luck with that. History is showing that it is likely his will be the correct decission. As has been mentioned, he is comming over as a more controled and measured leader than Gillard.
It will be interesting to see how the opinion polls go.

 

[sptrawler]

A flawed Malaysia deal would surely be better than losing more lives.

That is unless you are one of the chosen ones to go. I am sure the refugees would rather be sent to an Australian run facility, than Malaysia.
Oh but I forgot Knobby, it's not about them its about the goon show saving face, talk about shallow.

On one hand your saying show compassion to these poor refugees, taking a dangerous trip.
Then in the next breath your saying who gives a rats ar$e where you send them.

What does Gillard say to you people " look into my eyes, look into my eyes you will believe any crap I speak"
Jeez give me a break.

You talk about morals, I'm yet to see any shining through from the labor bench.

 

[Calliope]

As I said in an earlier post, there is a difference between turning people back to from whence they came as opposed to sending them to a new destination.
They entered Indonesia of their own free will, to send them back isn't disadvataging them. Just emphasising the futility of going there in the first place.
It is completely different to taking them in and shipping them off to somewhere else. I'm a bit suprised with your take on it Julia, if you fail to see the difference, most of the electorate will.

I agree sptrawler. One thing that is often overlooked is that the boat people who embark from Indonesia are almost 100% Muslims, and Indonesia is a Muslim country. Naturally the illegals would feel more at home living among their own kind than living in an infidel country like Australia.

The big difference is that in Australia they would get all the security that our welfare state would throw at them. In Indonesia they would be free loaders. However these people are not poor people they are well funded and they can afford $10,000 apiece to pay people smugglers. By Indonesian standards these people are rich. They say they are fleeing from persecution. Okay - then they have found safe haven in Indonesia.

 

[dutchie]

The big difference is that in Australia they would get all the security that our welfare state would throw at them. In Indonesia they would be free loaders. However these people are not poor people they are well funded and they can afford $10,000 apiece to pay people smugglers. By Indonesian standards these people are rich. They say they are fleeing from persecution. Okay - then they have found safe haven in Indonesia.

That makes common sense. But for the PM vanity trumps common sense.

 

[sptrawler]

I agree sptrawler. One thing that is often overlooked is that the boat people who embark from Indonesia are almost 100% Muslims, and Indonesia is a Muslim country. Naturally the illegals would feel more at home living among their own kind than living in an infidel country like Australia.

The big difference is that in Australia they would get all the security that our welfare state would throw at them. In Indonesia they would be free loaders. However these people are not poor people they are well funded and they can afford $10,000 apiece to pay people smugglers. By Indonesian standards these people are rich. They say they are fleeing from persecution. Okay - then they have found safe haven in Indonesia.

Oh my god Calliope, what you are saying makes sense, it would appear that is the last thing labor want to hear.
As per usual Gillard is going "it's my way or the highway" despite her abysmal track record. Talk about a complete lack of self appraisal, you would think someone near her would give her a reality check.
Oh no I forgot she has most of them pi$$ing in their pants, have a look at poor old Bowen. What a carry on, bring on the election.

 

[MrBurns]

The "high moral ground" looks like an ivory tower from a child's watery grave.

High moral ground ? Wrong terminology, this is nothing about high moral ground.
How about protecting women and children ?

Gillard is a murderer that's all there is to it.
She is beyond contempt, even now she'll be calculating her next move to save herself.
Children drowning meh, just collateral damage to her.

 

[noco]

The whole problem is Gillard just can't put her pride aside and accept Nauru and TPVs which she knows damn well will work.

I am also of the opinion she set Oakshot up with his private members bill, which was almost identical to hers, knowing full well it would not pass the senate so it relieves her of 'WELL IT WAS NOT MY IDEA'.

The other thing that concerns me is she has hand picked and appointed a panel of three dignitarys on the same day the bill was rejected in the senate, something I believe this cunning woman had planned well before the bill even went into the lower house. I do not know what colour these panelist are but one can only guess they will be close to the same colour as Gillard and she will no doubt be influencial on them favoring the Malayasia deal. Gillard is determined to win one way or another over Abbott. I do not trust her modus operandi.

However, if the panel does recommend Malayasia it still has to go through the lower house and the senate and will most likely be rejected again.

 

[drsmith]

A flawed Malaysia deal would surely be better than losing more lives.

The flaws of limitation in both overall number and distinction between child and adult means it won't be effective in stopping the boats.

Andrew Wilkie's 12-month limitation would also impact negatively on it's effectiveness in stopping the boats.

 

[dutchie]

The only recommendation the two (or is it three) "experts", whom are completely impartial of course, that will make any difference is onshore processing.

(Without onshore processing "the fairy land dwellers" will knock back any other legislation and we are back where we started)

Onshore processing will of course appease the "fairy land dwellers" , (who will again be running the country) and pass the new legislation that "the person that is the current leader of the Labor party" will have to offer to parliament.

So if she accepts onshore processing now, why didn't she do that in the first place and save us two days of "debate", save us the expense of parliament doing nothing for two days, save us the expense of setting up another useless committee and enable all those hard working politicians go on on their trips with a clear head.

 

[noco]

I agree sptrawler. One thing that is often overlooked is that the boat people who embark from Indonesia are almost 100% Muslims, and Indonesia is a Muslim country. Naturally the illegals would feel more at home living among their own kind than living in an infidel country like Australia.

The big difference is that in Australia they would get all the security that our welfare state would throw at them. In Indonesia they would be free loaders. However these people are not poor people they are well funded and they can afford $10,000 apiece to pay people smugglers. By Indonesian standards these people are rich. They say they are fleeing from persecution. Okay - then they have found safe haven in Indonesia.

Calliope, it is heartening to read your assessment that most of the boat people are almost 100% Muslim.

It strenghtens the thought that has been in the back of my mind for some time that perhaps Indonesia, being an overcrowded Muslim country bursting at the seams, is behind the influx of muslim boat people into Australia. Is Indonesia sowing the seeds to become a dominant factor in Australia?

 

[Calliope]

The flaws of limitation in both overall number and distinction between child and adult means it won't be effective in stopping the boats.

The whole concept could not be put into practice. Can you imagine the outcry from the do-gooders when the pictures of these illegals, showing them being forcibly loaded on a plane to take them from a paradise like Christmas Island to a hell-hole in Malaysia, were shown around the world.

They didn't pay $10,000 to go to Malaysia. They will only go kicking and screaming. It won't happen. Knobby's "flawed Malaysian deal" has more flaws than is prepared to concede.

The biggest flaw is that Labor hasn't the guts to enforce it. So the big debate was "much ado about nothing."

 

[Knobby22]

If I was Abbott, I would think what would Menzies, Churchill do?

In my opinion, they would do something Prime Ministerial like offer a completely new option and then soften it with giving up some ground to Labor. They would show pity to the other party and do something for the greater good.

Abbot could then look Prime Ministerial, while making Labor look petty at the same time. He could really make the Greens look pathetic with the right attitude.

Tony Abbott needs to look at this from another angle. He needs to show some greatness because, otherwise lets face it, he will share in the mud and blood game when the next boat sinks.

He has the chance to rise above it all. That is my political view.
If he doesn't then he is another politician like Julia, not really up to the job.

I hold Labor, Greens and the LIbs in comtempt. Some of you arguing that Julia deserves more contempt, doesn't stop the contempt being derserved for the Libs. I am sick of sychophants.

 

[drsmith]

In my opinion, they would do something Prime Ministerial like offer a completely new option and then soften it with giving up some ground to Labor. They would show pity to the other party and do something for the greater good.

Pity ??

There's no pity in politics. Just ask Julia Gillard.

On second thought, ask Kevin Rudd. You might have a better chance of getting an honest answer.

What new option did you have in mind ?

 

[drsmith]

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie says MPs who start a six-week recess today should have continued sitting until they were able to break the political impasse over refugee policy.

The House of Representatives sat until 4:19am, following a "last ditch" effort by Mr Wilkie to bring on debate on the Opposition's bill to allow offshore processing of asylum seekers in countries that have ratified the United Nations' refugee convention.

What a goose.

Andrew Wilkie should have realised that his 12-month restriction on the Malaysia solution would not get it past the Coalition in the Senate.

He probably did and this was just a publicity stunt.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-29/panel-formed-to-break-asylum-deadlock/4099468

 

[Calliope]

Tony Abbott needs to look at this from another angle. He needs to show some greatness because, otherwise lets face it, he will share in the mud and blood game when the next boat sinks.

He has the chance to rise above it all. That is my political view.
If he doesn't then he is another politician like Julia, not really up to the job.

Okay. Then in your "political view" what should Abbott do? What is your recipe for Abbott "to show some greatness" If you do have the solution, you should get in touch with Gillard's "independent key experts." I don't think the Green's policy (and yours I suspect) of onshore processing would be accepted by the electorate.

 

[drsmith]

Three more boats under this government's watch.

Overnight and this morning, as MPs prepared to leave Canberra, three new asylum-seeker boats arrived at Christmas Island, continuing the flow that now looks set to continue.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...shore-processing/story-fn9hm1gu-1226411969138

 

[dutchie]

If I was Abbott, I would think what would Menzies, Churchill do?

In my opinion, they would do something Prime Ministerial like offer a completely new option and then soften it with giving up some ground to Labor. They would show pity to the other party and do something for the greater good.

Abbot could then look Prime Ministerial, while making Labor look petty at the same time. He could really make the Greens look pathetic with the right attitude.

I agree with the above. Any suggestions on a better option?