Is it the governments fault people are stuck in Beirut?

[Prospector]

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]

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]

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.

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

 

[wayneL]

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]

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 >

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]

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?

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..

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]

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?


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..



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.

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]

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

Buster
Good link there!

 

[Buster]

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..

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..

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?
The Land?
The culture?
The economy?
All of the above?

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

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?

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..)

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

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

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.

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..

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.

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]

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]

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?

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..

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

Yup..

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]

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.
And some of you had to sleep on the floor!?

Oh, the indignity of it.

To listen to the whining and carping of many of the 261 Canadians rescued from Beirut on the first day of the evacuation from Lebanon, you would think they had just been returned to port from an ocean cruise that went terribly wrong, instead of being saved from a war zone.

Tuesday, the Crown Princess, a Princess Cruises ship, suddenly listed to port in heavy seas off the coast of Florida. The promenade deck almost submerged. Stairwells "became waterfalls." The casino and gift shop below decks were flooded. The main dining room had to be turned into a triage ward as more than 200 of the 3,100 passengers on board were injured by the sudden tilt; 94 had to be taken off for hospitals on shore.

By contrast, no passengers on the first Canadian rescue ship were injured. The worst that happened was a few threw up.

And, yet, the grousing and moaning on the Crown Princess did not equal that of the evacuees from Lebanon when they reached Cyprus early Thursday morning. Some even cursed at the Canadian diplomats who greeted them.

One woman from Montreal described the trip as "hell;" not the war, but rather her tax-paid voyage to freedom. After all, it had taken 15 hours instead of seven. Twice their ship, the Blue Dawn, had been stopped by the Israeli navy to ensure it was not hostile.

Imagine that. Stopping a ship in a war zone to see whether it is friend or foe. How rude! And the griping doesn't end with those Ottawa has already plucked
from the suddenly very hot zone in south Lebanon. Others still awaiting evacuation complain that our embassy in Beirut has not dealt with them fast enough. Their e-mails have gone unanswered, their phone calls meet with a busy signal. If they present themselves in person, there are long lines in the hot sun to meet a Foreign Affairs official face-to-face.

There aren't hotel rooms for them all. The waiting rooms are inadequate for the numbers wanting to leave. Embassy staff will not give precise departure times.

No kidding. We're not talking about the returns desk at Wal-Mart the day after Christmas. A staff of two dozen, who normally deal with a few thousand
inquiries a year are suddenly swamped with 2,000 or 3,000 people demanding to be saved - Now! In a city that no longer has a functioning airport. Where fighter-bombers frequently scream overhead. Air raids do tend to disrupt the flow of things.

It's a wonder our government managed, at all, to find seven underused cruise ships it could lease on such short notice.

On the first day that any country was able to get its citizens out by boat, we managed to rescue 261. The British got out just 170 of their people. The French, who have a fleet of warships patrolling the Mediterranean, could manage just 180.

Thursday, we rescued another 1,375. And thereafter, we should be able to extract 700 to 1,000 swearing, muttering ingrates each day, either to Cyprus or Turkey.

But just wait until they get to safe ports and find out they have several-day waits ahead of them until they can be airlifted - again at taxpayers' expense - to Canada.

When told she might have to sit put in Cyprus for a few days until a jet ride could be arranged, and that while she waited she would have to find and pay for her own hotel and meals, one of the first evacuees complained that the government had not already taken care of such things.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? To simple gratefulness?

I don't expect the rescued Canadians to bow down and kiss the feet of our diplomats when they arrive on safe soil. But why is it too much to expect they might be thankful simply for being extracted from a danger zone, regardless of how uncomfortably?

They remind me of the Canadian and British antiwar activists extracted by commandos earlier this year from months of captivity in Iraq, who rather than saying thank you criticized the rescuers for using force to free them.

Wouldn't you be grateful to be rescued from Lebanon right now even if you and your family had to ride out in the fish hold of a trawler for a few days?

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.

There is a simple solution to this carping. The boats have to go back to Beirut for more evacuees. Anyone who profanes a Canadian worker or whines about conditions on the free boat gets put back on board and returned to Lebanon where they can find their own way out.

 

[wayneL]

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?

....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]

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..

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..

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

Concur..

Regards,

Buster.

 

[Bobby]

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 >



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?

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]

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.

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...