GALP has more blood on their hands

[IQS.RLOW]

I see you have met monks debating style

Don't worry, just poke the tard through the cage with sticks and throw things at him for fun- it about all he's good for

Watch out in the early afternoons. He hits the home brew and loads up on mersyndol so you will have a barrage of abusive posts till he falls asleep early and then around 12-2am his liver kicks in wakes him up and you'll find another batch of useless topic avoiding abusive posts

[Rorschach]

Oh great!

[IQS.RLOW]

Oh great!

Its 90% of the fun here.

The Aussies and Monks of the world arent capable of arguing their point or explaining the inexplicable from the alp...only excusing fuckup after fuckup

[Jovial Monk]

hahahahah load up on codeine! ONE tablet early this year is it. IQ mentioned “codeine rages” which indicates it is he who loads up on the codeine. Annie has told him I have never ever sounded drunk even when she has rung me of an evening, whereas IQ did post one hilarious night blind drunk

At least I can stay and argue, IQ just gets abusive after five minutes—codeine rage most like.

As to Rotsack, I was developing an argument as to why the Greens are Australia’s third conservative party. Ended up finding out Rotsack had no idea of the political scene.

[Rorschach]

oh dear... still suffering from inadequacies I see.
That's Rorshach to you Monkey boy.
The only rotting sack around here would be yours.
probably know more about Australian politics than you ever will.
Why don't you start a topic and we'll see. ch-ch-chicken????????
Of course you are, all piss and wind hence the need for the meds eh.

See JM, I can flame with the best of 'em.
Not that you are the best of 'em.

[Rorschach]

What's the betting they let the "pirates" stay?

[Rorschach]

For those not rusted-on ALP/Green supporters, I promise you this is a good one.

Stopping the boats with Greens going overboard
* by: Tim Blair
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* August 20, 2012 12:00AM

The Greens still believe offshore processing will return Australia to the "bad old days".

FOR once, we're almost all in agreement. According to the Labor government, Tony Abbott's opposition, the previous Howard government, Julia Gillard's expert panel, News Ltd, Fairfax and just about everybody capable of ambulatory speech, offshore processing of asylum seekers is a deterrent.

The main holdouts are the Greens, which emphasises just how sensible is the majority view. Greens leader Christine Milne believes offshore processing would return us to the "bad old days", by which she presumably means days when detention centres were empty and hundreds of asylum seekers weren't drowning.

When it comes to climate change, Greens love a consensus. When it comes to corpses in the Timor Sea, not so much. The rest of us, blessed with functioning memories, can only agree with Angus Houston's quick summary last week of his panel's findings: "Onshore processing encourages people to jump into boats."

In the spirit of the panel's revelatory discovery that previously successful asylum seeker policies were successful, let's push on.

A number of asylum seeker issues could do with some re-examination, beginning with the insistence by the politically correct set of using the phrase "asylum seekers" instead of once-common terms such as "illegal immigrants" or even "unlawful entrants".

The PC overlords are deeply worried about offending people who, in most cases, can't actually read any English words at all.

I'd suggest the more general term "seekers", but then we'd face potential copyright litigation from Judith Durham and Athol Guy. For now, though, we're stuck with a term that probably does not fit the vast majority of those arriving on boats. Other inaccuracies also need fixing, particularly the surprisingly widespread notion that asylum seekers only attempt to reach Australian territory by boat because they can't afford to fly.

"Wouldn't it be cheaper coming here by boat?" asked Blacktown's Amanda Burr in a Street Talk item published in last Wednesday's Daily Telegraph. "That's why they're risking their lives." Not so, Amanda. Not so by up to 2000 per cent, although you're far from alone in believing this. "If they had enough money to fly in, then presumably they'd just get a plane ticket," a Crikey correspondent argued in 2009. "A lot safer, and you don't end up on Christmas Island."

The reason many asylum seekers prefer boats to planes is because airlines and customs require passports.

Money isn't an issue. You can currently jag a flight from Jakarta to Sydney aboard Malaysia Airlines for just $439 one way, if you shop around.

Wrong. "Asylum seekers certainly do not catch boats because it is the cheaper way to travel - not at the going people-smuggler rates of $5000 to $10,000 per person," Mike Steketee wrote last week in The Global Mail.

You pay a huge premium to travel passport-free because immigration authorities are then less able to check your background. As William Maley, vice-president of the Refugee Council, told Steketee: "It doesn't increase their chances of being found to be a refugee, but it does mean it is harder for them to be removed from Australia."

And that's half the battle, as asylum seekers are clearly aware, despite being routinely portrayed as hopeless victims with no say over their destiny.

I've mentioned before the bigotry that assumes asylum seekers lack the innately human capacity for cunning. Depicting them as guileless innocents is every bit as inaccurate and offensive as painting all asylum seekers to be potential terrorists.

The overwhelming majority are simply aiming at a gap in our laws that will let them enter Australia ahead of other asylum claimants.

The bar isn't set too high. People smuggler Captain Emad managed to drive his trolley-collecting tractor beneath it, which should be kept in mind every time refugee advocates try to make a point of how many previous asylum seekers have been found to be "legitimate".

It'll be interesting to see how the left-leaning media deals with asylum seeking now that Prime Minister Gillard has taken the Howard-Abbott line. Fairfax's Michelle Grattan was quick to adapt: "Many people (this writer included) who condemned the earlier Pacific Solution accept the view that offshore processing is now needed."

Indonesia correspondent Michael Bachelard seemed worried over a lack of consultation. "The people I've been talking to do know it can affect them and they hear it's going to affect people who are arriving very soon, so they're quite desperate for more detail," Bachelard told Ten's The Project.

They're asking Australia for more details while chucking their own passports overboard. Interesting. Bachelard added: "It's a worrying time, because the situation is changing."

The same is true for those in journalism and politics who still cling to Greenish asylum views. They should look to St Julian of WikiLeaks for guidance. There's always the Ecuadorean option.

[Rorschach]

Greens disagree with Labor's position on deterring asylum seekers
* From: AAP
* September 02, 2012 12:11PM

AUTHORITIES have intercepted a boat carrying 81 suspected asylum seekers off the West Australian coast.

Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare said ACV Hervey Bay, operating under the control of Border Protection Command, intercepted the boat north-northwest of Cocos (Keeling) Islands on Saturday. Well we all know that intercepted means they escorted it.

It was the 10th boat to be intercepted by Australian authorities since August 22. The boats carried a total of 650 suspected asylum seekers. Suspected country shoppers perhaps?

Border Protection Command have transferred the 81 people on board the latest boat to the Cocos Islands.

They will be transferred to Christmas Island for initial security, health and identity checks. And we all know how well immigration have been doing in that regard... Captain Emad anyone?

Mr Clare said people arriving by boat without a visa after August 13, 2012, ran the risk of transfer to a regional processing nation.

The latest boat comes as Foreign Minister Bob Carr said our migrant intake could be overtaken by boat arrivals unless deterrents such as offshore processing are in place. How long has it taken labor to come to that conclusion? hmmm.

Senator Carr says the government's reopening of offshore processing on the Pacific island of Nauru and Papua New Guinea's Manus Island sends a message to those who cynically run businesses smuggling people to Australia.

"If Australia were to say you can sign up with a people smuggler, put your money down and enter territorial waters and you will be processed in Australia, we would very soon have all migrant intake occupied by the people brought here by people smugglers," he told Sky News today.

He said it was conceivable that, without deterrents, the number of people arriving by boat could eventually hit Australia's current immigration intake of 180,000 a year.

That would eliminate any chance that refugees waiting in camps for years would be able to migrate to Australia.

"It is a pretty pessimistic vision, but it could happen," Senator Carr said.

Asylum Seeker Background

"That would mean us not taking people from camps who are waiting for processing to get to Australia - it would mean no other source of migrants to Australia."

Australian authorities have intercepted nine boats, carrying a total of about 580 suspected asylum seekers, off the West Australian coast since August 22.

Senator Carr said it was not humanitarian to have more people crowded into unseaworthy boats and put onto the high seas.

"That is what happens if you have access unimpeded to Australia from offshore processing," he said.

He said the refugee swap deal with Malaysia had to be added to the arrangements with Nauru and Manus Island as an extra deterrent to people smugglers. If only the deal wasn't so one sided perhaps more australians would agree with that, even if the High Court still won't allow it.

Australian Greens leader Christine Milne said the deterrence model adopted by the government doesn't work. yes, well someone should tell her neither does hers. Oh wait... the Greens don't have any such policy.

Instead, Australia should "encourage people not to get on boats by promising them proper assessments and safe passage to Australia", she said.

This can be achieve through offering appropriate assessment processes and an increased humanitarian intake, Senator Milne told ABC Television today.

http://www.news.com.au/national/greens- ... 6463295813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Rorschach]

Sri lanka, unlike Indonesia are stopping boats and turning them back.
I don't think that is a bad thing. Nor do I disagree with the Libs on this.

Coalition lashed for boat-people 'brain snap'
September 3, 2012 - 2:20PM
Judith Ireland

A Coalition call for Sri Lankan boat arrivals to be sent straight back without processing has been labelled a "brain snap" by the Greens and "hypocritical" by the government.

Yesterday, Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop and opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said Australia should reach an agreement with Sri Lanka for the "immediate transfer of people intercepted" back to where they came from. Yeah... if they really have problems the Tamils in southern India are much closer than Australia. Gee I wonder why they come here instead.

"The rejection rate for Sri Lankan asylum seekers is extremely high," the two Coalition frontbenchers said, adding that the "vast majority" proved to be economic migrants and that there was a higher incidence of negative security assessments by ASIO.

Today, Greens immigration spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young said the move was in breach of international law.

“This latest brain-snap by the Coalition is simply extraordinary – it is illegal, dangerous and blatantly discriminatory," she said.

“Refusing desperate people protection prior to having their claims assessed is cruel and breaches our obligations under the Refugee Convention."

Defence Minister Stephen Smith called Ms Bishop's comments "extraordinary and hypocritical."

"This is the political party who said that they couldn't authorise the Malaysian arrangement because Malaysia was not a party to the Refugee Convention," he said.

But Opposition Leader Tony Abbott was standing by the comments, saying that turning boats around "where its safe to do so" was an important element in the border protection policy.

"Sri Lanka had a civil war, the civil is long over," he said.

"That's why it is important to have a robust policy in place to stop the boats."

The Sri Lanka suggestion comes as a boat carrying 56 people was intercepted north-north-west of Cocos Islands overnight.

So far this year, 140 boats have arrived in Australian waters carrying about 9,123 people.

Refugee and Tamil groups have also condemned the idea.

[lisa jones]

Sri lanka, unlike Indonesia are stopping boats and turning them back.
I don't think that is a bad thing. Nor do I disagree with the Libs on this.

<< eyes wide open like dinner plates here >>

I assumed you were a typical boring Leftie. Much respect for being anything but that.