From: Clocky on
Noddy wrote:
> "PhilD" <replytonewsgrouponly(a)aussient.com.au> wrote in message
> news:S3t0o.1002$FH2.301(a)viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>
>> They aren't refugees if they have already passed through safe
>> countries, multiple times, then choose to pay people smugglers to
>> get here by boats. Then within phone range of Australia call "000"
>> to get help and before they
>> are collected by our defence force taxi service they have destroyed
>> all their documentation and on occasions sabotaged their boat.
>
> I think this is a very crucial point most "pro" refugee supporters
> seem to ignore. You give up your status as a bona fide refugee the
> moment you by-pass the nearest safe country.
>

The fact that they risk their lives to get here says an awful lot about
those "safe" countries they don't want to live in, and you wouldn't want to
either.

> 100% of the people who enter Australia as "refugees" are doing so
> illegally, and are nothing more that queue jumpers.

Most refugees and illegals don't get here by boat, that is the point. I'm
not at all supportive of illegals entering the country but it's rediculous
that the focus is on a few thousand boat people which represents a drop in
the ocean of the total number entering. I think the number of illegals is
estimated at 53,000, yet boat people account for only about 3000 of those
but they remain the focus group.


From: PhilD on

"Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> wrote in message
news:4c439290$0$11114$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com...
> Noddy wrote:
>> "PhilD" <replytonewsgrouponly(a)aussient.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:S3t0o.1002$FH2.301(a)viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>>
>>> They aren't refugees if they have already passed through safe
>>> countries, multiple times, then choose to pay people smugglers to
>>> get here by boats. Then within phone range of Australia call "000"
>>> to get help and before they
>>> are collected by our defence force taxi service they have destroyed
>>> all their documentation and on occasions sabotaged their boat.
>>
>> I think this is a very crucial point most "pro" refugee supporters
>> seem to ignore. You give up your status as a bona fide refugee the
>> moment you by-pass the nearest safe country.
>>
>
> The fact that they risk their lives to get here says an awful lot about
> those "safe" countries they don't want to live in, and you wouldn't want
> to either.
>
>> 100% of the people who enter Australia as "refugees" are doing so
>> illegally, and are nothing more that queue jumpers.
>
> Most refugees and illegals don't get here by boat, that is the point. I'm
> not at all supportive of illegals entering the country but it's rediculous
> that the focus is on a few thousand boat people which represents a drop in
> the ocean of the total number entering. I think the number of illegals is
> estimated at 53,000, yet boat people account for only about 3000 of those
> but they remain the focus group.
>
Do you really think that if we said to the world that if you come by your
own boat that you are welcome that it would stop at what you say is a small
number. The flood gates would open.

PhilD


From: atec77 on
On 18/07/2010 8:10 PM, D Walford wrote:
> On 18/07/2010 7:21 PM, atec77 wrote:
>> On 18/07/2010 12:00 PM, D Walford wrote:
>>> On 17/07/2010 11:55 PM, hippo wrote:
>>>> Jason James wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The choice hasnt been so easy for a long while> back to the '50s with
>>>>> Abbott
>>>>> and his school-days Nulla nulla to educate us,. or a woman's version
>>>>> of the
>>>>> ALP.
>>>>> Back to full blown "work-choices" or some sanity from Julia.
>>>>>
>>>>> A while back, Austar was advertising the function of the red button
>>>>> on their
>>>>> remote. Some wags were filmed offering their opinion on what the "red"
>>>>> button should do,..one said "press it to erase that mental picture I
>>>>> still
>>>>> have in my mind, of Abbott in his speedos,...LOL!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Jason
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll be voting for our sitting member because she's actually helped to
>>>> achieve a lot for this electorate in the last decade and a half. From
>>>> what
>>>> I've seen, I've only lived in one other federal seat where the local
>>>> member has been more visible, more accessible, or taken pains to be
>>>> more
>>>> accountable.
>>>>
>>> Julia Gillard was very active in her electorate especially supporting
>>> schools, she regularly visited almost every school in the area, don't
>>> now if that will continue because she is no longer education minister
>>> but she is liked and respected amongst the school communities in the
>>> west of Melb.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daryl
>> nce the party get thier hooks into her and considering she has given
>> education unofficially aware you district will suffer
>> she will be useless shortly
>>
> Decoder ring broken, please translate?
>
>
> Daryl
I am told it means
Once the caucus get their hooks into her (and she no longer handles the
education portfolio) your district will suffer , shortly she will be
completely useless to you

That will teach me to leave the laptop in the living room

--
X-No-Archive: Yes
From: atec77 on
On 19/07/2010 8:57 AM, John_H wrote:
> Noddy wrote:
>>
>> If you got called up for national service during the Vietnam War you had to
>> go into the army, but you had to volunteer to serve overseas and everyone
>> who went to Vietnam elected to go. I'm sure there were some who were
>> pressured into going and they really didn't want to be there, but if you
>> *really* didn't want to go you could make enough noise about it and miss out
>> if you wanted.
>>
>> Either that, or you could be a conscientious objector and do your two years
>> on a prison farm.
>
> Maybe if you were lucky.
>
> I knew a conscientious objector who tried to take the legal way out.
> He was handed over to the army by the law court and given the job of
> painting army huts with a toothbrush. Nor was he allowed to take the
> paint can up the ladder. He survived the two years but wasn't the
> full quid when I met him.
>
> Such was/is the military mentality!
>
> The smart path was to obtain a medical exemption. Does anyone know of
> any politician's son, Liberal or Labor, who actually did their nacho?
>
Great story but I have my doubts considering thats unusual punishment
and a human rights violation

--
X-No-Archive: Yes
From: Noddy on

"Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> wrote in message
news:4c439290$0$11114$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com...

> The fact that they risk their lives to get here says an awful lot about
> those "safe" countries they don't want to live in, and you wouldn't want
> to either.

Whether they *want* to or not is completely beside the point.

As a refugee, you're entitled to flee to the nearest "safe" country under
international law, but that *doesn't* mean you flee to the country of your
choice. Nor does it mean anyone other than the nearest safe country has any
obligation to accept you.

> Most refugees and illegals don't get here by boat, that is the point. I'm
> not at all supportive of illegals entering the country but it's rediculous
> that the focus is on a few thousand boat people which represents a drop in
> the ocean of the total number entering. I think the number of illegals is
> estimated at 53,000, yet boat people account for only about 3000 of those
> but they remain the focus group.

"Boat people" get the most media attention because they're the most obvious
illegal immigrants. People coming in by plane, which are far and away the
most numerous, blend into the crowd and are easily "lost" by the media but
it's irrelevant anyway.

Regardless of *how* they're getting here, they have no right to be here and
*that's* the point.

--
Regards,
Noddy.


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Prev: Report Traffic Incidents 131 700
Next: Who Owned it?