Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did?

If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard?


A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer.

---

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:41am:

Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

To be moved into "extremist rants" thread...

Workchoices, if Abbott gains a DD control of both houses, how soon will anti worker's workchoices be erected?

---

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:43am:

To be moved into "extremist rants" thread...

Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer?

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:43am:

Workchoices, if Abbott gains a DD control of both houses, how soon will anti worker's workchoices be erected?

Greens you really like long threads. Abbott has no answers to any question and no policies to support anything he says. But the most notable thing he has said is that everything he has promised is aspirational. So in other words he will do nothing and has no ideas. WOW what a leader.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:45am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer?

What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

FRED. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia.


Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:51am:

FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff.

YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;)

FRED. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:54am:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;)

Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors.

How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children.

Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did?

How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture?

Another question, Abbott has a 5% greenhouse gas pollution target for the short term, what is his medium and long term percentage targets for greenhouse gas reduction for Australia.

And will nuclear be considered to reach these targets?

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:58am:

FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture?

Are your ravings caused by some form of STD  ;)

FRED. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Fred has nothing to offer any debate apart from abuse.....It is worthless trying to respond to such people Green.....His comments say more about him than anyone else!!!

He who strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument.
Chinese Proverb

[smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif]

FRED. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? Are your ravings caused by some form of STD  ;)

Don't require to rave, just planting questions so perhaps some may filter back to journalsts and they may ask Mr lame duck Abbott.

We have so many to ask since Abbott has refused to answer questions for well over a year now.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:41am:

Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer.

WTF does Abbott have to answer anything - especially to the Greens

Any Greens that says "I might vote for the Coalition if Abbott answer the questions" are as believable as Gillard when she said "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead"

His job is to get rid off a bad government and a bad MP called Adam Bandt

Maqqa wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:13pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:41am: Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer. WTF does Abbott have to answer anything - especially to the Greens Any Greens that says "I might vote for the Coalition if Abbott answer the questions" are as believable as Gillard when she said "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" His job is to get rid off a bad government and a bad MP called Adam Bandt

I understand Liberals are scared of transparency and so want Abbott to hide all his mean spirited plans concerning torture and possible murder of child boat refugees, greenhouse reduction plans beyond 2013, his nuking Australia agenda, and worker attack via a DD so to ram through workchoices during a world recession.

And it isn't only Greens' supporters willing to dig until answers are forthcoming, swing voters desire answers from Mr Lame Duck too.

So come on down Mr Abbott and start answering all the questions.

Please show exact evidence of where this is happening especially the torture and murder



http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html



The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said.


http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-boats-plan-reckless-20120121-1qb7a.html

THE proposal by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, to use navy resources to turn back all asylum seeker boats to Indonesia is reckless, the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has warned.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:34pm:

Please show exact evidence of where this is happening especially the torture and murder http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-boats-plan-reckless-20120121-1qb7a.html THE proposal by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, to use navy resources to turn back all asylum seeker boats to Indonesia is reckless, the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has warned.

Gillard has Warned sendem to MALASAYSIA TOO BE WHIPPED  GOOD PLAN  ;D ;D

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:41am:

Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer.

Mr Abbott has said that he is going to turn back the boats, and parasitc illegal immigrants won't be coming here in the thousands and millions as they are now, under the pathetic, disgraceful, shambolic and diastrous Labor/Green/Independent so-called government.

That's all that the Australian people want. No more needs to be known/detailed.

FRED. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:38pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 12:34pm: Please show exact evidence of where this is happening especially the torture and murder http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-boats-plan-reckless-20120121-1qb7a.html THE proposal by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, to use navy resources to turn back all asylum seeker boats to Indonesia is reckless, the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has warned. Gillard has Warned sendem to MALASAYSIA TOO BE WHIPPED  GOOD PLAN  ;D ;D

So both Libs and Labs have been returned to the cheapest, most logical and most humane policy, Greens policy of processing these people as quickly as possible without risking Australia and then letting them integrate with Australian society while their cases are processed.

This will cut down on the medical cost of repairing destroyed people due to Australian torture procedures like Howard had and Gillard and Abbott want returned.

It will reduce pressure on jailing refugees and will help integrate these people into Australia culture.

More chance of even greater benefits to Australia that foreign born Australians bring.   

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:30pm:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 12:13pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:41am: Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer. WTF does Abbott have to answer anything - especially to the Greens Any Greens that says "I might vote for the Coalition if Abbott answer the questions" are as believable as Gillard when she said "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" His job is to get rid off a bad government and a bad MP called Adam Bandt I understand Liberals are scared of transparency and so want Abbott to hide all his mean spirited plans concerning torture and possible murder of child boat refugees, greenhouse reduction plans beyond 2013, his nuking Australia agenda, and worker attack via a DD so to ram through workchoices during a world recession. And it isn't only Greens' supporters willing to dig until answers are forthcoming, swing voters desire answers from Mr Lame Duck too. So come on down Mr Abbott and start answering all the questions.

If the Greens have better transparency then why does it only have 11% of the votes?

matty wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:42pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:41am: Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer. Mr Abbott has said that he is going to turn back the boats, and parasitc illegal immigrants won't be coming here in the thousands and millions as they are now, under the pathetic, disgraceful, shambolic and diastrous Labor/Green/Independent so-called government. That's all that the Australian people want. No more needs to be known/detailed.

And all that will happen is boats will be sunk and children will drown because of Abbott's hate of children.

Will the Navy lose recruits because young people will not want to be killing children at sea for Abbott.

Time for Abbott to start thinking through the ramifications of his anti children policies before shooting his mouth off for a 6.30 television news segment.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:41am:

Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer.

Can you provide the official number of children tortured while in detention. I can't find any reports of torture.


Quote:

[...] There are 93 children currently detained in Nauru, as many as the combined total of all the detention centers in Australia. The 43 girls and 50 boys includes an infant born on 19 March 2003. Five of the children are unaccompanied by their parents. Some children attend school at one of two primary schools outside the camp. They start at 7.30am and finish at 1.30pm. The Nauru schools are impoverished, lacking basic facilities and equipment. Teachers have gone months without pay. Children also have classes with the older detainees in the camp in the afternoons. The children are able to play soccer and volleyball in the camp. [...] http://www.ajustaustralia.com/resource.php?act=attache&id=27

Unless you view being made to participate in volleyball and soccer a form of torture.

Maqqa wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:51pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 12:30pm: Maqqa wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 12:13pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:41am: Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer. WTF does Abbott have to answer anything - especially to the Greens Any Greens that says "I might vote for the Coalition if Abbott answer the questions" are as believable as Gillard when she said "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" His job is to get rid off a bad government and a bad MP called Adam Bandt I understand Liberals are scared of transparency and so want Abbott to hide all his mean spirited plans concerning torture and possible murder of child boat refugees, greenhouse reduction plans beyond 2013, his nuking Australia agenda, and worker attack via a DD so to ram through workchoices during a world recession. And it isn't only Greens' supporters willing to dig until answers are forthcoming, swing voters desire answers from Mr Lame Duck too. So come on down Mr Abbott and start answering all the questions. If the Greens have better transparency then why does it only have 11% of the votes?

Because 7 percent to 11 percent from the 2007 federal election to the 2010 is sustainable core support growth.

Also Senate support at the last election was 13% and current polling shows even more growth possible in the Senate. So still plenty of more core support growth available in the future.

Better slower and steady, so to prepare for the next potential situation, Greens holding the balance in both houses, rather than just the Senate.


Now enough of the Greens, when will Abbott tell us his plans of spreading the racist intervention plan onto all welfare recipients. Will he control all welfare to elderly non aboriginal pensioners, so they don't waste money on drugs and gambling and not buy food or pay their bills?

salad in wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 12:54pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:41am: Nauru, Abbott's solution to child refugees. Will they be tortured behind barbed wire, Like Howard did? If not, will the Boats continue to come with children aboard? A thread for all those unanswered questions Abbott refuses to answer. Can you provide the official number of children tortured while in detention. I can't find any reports of torture. Quote: [...] There are 93 children currently detained in Nauru, as many as the combined total of all the detention centers in Australia. The 43 girls and 50 boys includes an infant born on 19 March 2003. Five of the children are unaccompanied by their parents. Some children attend school at one of two primary schools outside the camp. They start at 7.30am and finish at 1.30pm. The Nauru schools are impoverished, lacking basic facilities and equipment. Teachers have gone months without pay. Children also have classes with the older detainees in the camp in the afternoons. The children are able to play soccer and volleyball in the camp. [...] http://www.ajustaustralia.com/resource.php?act=attache&id=27 Unless you view being made to participate in volleyball and soccer a form of torture.

Interesting no links to the post


was it from here?

http://www.ajustaustralia.com/resource.php?act=attache&id=27

or maybe from here

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/children_detention_report/report/chap03.htm


So back to the original question, how will Abbott destroy the business model if he doesn't punish refugee children via torture or death?

Salad, in the child torture numbers, can I count the children Howard sent back to Afghanistan and then were killed by Howard's mean spirited policy?


Or should we just count via the ones that were mentally scared by Howard's Nauru policy, the one Abbott wants.

How about the child suicides because of this Liberal Party torture, in or out?

Here is the thread Macca, with the answer you are after

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 11:58am:

FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture?

If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 6:43pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof.

You are all so funny, this subject died quickly after the community detention was started. Abbott has already put foot in mouth with the turn them back idea, he should have no problem with malaysia then. Cornered himself on that one so it is dead.

nairbe wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 6:48pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. You are all so funny, this subject died quickly after the community detention was started. Abbott has already put foot in mouth with the turn them back idea, he should have no problem with malaysia then. Cornered himself on that one so it is dead.

So you'd prefer that if there were only two options available it would be better for them to be caned in Malaysia than simply detained in Nauru where they get better living facilities than mosy homeless people get here?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 6:43pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html

The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:02pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said.

Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:05pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:02pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan.

Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. These push factors forced pressure on to camps and so some took risks to come to Australia because the Howard government agreed with our commitment to take care of refugees according to the 1951 UN agreement.

The Children where the Howard government's responsibility and Howard then tortured them via his government's policies.

Abbott now wants to replicate this torture.

Shame hard righters for backing this torture of children. Shame on you all.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:14pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:05pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:02pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan. Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. These push factors forced pressure on to camps and so some took risks to come to Australia because the Howard government agreed with our commitment to take care of refugees according to the 1951 UN agreement. The Children where the Howard government's responsibility and Howard then tortured them via his government's policies. Abbott now wants to replicate this torture. Shame hard righters for backing this torture of children. Shame on you all.

How was the Afghan war illegal? The Afghan govt was providing sanctuary to terrorists and refused to hand them over. They supported terrorism and have paid the price. End of story. Your fifth-grade logic has no place in an adult world. Grow up.

Edit: Howard's policy was far more humane. No one died trying to cross the ocean between Indonesia and Australia whereas thousands have died under Rudd/Gillard's "compassionate" policy. What a tragic farce.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:14pm:

Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan.

Please let us know how it was illegal.

Please also let us know how we forced these fvckers to have a civil war - ie how they couldn't help but murder each other on a large scale because of us.

Soren wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:21pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. Please let us know how it was illegal. Please also let us know how we forced these fvckers to have a civil war - ie how they couldn't help but murder each other on a large scale because of us.

They've been killing each other for thousands of years. If they didn't have the Russians or US to fight, they'd just fight each other. War is their national pastime, with RPG shooting their national sport.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:05pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:02pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan. Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. These push factors forced pressure on to camps and so some took risks to come to Australia because the Howard government agreed with our commitment to take care of refugees according to the 1951 UN agreement. The Children where the Howard government's responsibility and Howard then tortured them via his government's policies. Abbott now wants to replicate this torture. Shame hard righters for backing this torture of children. Shame on you all. How was the Afghan war illegal? The Afghan govt was providing sanctuary to terrorists and refused to hand them over. They supported terrorism and have paid the price. End of story. Your fifth-grade logic has no place in an adult world. Grow up. Edit: Howard's policy was far more humane. No one died trying to cross the ocean between Indonesia and Australia whereas thousands have died under Rudd/Gillard's "compassionate" policy. What a tragic farce.

Illegal Iraqi War

As for terrorists ... what is a terrorist. Someone that scares. That would include Joe Hockey's opposition treasury skills, or lack of.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:26pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:18pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:05pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:02pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan. Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. These push factors forced pressure on to camps and so some took risks to come to Australia because the Howard government agreed with our commitment to take care of refugees according to the 1951 UN agreement. The Children where the Howard government's responsibility and Howard then tortured them via his government's policies. Abbott now wants to replicate this torture. Shame hard righters for backing this torture of children. Shame on you all. How was the Afghan war illegal? The Afghan govt was providing sanctuary to terrorists and refused to hand them over. They supported terrorism and have paid the price. End of story. Your fifth-grade logic has no place in an adult world. Grow up. Edit: Howard's policy was far more humane. No one died trying to cross the ocean between Indonesia and Australia whereas thousands have died under Rudd/Gillard's "compassionate" policy. What a tragic farce. Illegal Iraqi War As for terrorists ... what is a terrorist. Someone that scares. That would include Joe Hockey's opposition treasury skills, or lack of.

The war in Iraq was based on flawed intel, but removed a murderous despot who was despised by his countrymen and neighbouring countries alike.

Soren wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:21pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. Please let us know how it was illegal. Please also let us know how we forced these fvckers to have a civil war - ie how they couldn't help but murder each other on a large scale because of us.

WMD was a known lie and Howard and his ministers, including Abbott, new it.

So the invasion was illegal.

As for Afghanistan, Australia took part in the overthrow of the Afghan government on a make up boogieman "terrorist"

This help cause a civil war we are still are apart even though the americans are negotiating with the original government so they can cut and run and so reveal the waste of life limb and taxes Australia has wasted due to the LibLabs.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:28pm:

The war in Iraq was based on flawed intel, but removed a murderous despot who was despised by his countrymen and neighbouring countries alike.

The war was based on the reinforcing of western control in the middle east. The despot was supported by the same people who propped up Mubarak and ben Ali. The 'flawed intel' was the misguided belief that Iraqis, having lived in a 'secular' state for decades, would reject their ancient loyalty to Shi'ism and resist alliance with its Shi'ite neighbour, Iran. A ridiculously myopic position.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:28pm:

____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:26pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:18pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:05pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:02pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 6:43pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:58am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:54am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:51am: FRED. wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:47am: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:45am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 11:43am: To be moved into "extremist rants" thread... Scare of discussing the questions Abbott refuses to answer? What QUESTION you dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D How about my first one, if children are not tortured via this illegal Nauru solution, how will the business model of the boat supliers be broken since they can undermine the illegal Nauru solution by sending boat load after boatload of child refugees to Australia. Will Abbott start sinking these children by trying to turn the boats around with overstretched naval staff. YOUR STILL A dam MORON    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D IS IT A KIWI THING  ;) Deflection just shows the panic in your eyes because this thread is and will put the spotlight on Lib policy errors. How will Abbott stop the Indonesian refugee business model if not via punishing refugee children. Will it be by drowning the kids at sea or via torture behind barbed wire on Nauru, just like Howard did? How does such a religious politician act under these conditions. Death or Torture? If you're so passionately against deflection, them please provide some PROOF of your claims that the Howard government's Pacific Solution policy involved any children being tortured. Please keep in mind that personal opinion is not proof. http://www.smh.com.au/national/ruling-opens-door-for-nauru-class-action-20110905-1jubv.html The Edmund Rice Centre director, Phil Glendenning, said nine Afghans who had been held on Nauru and were sent back to Afghanistan died, including children. Others developed mental illness. ''Having seen what Nauru did last time, we just can't go there again,'' Mr Glendenning said. Did our government force them to come? No. Did they know they would likely have to endure a lengthy stay in detention? More than likely. Not the fault of Howard if some people are stupid and selfish enough to subject their own children to such hardship. They had plenty of opportunities to stop elsewhere much closer to Afghanistan. Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. These push factors forced pressure on to camps and so some took risks to come to Australia because the Howard government agreed with our commitment to take care of refugees according to the 1951 UN agreement. The Children where the Howard government's responsibility and Howard then tortured them via his government's policies. Abbott now wants to replicate this torture. Shame hard righters for backing this torture of children. Shame on you all. How was the Afghan war illegal? The Afghan govt was providing sanctuary to terrorists and refused to hand them over. They supported terrorism and have paid the price. End of story. Your fifth-grade logic has no place in an adult world. Grow up. Edit: Howard's policy was far more humane. No one died trying to cross the ocean between Indonesia and Australia whereas thousands have died under Rudd/Gillard's "compassionate" policy. What a tragic farce. Illegal Iraqi War As for terrorists ... what is a terrorist. Someone that scares. That would include Joe Hockey's opposition treasury skills, or lack of. The war in Iraq was based on flawed intel, but removed a murderous despot who was despised by his countrymen and neighbouring countries alike.

It was still illegal and the Liberal Party new it when provoking it.

1 million dead civilians from the Iraq and Afghan wars.

You lot, if you had any morals, should be ashamed of your total waste of human life for political opportunism. .

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:32pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:21pm: ____ wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:14pm: Did the howard government force them to come, yes in that Howard was a part of the illegal invasion into Iraq and the provoking of the civil war we are still in in Afghanistan. Please let us know how it was illegal. Please also let us know how we forced these fvckers to have a civil war - ie how they couldn't help but murder each other on a large scale because of us. WMD was a known lie and Howard and his ministers, including Abbott, new it. So the invasion was illegal. As for Afghanistan, Australia took part in the overthrow of the Afghan government on a make up boogieman "terrorist" This help cause a civil war we are still are apart even though the americans are negotiating with the original government so they can cut and run and so reveal the waste of life limb and taxes Australia has wasted due to the LibLabs.

Abbott was not involved in any way, shape or form with anything related to the ADF while serving as a Minister in Howard's cabinet. As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:36pm:

As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false.

And you know this, because?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 7:41pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:36pm: As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false. And you know this, because?

I'll answer your question with a question. Why would the Minister for Health (I think that's what he was at the time) be involved in secret briefings regarding the ADF in Iraq? In any case, only the Minister for Defence and probably the Foreign Minister would have had any briefings on the Iraq war. It's just common sense. I can't see the Minister for Education sitting in on a war briefing!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:10pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:41pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:36pm: As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false. And you know this, because? I'll answer your question with a question. Why would the Minister for Health (I think that's what he was at the time) be involved in secret briefings regarding the ADF in Iraq? In any case, only the Minister for Defence and probably the Foreign Minister would have had any briefings on the Iraq war. It's just common sense. I can't see the Minister for Education sitting in on a war briefing!

Really? What about Abbott the confidante? Do you think senior ministers are generally frozen out of secret discussions? Isn't that a primary complaint against Rudd by his former senior ministers.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:11pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:10pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:41pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:36pm: As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false. And you know this, because? I'll answer your question with a question. Why would the Minister for Health (I think that's what he was at the time) be involved in secret briefings regarding the ADF in Iraq? In any case, only the Minister for Defence and probably the Foreign Minister would have had any briefings on the Iraq war. It's just common sense. I can't see the Minister for Education sitting in on a war briefing! Really? What about Abbott the confidante? Do you think senior ministers are generally frozen out of secret discussions? Isn't that a primary complaint against Rudd by his former senior ministers.

It is called secret for a reason. My God!  :o

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:13pm:

It is called secret for a reason. My God!  :o

Haven't really met pollies, have you.

You're suggesting a senior minister of the crown, and a close personal confidante of the then prime minister, cannot be trusted with confidential information.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:13pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:10pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:41pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:36pm: As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false. And you know this, because? I'll answer your question with a question. Why would the Minister for Health (I think that's what he was at the time) be involved in secret briefings regarding the ADF in Iraq? In any case, only the Minister for Defence and probably the Foreign Minister would have had any briefings on the Iraq war. It's just common sense. I can't see the Minister for Education sitting in on a war briefing! Really? What about Abbott the confidante? Do you think senior ministers are generally frozen out of secret discussions? Isn't that a primary complaint against Rudd by his former senior ministers. It is called secret for a reason. My God!  :o

Secret within cabinet ?

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:17pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:13pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:10pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:41pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 7:36pm: As such, he would not have been present at any secret briefings on the war. Your argument that he knew as well is patently, blatantly false. And you know this, because? I'll answer your question with a question. Why would the Minister for Health (I think that's what he was at the time) be involved in secret briefings regarding the ADF in Iraq? In any case, only the Minister for Defence and probably the Foreign Minister would have had any briefings on the Iraq war. It's just common sense. I can't see the Minister for Education sitting in on a war briefing! Really? What about Abbott the confidante? Do you think senior ministers are generally frozen out of secret discussions? Isn't that a primary complaint against Rudd by his former senior ministers. It is called secret for a reason. My God!  :o Secret within cabinet ?

You truly are stupid, aren't you? Briefings on Iraq would have been marked secret and therefore only select members of the cabinet would have attended, such as Defence Minister and perhaps Foreign Minister and possibly the Attorney-General to weigh in on legal advice. Contents of those briefings would not have been discussed with other Ministers, such as the Minister for Climate Change. It's just common sense!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:21pm:

You truly are stupid, aren't you? Briefings on Iraq would have been marked secret and therefore only select members of the cabinet would have attended, such as Defence Minister and perhaps Foreign Minister and possibly the Attorney-General to weigh in on legal advice. Contents of those briefings would not have been discussed with other Ministers, such as the Minister for Climate Change. It's just common sense!

I like how you make it up as you go along!

You're so sure who was where and who heard what... Have you met pollies?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:23pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:21pm: You truly are stupid, aren't you? Briefings on Iraq would have been marked secret and therefore only select members of the cabinet would have attended, such as Defence Minister and perhaps Foreign Minister and possibly the Attorney-General to weigh in on legal advice. Contents of those briefings would not have been discussed with other Ministers, such as the Minister for Climate Change. It's just common sense! I like how you make it up as you go along! You're so sure who was where and who heard what... Have you met pollies?

Yep, worked in the office of a Federal MP for a while. Less than enlightening experience, given it was a Labor MP. Also, I wasn't making anything up - it's just pure and simple common sense. Why would Abbott be involved in Defence briefings on Iraq if he was Minister of Health at the time? Answer: he wouldn't have been and would have had no more information on Iraq than you or I. Is that too difficult for a single-cell organism such as yourself to understand?

He probably didn't know from official briefings - he would not hasve been involved.

On the special run about the Howard years it was clear than most Liberal ministers hadn't worked out that workchoices hurt people - they were completly oblivious to the actual facts but could sprout the official line by rote.

Even Abbnott with his policy to turn all the boats around was quoted to have said that Howard was able to do it so he could see no problem, Obviously he either forgot or was never aware that Howard stopped doing it after he had directed a turn around where people drowned.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:26pm:

Also, I wasn't making anything up - it's just pure and simple common sense. Why would Abbott be involved in Defence briefings on Iraq if he was Minister of Health at the time? Answer: he wouldn't have been and would have had no more information on Iraq than you or I. Is that too difficult for a single-cell organism such as yourself to understand?

You seem to imagine politics is like a predictable geological process... You're under the delusion that no PM speaks to anyone but the ones you imagine he does on certain subjects... because? Who knows? Suits your agenda?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:32pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:26pm: Also, I wasn't making anything up - it's just pure and simple common sense. Why would Abbott be involved in Defence briefings on Iraq if he was Minister of Health at the time? Answer: he wouldn't have been and would have had no more information on Iraq than you or I. Is that too difficult for a single-cell organism such as yourself to understand? You seem to imagine politics is like a predictable geological process... You're under the delusion that no PM speaks to anyone but the ones you imagine he does on certain subjects... because? Who knows? Suits your agenda?

Never worked in government, have you? Confidentiality actually has meaning in government, you know? I doubt any responsible PM would talk about secret matters to those who have no right/reason to know about them. One of my uncle's was a high-ranking officer in the RAAF prior to retiring. He is still unable to talk about aspects of his work and to do so would leave him open to criminal charges. Get my drift now?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:49pm:

Never worked in government, have you? Confidentiality actually has meaning in government, you know? I doubt any responsible PM would talk about secret matters to those who have no right/reason to know about them. One of my uncle's was a high-ranking officer in the RAAF prior to retiring. He is still unable to talk about aspects of his work and to do so would leave him open to criminal charges. Get my drift now?

Certainly have worked with government... What you're saying is that no authorised personnel may talk to anybody about anything they like. which is true.

But we're not talking about anybody talking to anyone... We're talking about a PM talking to a senior minister who is also a close personal confidante... Or do you imagine Abbott would dob Howard in?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:56pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:49pm: Never worked in government, have you? Confidentiality actually has meaning in government, you know? I doubt any responsible PM would talk about secret matters to those who have no right/reason to know about them. One of my uncle's was a high-ranking officer in the RAAF prior to retiring. He is still unable to talk about aspects of his work and to do so would leave him open to criminal charges. Get my drift now? Certainly have worked with government... What you're saying is that no authorised personnel may talk to anybody about anything they like. which is true. But we're not talking about anybody talking to anyone... We're talking about a PM talking to a senior minister who is also a close personal confidante... Or do you imagine Abbott would dob Howard in?

If Howard talked to Tony Abbott about something he had no clearance to be privy to, then Howard is in the wrong. Having said that, I can't see Howard doing that - he and Abbott were never that close.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:56pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:49pm: Never worked in government, have you? Confidentiality actually has meaning in government, you know? I doubt any responsible PM would talk about secret matters to those who have no right/reason to know about them. One of my uncle's was a high-ranking officer in the RAAF prior to retiring. He is still unable to talk about aspects of his work and to do so would leave him open to criminal charges. Get my drift now? Certainly have worked with government... What you're saying is that no authorised personnel may talk to anybody about anything they like. which is true. But we're not talking about anybody talking to anyone... We're talking about a PM talking to a senior minister who is also a close personal confidante... Or do you imagine Abbott would dob Howard in? If Howard talked to Tony Abbott about something he had no clearance to be privy to, then Howard is in the wrong.

Course there'd be the problem of proving it.

Senior politicians certainly usher senior public servants out of the room when discussing secret cabinet business during a conversation with them... But within cabinet they are much more collegial and trust each other well enough with confidential information.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 9:03pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:59pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:56pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26th, 2012 at 8:49pm: Never worked in government, have you? Confidentiality actually has meaning in government, you know? I doubt any responsible PM would talk about secret matters to those who have no right/reason to know about them. One of my uncle's was a high-ranking officer in the RAAF prior to retiring. He is still unable to talk about aspects of his work and to do so would leave him open to criminal charges. Get my drift now? Certainly have worked with government... What you're saying is that no authorised personnel may talk to anybody about anything they like. which is true. But we're not talking about anybody talking to anyone... We're talking about a PM talking to a senior minister who is also a close personal confidante... Or do you imagine Abbott would dob Howard in? If Howard talked to Tony Abbott about something he had no clearance to be privy to, then Howard is in the wrong. Course there'd be the problem of proving it. Senior politicians certainly usher senior public servants out of the room when discussing secret cabinet business during a conversation with them... But within cabinet they are much more collegial and trust each other well enough with confidential information.

If that was indeed the case, we may never know. So those who insinuated that Abbott knew more about Iraq than he let on are basing their accusation on thoughts as flimsy as wet paper.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 9:05pm:

So those who insinuated that Abbott knew more about Iraq than he let on are basing their accusation on thoughts as flimsy as wet paper.

As are you.

A.P, next you will be trying to spin than no Lib ministers noticed all the paperwork that past over their desks concerning the wheat for weapons scandal ... and no discussions took place around Abbott.

Go on, pretend you were there and can say with certainty it couldn't of happened because you are an Abbott sycophant.

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 1:09pm:

Interesting no links to the post

Quote:

http://www.ajustaustralia.com/resource.php?act=attache&id=27

____ wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 1:12pm:

Salad, in the child torture numbers, can I count the children Howard sent back to Afghanistan and then were killed by Howard's mean spirited policy? Or should we just count via the ones that were mentally scared by Howard's Nauru policy, the one Abbott wants. How about the child suicides because of this Liberal Party torture, in or out?

Numbers please. Are we talking about 7....maybe 28....or even 39. NUMBERS PLEASE.

A failed application for refugee status is not torture.