http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/13912577/abbotts-comments-misleading-refugee-group/

Refugee advocates have attacked the federal opposition's proposal to penalise asylum seekers not carrying all documentation, saying it over-simplifies a complicated issue.

In a press conference in Sydney on Saturday, opposition leader Tony Abbott said asylum seekers believed to have destroyed their documents before arriving in Australia will earn a presumption against refugee status under a coalition government.

"Everyone who comes to Indonesia from Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan normally comes by plane, Mr Abbott said.

"So the vast majority of people have had documents before they got on the boats."

But Refugee Action Coalition Sydney spokesman Ian Rintoul said the comments were misleading.

"The issue of documentation is not as straight forward as the opposition is making out," he told AAP.

Mr Rintoul said many asylum seekers travelled by fake passports to Indonesia, which they destroyed on arrival in order to prevent any possible criminal proceedings.

Others destroyed valid passports in order to avoid being deported by the Indonesian government, he said.

"They may not have passports but they have other documentation, such as driver's licenses.

"People want to be identified because they can't be processed in Australia unless they are identified."

"It (the announcement) is all about the coalition painting a picture that a lot of people are trying to take advantage of Australia.

"There is no indication that this is the case.

"It is not easy to get refugee status in Australia."

He also rejected moves to review approvals of refugees and the establishment of a new integrity commissioner to audit all refugee decisions.
"This would just create another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy," he said.

So Rintoul is saying that they destroy their passport so their country of origin and deported back to their country - but they have a driver's license. Which identifies the country they are allowed to drive in. I wonder if it has their address and what sort of vehicle they can drive?

Rintoul is a tool

He accepts these people destroy their paperwork to engage in illegal activities and jump the queue. He abandons a group of rich people in favour of the poor people in the refugee queue.

Hey Forrest, do you consider anyone who has a different opinion to you stupid? I suggest you look in a mirror ... oh wait, you can't see your reflection can you .... stupid is the title you gave this thread ... gives you no credibility .... ohh, you never had any did you?

John Smith wrote on Jun 9^th, 2012 at 6:47pm:

Hey Forrest, do you consider anyone who has a different opinion to you stupid? I suggest you look in a mirror ... oh wait, you can't see your reflection can you .... stupid is the title you gave this thread ... gives you no credibility .... ohh, you never had any did you?

When the facts are there in plain sight and they still talk as if it's not - they are moronic!!! Just like most lefties on here

tony's ideas good.
No ID, get lost.
Come here illegally, get lost.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 9^th, 2012 at 6:46pm:

So Rintoul is saying that they destroy their passport so their country of origin and deported back to their country - but they have a driver's license. Which identifies the country they are allowed to drive in. I wonder if it has their address and what sort of vehicle they can drive?

So what if they have a driver's licence?  Other than being a form of proof of identity, which could be used for checking for a criminal history, it isn't much use to the Australian authorities.  It doesn't prove what nationality they are.  You're not suggesting that they be deported to a particular country just because they used to drive a car, truck or bus there are you?


Maqqa wrote on Jun 9^th, 2012 at 6:46pm:

He accepts these people destroy their paperwork to engage in illegal activities

Where does he accept that or even mention it?  You are making up things as you go along.  Is your motto "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"?

Do you ever think before you post this sort of crap?

And, by the way, a presumption against refugee status because a person does not have documents is a breach of the Geneva Convention on Refugees.

If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan???

Frances wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 1:18am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 9th, 2012 at 6:46pm: So Rintoul is saying that they destroy their passport so their country of origin and deported back to their country - but they have a driver's license. Which identifies the country they are allowed to drive in. I wonder if it has their address and what sort of vehicle they can drive? So what if they have a driver's licence?  Other than being a form of proof of identity, which could be used for checking for a criminal history, it isn't much use to the Australian authorities.  It doesn't prove what nationality they are.  You're not suggesting that they be deported to a particular country just because they used to drive a car, truck or bus there are you? What's  driver's license? Its proof that you are allowed to drive in certain country. Generally its you country of origin. Maqqa wrote on Jun 9th, 2012 at 6:46pm: He accepts these people destroy their paperwork to engage in illegal activities Where does he accept that or even mention it?  You are making up things as you go along.  Is your motto "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"? Mr Rintoul said many asylum seekers travelled by fake passports to Indonesia, which they destroyed on arrival in order to prevent any possible criminal proceedings. Do you ever think before you post this sort of crap? I often ask the same of the left And, by the way, a presumption against refugee status because a person does not have documents is a breach of the Geneva Convention on Refugees. Show me the exact ruling in the UN Convention that Abbott will be breaching.

Macca you can be an idiot sometimes ... my brother in law has a NSW license, but lives and resides in Norway .... Australia is certainly not his country of origin

John Smith wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

Macca you can be an idiot sometimes ... my brother in law has a NSW license, but lives and resides in Norway .... Australia is certainly not his country of origin

You are an idiot all the time and there's a difference between third world countries compared to Aust and Norway

Plus we only have your word for it.

thats your response? the response you give when your not giving a response ... you  are a politician aren't you?

John Smith wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:36am:

you  are a politician aren't you?

We only have his word for it....

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:28am:

If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan???

The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something?

If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them?

Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH!

Idiot.

Gist wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:58am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot.

You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA

That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:00am:

Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well.

But Abbott voted NO to offshore processing ......

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

Frances wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 1:18am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 9th, 2012 at 6:46pm: So Rintoul is saying that they destroy their passport so their country of origin and deported back to their country - but they have a driver's license. Which identifies the country they are allowed to drive in. I wonder if it has their address and what sort of vehicle they can drive? So what if they have a driver's licence?  Other than being a form of proof of identity, which could be used for checking for a criminal history, it isn't much use to the Australian authorities.  It doesn't prove what nationality they are.  You're not suggesting that they be deported to a particular country just because they used to drive a car, truck or bus there are you? What's  driver's license? Its proof that you are allowed to drive in certain country. Generally its you country of origin. Maqqa wrote on Jun 9th, 2012 at 6:46pm: He accepts these people destroy their paperwork to engage in illegal activities Where does he accept that or even mention it?  You are making up things as you go along.  Is your motto "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"? Mr Rintoul said many asylum seekers travelled by fake passports to Indonesia, which they destroyed on arrival in order to prevent any possible criminal proceedings. Do you ever think before you post this sort of crap? I often ask the same of the left And, by the way, a presumption against refugee status because a person does not have documents is a breach of the Geneva Convention on Refugees. Show me the exact ruling in the UN Convention that Abbott will be breaching.

Well said Magga :D :D

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:00am:

Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well.

Offshore? Where offshore? There is nowhere. The courts ruled against it and Tony voted it down.

And how long will you hold them there? You can't send them anywhere else because nowhere else will accept them.

So you'll be happy to pay megabucks to keep them imprisoned forever somewhere rather than let them out, get a job, pay taxes. You do realise it'd be far, far cheaper to give them welfare, a house to live in free everything FOR LIFE than to keep them locked up?

You are very generous this morning.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:00am:

You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA

OK then, so if they don't have any paperwork, you refuse to accept them, contrary to the Geneva Convention on refugees.  One question (sorry - I know you don't like answering questions, but I thought I'd ask it anyway) - what do you do with them?  You can't send them back where they came from, as there's no paperwork to prove where that was.  Do you keep them offshore in detention until they die of old age?

Frances wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:18pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA OK then, so if they don't have any paperwork, you refuse to accept them, contrary to the Geneva Convention on refugees.  One question (sorry - I know you don't like answering questions, but I thought I'd ask it anyway) - what do you do with them?  You can't send them back where they came from, as there's no paperwork to prove where that was.  Do you keep them offshore in detention until they die of old age?

They have no answers to these good questions Frances, they only have thought bubbles they can chant as a slogan.

"STOP THE BOATS!"

Beyond that, they don't have a clue.

Gist wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:

Frances wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:18pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA OK then, so if they don't have any paperwork, you refuse to accept them, contrary to the Geneva Convention on refugees.  One question (sorry - I know you don't like answering questions, but I thought I'd ask it anyway) - what do you do with them?  You can't send them back where they came from, as there's no paperwork to prove where that was.  Do you keep them offshore in detention until they die of old age? They have no answers to these good questions Frances, they only have thought bubbles they can chant as a slogan. "STOP THE BOATS!" Beyond that, they don't have a clue.

Of course you are assuming they will continue to come at the current rate.

You are wrong - OF COURSE!

(1) Under Howard's Pacific Solution - 104 people arrived in 2007 and 200 the year before that. That's 2 boats a year. This was easier to process than 15,000 arrivals since 2008 or about 300+ boats

(2) It worked because there was a clear message that we would process them offshore therefore if they did not have the correct paperwork then they would not be permitted in. This message needs to be sent to Indonesia.

(3) There's a history of it working because the Pacific Solution was implemented in 2003 because in 2002 there were more than 3,000 illegals as a result of using Keating's old system.

Gist wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:50am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. Offshore? Where offshore? There is nowhere. The courts ruled against it and Tony voted it down. And how long will you hold them there? You can't send them anywhere else because nowhere else will accept them. So you'll be happy to pay megabucks to keep them imprisoned forever somewhere rather than let them out, get a job, pay taxes. You do realise it'd be far, far cheaper to give them welfare, a house to live in free everything FOR LIFE than to keep them locked up? You are very generous this morning.

MORON!!!

We were processing them offshore then Labor got rid off it now it wants it back again!!!

Maqqa wrote on Jun 9^th, 2012 at 6:42pm:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/13912577/abbotts-comments-misleading-refugee-group/ Refugee advocates have attacked the federal opposition's proposal to penalise asylum seekers not carrying all documentation, saying it over-simplifies a complicated issue. In a press conference in Sydney on Saturday, opposition leader Tony Abbott said asylum seekers believed to have destroyed their documents before arriving in Australia will earn a presumption against refugee status under a coalition government. "Everyone who comes to Indonesia from Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan normally comes by plane, Mr Abbott said. "So the vast majority of people have had documents before they got on the boats." But Refugee Action Coalition Sydney spokesman Ian Rintoul said the comments were misleading. "The issue of documentation is not as straight forward as the opposition is making out," he told AAP. Mr Rintoul said many asylum seekers travelled by fake passports to Indonesia, which they destroyed on arrival in order to prevent any possible criminal proceedings. Others destroyed valid passports in order to avoid being deported by the Indonesian government, he said. "They may not have passports but they have other documentation, such as driver's licenses. "People want to be identified because they can't be processed in Australia unless they are identified." "It (the announcement) is all about the coalition painting a picture that a lot of people are trying to take advantage of Australia. "There is no indication that this is the case. "It is not easy to get refugee status in Australia." He also rejected moves to review approvals of refugees and the establishment of a new integrity commissioner to audit all refugee decisions. "This would just create another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy," he said.

Let me highlight the stupidity again

Rintoul says many travel to Indonesia with a FAKE passport then they destroy the fake documents. They then present a driver's license in Indonesia/Australia as a means of identification - why should we allow them in Australia if they have a fake passport in the first place??!!!

Of course - the fake passport was destroy in Indonesia therefore they never committed the crime under Australian laws.

If you have committed crimes in other countries the Immigration Dept has the authority to reject your VISA application based on these crimes.

John Smith wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:28am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. But Abbott voted NO to offshore processing ......

WRONG - he voted NO to offshore processing only in Malaysia. He has REPEATEDLY offered to support government legislation bringing back offshore processing as long as it doesn't include Malaysia.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:05am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:28am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. But Abbott voted NO to offshore processing ...... WRONG - he voted NO to offshore processing only in Malaysia. He has REPEATEDLY offered to support government legislation bringing back offshore processing as long as it doesn't include Malaysia.

The Bill has two factors

(1) Vote "Yes" to Offshore processing

(2) Nominate Malaysia as the offshore destination


Abbot agreed to point 1 - he has always agreed to this.

Abbott disagreed with point 2 - because the High Court ruled Malaysia as illegal

Abbott offered Nauru as an alternative - but Gillard insists it must be Malaysia or it's nothing!!!

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:11am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 9:05am: John Smith wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:28am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. But Abbott voted NO to offshore processing ...... WRONG - he voted NO to offshore processing only in Malaysia. He has REPEATEDLY offered to support government legislation bringing back offshore processing as long as it doesn't include Malaysia. The Bill has two factors (1) Vote "Yes" to Offshore processing (2) Nominate Malaysia as the offshore destination Abbot agreed to point 1 - he has always agreed to this. Abbott disagreed with point 2 - because the High Court ruled Malaysia as illegal Abbott offered Nauru as an alternative - but Gillard insists it must be Malaysia or it's nothing!!!

Naturally, the Leftards quite willingly leave out certain things (such as the FACT that Malaysia was ruled illegal by the full bench of the High Court) to suit their twisted point of view...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 9:11am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 9:05am: John Smith wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:28am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. But Abbott voted NO to offshore processing ...... WRONG - he voted NO to offshore processing only in Malaysia. He has REPEATEDLY offered to support government legislation bringing back offshore processing as long as it doesn't include Malaysia. The Bill has two factors (1) Vote "Yes" to Offshore processing (2) Nominate Malaysia as the offshore destination Abbot agreed to point 1 - he has always agreed to this. Abbott disagreed with point 2 - because the High Court ruled Malaysia as illegal Abbott offered Nauru as an alternative - but Gillard insists it must be Malaysia or it's nothing!!! Naturally, the Leftards quite willingly leave out certain things (such as the FACT that Malaysia was ruled illegal by the full bench of the High Court) to suit their twisted point of view...

The same way GIST and Greens will say that a repealing of the carbon tax won't reduce the cost of living eg electricity bill

Of course it won't reduce cost of living. The same way that it won't reduce the number of homosexuals in this world

Gist wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:50am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. Offshore? Where offshore? There is nowhere. The courts ruled against it and Tony voted it down. And how long will you hold them there? You can't send them anywhere else because nowhere else will accept them. So you'll be happy to pay megabucks to keep them imprisoned forever somewhere rather than let them out, get a job, pay taxes. You do realise it'd be far, far cheaper to give them welfare, a house to live in free everything FOR LIFE than to keep them locked up? You are very generous this morning.

They were being processed offshore - very successfully under Howard - until Rudd thought it'd be a good idea to change everything in the name of being seen as "compassionate". Now all these people smugglers and illegal immigrants see when they look at us is what a soft touch we are. By the way, the High Court only ruled against offshore processing in Malaysia - not everywhere. Also, Abbott only voted against offshore processing in Malaysia - not everywhere.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:24am:

The same way GIST and Greens will say that a repealing of the carbon tax won't reduce the cost of living eg electricity bill Of course it won't reduce cost of living. The same way that it won't reduce the number of homosexuals in this world

Thank you for finally admitting the bleeding obvious. Of course it won't reduce the cost of living. But it WILL reduce incomes - pensions WILL be cut. Income tax WILL increase. But the cost of living will still be higher. Great plan there Lieberals.  :P

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 11:39pm:

Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:50am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. Offshore? Where offshore? There is nowhere. The courts ruled against it and Tony voted it down. And how long will you hold them there? You can't send them anywhere else because nowhere else will accept them. So you'll be happy to pay megabucks to keep them imprisoned forever somewhere rather than let them out, get a job, pay taxes. You do realise it'd be far, far cheaper to give them welfare, a house to live in free everything FOR LIFE than to keep them locked up? You are very generous this morning. MORON!!! We were processing them offshore then Labor got rid off it now it wants it back again!!!

You can call me a moron all you like but that doesn't answer the questions I asked. Care to answer them? Or are they just too uncomfortable for you?

Gist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:17am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 9:24am: The same way GIST and Greens will say that a repealing of the carbon tax won't reduce the cost of living eg electricity bill Of course it won't reduce cost of living. The same way that it won't reduce the number of homosexuals in this world Thank you for finally admitting the bleeding obvious. Of course it won't reduce the cost of living. But it WILL reduce incomes - pensions WILL be cut. Income tax WILL increase. But the cost of living will still be higher. Great plan there Lieberals.  :P

And it won't decrease the number of homosexuals in Australia either so live with it princess!!

Gist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:20am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 11:39pm: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:50am: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:28am: If you can't prove you are who you say you are, then bugger off. That's the gist of the message. About time someone had the balls to come out and propose it as policy. I wonder how many of the men on those boats had escaped during the mass escape from the prison in Afghanistan??? The more stupid the idea, the more likely you are to think it's a great idea. What is it with you? Did someone whack you with the moron stick or something? If someone turns up and you can't prove where they came from then how are you going to send them anywhere? What makes you think the country you're trying to send them to will be as stupid as you and actually take them? Oh of course! They won't! Because they're NOT as stupid as you. DOH! Idiot. You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA That's why the Pacific Solution worked so well. Offshore? Where offshore? There is nowhere. The courts ruled against it and Tony voted it down. And how long will you hold them there? You can't send them anywhere else because nowhere else will accept them. So you'll be happy to pay megabucks to keep them imprisoned forever somewhere rather than let them out, get a job, pay taxes. You do realise it'd be far, far cheaper to give them welfare, a house to live in free everything FOR LIFE than to keep them locked up? You are very generous this morning. MORON!!! We were processing them offshore then Labor got rid off it now it wants it back again!!! You can call me a moron all you like but that doesn't answer the questions I asked. Care to answer them? Or are they just too uncomfortable for you?

Where offshore?

It's called Nauru

Gist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:20am:

You can call me a moron all you like but that doesn't answer the questions I asked. Care to answer them? Or are they just too uncomfortable for you?

I don't think he answered my questions either.  Bit of a waste of time asking him anything really.  It appears that his powers of comprehension are too limited to be of use.....

Funny that the conservatives and their supporters are not racist, they just come out on the anti race side of every single issue - they are very unlucky - hey and it is politically a vote winner as well - how fortunate for them.

Liberals - playing to the most base human emotions for political gain since 1996.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:02pm:

Funny that the conservatives and their supporters are not racist, they just come out on the anti race side of every single issue - they are very unlucky - hey and it is politically a vote winner as well - how fortunate for them. Liberals - playing to the most base human emotions for political gain since 1996.

they aren't racist ... they hate everyone else equally ...

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:02pm:

Funny that the conservatives and their supporters are not racist, they just come out on the anti race side of every single issue - they are very unlucky - hey and it is politically a vote winner as well - how fortunate for them. Liberals - playing to the most base human emotions for political gain since 1996.

Any discussion in terms of Aborigines, illegals are hijacked by the left accusing us of racism.

You assumed racism because you have no other argument

Frances wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:45pm:

Gist wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:20am: You can call me a moron all you like but that doesn't answer the questions I asked. Care to answer them? Or are they just too uncomfortable for you? I don't think he answered my questions either.  Bit of a waste of time asking him anything really.  It appears that his powers of comprehension are too limited to be of use.....

And now he's changing the subject by trying to make out that he is being falsely accused of being racist.  Rather sad that he's incapable of debating anything properly.

Does he ever have any original ideas?

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 11:38pm:

Gist wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:30pm: Frances wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:18pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 10:00am: You process them offshore and send a clear message if they don't have paperwork - you don't get a VISA OK then, so if they don't have any paperwork, you refuse to accept them, contrary to the Geneva Convention on refugees.  One question (sorry - I know you don't like answering questions, but I thought I'd ask it anyway) - what do you do with them?  You can't send them back where they came from, as there's no paperwork to prove where that was.  Do you keep them offshore in detention until they die of old age? They have no answers to these good questions Frances, they only have thought bubbles they can chant as a slogan. "STOP THE BOATS!" Beyond that, they don't have a clue. Of course you are assuming they will continue to come at the current rate. You are wrong - OF COURSE! (1) Under Howard's Pacific Solution - 104 people arrived in 2007 and 200 the year before that. That's 2 boats a year. This was easier to process than 15,000 arrivals since 2008 or about 300+ boats (2) It worked because there was a clear message that we would process them offshore therefore if they did not have the correct paperwork then they would not be permitted in. This message needs to be sent to Indonesia. (3) There's a history of it working because the Pacific Solution was implemented in 2003 because in 2002 there were more than 3,000 illegals as a result of using Keating's old system.

Just because you didn't understand the answer does not mean I did not answer it

What would you do with them? The same you would under Howard's Pacific Solution - hence my reference to the Pacific Solution

Those who absolutely do not have then they stay in detention until their identity is established - PERIOD! This is occurring now.

Oh.  So that was an answer to my question was it?  Sorry but, given that it didn't really address what I asked, I failed to recognise it as an answer at the time.....

Frances wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:10pm:

Oh.  So that was an answer to my question was it?  Sorry but, given that it didn't really address what I asked, I failed to recognise it as an answer at the time.....

Just because you did not understand the answer does not mean I didn't answer it!!

refugee advocate ........... paid traitor

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 9:11pm:

Just because you did not understand the answer does not mean I didn't answer it!!

I understood what you posted.  It didn't go very far towards answering the question though, but I'm used to these tactics from you.  Whenever you are asked a question that you can't answer fully (which is quite often) you just keep repeating yourself.  It does get rather tedious.  Maybe the qualities of your arguments will improve once you start high school.