A five-year-old was not raped on Nauru, immigration officials say

The five-year-old boy allegedly raped on Nauru doesn't even exist, a Senate committee in Canberra has been told that.

“There is no five-year-old child, it’s a figment,” immigration department secretary Michael Pezzullo said this morning.

Refugee advocates seized on the rape claim ahead of the failed High Court challenge to Australia’s offshore processing arrangements.

But department official Cheryl-Anne Moe said the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped.

“It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/on-the-tele/xxx/news-story/792fc7f9aa1f42b6bb550e64d50bf780

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said.

ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D

Oh, so just sexual assault, its ok, no penetration.

Off we go then, send them back so they can get raped.

Do you feel disgust when you look at yourself?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:23am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D

so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:25am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner.

you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:28am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian?

Ian is 5 years of age, he hasnt had the chat yet.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:28am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian?

Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:28am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian?

are you sure its groping now? I mean, you were slandering the staff on Nauru calling them all pedophiles based on the previous claim of rape. Now you are attemptiing to deflect because your shameful claim has proven to be erroneous, (as I predicted.} Now we have a report stating skiin to skin contact occurred. All you have to do now Giovanni is show exactly where it states there was any "groping".

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:20am:

“It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said.

Hand to hand? Hand to head?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:43am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals?

maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there!

lee wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:50am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head?

Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim.

Watch the bullshit, ian.

I've done no such thing.

That's your only warning.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:47am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? are you sure its groping now? I mean, you were slandering the staff on Nauru calling them all pedophiles based on the previous claim of rape. Now you are attemptiing to deflect because your shameful claim has proven to be erroneous, (as I predicted.} Now we have a report stating skiin to skin contact occurred. All you have to do now Giovanni is show exactly where it states there was any "groping".

you can call it whatever you like Ian, for claims of this nature to be made I think it's safe to assume they weren't talking about shaking hands.

as for the rest of your crap, can you show me where I ever called the staff at Nauru pedo's?

and newsflash for you genius, it wasn't MY claim. I was merely commenting on a claim made in the news.

is there anything else you want to get wrong for today or do you feel you've had your arse handed to you enough for one post?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim.

speaking of unproven, still waiting for that link?

Quote:

.................But department official Cheryl-Anne Moe said the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said................

So, did someone shake his hand ?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:51am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there!

Thats possibly true but it doesnt give  licence to maliciously slander does it? The problem with you and your fellow beta male Greggary is that you arent on the side of the refugees as you claim, as you have displayed here and on other issues you have a very low moral character and and a non existent ethical compass.

armpit you got the wrong link you id jut

Lying cretins. How many other lies have they told.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:56am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:53am: lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim. speaking of unproven, still waiting for that link?

I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you?

A kiss on the neck is sexual assault. Patting a child's cheek can be sexual assault, if whoever sees it, deems it so.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:59am:

Thats possibly true but it doesnt give  licence to maliciously slander does it?

who said it does?
ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:59am:

as you have displayed here and on other issues you have a very low moral character and and a non existent ethical compass.

is knowingly falsely claiming that I called staff at Nauru pedo's considered low or high moral character? and what sort of ethics does it display?

lee wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:01am:

A kiss on the neck is sexual assault. Patting a child's cheek can be sexual assault, if whoever sees it, deems it so.

2 things. Who has now made the claim of sexual assault and how has this been proven?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:00am:

I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you?

you claimed I called staff at Nauru pedo's,  either prove the claim or withdraw your comment you dickhead.

I suspect armpits story is bullsh1t

this link doesn't work and a google search finds nothing to support it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:55am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:53am: lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim. Watch the bullshit, ian. I've done no such thing. That's your only warning.

Cut the cr@p. Every poster on this forum knows that you suggested the staff in these detention centres were kiddy fiddlers. Dont be so facile as to think that you can give me a "warning". Whatta you gonna do, flap your wrists around a bit more?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:19am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:55am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:53am: lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim. Watch the bullshit, ian. I've done no such thing. That's your only warning. Cut the cr@p. Every poster on this forum knows that you suggested the staff in these detention centres were kiddy fiddlers. Dont be so facile as to think that you can give me a "warning". Whatta you gonna do, flap your wrists around a bit more?

I gave you your warning.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:03am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:00am: I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you? you claimed I called staff at Nauru pedo's,  either prove the claim or withdraw your comment you dickhead.

if i feel like it later I may search for the posts. I have better things to do than worry about your hurt feelings. you dont like it then dont make the claim.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:21am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:03am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:00am: I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you? you claimed I called staff at Nauru pedo's,  either prove the claim or withdraw your comment you dickhead. if i feel like it later I may search for the posts. I have better things to do than worry about your hurt feelings. you dont like it then dont make the claim.

hurt feelings? you couldn't hurt my feelings if you tried.

I'm not surprised though, you are to cowardly to own up to your mistakes.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:20am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:19am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:55am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:53am: lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim. Watch the bullshit, ian. I've done no such thing. That's your only warning. Cut the cr@p. Every poster on this forum knows that you suggested the staff in these detention centres were kiddy fiddlers. Dont be so facile as to think that you can give me a "warning". Whatta you gonna do, flap your wrists around a bit more? I gave you your warning.

Really? Dont slander people on unproven allegations and you wont have cause to get your panties in a twist. You dont even have the intestinal fortitude to own your comments and admit you were wrong.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:22am:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:21am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:03am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:00am: I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you? you claimed I called staff at Nauru pedo's,  either prove the claim or withdraw your comment you dickhead. if i feel like it later I may search for the posts. I have better things to do than worry about your hurt feelings. you dont like it then dont make the claim. hurt feelings? you couldn't hurt my feelings if you tried. I'm not surprised though, you are to cowardly to own up to your mistakes.

Lol. I would make you cry in about 30 seconds if I wished to.

So it went from 5 year old gets raped to 10 year old gets skin on skin contact. And we don't even know what that is. No charges have been laid, the kid didn't need any medical treatment. What a joke. Stinking liars.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:24am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:22am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:21am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:03am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:00am: I dont have a link to unproven allegations. Do you? you claimed I called staff at Nauru pedo's,  either prove the claim or withdraw your comment you dickhead. if i feel like it later I may search for the posts. I have better things to do than worry about your hurt feelings. you dont like it then dont make the claim. hurt feelings? you couldn't hurt my feelings if you tried. I'm not surprised though, you are to cowardly to own up to your mistakes. Lol. I would make you cry in about 30 seconds if I wished to.

you must be talking about tears of laughter.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:24am:

So it went from 5 year old gets raped to 10 year old gets skin on skin contact. And we don't even know what that is. No charges have been laid, the kid didn't need any medical treatment. What a joke. Stinking liars.

actually it hasn't gone anywhere ... armpits link is a dud, and there is nothing on any of the news sites.

ian and double plus good have no problem with this sort of abuse:

"Authorities are investigating several allegations of the sexual abuse of children being held at Darwin's Wickham Point detention centre, doctors say."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-04/probe-underway-alleged-child-sex-abuse-in-detention-doctors/7138702

They do their best to cover it up, though.

I wonder why.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:23am:

You dont even have the intestinal fortitude to own your comments and admit you were wrong

I think Ian has been taking lessons from Maria :D :D .... when are you going to start admitting you were wrong, dopey?

check out 9msn numpty.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:23am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:20am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:19am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:55am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:53am: lee wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:50am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. Hand to hand? Hand to head? Thats the thing isnt it, we dont know. But apparently according to GreggaryPeccary, John Smith et all. Its ok to label all staff on Nauru pedophiles because of a single unproven claim. Watch the bullshit, ian. I've done no such thing. That's your only warning. Cut the cr@p. Every poster on this forum knows that you suggested the staff in these detention centres were kiddy fiddlers. Dont be so facile as to think that you can give me a "warning". Whatta you gonna do, flap your wrists around a bit more? I gave you your warning. Really? Dont slander people on unproven allegations and you wont have cause to get your panties in a twist. You dont even have the intestinal fortitude to own your comments and admit you were wrong.

IAN I would like you to say sorry to gweegy right now

Before his tanti get him banned, you know this forum is his whole life

;) ;) ;)

The five-year-old boy allegedly raped on Nauru does not exist, a Senate committee has been told.

"There is no five-year-old child, it's a figment," immigration department secretary Michael Pezzullo told an estimates hearing in Canberra on Monday.

He blamed refugee advocates for making inaccurate allegations and media advocacy "parading as journalism".




The department followed up the claims with pediatrician Karen Zwi who raised concerns about a case.

She did not say the child was five or had been raped, as reported by the ABC.

Department official Cheryl-anne Moy told the hearing the child at the centre of the claims was actually more than twice that age.

"The allegation was of a sexual assault from another child who was two years older - it was physical skin-to-skin contact," she said.

"It wasn't an allegation of rape."

The hearing was told the boy is now living in the community in NSW and receiving appropriate care.

"It would be very helpful for advocates ... to get their facts right," Mr Pezzullo said.

Refugee advocates seized on the rape claim ahead of the High Court rejecting a challenge to Australia's offshore processing arrangements.

The case had implications for 267 asylum seekers receiving medical attention in Australia who are now faced with being sent back to Nauru.

© AAP 2016

Politics


Send your photos, videos and stories to 9NEWS



Email

contact@9news.com.au


Large files

9news.wetransfer.com

You can remain anonymous. Click here for more information.





Property news: Five dream homes to drool over this week - realestate.com.au


We recommend
Recommendations powered by plista





button
The tragic reality behind photos of a sea lion pup sitting in a...

9News
 




'My daughter, future serial killer': man shares daughter’s...

9News
 




Cheeky wife message engraved inside man’s wedding ring sparks online debate

9News
 




Iraqi refugee says a dilapidated Paddington terrace should be his

9News
 




Men who 'left drunk mother to die' on beach to avoid prosecution

9News
 




'Warne proposed late night booty call' to reality TV star

9News
 



Are you prepared to run your own SMSF?

SPONSORED




End of Life Insurance in Australia

SPONSORED




The Solar Rebate: How (and Why) It Works

SPONSORED







Livefeed
LIVE FEED


p
Super Bowl 50: the ads that will reach millions of eyeballs this year

44 minutes ago


p
Bushfire emergency continues in south-west WA

33 minutes ago


p
Emergency crews on scene after waterfront restaurant and pier collapses on Lake Macquarie

An hour ago


p
Port Adelaide, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne and St Kilda denied top up players after AFL reconsiders doping ban substitution ruling

An hour ago i


Advertisement

Top News 

    Lady Gaga stuns with Super Bowl anthem as Denver starts strong 
Panthers v Broncos:  Lady Gaga stuns with Super Bowl anthem as Denver starts strong
y

    Waterfront restuarant collapses into water on NSW's Lake Macquarie 
WHOOPS:  Waterfront restuarant collapses into water on NSW's Lake Macquarie


    


Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/08/10/48/five-year-old-rape-victim-does-not-exist#bSkK7OCTWchQ8861.99

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:25am:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:24am: So it went from 5 year old gets raped to 10 year old gets skin on skin contact. And we don't even know what that is. No charges have been laid, the kid didn't need any medical treatment. What a joke. Stinking liars. actually it hasn't gone anywhere ... armpits link is a dud, and there is nothing on any of the news sites.

Here is the:

Link.

Notice the lie in the Thread title!

The allegation was of a sexual assault from another child who was two years older - it was physical skin-to-skin contact," she said.
It's an old allegation of 2 kids touching each other. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it.

so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story.

However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:36am:

thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise.

That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda.

The children in these centres all seem to have their own personal paeditrician, their own personal lawyer, their own personal psychologist.
They would be the most fussed over, monitored and catered to children in the southern hemisphere.
the idea that someone would target such children is fanciful.
If someone really wanted to target young and impressionable children, they would probably target children in one of sydneys mosques.

Oh Yeah, thats right...they already did.....case closed

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:36am:

thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise.

"Authorities are investigating several allegations of the sexual abuse of children being held at Darwin's Wickham Point detention centre, doctors say."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-04/probe-underway-alleged-child-sex-abuse-in-detention-doctors/7138702

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:38am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda.

I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:00am:

Lying cretins. How many other lies have they told.

1000's

Quote:

Refugee advocates telling porkies!!!

Since it appears to have not been Refugee advocates telling porkies do we have to Label AP at having told another porkie ?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:42am:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers.

The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:05pm:

The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates.

said no such thing, the senate merely asked where the information about a 5yr old being raped came from

But Mr Pezzullo told a parliamentary estimates committee the doctor did not tell media the child was five years old and did not know where this incorrect information came from

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:57am:

1000's

are we talking about the libs now?

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:05pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie.

well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:43pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. said no such thing, the senate merely asked where the information about a 5yr old being raped came from But Mr Pezzullo told a parliamentary estimates committee the doctor did not tell media the child was five years old and did not know where this incorrect information came from

......The five-year-old boy allegedly raped on Nauru does not exist, a Senate committee has been told.

"There is no five-year-old child, it's a figment," immigration department secretary Michael Pezzullo told an estimates hearing in Canberra on Monday.

He blamed refugee advocates for making inaccurate allegations and media advocacy "parading as journalism".

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:46pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:43pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. said no such thing, the senate merely asked where the information about a 5yr old being raped came from But Mr Pezzullo told a parliamentary estimates committee the doctor did not tell media the child was five years old and did not know where this incorrect information came from ......The five-year-old boy allegedly raped on Nauru does not exist, a Senate committee has been told. "There is no five-year-old child, it's a figment," immigration department secretary Michael Pezzullo told an estimates hearing in Canberra on Monday. He blamed refugee advocates for making inaccurate allegations and media advocacy "parading as journalism".

Easy question for you double, if he doesn't know who made the claims, how can he claim it was refugee advocates?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:45pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie. well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions.

speaking of defaming, found that link yet?

Lol, the drowning man clutching at anything. Funny to watch.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:49pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:45pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie. well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions. speaking of defaming, found that link yet?

My memory is good enough. Your hatred will burn you up eventually Giovanni.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:51pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:49pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:45pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie. well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions. speaking of defaming, found that link yet? My memory is good enough. Your hatred will burn you up eventually Giovanni.

your memory might be good enough for you, but out in the real world it doesn't cut the mustard.

Only one of us hates Ian, and I know it's not me. I don't hate people because of race or religion, but like you said, it will burn you up.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:50pm:

Lol, the drowning man clutching at anything. Funny to watch.

I love it Ian. All he needs to do is read the articles and he wouldn't keep making mistakes. ;D ;D

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:51pm:

However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise.

Oh yes, nearly missed this lie and defamation from Givovanni. he cant help himsef, those with low moral values mostly cant, they continue to trap themselves in their own urge to hate others, they dont even realise they are doing it.

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:53pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:51pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:49pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:45pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie. well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions. speaking of defaming, found that link yet? My memory is good enough. Your hatred will burn you up eventually Giovanni. your memory might be good enough for you, but out in the real world it doesn't cut the mustard. .

This isnt the real world. Its the internet.   ::)

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:54pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:50pm: Lol, the drowning man clutching at anything. Funny to watch. I love it Ian. All he needs to do is read the articles and he wouldn't keep making mistakes. ;D ;D

yes. His squirming and attempted projection onto others is great to watch. Him, greggary, karnal, all have the same M.O. 

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:59pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:54pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:50pm: Lol, the drowning man clutching at anything. Funny to watch. I love it Ian. All he needs to do is read the articles and he wouldn't keep making mistakes. ;D ;D yes. His squirming and attempted projection onto others is great to watch. Him, greggary, karnal, all have the same M.O.

Can't argue with that Ian. :)

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:57pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:53pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:51pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:49pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:45pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:05pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:42am: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:38am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:36am: thanks aussie/ double ... not sure why it didn't come up when I searched for it. so the story is that the media got it wrong, not the person who made the original claim? .. who'd a thunk it that the media 'embellishes' a story. However, that doesn't change the fact that kids are being abused in the detention centers. No matter how much Ian pretends otherwise. That's not embellishing. That's flat out lying to sway public opinion towards a political agenda. I agree with the first part, disagree with the second. It's lying to sell more papers. The senate enquiry made mention of false reporting by refugee advocates. They brought these false allegations to attention and the left in the media seized on it. It was a combination of people concocting a lie. well the haters here certainly seized on it not waiting a second to defame and draw conclusions. speaking of defaming, found that link yet? My memory is good enough. Your hatred will burn you up eventually Giovanni. your memory might be good enough for you, but out in the real world it doesn't cut the mustard. . This isnt the real world. Its the internet.   ::)

yes, and on the internet what you 'remember'  doesn't mean sh1t, put up the link you  lying scumbag

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 12:59pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:54pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 12:50pm: Lol, the drowning man clutching at anything. Funny to watch. I love it Ian. All he needs to do is read the articles and he wouldn't keep making mistakes. ;D ;D yes. His squirming and attempted projection onto others is great to watch. Him, greggary, karnal, all have the same M.O.

what? we don't believe your crap? Sounds like a good MO to me.

I'm interested in what "Skin to Skin" contact actually means.

Holding hands?

With all the "Stop the Boats" sh!t do you think they'd relocate a reffo family to Australia for that?

So lets here exactly what this child(yes it's still a child at 10 or in fact any age under 18) went through, then as the director of the Gulags says


Quote:

Mr Pezzullo said “it would be very, very helpful indeed for advocates and people who are passionately engaged in this issue to get their facts rights”.

Give us the facts instead of obstructionism & we would.

I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick.

Just a laugh?
Something all kids go through?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:51am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there!

Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies...

Not sure we could count on the libs getting the facts right, actually its a given they wouldnt get the facts right  :D

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:09pm:

I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick.

Would it be force, though?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there! Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies...

you mean like you do?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there! Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies...

We don't.

You anti-refugee grubs do more than enough of that.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there! Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies...

They wouldn't be able to if free access was given to media outlets dipsh!t.

But if that were to happen the Tele wouldn't be able to push a political barrow would they?

Loved how the photo of the boat sinking was used on the front page this morning, considering it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with anything that is being discussed.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:09pm:

I I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. ?

Wonder what made you think of this. Bears no relation to anything mentioned in the media. I never mentioned forgiving anyone.My stance right from the beginning has been to wait for the facts to come out.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:52pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. ? Wonder what made you think of this. Bears no relation to anything mentioned in the media. I never mentioned forgiving anyone.My stance right from the beginning has been to wait for the facts to come out.

the emotional left ian....remain as you are. like a 10 ton block of concrete, unshakeable and resolute against the emotional winds and mind storms of the scattered left

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:19pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. Would it be force, though?

Greggary speculating about how children have sex, wonderful. I bet the AFP would have a field day with your PC Greggary. 

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:52pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. ? Wonder what made you think of this. Bears no relation to anything mentioned in the media. I never mentioned forgiving anyone.My stance right from the beginning has been to wait for the facts to come out.

Quote:

so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner.

Quote:

are you sure its groping now?

Perhaps I'm wrong to have singled your name out, so I apologize.


aquascoot wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:54pm:

the emotional left ian

back to your self help books horseboy ;)

Kat wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:26pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:16pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there! Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies... We don't. You anti-refugee grubs do more than enough of that.

I find your comment interesting KAt. here we have a couple of pro refugee advocates clearly fantasising in this thread about children having sex with each other and you call others "grubs". Its all ok as long as they share your political viewpoint eh?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:55pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:19pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. Would it be force, though? Greggary speculating about how children have sex, wonderful. I bet the AFP would have a field day with your PC Greggary.

Nah: I've deleted those family snaps you sent me.

I don't think that's what they mean when they say "hands on parenting", ian.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:19pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. Would it be force, though?

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 2:06pm:

here we have a couple of pro refugee advocates clearly fantasising in this thread about children having sex with each other

Please look up fantasising & speculating in the dictionary.

And once again if we had factual reporting instead of obstruction "Speculation" would not be required.

And speculation is much more interesting.

lee wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 2:36pm:

And speculation is much more interesting.

No it's not it's a best misleading & wasteful to downright dangerous & fatal.

You want fiction go read a book.

We are not talking hypotheticals here it's peoples lives.

But then their brown & probably Muslim so who gives a ..... , hey.

My apology is revoked.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 2:43pm:

No it's not it's a best misleading & wasteful to downright dangerous & fatal.

Sorry, sarcasm does not come across well in print.

Speculation is exciting for those who peddle it.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:16pm:

Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies...

Now that we know that the refugee advocates didn't tell porkies the story was incorrect why do you keep lying about it ?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:06pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:16pm: Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies... Now that we know that the refugee advocates didn't tell porkies the story was incorrect why do you keep lying about it ?

So who told the porkie about the 5 year old kid being raped which the SBS,ABC and SMH all covered?

John Smith wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:23am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D

you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected....

always male with male child of course....

we are still dealing with female mutilation...which is still part of some  cultures we have brought here.......


how do you think we would cope with this type of culture....??... not a lot of good taking them to court after the damage is done... it it?..

cods wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:35pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected.... always male with male child of course.... we are still dealing with female mutilation...which is still part of some  cultures we have brought here....... how do you think we would cope with this type of culture....??... not a lot of good taking them to court after the damage is done... it it?..

There was a 10 year old boy raped at a swimming pool in Vienna the other day by a refugee who claimed it was a sexual emergency.

Some cultures like having sex with little boys-
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 2:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:19pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:09pm: I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. Would it be force, though?

In the case of your son, highly unlikely.

(not that there's ...)

Instead of telling us actually what happened, why did he bother to say, 'skin to skin?'  Why not tell us exactly?

Kat wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:26pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:16pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:43am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:28am: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:25am: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D so no rape. hang your head and go sit in the corner. you don't have a problem with groping 10 yr olds Ian? Of course we do. Do you not have a problem with refugee advocates telling blatant lies in order to achieve their own twisted goals? maybe if the govt. gave reporters access to the refugees, instead of threatening to jail them, you wouldn't have a problem with the wrong information getting out there! Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies... We don't. You anti-refugee grubs do more than enough of that.

You don't, eh? Well, the doctor who treated the child (and who clearly knows far more than you do) says you're wrong. Not for the first time, either.

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:08pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:06pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 1:16pm: Maybe if refugee advocates didn't tell porkies... Now that we know that the refugee advocates didn't tell porkies the story was incorrect why do you keep lying about it ? So who told the porkie about the 5 year old kid being raped which the SBS,ABC and SMH all covered?

ABC and refugee advocates.

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:38pm:

cods wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:35pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected.... always male with male child of course.... we are still dealing with female mutilation...which is still part of some  cultures we have brought here....... how do you think we would cope with this type of culture....??... not a lot of good taking them to court after the damage is done... it it?.. There was a 10 year old boy raped at a swimming pool in Vienna the other day by a refugee who claimed it was a sexual emergency. Some cultures like having sex with little boys- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi

I'm sure the
"I couldn't help it" line has been used by numerous non refugee rapists throughout the years as well.

What's your point?

They let him go?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:56pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:38pm: cods wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:35pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected.... always male with male child of course.... we are still dealing with female mutilation...which is still part of some  cultures we have brought here....... how do you think we would cope with this type of culture....??... not a lot of good taking them to court after the damage is done... it it?.. There was a 10 year old boy raped at a swimming pool in Vienna the other day by a refugee who claimed it was a sexual emergency. Some cultures like having sex with little boys- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi I'm sure the "I couldn't help it" line has been used by numerous non refugee rapists throughout the years as well. What's your point? They let him go?

I still want to know why the SBS-ABC-SMH and every other leftist tabloid trash published a bullshit story about a 5 year old being raped.

Multiculturalism - a leftist concept where praise of every culture except white man is encouraged.

cods wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:35pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected.... always male with male child of course.....

are you drunk again?

can't believe with all your 'who's looking after the kids' threads, you suddenly don't care about the kids. Is it because they are tinted or is it because the libs might be criticised?

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 4:41pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:56pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:38pm: cods wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 3:35pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:23am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:20am: the child at the centre of the sexual assault claims was actually more than twice that age, and they hadn't been raped. “It was physical skin-to-skin contact,” she said. ohh, why didn't she say so in the first place ... that's different, someone manhandling a ten year old is fine   :D :D :D you may not know.. but in some cultures same sex with a child is normal..in fact its expected.... always male with male child of course.... we are still dealing with female mutilation...which is still part of some  cultures we have brought here....... how do you think we would cope with this type of culture....??... not a lot of good taking them to court after the damage is done... it it?.. There was a 10 year old boy raped at a swimming pool in Vienna the other day by a refugee who claimed it was a sexual emergency. Some cultures like having sex with little boys- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi I'm sure the "I couldn't help it" line has been used by numerous non refugee rapists throughout the years as well. What's your point? They let him go? I still want to know why the SBS-ABC-SMH and every other leftist tabloid trash published a bullshit story about a 5 year old being raped. Multiculturalism - a leftist concept where praise of every culture except white man is encouraged.

So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs.

So are you saying the story was not reported by any Murdoch press?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 5:22pm:

[ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs.

They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 3:56pm:

[ I'm sure the "I couldn't help it" line has been used by numerous non refugee rapists throughout the years as well. ?

But thats not what he said was it? Anything you can do to downplay the facts eh.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 5:26pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia.

Nobody said they were.

Try to keep up.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 5:43pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up.

Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language? 

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 1:09pm:

I'm interested in what "Skin to Skin" contact actually means. Holding hands? With all the "Stop the Boats" sh!t do you think they'd relocate a reffo family to Australia for that? So lets here exactly what this child(yes it's still a child at 10 or in fact any age under 18) went through, then as the director of the Gulags says Quote: Mr Pezzullo said “it would be very, very helpful indeed for advocates and people who are passionately engaged in this issue to get their facts rights”. Give us the facts instead of obstructionism & we would. I wonder if Ian & Co would be so forgiving if the 12 year old boy up the road forced their 10 year old son to suck his dick. Just a laugh? Something all kids go through?

I actually can't believe this prick isn't at the very least pretending to act impartial.  Since when do department heads get involved in the politics of the policies?  It's as if we are in Putin Russia.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 6:41pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?

I see your stupidity has no limits, child.

Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia.

It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect?

Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect?

You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there.

Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty?

They haven't signed the refugee convention and don't have a framework that adequately deals with refugees. They also don't guarantee they won't deport Refugees back to the country they flee from.  Because they aren't bound to the international agreement and thus have no domestic laws that fulfill the convention.

Must we continue the education for you over and over, Sparky?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:26pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia.

There you go, chidlish demanding again. You want to be taught but you dont show respect. No ccokie for you till you drop the 12 year old antics. sit on the sidelines.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:28pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. There you go, chidlish demanding again. You want to be taught but you dont show respect. No ccokie for you till you drop the 12 year old antics. sit on the sidelines.

So in other words you have absolutely 0 understanding. Well done, dickhead. ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:26pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia.

They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty?

Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 6:41pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?

He didn't say they were fleeing persecution from Indonesia.

You're seeing things.

Either that, or you are severely retarded.

You decide which one.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters.

Typical country shoppers Ian.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed.

Yes, correct. Many of them operate businesses in Indonesia and are in no danger of getting sent back by the Indonesian authorities.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters.

Do asylum seekers lose the right to claim Asylum because they did not do so in Indonesia? Yes or No.  And if Yes, explain why.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed.

No. There is no guarantees they won't be sent back. Show the law in Indonesia that deems refugees won't be sent back. It doesn't exist. That is why Indonesia is not considered safe by UNHCR.

It really isn't this hard, Sparky. We've been over this now like 500 times. Why do you continue to get it so very wrong?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:32pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Do asylum seekers lose the right to claim Asylum because they did not do so in Indonesia? Yes or No.  And if Yes, explain why.

Asylum means safety and Indonesia is safe. So they gained what they wanted in Indonesia. But safety is not what they wanted. They want the best.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:32pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Do asylum seekers lose the right to claim Asylum because they did not do so in Indonesia? Yes or No.

Nope.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:32pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Typical country shoppers Ian.

yes, the claim that they are somehow felling persecution is erroneous, they may have been originally when they left their countries but Indonesia is a safe haven for them. they are able to live and work there and have a comfortable existence. The claim that they have no rights because they are asylum seekers and Indonesia is not a signatory is also erroneous because they arent claiming asylum in Indonesia.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:32pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed. Yes, correct. Many of them operate businesses in Indonesia and are in no danger of getting sent back by the Indonesian authorities.

Completely incorrect, dickhead ;D   

How does one get such a complete misunderstanding of an issue they continually try to debate? You've been at it for, what, 3 years now? And still you fail to obtain the slightest understanding of how the refugee convention operates, and whether or not asylum seekers or refugees are deemed safe in Indonesia.  They aren't. There is *no* guarantee they won't get deported. 0. None. It does not exist.

ian wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:36pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:32pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Typical country shoppers Ian. yes, the claim that they are somehow felling persecution is erroneous, they may have been originally when they left their countries but Indonesia is a safe haven for them. they are able to live and work there and have a comfortable existence. The claim that they have no rights because they are asylum seekers and Indonesia is not a signatory is also erroneous because they arent claiming asylum in Indonesia.

Oh really? Show which legislation in Indonesia enables an asylum seeker to work.

dickhead! ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:34pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed. No. There is no guarantees they won't be sent back. Show the law in Indonesia that deems refugees won't be sent back. It doesn't exist. That is why Indonesia is not considered safe by UNHCR. It really isn't this hard, Sparky. We've been over this now like 500 times. Why do you continue to get it so very wrong?

There's no guarantee they won't be sent back from here s hit for brains. As far as I'm aware Indonesians do not send back proper refugees. Look it up if you don't believe me.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:35pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:32pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Do asylum seekers lose the right to claim Asylum because they did not do so in Indonesia? Yes or No.  And if Yes, explain why. Asylum means safety and Indonesia is safe. So they gained what they wanted in Indonesia. But safety is not what they wanted. They want the best.

Does Indonesia guarantee they won't deport a refugee. Yes or no? I'm making it very easy for you Sparky.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:36pm:

ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:32pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed. Yes, correct. Many of them operate businesses in Indonesia and are in no danger of getting sent back by the Indonesian authorities. Completely incorrect, dickhead ;D    How does one get such a complete misunderstanding of an issue they continually try to debate? You've been at it for, what, 3 years now? And still you fail to obtain the slightest understanding of how the refugee convention operates, and whether or not asylum seekers or refugees are deemed safe in Indonesia.  They aren't. There is *no* guarantee they won't get deported. 0. None. It does not exist.

ian will never learn.

He just doesn't have the intelligence.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:35pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:32pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:23pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? Why is Indonesia a transit country numpty? Its not, they dont enter Indonesia as refugees, they enter on valid tourist visas. As far as Indonesia is concerned they are tourists with all the rights associated with being on a tourist visa. these people dont claim asylum and dont become refugees until they enter Australian waters. Do asylum seekers lose the right to claim Asylum because they did not do so in Indonesia? Yes or No.  And if Yes, explain why. Asylum means safety and Indonesia is safe. So they gained what they wanted in Indonesia. But safety is not what they wanted. They want the best.

yes, correct. By the way, the average Indo doesnt like them because of their arrogance, these Middle easterners are generally very racist and look down on the Indos.

double plus good wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:37pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:34pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:30pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:26pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:25pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:21pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:43pm: ian wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:26pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 5:22pm: [ So nothing then, just more fuel to the fire stoking the hatred of those seeking refuge from persecution or OUR bombs. They arent being persecuted or bombed in Indonesia. Nobody said they were. Try to keep up. Sure he did. Smithy claimed they are fleeing persecution and our bombs. Ive higlighted it for you . You have trouble with the English language?  I see your stupidity has no limits, child. Indonesia is a transit country. A person leaving Indonesia is not fleeing Indonesia. It's amazing that no matter how many times you get shown to be a complete id10t on this you continue anyway.  Do you have no self respect? You get a cigar. Correct, they are not fleeing Indonesia, they are quite safe and secure there. Show me what rights refugees get in Indonesia. They are safe and if are proper refuges don't get sent back. So they've found asylum. Case closed. No. There is no guarantees they won't be sent back. Show the law in Indonesia that deems refugees won't be sent back. It doesn't exist. That is why Indonesia is not considered safe by UNHCR. It really isn't this hard, Sparky. We've been over this now like 500 times. Why do you continue to get it so very wrong? There's no guarantee they won't be sent back from here s hit for brains. As far as I'm aware Indonesians do not send back proper refugees. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Our law prohibits us from sending someone back while they have a protection visa. We actually HAVE a legal framework around this. There are guarantees.

Indonesia has NO such framework. They have NO such visas. There is NO guarantee.

Please stick to chewing boxes, Sparky. You are totally out of your league on this.... and in fact on any discussion about anything.  Just stick to chewing boxes. It's what you know.