It really is quite simple. She can't stay. Her parents came here illegally by boat and have (until she was injured) been held in Nauru. Her parents are from Nepal. They aren't seeking to live here because they fear for their lives, or because they're fleeing a despotic, oppressive regime. Nepal is a developing country and relatively poor, but the situation of the Nepalese is nothing like that of people in Syria living under ISIS or the threat of ISIS moving into their region. There are no roving death squads, no rampant corruption, no secret Police dragging people from their homes in the dead of the night, never to be heard from again. Their lives weren't in immediate danger when they chose to pay people smugglers tens of thousands of dollars, nor would they be if they returned. They're economic refugees simply looking for greener pastures. That is fine in itself, but they should've availed themselves of the proper immigration program and if they had done so they'd probably be living freely here today. It's time for the Minister to end this farce and immediately send them either back to Nauru or give them the option of returning to their homeland, where they'll be far more comfortable and surrounded by family/friends who they left behind. There's another reason why Mr Dutton must not cave in to the bleeding heart brigade. To do so would be an invitation to people smugglers to start sending boats again. That's what happened when Rudd became PM and dismantled the Pacific Solution. He let in 50,000 people and was responsible for more than 1,200 dying at sea. He was also responsible for the trauma inflicted on our Navy and Customs personnel who had to pull dead bodies - including babies and children - from the sea. Mr Dutton must not waver and going by an interview he gave on radio this morning from Washington, he won't and he is to be commended for his stance.

Rest assured armchair, if the government had deemed the family to not be genuine refugees - which you are clearly insinuating - they would have been sent back on a plane to Nepal. As they have done to 100s before.

The fact that they are still here, and that the only threat the government can make is to send them back to limbo on Nauru - leaves us with only one conclusion: they are genuine refugees, and the government knows they can't send them back home.

Genuine refugees from Nepal?? ;D ;D ;D Do your job Dutton and send them home forcibly.

Quote:

Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay

Because he is a filthy heartless grub ?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 1:57pm:

Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ?

Wrong. He's saving thousands of lives by not changing his stance or else people smugglers would quickly send thousands on leaky boats to their deaths again.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 1:57pm:

Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ?

Close enough.

Have a cigar.

Kat wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 2:09pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar.

Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:13pm:

Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart?

why do you want to see kids abused or sent back to be bombed? have you no heart?

Is nepal a hotbed of abuse and/or bombing?

... wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:44pm:

Is nepal a hotbed of abuse

For certain folks yes.

Stratos wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:44pm:

... wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:44pm: Is nepal a hotbed of abuse For certain folks yes.

Which folks?

... wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:45pm:

Which folks?

Female ones mostly I believe.

Australia has nothing to be proud of in regards to refugees....It is our signature on the refugee convention that draws asylum seekers to this country and our neighbours must shoulder the burden of Australian domestic policy to ignore the convention....Take our signature off the convention and stop this pretence for the sake of the refugees we lied to!!!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34322115

>:( >:( >:(

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:59pm:

Australia has nothing to be proud of in regards to refugees....It is our signature on the refugee convention that draws asylum seekers to this country and our neighbours must shoulder the burden of Australian domestic policy to ignore the convention....Take our signature off the convention and stop this pretence for the sake of the refugees we lied to!!! http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34322115 >:( >:( >:(

No, I have to disagree.

Keep it in place, and FORCE the government to do the right thing and meet their obligations.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 2:02pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Wrong. He's saving thousands of lives by not changing his stance or else people smugglers would quickly send thousands on leaky boats to their deaths again.

Bit of a stretch maybe or more like absolute rubbish.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:13pm:

Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart?

The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all.

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 4:40pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? why do you want to see kids abused or sent back to be bombed? have you no heart?

Who is bombing Nepal?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 7:51pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:40pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? why do you want to see kids abused or sent back to be bombed? have you no heart? Who is bombing Nepal?

how many nepalese drowned?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 6:28pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all.

Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 7:53pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality.

no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned?

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned?

DNA said they did. You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

DNA said they did.

no he didn't ... you should learn English




Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal.

after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned

It takes guts to go against the SJWs and speak with logic and conviction. You took a hard stance, AP. The rusteds on the left, screaming,  "What about the children?", could take a leaf out of your book when it comes to independent thought and the willingness to go against the choir. Early days, still, your post is early ccontender for post of the year.

double plus good wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:07pm:

logic and conviction.

from armpit?

---

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:05pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned

I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:11pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal?

since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first?

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:09pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:07pm: logic and conviction. from armpit?

Yeah I wouldn't expect you to know what those words mean.

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:12pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first?

So no one is bombing Nepal, right?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:12pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first? So no one is bombing Nepal, right?

I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned? DNA said they did. You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal.

Bet you can't show where I said we control people smugglers in the Mediterranean ?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:12pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:09pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:07pm: logic and conviction. from armpit? Yeah I wouldn't expect you to know what those words mean.

If you lift your arm it is the bit underneath ?

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:33pm:

I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings?

don't run away now armpit .... show us your logic and conviction?

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:33pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first? So no one is bombing Nepal, right? I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings?

You guys type way too fast - I am still trying to work out how you drown from bombing ?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:48pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:33pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first? So no one is bombing Nepal, right? I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings? You guys type way too fast - I am still trying to work out how you drown from bombing ?

That's because you're stupid, like John. The two of you are dumb and dumber.

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 7:58pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned?

No but apparently if they go to Napal they may get blown up but it probably isn't the best solution to prevent drowning.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:40pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned? DNA said they did. You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. Bet you can't show where I said we control people smugglers in the Mediterranean ?

"The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all."

You clearly state your opinion is that we (the government) have somehow made people go somewhere else to drown. It's not our governments' fault if the European governments are weak as piss.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:50pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:48pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:33pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first? So no one is bombing Nepal, right? I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings? You guys type way too fast - I am still trying to work out how you drown from bombing ? That's because you're stupid, like John. The two of you are dumb and dumber.

Now look what you have done - you made me laugh.

John Smith wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:33pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:11pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: DNA said they did. no he didn't ... you should learn English Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. after you tell me how many Nepalese drowned I asked you first. Who is bombing Nepal? since you dragged Nepal into a discussion about drownings, I want to know how many Nepalese drowned first? So no one is bombing Nepal, right? I didn't say they did, you did ... now will you tell me why you felt inclined to single Nepal out when discussing drownings?

Because this topic is about a little girl from Nepal and her parents, who are also from Nepal. Gawd, they sure breed them stupid in your family, John.

Kat wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 5:25pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:59pm: Australia has nothing to be proud of in regards to refugees....It is our signature on the refugee convention that draws asylum seekers to this country and our neighbours must shoulder the burden of Australian domestic policy to ignore the convention....Take our signature off the convention and stop this pretence for the sake of the refugees we lied to!!! Link to violence in Nepal.... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34322115 >:( >:( >:( No, I have to disagree. Keep it in place, and FORCE the government to do the right thing and meet their obligations.

That is the other option....One both major parties have abandoned!!!

>:( >:( >:(

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:40pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned? DNA said they did. You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. Bet you can't show where I said we control people smugglers in the Mediterranean ? "The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all." You clearly state your opinion is that we (the government) have somehow made people go somewhere else to drown. It's not our governments' fault if the European governments are weak as piss.

It does appear that this is what occurred - world drowning's increased and the people who were coming here obviously had to go somewhere else ?

Sort of shows that our actions didn't really fix the problem, in fact the increase makes it look like we made it worse.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 5:25pm: philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:59pm: Australia has nothing to be proud of in regards to refugees....It is our signature on the refugee convention that draws asylum seekers to this country and our neighbours must shoulder the burden of Australian domestic policy to ignore the convention....Take our signature off the convention and stop this pretence for the sake of the refugees we lied to!!! Link to violence in Nepal.... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34322115 >:( >:( >:( No, I have to disagree. Keep it in place, and FORCE the government to do the right thing and meet their obligations. That is the other option....One both major parties have abandoned!!! >:( >:( >:(

We should be proud of our refugee intake. We take in tens of thousands, while NZ takes less than 800 a year.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:56pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:52pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:40pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:02pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 7:53pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 6:28pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:13pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 2:09pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 1:57pm: Quote: Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay Because he is a filthy heartless grub ? Close enough. Have a cigar. Why do you want the drownings to recommence? Have you no heart? The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all. Not a single boat has attempted to come here from Greece or Turkey. They come from Indonesia primarily, or Malaysia. No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean. Get a grip on reality. no one said they did ... they do however have limited control where the asylum seekers can go. If they can't come here, so go to greece and drown, and they any less drowned? DNA said they did. You still haven't told me who is bombing Nepal. Bet you can't show where I said we control people smugglers in the Mediterranean ? "The drowning's have never stopped there were more drowning's last year than ever before. We only moved them around a bit is all." You clearly state your opinion is that we (the government) have somehow made people go somewhere else to drown. It's not our governments' fault if the European governments are weak as piss. It does appear that this is what occurred - world drowning's increased and the people who were coming here obviously had to go somewhere else ? Sort of shows that our actions didn't really fix the problem, in fact the increase makes it look like we made it worse.

They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants.

AP

Quote:

No leader of this nation has the ability to control people smugglers in the Mediterranean.

no one said they did

AP

Quote:

DNA said they did.

Bet you can't show where I said we control people smugglers in the Mediterranean ?

AP

Quote:

You clearly state your opinion is that we (the government) have somehow made people go somewhere else to drown.

Can you see how your original position seems to deviate from the facts ?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:59pm:

They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants.

Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ?

Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance.

It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions.

The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 9:16pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:59pm: They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants. Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ? Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance. It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions. The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d.

No, you don't. You never do. ::)

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:59pm:

They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants.

You say that you are doing something to stop people from drowning and the result is that more people drown?

The question is did it work ?

The answer is no.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 9:21pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:16pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:59pm: They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants. Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ? Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance. It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions. The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d. No, you don't. You never do. ::)

Coming from someone who had his tail cut off by the farmers wife.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 9:30pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:21pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:16pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:59pm: They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants. Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ? Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance. It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions. The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d. No, you don't. You never do. ::) Coming from someone who had his tail cut off by the farmers wife.

You still haven't given one good reason why she and her parents can't go back to Nepal.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 9:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:30pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:21pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:16pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:59pm: They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants. Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ? Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance. It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions. The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d. No, you don't. You never do. ::) Coming from someone who had his tail cut off by the farmers wife. You still haven't given one good reason why she and her parents can't go back to Nepal.

You know you can do your own research if you really want to know.

She was born in Australia, she has never been to Nepal ?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 8:58pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Kat wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 5:25pm: philperth2010 wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 4:59pm: Australia has nothing to be proud of in regards to refugees....It is our signature on the refugee convention that draws asylum seekers to this country and our neighbours must shoulder the burden of Australian domestic policy to ignore the convention....Take our signature off the convention and stop this pretence for the sake of the refugees we lied to!!! Link to violence in Nepal.... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34322115 >:( >:( >:( No, I have to disagree. Keep it in place, and FORCE the government to do the right thing and meet their obligations. That is the other option....One both major parties have abandoned!!! >:( >:( >:( We should be proud of our refugee intake. We take in tens of thousands, while NZ takes less than 800 a year.

NZ offered to take some refugees and our government said no.

DNA keeps calling country shoppers from Nepal refugees. What a numpty!

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 3:31am:

DNA keeps calling country shoppers from Nepal refugees. What a numpty!

The Australian government take refugees from Nepal they must be numpties too.


OH look Nepal currently have over 800,000 refugees and Australia helped to set up refugee camps in Nepal ????


Quote:

In the years 1959, 1960, and 1961 following the 1959 Tibetan uprising and exile of the Dalai Lama, over 20,000 Tibetans migrated to Nepal. Since then many have emigrated to India or settled in refugee camps set up by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Government of Nepal, the Swiss Government, Services for Technical Co-operation Switzerland, and Australian Refugees Committee.[5] Those who arrived before 1989 were issued refugee ID cards and benefited from de facto economic integration; however, more recent arrivals have no legal status and cannot own property, businesses, vehicles, or be employed lawfully.

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 3:31am:

DNA keeps calling country shoppers from Nepal refugees. What a numpty!

The only affordable countries are in reality small islands.

Natasha Blucher, the refugee advocate who has been visiting baby Asha and her parents has now been blocked from visiting the family. Good - it should be a job done by immigration officials, not refugee advocates who have a personal agenda and axe to grind against the government.

DNA, as the Nepalese civil war ended 10 years ago, exactly what is, apart from poverty, the basis for refugee status now? I mean,, citing events that happened 30 years ago just doesn't cut it, champ.

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 3:01pm:

DNA, as the Nepalese civil war ended 10 years ago, exactly what is, apart from poverty, the basis for refugee status now? I mean,, citing events that happened 30 years ago just doesn't cut it, champ.

Do you really expect everyone else to be researching information for you that you will neither understand nor believe ?

I have already provided you with significant information and you responded with a silly question. There are currently over 800,000 refugees in Nepal, Australia take some of them and we have helped to build refugee camps in Nepal. Their refugee problems go back to the 1950's.

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 3:01pm:

DNA, as the Nepalese civil war ended 10 years ago, exactly what is, apart from poverty, the basis for refugee status now? I mean,, citing events that happened 30 years ago just doesn't cut it, champ.

Sex trafficking is a huge issue in Nepal.

So if the baby stays do the parents stay too?

Sex trafficking is a law enforcment issue. Also, we took Vietnamese refugees in the '70's. So what?  Thing's change. What apart from poverty and a lousy legal system justifies refugee status in 2016, numptoid?

A million excuses but nothing with substance to say why we should not assist a baby refugee girl.

Some people just like to be nasty for no reason.

Putting aside all of Mr Dutton's faults,  who else thinks he has a perdy mouth?

The fact that they're not refugees just doesn't matter to you, does it nump? BTW, he does have a bit of a pretty mouth. I don't want him to squeal like a pig, though.

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 4:01pm:

Sex trafficking is a law enforcment issue.

You can't see any reason why anybody anywhere might have reason to seek asylum for fear from a sex trafficking organisation?

There's rampant gun crime and drug trafficking in Washington DC. Why not refugees from America? Drug cartels in Mexico? Jungle justice in Nigeria?  Endemic organised crime in Putin's Russia. The statlessness of the Armenians. The attempts of Israel's neighbours to wipe her out of existence. Columbia. Northern Ireland. The Congo. The list goes on and on. Isn't the definition of a refugee someone fleeing persecution;  not just a f#$ked up country?

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 4:56pm:

Isn't the definition of a refugee someone fleeing persecution

What evidence do you have to suggest Asha and her family do not fit this description?

It was announced that anyone who comes on a people smuggler boat after a certain date would never be allowed to settle permanently in Australia.

People who ignored this warning should not be exempted from the rule just because they have a baby to blackmail Australia with.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNyx1O6panU


No means no.  It's not difficult.

Good question, Stratos. Have you read anywhere that these asylum seekers,  are in fact, refugees? Is being pregnant solely grounds for asylum now? The ABC and Fauxfacts are too busy picking out baby clothes to even bother finding out.

Baby Asha, and those like her, are the reason why we CANNOT let Dutton stay.

Do you ever post anything that isn't a spermicidal regurgitation of all things leftard?

Kat wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 5:54pm:

Baby Asha, and those like her, are the reason why we CANNOT let Dutton stay.

Parents of 'baby Asha' what have you DONE to her????!!!!!!!


You cruel, heartless tormenters of baby Asha!!!!! SHame!!!! Shame!!!!!!  You call yourself parents??!!!??!

Throw it out of an 11th floor window.

That's the sole right illegals have.

Kat wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 5:54pm:

Baby Asha, and those like her, are the reason why we CANNOT let Dutton stay.

Too true.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 8:09pm:

Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have.

The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ?

In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct.

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 5:57pm:

Do you ever post anything that isn't a spermicidal regurgitation of all things leftard?

How you perceive my comments is your problem, not mine.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct.

yes, its mother is an illegal

The problem is; they're  not your comments. You've  simply been indoctrinated  to parrot  every bit of leftist mumbo jumbo going around.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:31pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:30pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:21pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 9:16pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 18th, 2016 at 8:59pm: They did. The boats stopped coming here. If the European leaders had some spine in them, they'd follow Howard and Abbott and then people wouldn't be drowning, rapes and other atrocities wouldn't be happening and there wouldn't be train stations being overrun by thousands of economic migrants. Oh I see the solution is for everyone to lock the refugees in their country of origin where they are in danger and now can not escape to anywhere ? Fact is that refugees have the right to come here and ask for assistance. It is a very grubby act to deliberately send young children into sub standard and potentially dangerous conditions. The spin that protecting this child would open the flood gates is unbelievably stup1d. No, you don't. You never do. ::) Coming from someone who had his tail cut off by the farmers wife. You still haven't given one good reason why she and her parents can't go back to Nepal. You know you can do your own research if you really want to know. She was born in Australia, she has never been to Nepal ?

Yep, you've got nothing!

Dnarever wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 6:02am:

double plus good wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 3:31am: DNA keeps calling country shoppers from Nepal refugees. What a numpty! The Australian government take refugees from Nepal they must be numpties too. OH look Nepal currently have over 800,000 refugees and Australia helped to set up refugee camps in Nepal ???? Quote: In the years 1959, 1960, and 1961 following the 1959 Tibetan uprising and exile of the Dalai Lama, over 20,000 Tibetans migrated to Nepal. Since then many have emigrated to India or settled in refugee camps set up by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Government of Nepal, the Swiss Government, Services for Technical Co-operation Switzerland, and Australian Refugees Committee.[5] Those who arrived before 1989 were issued refugee ID cards and benefited from de facto economic integration; however, more recent arrivals have no legal status and cannot own property, businesses, vehicles, or be employed lawfully.

Wow, that was truly desperate going back nearly 70 years! That's just pathetic, but hey that's you!

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 9:23pm:

The problem is; they're  not your comments. You've  simply been indoctrinated  to parrot  every bit of leftist mumbo jumbo going around.

Rubbish.

But, as I said, the way you perceive my comments is your problem, not mine.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 9:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal

it is not illegal to seek asylum.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/7166430-3x2-460x307.jpg


"For the first time in several years our polls are showing a softening in the hardline stance voters have on asylum seekers, writes Peter Lewis.
The ethical showdown over the status of the babies of asylum seekers who are born in Australia risks breathing life into our national conscience.
With state premiers backing medical professionals in refusing to send these children back, this week's Essential Report shows a majority of the public supporting calls to let the babies - and by implication their parents - stay in Australia.
Yes it's a narrow majority and not an absolute one, but it is the first softening of our hardline stance on asylum seekers that Essential has picked up in several years."

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/lewis-babies-of-asylum-seekers-have-stirred-our-conscience/7175138

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 7:07am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 9:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal it is not illegal to seek asylum.

And it's not illegal to process asylum seekers offshore.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 9:07am:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:07am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 9:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal it is not illegal to seek asylum. And it's not illegal to process asylum seekers offshore.

Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre?

Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 9:34am:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:07am: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:07am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 9:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal it is not illegal to seek asylum. And it's not illegal to process asylum seekers offshore. Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre? Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian

So if a couple of tourists are on holiday in Australia and the pregnant  lady tourist  has her baby here does that make the baby an Australian?

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 9:34am:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:07am: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:07am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 9:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal it is not illegal to seek asylum. And it's not illegal to process asylum seekers offshore. Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre? Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian

Asha isn't an Australian.

double plus good wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 9:49am:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:34am: Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:07am: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:07am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 9:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal it is not illegal to seek asylum. And it's not illegal to process asylum seekers offshore. Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre? Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian So if a couple of tourists are on holiday in Australia and the pregnant  lady tourist  has her baby here does that make the baby an Australian?

Absolutely not.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 10:17am:

double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:49am: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:34am: Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre? Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian So if a couple of tourists are on holiday in Australia and the pregnant  lady tourist  has her baby here does that make the baby an Australian? Absolutely not.

So answer this

You have a German wife and a Polish husband and they have been living here for 5 years.

They are not nationalize  Australians and they have a baby, what nationality is the baby, German, Polish or Australian?

when the illegals are called illegals, everyone knows who is meant.

must be what they are then .

Labor voter, don't get into a funk over the thought of cute little newborns. If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants; she gos back to Nepal with them.

double plus good wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 3:38pm:

Labor voter, don't get into a funk over the thought of cute little newborns. If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants; she gos back to Nepal with them.

If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants;

Get it through your thick head Asha parents are not illegal immigrants they are asylum seekers and there is nothing wrong with someone seeking asylum.

You could go to England and seek asylum then it is up to the British government to grant you asylum or reject your application for asylum. We don't know if the Australian government has approve or reject Asha parents application for asylum.

You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept?

double plus good wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 3:38pm:

Labor voter, don't get into a funk over the thought of cute little newborns. If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants; she gos back to Nepal with them.

Yes, correct.  Is that the case here though?  No.

double plus good wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 4:38pm:

You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept?

How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution?

Have you seen their application for asylum?

If you want to know all about asylum seekers and refugees here is a link to the government web site.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 9:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:54pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 19th, 2016 at 8:09pm: Throw it out of an 11th floor window. That's the sole right illegals have. The baby was born here - nothing illegal about that ? In fact there is no place for stupid emotive labelling particularly when it isn't even correct. yes, its mother is an illegal

She was convicted of what ?

What law has she broken ?

When is the trial ?

double plus good wrote on Feb 19^th, 2016 at 9:23pm:

The problem is; they're  not your comments. You've  simply been indoctrinated  to parrot  every bit of leftist mumbo jumbo going around.

*** double plus good wants a cracker !!!

The only reason to not let Asha stay is the 2016 election.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 7:40pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum?

Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true?


And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:06pm:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown.

Asha parents are not in the country illegal.

This is from the government web site all about asylum seekers


Quote:

It is not a crime to enter Australia without authorisation for the purpose of seeking asylum. Asylum seekers do not break any Australian laws simply by arriving on boats or without authorisation. Article 31 of the Refugee Convention clearly states that refugees should not be penalised for arriving without valid travel documents. What may be considered an illegal action under normal circumstances (e.g. entering a country without a visa) should not, according to the Convention, be considered illegal if a person is seeking asylum. Australian and international law make these allowances because it is not always safe or even possible for asylum seekers to obtain travel documents or travel through authorised channels. Refugees are, by definition, people fleeing persecution and in most cases are being persecuted by their own governments. It is often too dangerous for refugees to apply for a passport or exit visa or approach an Australian Embassy for a visa, as this could put their lives, and the lives of their families, at risk. Refugees may also be forced to flee with little notice due to rapidly deteriorating situations and do not have time to apply for travel documents or arrange travel through authorised channels. In other cases, refugees may be unable to obtain travel documents because they do not have identity documentation or because they cannot meet the necessary visa requirements. Australia has very restrictive policies which work to prevent citizens of countries where persecution is widespread from getting access to temporary visas of any kind. These policies leave many people seeking to flee to Australia with no way of entering in an authorised manner. Permitting asylum seekers to enter a country without travel documents is similar to allowing ambulance drivers to exceed the speed limit in an emergency – the action may ordinarily be illegal but, in order to protect lives at risk, an exception is made.[8]

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AsylumFacts

Now show everyone where does it say that asylum seekers are illegal

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:06pm:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown.

i notice no one answer this question that I put on this thread reply #86 at 2.00 pm today

So answer this

You have a German wife and a Polish husband and they have been living here for 5 years.

They are not nationalize  Australians and they have a baby, what nationality is the baby, German, Polish or Australian?


Now come on what citizenship is this baby when she is born in Australia.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:41pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:06pm: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown. i notice no one answer this question that I put on this thread reply #86 at 2.00 pm today So answer this You have a German wife and a Polish husband and they have been living here for 5 years. They are not nationalize  Australians and they have a baby, what nationality is the baby, German, Polish or Australian? Now come on what citizenship is this baby when she is born in Australia.

It is not Australian. The authorities will probably go with the mothers nationality.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 2:01pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 10:17am: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:49am: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 9:34am: Since when has it become legal to sent Australians to oversea detention centre? Baby Asha was born in Australia so that makes her  a Australian. It doesn't matter where her parents come from is was born in Australian So if a couple of tourists are on holiday in Australia and the pregnant  lady tourist  has her baby here does that make the baby an Australian? Absolutely not. So answer this You have a German wife and a Polish husband and they have been living here for 5 years. They are not nationalize  Australians and they have a baby, what nationality is the baby, German, Polish or Australian?

Usually the nationality of the father, so Polish. Definitely not Australian.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 4:34pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 3:38pm: Labor voter, don't get into a funk over the thought of cute little newborns. If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants; she gos back to Nepal with them. If Asha's parents are illegal immigrants; Get it through your thick head Asha parents are not illegal immigrants they are asylum seekers and there is nothing wrong with someone seeking asylum. You could go to England and seek asylum then it is up to the British government to grant you asylum or reject your application for asylum. We don't know if the Australian government has approve or reject Asha parents application for asylum.

They attempted to immigrate to Australia illegally, after the government explicitly told people not to use people smugglers and that if they did so they would never be settled in Australia. The High Court has backed this government on this.

Protesters check cars leaving hospital for baby Asha

HUNDREDS of protesters are covering exits at a Brisbane hospital after fears authorities planned to move asylum seeker baby Asha.

Up to 200 protesters are at Lady Cilento Children’s Hospital after rumours swirled on social media earlier today that she would be moved on Saturday ahead of being sent to Nauru.

Authorities have denied the rumours, with Queensland Health posting on Twitter tonight that they understood baby Asha would remain at the hospital “at least overnight”.

Protesters today gathered in droves, checking any cars leaving the hospital.

Earlier they swarmed two police vehicles, looking through windows to make sure the 13-month-old was not smuggled inside.

A large police presence has now joined the crowd, approaching protesters who become agitated.

Queensland Health asked protesters “to respect other patients and staff”.

The group has organised shifts to ensure a presence remains outside the hospital around the clock.

http://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/protesters-check-cars-leaving-brisbane-hospital-after-fears-baby-asha-to-move/news-story/3da32ffb006bef7abebcf957228efb73

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 7:05am:

Protesters check cars leaving hospital for baby Asha HUNDREDS of protesters are covering exits at a Brisbane hospital after fears authorities planned to move asylum seeker baby Asha. Up to 200 protesters are at Lady Cilento Children’s Hospital after rumours swirled on social media earlier today that she would be moved on Saturday ahead of being sent to Nauru. Authorities have denied the rumours, with Queensland Health posting on Twitter tonight that they understood baby Asha would remain at the hospital “at least overnight”. Protesters today gathered in droves, checking any cars leaving the hospital. Earlier they swarmed two police vehicles, looking through windows to make sure the 13-month-old was not smuggled inside. A large police presence has now joined the crowd, approaching protesters who become agitated. Queensland Health asked protesters “to respect other patients and staff”. The group has organised shifts to ensure a presence remains outside the hospital around the clock. http://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/protesters-check-cars-leaving-brisbane-hospital-after-fears-baby-asha-to-move/news-story/3da32ffb006bef7abebcf957228efb73

These lunatics are harassing ordinary people leaving the hospital - patients, families and staff who have nothing whatsoever to do with this baby. If it were me driving away and they blocked my path, I wouldn't stop and I absolutely wouldn't let any of those lunatics search my car. Police need to erect barricades to prevent protesters blocking driveways at the hospital.

105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes.

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:06pm:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown.

He isn't "being" a clown. He "is" a clown, and a dopey one too.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 9:17am:

105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes.

105 posts and no one can answer my simple question about why her parents would need to flee Nepal so badly.

The luvvies have flocked together yet once again to plead that 'decent Christian values' once again be allowed to be the portal through which more Muslims can take root in Australia.

link

Can you see any hijabs in the picture - or big black beards?

No you can't.

It's just The Usual Suspect luvvies getting their rocks off while posing as the Moral Elite - and to hell with the consequences for the future social harmony of Australian society.

Have any of you been to Sydney's Parramatta district yet? Go there and take a look at what ALL of our major cities will look like in 30 year's time. Wall-to-wall subcontinental Darkies and Chinese.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 10:07am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 9:17am: 105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes. 105 posts and no one can answer my simple question about why her parents would need to flee Nepal so badly.

I did, sex trafficking is a major issue in Nepal.  You ignored that however, can't think why.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 10:29am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 10:07am: Dnarever wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 9:17am: 105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes. 105 posts and no one can answer my simple question about why her parents would need to flee Nepal so badly. I did, sex trafficking is a major issue in Nepal.  You ignored that however, can't think why.

Correction.

The kidnapping and forced sex trafficking in Nepal.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 10:07am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 9:17am: 105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes. 105 posts and no one can answer my simple question about why her parents would need to flee Nepal so badly.

You do not accept that there are 800,000 people refugee camps in Nepal who Australia recognise as refugees would be enough of a reason.

The answers have been provided it is just that you don't like them.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 10:31am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 10:29am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 10:07am: Dnarever wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 9:17am: 105 posts and still nobody has provided a sensible reason for Australia to need be miserable heartless arsewipes. 105 posts and no one can answer my simple question about why her parents would need to flee Nepal so badly. I did, sex trafficking is a major issue in Nepal.  You ignored that however, can't think why. Correction. The kidnapping and forced sex trafficking in Nepal.

Sorry Herb, what are you referring to? 

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 10:52am:

Sorry Herb, what are you referring to?

There's a lot of 'sex trafficking' in the Third World that is voluntary and initiated by parents themselves who sell their daughters to the traffickers, but in Nepal it has been a case of victims being abducted off the streets and passed along to 'middle men' outside of Nepal.

The distinction should be made.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 11:17am:

There's a lot of 'sex trafficking' in the Third World that is voluntary and initiated by parents themselves who sell their daughters to the traffickers,

I wouldn't call that "voluntary"

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:41pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:06pm: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown. i notice no one answer this question that I put on this thread reply #86 at 2.00 pm today So answer this You have a German wife and a Polish husband and they have been living here for 5 years. They are not nationalize  Australians and they have a baby, what nationality is the baby, German, Polish or Australian? Now come on what citizenship is this baby when she is born in Australia.

Not Australian.

Why does DNA continue to lie about Nepalese refugees?  Refugees from Nepal are being housed in U.N supervised refugee camps while they are being repatriated to countries including Australia.  They are in no danger in Nepal. There was no overriding threat compelling Asha's parent to bundle themselves into a people smuggling boat. DNA knows this and still he is willing to lie for Shorten.

double plus good wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:18pm:

There was no overriding threat compelling Asha's parent to bundle themselves into a people smuggling boat.

How do you know this.  Just curious.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:19pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 12:18pm: There was no overriding threat compelling Asha's parent to bundle themselves into a people smuggling boat. How do you know this.  Just curious.

When was the last time you heard about rebels raiding a UN camp in Nepal, shooting the men and raping the women?

The refugee crisis in Nepal is being solved by housing refugees in UN supervised camps while they are being repatriated. I can't make it any clearer than that.

I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from.

I notice neither of you actually answered the question either.

double plus good wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:26pm:

The refugee crisis in Nepal is being solved by housing refugees in UN supervised camps while they are being repatriated. I can't make it any clearer than that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_in_Nepal

I can't find any reference to rape, murder, etc.

Stratos, it's a real character flaw not being able to admit when your wrong.

double plus good wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:31pm:

Stratos, it's a real character flaw not being able to admit when your wrong.

Is that just you admitting that you DON'T know for sure their circumstances of why they sought asylum in Australia for sure?


Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:29pm:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_in_Nepal I can't find any reference to rape, murder, etc.

LOL you think Nepalese refugee camps are for Nepalese people! ;D ;D ;D

That's the one people they CAN'T be for.

You've demonstrated your willingness to outright lie. I just couldn't be a.r.s.e.d.

double plus good wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:44pm:

You've demonstrated your willingness to outright lie.

Where?  Please link the post where I lied.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 11:37am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 11:17am: There's a lot of 'sex trafficking' in the Third World that is voluntary and initiated by parents themselves who sell their daughters to the traffickers, I wouldn't call that "voluntary"

It's consensual and very widely practiced, especially by farming families who are suffering dought and disease of their crops.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:19pm:

double plus good wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 12:18pm: There was no overriding threat compelling Asha's parent to bundle themselves into a people smuggling boat. How do you know this.  Just curious.

Nepal is not a place you flee as a refugee.

As an economic refugee, sure. But not as a political one.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20^th, 2016 at 11:35pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:06pm: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown. Asha parents are not in the country illegal.

Why are they detained then?

You do not detain legal entrants unless they are criminals.

Why Mr Dutton cannot let baby Asha stay?

Now look what you have gone and done Dutton, the righties are completely lost now.

Soren wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 6:11pm:

Nepal is not a place you flee as a refugee. As an economic refugee, sure. But not as a political one.

Anywhere is somewhere you can flee from as a refugee depending on your circumstance.

Soren wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 6:14pm:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:35pm: Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:06pm: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown. Asha parents are not in the country illegal. Why are they detained then? You do not detain legal entrants unless they are criminals.

I never thought you would be so dumb that id need to repeat things over and over to you.  Asylum seekers being detained for identification and processing in no way makes them criminals.  Dipstick.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:28pm:

I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from. I notice neither of you actually answered the question either.

It's patently deceitful nonsense that Nepalese girls have to be brought all the way to Australia in order to find safe sanction, instead of them being put in refugee camps just across the border in India where UN workers backed by millions of dollars from Western governments can supply their needs.

And, pray tell, why is the Nepalese government, with the help of Western agencies not able to identify and jail these traffickers?

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 4:43am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 12:28pm: I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from. I notice neither of you actually answered the question either. It's patently deceitful nonsense that Nepalese girls have to be brought all the way to Australia in order to find safe sanction, instead of them being put in refugee camps just across the border in India where UN workers backed by millions of dollars from Western governments can supply their needs. And, pray tell, why is the Nepalese government, with the help of Western agencies not able to identify and jail these traffickers?

India has not signed the refugee convention

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 5:21am:

India has not signed the refugee convention

They don't have to be. Indonesia is not a signatory either, but they have camps with hundreds of country-shoppers over there waiting for the Australian Labor Party to return.

Western largesse can rent space from the Indian government to set up a camp.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 5:26am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 5:21am: Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 4:43am: Stratos wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 12:28pm: I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from. I notice neither of you actually answered the question either. It's patently deceitful nonsense that Nepalese girls have to be brought all the way to Australia in order to find safe sanction, instead of them being put in refugee camps just across the border in India where UN workers backed by millions of dollars from Western governments can supply their needs. And, pray tell, why is the Nepalese government, with the help of Western agencies not able to identify and jail these traffickers? India has not signed the refugee convention They don't have to be. Indonesia is not a signatory either, but they have camps with hundreds of country-shoppers over there waiting for the Australian Labor Party to return. Western largesse can rent space from the Indian government to set up a camp.

Maybe so, but it still explains why a nepalese who goes to Australia via India or bypassing these neighbouring countries may still have a genuine claim for asylum.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 4:43am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 12:28pm: I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from. I notice neither of you actually answered the question either. It's patently deceitful nonsense that Nepalese girls have to be brought all the way to Australia in order to find safe sanction, instead of them being put in refugee camps just across the border in India

India is half the reason (probably more to be precise) that the Nepalese sex trafficking is so prevalent. 

Stratos wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 6:59am:

India is half the reason (probably more to be precise) that the Nepalese sex trafficking is so prevalent.

Why is it only now that suddenly Nepalese families are desperate to become citizens of a Western country? This trafficking is nothing new.

I'll tell you why.

They want to get onto the same cynical and opportunist band-wagon that every other Third Worlder is trying to get on to.

The Nepalese parents only need to keep an eye on their girls for this problem to be greatly reduced.

In most cases of girls disappearing it's the parent's fault.


Example:

link

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:12am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 6:59am: India is half the reason (probably more to be precise) that the Nepalese sex trafficking is so prevalent.  Why is it only now that suddenly Nepalese families are desperate to become citizens of a Western country? This trafficking is nothing new. I'll tell you why. They want to get onto the same cynical and opportunist band-wagon that every other Third Worlder is trying to get on to. The Nepalese parents only need to keep an eye on their girls for this problem to be greatly reduced. In most cases of girls disappearing it's the parent's fault. Example: link

Wow herb. Just wow.  You have no rational thinking my friend. I'm saddened for you.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:14am:

Wow herb. Just wow.  You have no rational thinking my friend. I'm saddened for you.

The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end.

The internet's alternative news sources and forum sites have informed the public as never before.

The news out of Germany, France, Sweden - and the rest - is getting through to the average person.

Watching the Channel Nine news you would think there was nothing amiss over there in Europe and Scandinavia, and that our chief concern should be about local car accidents, lost puppies, and Footy Heroes Behaving Badly.

Let's just wait and see how many votes Australian Liberal Alliance picks up at the next election. Granted, it won't make a hoot of difference because of our Preferential Voting system, but even so it will act as a poll which will show where people's sympathies lie.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:33am:

The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end.

Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there.

Stratos wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:39am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there.

he was talking in general terms and not specifically about Aisha.

double plus good wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:41am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:39am: Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there. he was talking in general terms and not specifically about Aisha.

I didn't think it needed explaining, but thank you.

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 9:10am:

double plus good wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:41am: Stratos wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:39am: Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there. he was talking in general terms and not specifically about Aisha. I didn't think it needed explaining, but thank you.

no worries herb.

Stratos wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:39am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there.

He doesn't think.

That's his problem.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 9:59am:

Stratos wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:39am: Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there. He doesn't think. That's his problem.

And you take each statement made by others put them under your critical petty little micropscope so that you can dissect them and use them to ridicule.

One liners that is all you're good for, not much else.

Fuzzball wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 10:50am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 9:59am: Stratos wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:39am: Lord Herbert wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:33am: The feel-good fashion for accepting Muslim 'refugees' is fast coming to an end. Why do you think Asha's family are Muslim.  Hindu is the prevalent religion of Nepal, followed by Buddhism.  Muslims are a small group there. He doesn't think. That's his problem. And you take each statement made by others put them under your critical petty little micropscope so that you can dissect them and use them to ridicule. One liners that is all you're good for, not much else.

He doesn't think.

It's a simple fact.

You do with it what you like,

I rest my case!

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 9:25pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 21st, 2016 at 6:11pm: Nepal is not a place you flee as a refugee. As an economic refugee, sure. But not as a political one. Anywhere is somewhere you can flee from as a refugee depending on your circumstance.

Bollocks. You can't be a refugee just because you are not happy.

It is not a subjective thing, like your 'gender'.

Soren wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 6:14pm:

Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:35pm: Soren wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 11:06pm: Labor voter wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 7:40pm: double plus good wrote on Feb 20th, 2016 at 4:38pm: You really are an android, aren't  you Labor? If they're  not fleeing persecution,  then they are illegal  immigrants. Can't  you grasp that patently obvious concept? How do you know that they are not fleeing persecution? Have you seen their application for asylum? Oh? So whatever they say on their application is true? And you do not get citizenship simply for being born in a country. Certainly not if your parents are in Australia illegally. Don't be a clown. Asha parents are not in the country illegal. Why are they detained then? You do not detain legal entrants unless they are criminals.

100% incorrect (yet again).

They are detained for identity, health, and security checks.

They are not criminals.

You're either extremely ignorant, or extremely stupid to think otherwise.

I'll let others decide which it is.

The term 'illegal immigrant' relates to someone who ISNT seeking refuge who enters another country without going through the proper procedures. You're the ultimate pedant, Pecker. Everyone knows what is meant by 'illegal immigrant'; I think you just enjoy boring the s.h.i.t. out of everyone.

double plus good wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:27pm:

The term 'illegal immigrant' relates to someone who ISNT seeking refuge who enters another country without going through the proper procedures. You're the ultimate pedant, Pecker. Everyone knows what is meant by 'illegal immigrant'; I think you just enjoy boring the s.h.i.t. out of everyone.

Why did you decide to change the subject?

You've never done that, have you arse face?

Asylum seekers are detained for identity, health, and security checks.

This is just a simple fact.

If you think otherwise, I'd like to see your evidence.

If they're  not refugees they are deemed  to be illegal immigrants  in so much as they have subjugated  our immigration system. That is why they are sent home.If you believe differently; show me YOUR evidence.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 18^th, 2016 at 12:15pm:

Rest assured armchair, if the government had deemed the family to not be genuine refugees - which you are clearly insinuating - they would have been sent back on a plane to Nepal. As they have done to 100s before. The fact that they are still here, and that the only threat the government can make is to send them back to limbo on Nauru - leaves us with only one conclusion: they are genuine refugees, and the government knows they can't send them back home.

There is no obligation to settle them, genuine refugees or not.


There is absolutely NO obligation on ANY country to permanently settle ANYONE.  Not refugees, not asylum seekers, not anyone.

Settlement is a sovereign decision not bound by any international convention.


Refugees? If yes, they cannot be sent home. That doesn't mean they have to be settled in Australia. They do not.

They can apply for settlement to any country they like - except Australia.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 7:41pm:

Asylum seekers are detained for identity, health, and security checks. This is just a simple fact. If you think otherwise, I'd like to see your evidence.

And when their identity, health and security checks are done - they stay detained.

Why?

Because they entered Australia illegally.  Yes, illegally. ILLEGALLY. Asylum seekers or not, they entered ILLEGALLY.
They are detained for no other reason but for being - yes - illegal.  They are illegal and you are stupid. Nothing new.



It's been, what? 10 years?  And you are as thick and untrainable as ever.

Soren wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 9:07pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:41pm: Asylum seekers are detained for identity, health, and security checks. This is just a simple fact. If you think otherwise, I'd like to see your evidence. And when their identity, health and security checks are done - they stay detained. Why? Because they entered Australia illegally.  Yes, illegally. ILLEGALLY. Asylum seekers or not, they entered ILLEGALLY. They are detained for no other reason but for being - yes - illegal.  They are illegal and you are stupid. Nothing new. It's been, what? 10 years?  And you are as thick and untrainable as ever.

You are still wrong. It is not illegal to come to Australia and ask for asylum.

Many of them have not entered anywhere, Many have been taken from outside Australian waters and mover to Nauru or PNG.

These people have not attempted to disembark in Australia without permission.

Of course you have evidence of the coast guard/navy entering Indonesian waters.

Stratos wrote on Feb 21^st, 2016 at 12:28pm:

I have explained that there is a widespread and horrific sex trade in Nepal that one could very easily need to flee from. I notice neither of you actually answered the question either.

I have no reason to doubt this....and it sounds appalling..

can you tell me where does the UN and Human Rights stand on this???>.

if its as appalling as you say..

why are these groups not doing something about it??>.

why is it Australias problem?....

why are the govts of these countries not SHAMED by the UN..???>..

their silence is incredible  >:( >:( >:( >:(

this isnt an AUstralian problem its a WORLD problem.

Does'nt Nepal have a police force?
:o :o

Soren wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 9:07pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:41pm: Asylum seekers are detained for identity, health, and security checks. This is just a simple fact. If you think otherwise, I'd like to see your evidence. And when their identity, health and security checks are done - they stay detained. Why? Because they entered Australia illegally.  Yes, illegally. ILLEGALLY. Asylum seekers or not, they entered ILLEGALLY. They are detained for no other reason but for being - yes - illegal.  They are illegal ...

Incorrect.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 11:34pm:

, Many have been taken from outside Australian waters and mover to Nauru or PNG. These people have not attempted to disembark in Australia without permission.

Nonsense. That would be piracy and kidnapping.  Are you saying the ADF is engaging in piracy?? Are you out of your mind?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 11:34pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 9:07pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 22nd, 2016 at 7:41pm: Asylum seekers are detained for identity, health, and security checks. This is just a simple fact. If you think otherwise, I'd like to see your evidence. And when their identity, health and security checks are done - they stay detained. Why? Because they entered Australia illegally.  Yes, illegally. ILLEGALLY. Asylum seekers or not, they entered ILLEGALLY. They are detained for no other reason but for being - yes - illegal.  They are illegal and you are stupid. Nothing new. It's been, what? 10 years?  And you are as thick and untrainable as ever. You are still wrong. It is not illegal to come to Australia and ask for asylum. Many of them have not entered anywhere, Many have been taken from outside Australian waters and mover to Nauru or PNG. These people have not attempted to disembark in Australia without permission.

Let me dumb it down even further for you because you clearly can't grasp this simple concept.

You are right insofar as it is not illegal to cross our border to claim asylum without a passport or visa. However, due to the FACT that these people have destroyed everything that can be used to positively identify them, they are detained for identity, health and security checks because we have no idea who they are. Once their identity is positively confirmed, then begins the process of determining their claim for asylum. This is why they are detained for so long - it takes a while to ascertain exactly who they are since they destroy their papers and then their claim for asylum must be determined. If their claim for asylum is approved, they are then resettled in another country with which Australia has an agreement to take these people. If their claim is rejected and their appeals have been exhausted, they are kicked out and sent home.

So while all you bleeding-heart fools whine about this process taking so long and how inhumane it is to detain these people, remember a few things. The job of the Australian government of the day is to protect the people of Australia first and foremost - a task at which Labor failed dismally when it allowed these people to live in the community despite not knowing who they were and which resulted in numerous assaults and rapes upon Australians by these people and which (along with the boats coming even faster) lead to the end of community detention. Secondly, if these people were serious about needing asylum and really did just want to live somewhere safe, they wouldn't be destroying their papers because that means literally years in detention while authorities find out who they are and assess their claim. The whole process could be done relatively quickly if they didn't destroy their ID. Thirdly, on Nauru these people are allowed to come and go from the detention centre at will. It's not a gulag or concentration camp, so stop with the insane insistence that it is. So while you criticise the Coalition for their handling of this, don't forget that no one has drowned in Australian waters since they came to office and of the more than 2000 children who were put in detention by Chris Bowen (ALP), fewer than 100 now remain thanks to the work of Morrison and Dutton.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 7:20am:

The job of the Australian government of the day is to protect the people of Australia first and foremost - a task at which Labor failed dismally when it allowed these people to live in the community despite not knowing who they were and which resulted in numerous assaults and rapes upon Australians by these people ...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/5970158-3x2-340x227.jpg

Brought into Australia by ... the Liberals.

Granted asylum by ... the Liberals.

Enough said.

Its simple, Aisha is in detention, and all the fuss about border 'security', is about the swinging conservative voters.  Nothing more, nothing less. 

Twenty thousand boat arrivals in one year under Rudd/Gillard and you mention one s.h.i.t bag.

it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 9:44am:

Brought into Australia by ... the Liberals. Granted asylum by ... the Liberals. Enough said.

Absolutely correct - and confirms what I've always said, to wit:~ The Liberals are Rightwing only with fiscal policy - and Leftwing on social issues.

More Negroes and Muslims entered Australia during Howard's 11 year term in office than during the combined total of all the governments before him.

Hence the need for a party like Australian Liberty Alliance to be given a chance to become Australia's first Conservative Party since Robert Menzies.

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 10:36am:

it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs.

And that's the truth of the matter, right there.

"They'd much prefer to keep them as political footballs."

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 10:36am:

it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs.

You're failing to read all of my posts.

All of these 'asylum-seeking' country-shoppers would use NZ as a backdoor entrance into Australia.

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 10:36am:

it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs.

You don't even know why the government won't send those people to NZ, do you? If we send them there, then we'll have boats off our coast tomorrow expecting to be sent to NZ. That'll mean more drownings and more deaths at sea.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 11:19am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 23rd, 2016 at 10:36am: it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs. You don't even know why the government won't send those people to NZ, do you? If we send them there, then we'll have boats off our coast tomorrow expecting to be sent to NZ. That'll mean more drownings and more deaths at sea.

We don't have boats off our coast, they get towed back to Indonesia ?

We even intercepted boats going directly to NZ and sent them back, paid the crew to turn around I believe.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 11:19am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 23rd, 2016 at 10:36am: it's absolutely ridiculous that New Zealand has offered to take ALL of the asylum seekers still in detention, and the libs refuse to take them up on it. They'd much prefer that to keep them as political footballs. You don't even know why the government won't send those people to NZ, do you? If we send them there, then we'll have boats off our coast tomorrow expecting to be sent to NZ. That'll mean more drownings and more deaths at sea.

It won't mean more drowning: it will just mean the drownings are relocated.

The boats are still out there, and people are still drowning ... today!

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2016 at 9:44am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 23rd, 2016 at 7:20am: The job of the Australian government of the day is to protect the people of Australia first and foremost - a task at which Labor failed dismally when it allowed these people to live in the community despite not knowing who they were and which resulted in numerous assaults and rapes upon Australians by these people ... http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/5970158-3x2-340x227.jpg Brought into Australia by ... the Liberals. Granted asylum by ... the Liberals. Enough said.

He wasn't brought into Australia by anyone other than himself. Certainly not by the Howard government, so you can stop with that lie right there. On October 28, 1996 Man Haron Monis (under the name Mohammad Hassan Manteghi) arrived at Sydney Airport from Iran on a one-month business visa, leaving behind his wife and two children. Less than a month later he applied for a protection visa. Information provided by the Iranian regime was considered by ASIO to be unreliable (remember, this is a regime that kidnaps and kills its own people without due process, so a reasonable person could understand ASIO not relying too heavily on the information it received from a despotic regime). It was four years before he was granted a protection visa. The report into the Martin Place siege shows a man who came here from Iran planning to bring his family with him after he arrived, but who was denied that opportunity (the reason for which is not stated in the report) and shows a gradual unbalancing of Monis over a period of 14 years.