Quote:

Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia SIX Iranian boat people were caught holidaying in their homeland after lying on their visa applications about fearing for their lives if they had to return there. But Administrative Appeals Tribunal bureaucrats have foiled Immigration Minister Peter Dutton’s attempts to deport the Iranians, allowing them to stay here regardless. Documents seen by the Herald Sun reveal in each case, the Iranians, who paid people smugglers to get to Australia, were given protection visas after claiming their lives would be in danger if they returned to Iran. The visas were cancelled by Mr Dutton, or his delegate, after the Immigration Department discovered they voluntarily returned to Iran and later came back to Australia. Documents reveal: ONE made three return trips to Iran after getting his Australian visa, including one to get married under Islamic law, an event conducted by the Iranian authorities he was supposedly terrified of; ANOTHER claimed to be on an Iranian wanted list, but the Immigration Department later discovered the person was in no danger by returning to Iran and was an economic migrant rather than a genuine refugee; A COUPLE who arrived by boat claimed to have no identification documents and they would be killed if they returned to Iran, but later voluntarily travelled to Iran and back to Australia on valid Iranian passports; and TWO Iranian family members claimed to be stateless with no identity documents — a lie discovered when another family member applied to join them in Australia and provided documents to show all were Iranian citizens who were in no danger of being persecuted in Iran. The revelations will put further pressure on the AAT, already under fire for overturning thousands of visa decisions made by Mr Dutton or his delegate in the past year. When asked by the Herald Sun on Monday about the Iranians having their visas reinstated by the AAT, a spokesman for Mr Dutton said he was considering his next step. “The minister has the power to set aside AAT decisions,” the spokesman said. “These matters will be reconsidered in due course. All matters are considered on a case-by-case basis.” The Herald Sun is not able to name the six Iranians for legal reasons.   ::) All of them wrongly claimed in their visa applications that they faced danger in Iran if they were denied protection in Australia and deported. Despite the AAT saying in the documents that it was satisfied the Iranian asylum seekers lied to Australian authorities about the dangers they faced if they were sent back to Iran, it still overturned the decisions by the minister to deport them and allowed them all to stay in Australia. In one case, the AAT said it believed two family members who said they were “stateless” when they claimed that documents showing they were citizens of Iran were false. This was despite expert evidence to the AAT that the documents were genuine and had been provided by a relative of the supposedly stateless family members. The Herald Sun last week revealed the AAT has overturned 4389 visa decisions made by Mr Dutton or his delegate in the past year. That means that of the 11,323 ministerial visa decisions reviewed in the 12 months to April 30 this year, the AAT rejected 39 per cent of them. One of those the AAT overturned was Mr Dutton’s decision to kick Indian sex creep taxi driver Jagdeep Singh out of the country after he admitted indecently ­assaulting a female passenger in Melbourne. The AAT also foiled Mr Dutton’s attempt to deport rapist Carl Stafford to New Zealand, despite Stafford having racked up 365 convictions in Australia.

"The Herald Sun is not able to name the six Iranians for legal reasons".

Fake news   ::)

finally we have a Politician with the Guts and determination to get rid of these scum but out fat lazy Public Servants are working against us...  >:(

how is it that these scumbags can overturn Australia's decision to rid our country of this filth???

why did the Labor/Greens government give these scum permanent visa's when the Temporary Visa's worked far better in that the Government could cancel their Temp Visa's and send the ****ers back from whence they came???

Dutton is doing a fantastic job for Australia regardless of these traitors who are working against us...

keep up the good work Dutto.... don't let the scum win..

Come on Turnbull, fire the Administrative Appeals Tribunal bureaucrats .

Follow Trumps good lead.

Have they rorted CTP greenslips yet?

Gordon wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 10:54am:

Have they rorted CTP greenslips yet?

Good question, Gordon. Do you have an article that says CTP greenslip rorting is an epidemic among the tinted races?

Mattyfisk wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 11:56am:

Gordon wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:54am: Have they rorted CTP greenslips yet? Good question, Gordon. Do you have an article that says CTP greenslip rorting is an epidemic among the tinted races?

That's a bingo.

They allege many of the participants in the fraud were Iraqi citizens who had arrived in Australia via Christmas Island.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-13/man-charged-over-alleged-green-slip-insurance-scam/8441436

"Found to be refugee" undocumented illegal Iranian entrants are mostly fake.
Nobody would be surprised if most others were also fake.

So the line "the vast majority have been found to be genuine refugees" is completely discredited.

They are simply given the benefit of doubt because nobody can prove or disprove what they claim - and they are extensively couched in what to say, both by the smugglers and the 'refugee advocates' here.

The bargain was that stopping the boats would mean orderly immigration. But 'orderly' immigration is also gamed and often fraudulent so the bargain is not holding any more.

Annual permanent intake should be capped at 70-80 thousand including a limited number of refugees from compatible cultural backgrounds.

what a smacking joke!!

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 10:36am:

Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia

you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote


(sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it)

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:16pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:36am: Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote (sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it)

fa rking off home when you are trying to escape home usually indicates deception nitwit.

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:21pm:

John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:16pm: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:36am: Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote (sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it) fa rking off home when you are trying to escape home usually indicates deception nitwit.

Not reporting the reasons for the findings also indicates deception, nitwit

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:21pm: John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:16pm: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:36am: Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote (sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it) fa rking off home when you are trying to escape home usually indicates deception nitwit. Not reporting the reasons for the findings also indicates deception, nitwit

No answer relating to my point. Next!!

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:16pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:36am: Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote (sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it)

Well, if you claim to be in danger of persecution in Iran and then you go back there for a holiday - you ARE a fake refugee

And you are not alone.


There are hundreds of AAT decisions published (not all are, though), and you can see for yourself how it is done.


Dutton is now considering his next step. “The Minister has the power to set aside AAT decisions,” a spokesman told The Daily Telegraph. “These matters will be reconsidered in due course. All matters are considered on a case-by-case basis.”

A couple who arrived by boat claimed to have no identification documents and that they would be killed if they returned to Iran, but later voluntarily travelled to Iran and back to Australia on valid Iranian passports.

And two Iranian family members claimed to be stateless with no identity documents — a lie discovered when another family member applied to join them in Australia and provided documents to show all were Iranian citizens who were in no danger of being persecuted.

The revelations will put further pressure on the AAT, already under fire for overturning thousands of visa decisions made by Mr Dutton or his delegate in the past year.

When asked yesterday about the Iranians having their visas reinstated by the AAT, a spokesman for Mr Dutton told the Herald Sun he was considering the next step. “The minister has the power to set aside AAT decisions,” the spokesman said.

Despite the AAT saying it was satisfied the Iranian asylum-seekers lied to Australian authorities about the dangers they faced if they were sent back to Iran, it still overturned the decisions by the minister. It was revealed last week that the AAT had overturned 4389 visa decisions made by Mr Dutton or his delegate in the past year.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/refugees-feared-for-lives-but-returned-to-iran-for-holidays/news-story/a57da4238e97d78da11545c6804ea436

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:28pm:

John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:26pm: Mr Hammer wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:21pm: John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:16pm: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 10:36am: Tribunal lets fake Iranian refugees stay in Australia you just know when a story starts by calling recognised refugees 'fake' that the writer has no agenda , it inspires a lot of confidence in the rest of the crap they wrote (sarcasm, for the thickheaded who don't get it) fa rking off home when you are trying to escape home usually indicates deception nitwit. Not reporting the reasons for the findings also indicates deception, nitwit No answer relating to my point. Next!!

did you ask a question? ::)

Frank wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:29pm:

Well, if you claim to be in danger of persecution in Iran and then you go back there for a holiday - you ARE a fake refugee

on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you ....

nevertheless, one can't help but wonder why the reporter left out such an important part of the story as 'why' they found as they did.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 10:38am:

"The Herald Sun is not able to name the six Iranians for legal reasons". Fake news   ::)

SBS



PM: Iranian refugee claims ‘not credible’

The prime minister says he understands concerns about some refugees who returned to Iran on holiday despite claiming they feared being persecuted there.
Source: AAP
16 MAY 2017 - 12:06 PM  UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO

Malcolm Turnbull is concerned six Iranian refugees have been allowed to stay in Australia after holidaying in the country they fled out of fear for their lives.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reportedly has overturned Immigration Minister Peter Dutton's decision to cancel their visas and deport them.

The prime minister said Mr Dutton was reviewing the cases and considering his next step.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/05/16/pm-understands-concerns-over-iranian-refugees-who-kept-protection-visas-after

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:35pm:

Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:29pm: Well, if you claim to be in danger of persecution in Iran and then you go back there for a holiday - you ARE a fake refugee on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you .... nevertheless, one can't help but wonder why the reporter left out such an important part of the story as 'why' they found as they did.

Because, as all the reports are saying, the Minister is REVIEWING the AAT decisions. He doesn't have to accept them, the AAT is not a court and is certainly not a visa issuing authority. The Minister is.

Anyone read the AAT's decision at all?

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:43pm:

Anyone read the AAT's decision at all?

Don't need to/ Letting them stay says it all.

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:43pm:

Anyone read the AAT's decision at all?

I'm still looking for it.....pretty sure it's not been published

Alinta wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:51pm:

Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:43pm: Anyone read the AAT's decision at all? I'm still looking for it.....pretty sure it's not been published

You are the best ferret I have seen on that stuff!

Frank wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:39pm:

John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:35pm: Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:29pm: Well, if you claim to be in danger of persecution in Iran and then you go back there for a holiday - you ARE a fake refugee on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you .... nevertheless, one can't help but wonder why the reporter left out such an important part of the story as 'why' they found as they did. Because, as all the reports are saying, the Minister is REVIEWING the AAT decisions. He doesn't have to accept them, the AAT is not a court and is certainly not a visa issuing authority. The Minister is.

how does the 'minister reviewing the decision' prevent the writer of this article from giving the reasons why?

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:46pm:

Don't need to/

of course not .... can't have facts interfere with your Islamphobia

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:58pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:46pm: Don't need to/ of course not .... can't have facts interfere with your Islamphobia

on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you ....   

so why are you arguing el doucho?

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 6:57pm:

Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:39pm: John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:35pm: Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:29pm: Well, if you claim to be in danger of persecution in Iran and then you go back there for a holiday - you ARE a fake refugee on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you .... nevertheless, one can't help but wonder why the reporter left out such an important part of the story as 'why' they found as they did. Because, as all the reports are saying, the Minister is REVIEWING the AAT decisions. He doesn't have to accept them, the AAT is not a court and is certainly not a visa issuing authority. The Minister is. how does the 'minister reviewing the decision' prevent the writer of this article from giving the reasons why?

Probably because the journalist is protecting his sources. The documents would have been shown to the journalist with the condition of not revealing details because the cases are under review.
It is most likely to be a DIBP or AAP insider leak of unpublished AAP decisions.

I think the best course of action is to send every single one of them back and start all over again.

This time, no one enters without valid papers or passports.

The judges and senior public servants are to b lame for this debacle,
They should be named and shamed.

Better still, bring in the American system where they are voted in based on their past performance.

They might actually start considering the Australian peopl over the deadshites and bring some good to our country

Mr Hammer wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:04pm:

John Smith wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:58pm: Mr Hammer wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 6:46pm: Don't need to/ of course not .... can't have facts interfere with your Islamphobia on the face of it, I'd actually agree with you ....    so why are you arguing el doucho?

what part are you struggling to follow?

Frank wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:04pm:

Probably because the journalist is protecting his sources

rubbish. this would be public information.

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:13pm:

Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 7:04pm: Probably because the journalist is protecting his sources rubbish. this would be public information.

Only if the AAT publishes the case 

Valkie wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:10pm:

I think the best course of action is to send every single one of them back and start all over again. This time, no one enters without valid papers or passports. The judges and senior public servants are to b lame for this debacle, They should be named and shamed. Better still, bring in the American system where they are voted in based on their past performance. They might actually start considering the Australian peopl over the deadshites and bring some good to our country

Quote:

I think the best course of action is to send every single one of them back and start all over again.

You gonna start by digging up the ones who came on the first fleet ?

I want Australia to help refugees,  but I want them sourced from the worlds worst trouble spots.

The ones who come by boat mooch around Jakarta for months and go to McDonald's to meet people smugglers.  Their life isn't ideal, but they're safe.

Wow, 12% of the people who have been acknowledged as Refugees are now discovered to be actually fake refugees.   12% is not that much really, when one considers that any system usually has about 10% "slippage" in it.   The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is BTW, not made of bureaucrats but rather is made up of "Government Appointees".   Looks like the Trump Government has stuffed it up, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 12:53am:

Wow, 12% of the people who have been acknowledged as Refugees are now discovered to be actually fake refugees.   12% is not that much really, when one considers that any system usually has about 10% "slippage" in it.   The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is BTW, not made of bureaucrats but rather is made up of "Government Appointees".   Looks like the Trump Government has stuffed it up, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Not all fake refugees are discovered. The very point of destroying their IDs is to avoid discovery.
And most of them did just that, destroy their passports.

Frank wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 6:45am:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 12:53am: Wow, 12% of the people who have been acknowledged as Refugees are now discovered to be actually fake refugees.   12% is not that much really, when one considers that any system usually has about 10% "slippage" in it.   The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is BTW, not made of bureaucrats but rather is made up of "Government Appointees".   Looks like the Trump Government has stuffed it up, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Not all fake refugees are discovered. The very point of destroying their IDs is to avoid discovery. And most of them did just that, destroy their passports.

Actually, Soren, it was done to make sending them back harder, on the advice of the People Smugglers.   It appears to have worked, relatively few Asylum Seekers have been sent back.  So, therefore one could be safe to conclude that it was good advice from that perspective.  Some Asylum Seekers have been proved to be false.   They deserve to be sent back, if their lives are not in danger.   So, where does that leave the other 78% of Asylum Seekers who have been adjudged to be genuine Refugees, Soren?   We know you're Xenophobic and Islamophobic and so I suspect you'd want to send them back to their deaths anyway.  Tsk, tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 12:53am:

Wow, 12% of the people who have been acknowledged as Refugees are now discovered to be actually fake refugees.   12% is not that much really, when one considers that any system usually has about 10% "slippage" in it.   The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is BTW, not made of bureaucrats but rather is made up of "Government Appointees".   Looks like the Trump Government has stuffed it up, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

You are right bwyannn
12% is a tiny ammount

So send ALL of them back and start again
Rule 1    NO MUZZOS
Rule 2    REFER RULE 1

You can always spot an 'illegal immigrant' in small towns (even with 90 'legal' immigrants) -

- they never nod a g'day as you pass them. They keep their heads down and avert eye contact. The legals will at least acknowledge you, even if their communication skills aren't the best and they are willing to 'give time' and give it a go. Illegals are always in a hurry to get away from any possible 'contact' and refuse to mix with other people other than their own.

I lived in a rural town where they picked 17 in one month. Sneaking down from Sydney to do some fruit picking and steal work from the 'legals'.

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 7:06pm:

Frank wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 6:45am: Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 12:53am: Wow, 12% of the people who have been acknowledged as Refugees are now discovered to be actually fake refugees.   12% is not that much really, when one considers that any system usually has about 10% "slippage" in it.   The Administrative Appeals Tribunal is BTW, not made of bureaucrats but rather is made up of "Government Appointees".   Looks like the Trump Government has stuffed it up, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Not all fake refugees are discovered. The very point of destroying their IDs is to avoid discovery. And most of them did just that, destroy their passports. Actually, Soren, it was done to make sending them back harder, on the advice of the People Smugglers.   It appears to have worked, relatively few Asylum Seekers have been sent back.  So, therefore one could be safe to conclude that it was good advice from that perspective.  Some Asylum Seekers have been proved to be false.   They deserve to be sent back, if their lives are not in danger.   So, where does that leave the other 78% of Asylum Seekers who have been adjudged to be genuine Refugees, Soren?   We know you're Xenophobic and Islamophobic and so I suspect you'd want to send them back to their deaths anyway.  Tsk, tsk, tsk.   ::)

The fake refugees were once 'ajudged' to bee genuine.

They have now cast a shadow on all of them.

You can take the boy out of the Middle East and the Third World but you cannot take the corruption of of the boy.  You came on a boat?  You are suspect.

And they are not going to turn out to be as splendid nation builders as the original scammers, the First Fleet.  These ones come fro corrupt cultures and have brought their corruptions with them -  corruption is a massive argument AGAINST multiculturalism.

John Smith wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:13pm:

Frank wrote on May 16th, 2017 at 7:04pm: Probably because the journalist is protecting his sources rubbish. this would be public information.

only its not

re all AAT decisions publicly available?

No.

Only selected decisions of the AAT’s Migration & Refugee Division and Social Services and Child Support Division are published.

Decisions in the AAT’s other Divisions are usually published unless the AAT has ordered otherwise.

Are all AAT decisions published in full?

No.

The AAT does not publish information, the disclosure of which is prohibited or restricted by an order of the AAT or by legislation.  Decisions are edited to comply with these requirements.

Valkie wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 7:11pm:

You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1

And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:31pm:

Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

The refugees of 1951 were a better class of people than the illegal boat 'refugees' of the 2010s.

Circumstances are different. The self-selecting 'refugees' of today are mostly queue jumping opportunists and chancers. The scene is quite different from the end of the war in Europe.  Not least because everyne was very, very thoroughly vetted after the war.

Today you simple need to throw away your ID and parrot some cockamamie BS story taught to you by a Muslim people smuggler  - echoes of the African slave trade there, Muslims being very, very prominent in that trade in people, too.

No wonder - slavery is STILL not an offence against Islam. A cartoon, a book, voting for non-Muslims ARE against Islam still - but slavery is not.

But we musn't pick on Muslims personally. They have nothing to do with Islam.

Frank wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:45pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:31pm: Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The refugees of 1951 were a better class of people than the illegal boat 'refugees' of the 2010s.

Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::)


Quote:

Circumstances are different. The self-selecting 'refugees' of today are mostly queue jumping opportunists and chancers. The scene is quite different from the end of the war in Europe.  Not least because everyne was very, very thoroughly vetted after the war.

The only "selection" the Asylum Seekers make is to flee for their lives, Soren.   How dare you sit there and type your bullshit about refugees being a "lower class" when you have absolutely no idea what they have gone through and what has prompted them to try and make it to Australia.   You're a Xenophobe it seems, as well as an Islamophobe. Tsk, tsk.


Quote:

Today you simple need to throw away your ID and parrot some cockamamie BS story taught to you by a Muslim people smuggler  - echoes of the African slave trade there, Muslims being very, very prominent in that trade in people, too.

Evidence, Soren, not prejudice.  You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::)


Quote:

No wonder - slavery is STILL not an offence against Islam. A cartoon, a book, voting for non-Muslims ARE against Islam still - but slavery is not. But we musn't pick on Muslims personally. They have nothing to do with Islam.

You are persecuting people who have been judged to be genuine Refugees, Soren.  Tsk, tsk, you are an Islamophobe and a Xenophobe.  Seek help.  Please.    ::)

Now, why not answer the question?  Or is that too hard for you?   Do you want us to withdraw from the UN Convention on Refugees and become a scofflaw like the DPRK?    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:58pm:

Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::)

And yet, we are now uncovering the fact that many of these people werent fleeing for their lives at all when they flew into Indonesia, you must of missed that Brian.  And there is no persecution of them in Indonesia, just the opposite, so theres no "fleeing for their lives" from there either. So of course it sounds very melodramatic Brian, but its pure and simple BS.



Quote:

Evidence, Soren, not prejudice.  You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::)

well Brian , as we now know and as some of us were saying all along, that is not true. All they did needed to do was give the AAT a cockamanie story

rhino wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 11:58pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:58pm: Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::) And yet, we are now uncovering the fact that many of these people werent fleeing for their lives at all when they flew into Indonesia, you must of missed that Brian.  And there is no persecution of them in Indonesia, just the opposite, so theres no "fleeing for their lives" from there either. So of course it sounds very melodramatic Brian, but its pure and simple BS.

Many?  12% of Asylum Seekers who were approved as Refugees have since been found not to be Refugees.   Hardly earth shaking, Rhino.  The world is not going to end as a consequence.   Approximately 4,000 Asylum Seekers were found to be Refugees.  12% of 4,000 is how many in real numbers?  52.   Not exactly going to set the world on fire, now is it, Rhino?


Quote:

[quote]Evidence, Soren, not prejudice.  You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::)

well Brian , as we now know and as some of us were saying all along, that is not true. All they did needed to do was give the AAT a cockamanie story[/quote]

No, they don't.  They need evidence to support their case, Rhino.  That it was found for 12% of the total number of cases, that a "cockamamie" story has been told, I think is pretty reasonable.  They got found out.   Send them back.   Problem solved.   See, we actually agree, for those 52 false refugees, send them back.   However, I suspect you'd like all Asylum Seekers sent back, now wouldn't you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Frank wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:45pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:31pm: Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The refugees of 1951 were a better class of people than the illegal boat 'refugees' of the 2010s. Circumstances are different. The self-selecting 'refugees' of today are mostly queue jumping opportunists and chancers. The scene is quite different from the end of the war in Europe.  Not least because everyne was very, very thoroughly vetted after the war. Today you simple need to throw away your ID and parrot some cockamamie BS story taught to you by a Muslim people smuggler  - echoes of the African slave trade there, Muslims being very, very prominent in that trade in people, too. No wonder - slavery is STILL not an offence against Islam. A cartoon, a book, voting for non-Muslims ARE against Islam still - but slavery is not. But we musn't pick on Muslims personally. They have nothing to do with Islam.

X100
The trash we get today, especially the sociopathic,  pedophile, retarded, isolationist muzzos are totally worthless.

Bring back the ones that work, mix, contribute, obey our laws and dont want to kill us in our sleep.

In other words...B
GET RID OF THE MUZZOS

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:58pm:

Frank wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:45pm: Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:31pm: Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The refugees of 1951 were a better class of people than the illegal boat 'refugees' of the 2010s. Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::)

The issue is about where they are re-settled, Brian. yes, they are all fleeing - Africans, Muslim Arabs, Persian Muslims, Afghan Muslims, Indian Muslims, Chinese, Vietnamese, Latinos.


But in a very curious coincidence, they all want to flee TO the West with which they have very litttle affinity and respect even less - very many of them want to remain Muslims, Africans, Chinese etc.

They should all settle in countries with which they have simpatico, not the hated West that gives them the most money. Why aren't Muslim refugees settled in Muslim countries if Islam is such a brilliant thing? Why not Africa for Africans?  Why don't Asian countries with Chinese minorities settle Chinese refugees if Chinese civilisation is such a wonderful thing?

Why is it always up to white Western countries to save every non-white who monstered by his fellow countrymen? Are there no nice non-white, non-Western countries where these refugees could go?


No, there aren't.  And so the superiority of white, Western societies is objectively established even as they/you constantly squeal about 'racism'.  Every montruous, oppressive culture - Islamic, Chinese, Indian - can be and IS supported in its desire to preserve itself, only the white European, enlightened civilisation is racist when it wants to preserve itself in the face of backward and barbarian intruders.

Pathetic.

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 12:37am:

rhino wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 11:58pm: Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:58pm: Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::) And yet, we are now uncovering the fact that many of these people werent fleeing for their lives at all when they flew into Indonesia, you must of missed that Brian.  And there is no persecution of them in Indonesia, just the opposite, so theres no "fleeing for their lives" from there either. So of course it sounds very melodramatic Brian, but its pure and simple BS. Many?  12% of Asylum Seekers who were approved as Refugees have since been found not to be Refugees.   Hardly earth shaking, Rhino.  The world is not going to end as a consequence.   Approximately 4,000 Asylum Seekers were found to be Refugees.  12% of 4,000 is how many in real numbers?  52.   Not exactly going to set the world on fire, now is it, Rhino? Quote: [quote]Evidence, Soren, not prejudice.  You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::) well Brian , as we now know and as some of us were saying all along, that is not true. All they did needed to do was give the AAT a cockamanie story

No, they don't.  They need evidence to support their case, Rhino.  That it was found for 12% of the total number of cases, that a "cockamamie" story has been told, I think is pretty reasonable.  They got found out.   Send them back.   Problem solved.   See, we actually agree, for those 52 false refugees, send them back.   However, I suspect you'd like all Asylum Seekers sent back, now wouldn't you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)


[/quote]


We had 50 thousand illegal queue jumpers foisting themselves on us in the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd years.

12% are proven liars - that's 6000. Considering that most of the 50 thousand ditched their passport, the 12% that got found out are the really, really dumb F Vcks of the cohort. I'd guess that at least 4-5 times as many are a bit more cunning and keep their heads down.

Iranians refugees - a joke. There would be very, very few genuine Iranian refugees. Ditto Pakistanis, Iraqis, Palestinians.

African refugees should be re-settled in Africa. Asians in Asia.

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 12:37am:

See, we actually agree, for those 52 false refugees, send them back.   However, I suspect you'd like all Asylum Seekers sent back, now wouldn't you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Let's deport everyone who cannot positively prove that he was persecuted. No benefit of the doubt. Let illegal entrants establish a watertight eligibility beyond doubt.

Then I'd say let them come by boat or whatever mean.  That is the spirit of he efugee convention -  as long as we kick out all the chancers who cannot establish that they are genuine.

No docs - booted out.

I am not against genuine refugees. I am against the corrupt, lying chancers who exploit our decency at the expense of those who are in genuine need.

You most certainly are against genuine refugees, dear boy - if they're tinted.

Don't you go all PC on us now.

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:58pm:

You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::)

Sooo.... how did the 12 % + get through??  How did they pull the wool over the eyes of Australia?  How many more have not been detected?



So after years of accepting bollock from corrupt farkers we have extreme vetting.

It can't be extreme enough if past experience is taken into account. We are dealing with unscrupulous, extremely corrupt, unsavoury and immoral chancers -  people who still have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity.

.

Frank wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 8:07pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:58pm: Frank wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:45pm: Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:31pm: Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The refugees of 1951 were a better class of people than the illegal boat 'refugees' of the 2010s. Really?  According to what critaria?  Refugees are refugees, Soren.  If you're fleeing for your life you don't stop and check to make sure you're wearing the right clothes.  ::) The issue is about where they are re-settled, Brian. yes, they are all fleeing - Africans, Muslim Arabs, Persian Muslims, Afghan Muslims, Indian Muslims, Chinese, Vietnamese, Latinos. But in a very curious coincidence, they all want to flee TO the West with which they have very litttle affinity and respect even less - very many of them want to remain Muslims, Africans, Chinese etc.

According to whom, Soren?  You?  Sorry, we all know you're an Islamophobe.   That means any opinion you might hold about Muslims is immediately suspect.  You know very few, if any Muslims, you've never discussed the reasons why they flee their circumstances and so, well, you're just talking bullshit as far as I can tell.


Quote:

They should all settle in countries with which they have simpatico, not the hated West that gives them the most money. Why aren't Muslim refugees settled in Muslim countries if Islam is such a brilliant thing? Why not Africa for Africans?  Why don't Asian countries with Chinese minorities settle Chinese refugees if Chinese civilisation is such a wonderful thing? Why is it always up to white Western countries to save every non-white who monstered by his fellow countrymen? Are there no nice non-white, non-Western countries where these refugees could go?

Perhaps because they flee to where they know they can build a better life for themselves and their families, Soren?   Ever consider that and the issue of course of safety of course.   You're assuming that all Muslims are like the Borg, all knowing the same thing, thinking the same thing, all at the same time.   It's obvious you've never studied any sociology or history, Soren.  We know that because you keep being tripped up by your ignorance in public.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Frank wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 8:23pm:

We had 50 thousand illegal queue jumpers foisting themselves on us in the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd years.

Who, when?  Sorry, Soren, it is not illegal to claim Asylum on our maritime border.  Wasn't then, still isn't.   Time you caught up with what the law actually states, rather than what your prejudices believe it says.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

When you can produce evidence about what you claim, I might listen to you.  Until then, you're just, as per usual, pissing in the wind, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Frank wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 9:00pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 12:37am:    See, we actually agree, for those 52 false refugees, send them back.   However, I suspect you'd like all Asylum Seekers sent back, now wouldn't you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Let's deport everyone who cannot positively prove that he was persecuted. No benefit of the doubt. Let illegal entrants establish a watertight eligibility beyond doubt. Then I'd say let them come by boat or whatever mean.  That is the spirit of he efugee convention -  as long as we kick out all the chancers who cannot establish that they are genuine. No docs - booted out. I am not against genuine refugees. I am against the corrupt, lying chancers who exploit our decency at the expense of those who are in genuine need.

So, you'd blame the victims in all this for their predicament?   Tell me, do you blame rape victims for being raped?  "You were wearing too short a skirt, too low cut a blouse!"   Yep, that sounds about right for you, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

The Asylum Seekers were advised to throw their documents overboard by the people smugglers.  That was poor advise, without a doubt but they accepted it and did so.   They were told that it would make it harder for the authorities to send them back.   They have been proved right.  Problem is, the Australian authorities have decided to keep them in Immigration Limbo on Manus and Nauru,  rather than accept them as genuine Refugees.  Something, now doubt you applaud them for, right, Soren?  Tsk, tsk.  Why did you flee Denmark?   Should we have accepted your claims?   I wonder?   ::) ::)

Frank wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 9:35pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 10:58pm:   You need to prove that you are fleeing for your life.  You need to prove that you have no other refuge.   No "cockamamie" story.   ::) Sooo.... how did the 12 % + get through??  How did they pull the wool over the eyes of Australia?  How many more have not been detected?

The 12% proved their case, initially.  Since then, they have undone that case by their own efforts in returning to the country which they claimed they were fleeing.   I have no argument against their deportation, Soren.   Send them back, as I have said, numerous times.    ::)


Quote:

So after years of accepting bollock from corrupt farkers we have extreme vetting. It can't be extreme enough if past experience is taken into account. We are dealing with unscrupulous, extremely corrupt, unsavoury and immoral chancers -  people who still have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity.

You are assuming that the individuals who have fled those societies had a say in whether or not their society outlawed slavery or not or "stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity."   You seem to think that Muslims are like the Borg, Soren.  All knowing, all understanding, all accepting of everything within their societies at the same time.

Tell me, do you accept and tolerate Homosexuality?  How about racism, Islamophobia, Xenophobia?  Do you condemn or accept those beliefs?   I think we all know the answer to that one, Soren, no matter how much you protest your innocence.  Your posts betray you.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 10:31pm:

Valkie wrote on May 17th, 2017 at 7:11pm: You are right bwyannn 12% is a tiny ammount So send ALL of them back and start again Rule 1    NO MUZZOS Rule 2    REFER RULE 1 And what of our signature to and ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, Valkie?  Do you want to join the ranks of the other Scoflaws like the DPRK?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Did you miss my question, Valkie?  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 10:07pm:

Frank wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 9:00pm: Let's deport everyone who cannot positively prove that he was persecuted. No benefit of the doubt. Let illegal entrants establish a watertight eligibility beyond doubt. Then I'd say let them come by boat or whatever mean.  That is the spirit of he efugee convention -  as long as we kick out all the chancers who cannot establish that they are genuine. No docs - booted out. I am not against genuine refugees. I am against the corrupt, lying chancers who exploit our decency at the expense of those who are in genuine need. So, you'd blame the victims in all this for their predicament?   Tell me, do you blame rape victims for being raped?  "You were wearing too short a skirt, too low cut a blouse!"   Yep, that sounds about right for you, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The Asylum Seekers were advised to throw their documents overboard by the people smugglers.  That was poor advise, without a doubt but they accepted it and did so.   They were told that it would make it harder for the authorities to send them back.   They have been proved right.  Problem is, the Australian authorities have decided to keep them in Immigration Limbo on Manus and Nauru,  rather than accept them as genuine Refugees.  Something, now doubt you applaud them for, right, Soren?  Tsk, tsk.  Why did you flee Denmark?   Should we have accepted your claims?   I wonder?   ::) ::)

Bollocks. If you are genuine you want to hang on to your ID so you can PROVE that you are genuine.  The people smugglers told them to lose the ID because that way nobody could prove that they are chancers. The case of the Iranians proves this - they are back to Iran for weddings and holidays.

It's all been a scam, so yes, I am all for their indefinite detention and barring from Australia for life. Let them get new ID or other solid proof of their genuineness - until then, no more benefit of the doubt after so many scammers and lying chancers.

And you can't be a Danish refugee in Australia, you ignorant, shrill crone.

Frank wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 9:35pm:

Sooo.... how did the 12 % + get through??

the same way so many marriage visas are given out, only to have the participants divorce once residency is granted. They convinced the authorities of the veracity of their claims.

Do you suggest we stop all marriage visa's? Or only those to tinted folk?

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 10:16pm:

Frank wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 9:35pm: It can't be extreme enough if past experience is taken into account. We are dealing with unscrupulous, extremely corrupt, unsavoury and immoral chancers -  people who still have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity. You are assuming that the individuals who have fled those societies had a say in whether or not their society outlawed slavery or not or "stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity."   You seem to think that Muslims are like the Borg, Soren.  All knowing, all understanding, all accepting of everything within their societies at the same time. Tell me, do you accept and tolerate Homosexuality?  How about racism, Islamophobia, Xenophobia?  Do you condemn or accept those beliefs?   I think we all know the answer to that one, Soren, no matter how much you protest your innocence.  Your posts betray you.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Muslim countries have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity simply because these are Koranically correct attitudes, all modelled by Mohammed himslef. How could they make Mohammedan conduct unlawful?

So if these 'fleeing' Muslims believe in Islam they also thereby accept these Koranocally correct attitudes. And so we can see the degradation of Muslim women, the harassment of 'kufar' teachers in Australian schools, the sectarian antagonism towards the 'wrong' kind of Muslims.

Until Islam is reformed, any thinking and honourable Muslim-born person must become an apostate and renounce unreformed Islam. That is the only sane and ethical position to take ESPECIALLY if they living in the West where they have freedom of conscience. Otherwise they are like Communists fleeing Stalinist Russia only to cling to their Communist beliefs once they safely in the West.

John Smith wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 8:50pm:

Frank wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 9:35pm: Sooo.... how did the 12 % + get through??  the same way so many marriage visas are given out, only to have the participants divorce once residency is granted. They convinced the authorities of the veracity of their claims. Do you suggest we stop all marriage visa's? Or only those to tinted folk?

I think marriage visas should be temporary for a much, much longer time. Seven or more years. Citizenship should also be available only after a much longer temporary residence.

As for tinted - well, the countries they come from are far more corrupt than, say Norway or Holland, so I would be extra vigilant with people for whom corruption and cheating is second nature  (partly because it is a tool of survival in their own cultures and countries).

Tintedness is irrelevant if you are properly acculturated. Ethics s not your skin, it's in your culture. yes, there is obvious overlap between race and culture/country. But what matters is culture which can and in most cases must be changed. Being tinted should not be an excuse for refusing to change their culture and ethics.

A Sicilian can be swarthy or blonde and blue eyed. What matters is that he leaves his maffia ethics behind. And so it's the same for all other cultural aliens - they must change and adapt, not cling on to the miserable culture they have fled.

Frank wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 9:05pm:

I think marriage visas should be temporary for a much, much longer time. Seven or more years.

ALL visa's are abused to some extent. You will never stop people abusing ANY system. You think everyone here on a work or skills visa is genuinely here for that job? Do you know how many 'engineers' here on work visa's I've met driving cabs? I lost count years ago. Especially in Sydney.

John Smith wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 9:11pm:

Frank wrote on May 19th, 2017 at 9:05pm: I think marriage visas should be temporary for a much, much longer time. Seven or more years. ALL visa's are abused to some extent. You will never stop people abusing ANY system. You think everyone here on a work or skills visa is genuinely here for that job? Do you know how many 'engineers' here on work visa's I've met driving cabs? I lost count years ago. Especially in Sydney.

That's a few more reasons for tightening the system, not letting it slide.

There are too many permanent immigrants - 200,000 a year - and there are 2 million temporary entrants who can become permanent residents far too easily.  And the scammers are overwhelmingly third world Asians.

Frank wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 9:42pm:

That's a few more reasons for tightening the system, not letting it slide.

I'm all for tightening the system

I'm not for discriminatory or racist policy

Frank wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 8:43pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 10:07pm: Frank wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 9:00pm: Let's deport everyone who cannot positively prove that he was persecuted. No benefit of the doubt. Let illegal entrants establish a watertight eligibility beyond doubt. Then I'd say let them come by boat or whatever mean.  That is the spirit of he efugee convention -  as long as we kick out all the chancers who cannot establish that they are genuine. No docs - booted out. I am not against genuine refugees. I am against the corrupt, lying chancers who exploit our decency at the expense of those who are in genuine need. So, you'd blame the victims in all this for their predicament?   Tell me, do you blame rape victims for being raped?  "You were wearing too short a skirt, too low cut a blouse!"   Yep, that sounds about right for you, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) The Asylum Seekers were advised to throw their documents overboard by the people smugglers.  That was poor advise, without a doubt but they accepted it and did so.   They were told that it would make it harder for the authorities to send them back.   They have been proved right.  Problem is, the Australian authorities have decided to keep them in Immigration Limbo on Manus and Nauru,  rather than accept them as genuine Refugees.  Something, now doubt you applaud them for, right, Soren?  Tsk, tsk.  Why did you flee Denmark?   Should we have accepted your claims?   I wonder?   ::) ::) Bollocks. If you are genuine you want to hang on to your ID so you can PROVE that you are genuine.  The people smugglers told them to lose the ID because that way nobody could prove that they are chancers. The case of the Iranians proves this - they are back to Iran for weddings and holidays.

From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::)


Quote:

It's all been a scam, so yes, I am all for their indefinite detention and barring from Australia for life. Let them get new ID or other solid proof of their genuineness - until then, no more benefit of the doubt after so many scammers and lying chancers.

So, for 52 "chancers" as you called them you'd justify condemning ~4000 Refugees to indefinite detention for breaking no laws.  Tsk, tsk, you're all heart, Soren, just all heart.   ::)


Quote:

And you can't be a Danish refugee in Australia, you ignorant, shrill crone.

Can't you, Soren?  I thought you were...    ::)

Frank wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 8:52pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 10:16pm: Frank wrote on May 18th, 2017 at 9:35pm: It can't be extreme enough if past experience is taken into account. We are dealing with unscrupulous, extremely corrupt, unsavoury and immoral chancers -  people who still have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity. You are assuming that the individuals who have fled those societies had a say in whether or not their society outlawed slavery or not or "stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity."   You seem to think that Muslims are like the Borg, Soren.  All knowing, all understanding, all accepting of everything within their societies at the same time. Tell me, do you accept and tolerate Homosexuality?  How about racism, Islamophobia, Xenophobia?  Do you condemn or accept those beliefs?   I think we all know the answer to that one, Soren, no matter how much you protest your innocence.  Your posts betray you.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) Muslim countries have not outlawed slavery, stoning of apostates, people who deny women their human dignity simply because these are Koranically correct attitudes, all modelled by Mohammed himslef. How could they make Mohammedan conduct unlawful?

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   This webpage proves you wrong, again, Soren.  Slavery has been outlawed in most Muslim nations.   Whether that law is observed and obeyed may be a different matter.   However, even in Saudi Arabia, slavery is illegal.


Quote:

So if these 'fleeing' Muslims believe in Islam they also thereby accept these Koranocally correct attitudes. And so we can see the degradation of Muslim women, the harassment of 'kufar' teachers in Australian schools, the sectarian antagonism towards the 'wrong' kind of Muslims. Until Islam is reformed, any thinking and honourable Muslim-born person must become an apostate and renounce unreformed Islam. That is the only sane and ethical position to take ESPECIALLY if they living in the West where they have freedom of conscience. Otherwise they are like Communists fleeing Stalinist Russia only to cling to their Communist beliefs once they safely in the West.

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  So, using your logic, do you wear clothing of two separate weaves?  Do you touch or eat pigs and products made from their skin?  DId you sleep with your wife before you were married?  Call yourself a Christian?  Tsk, tsk, Soren, you're no more Christian than a Hottentot in the wilds of Africa.  ::)

You appear to believe, like the Islamists that a literal understanding and implementation of the Koran is the only way to be a Muslim.  Down that road likes Daesh, Soren.  Do you really believe all Muslims believe what you believe about their religion?  Really?   ::)

Again you try to throw Christanity at us.
And yet how many Christians have been killed in the las 50 years for doing the things you say??

But in any backward, brutal, primitive muzzo country on a daily basis
They murder, commit pedophelia (with their CULTS blessing), whip inocent people and generally make life hell on earth for all their devoted followers.

Why do they do this?
Why do they feel the need to torture, punish, murder continually in these backward, brutal countries  wher this CULT has a hold.

And why do they bring this desease into countries that are willing to give them a chance?

I dont understand, it makes no logical sense.
Perhaps the great CULT desease rots the brain and destroys all humanity.

Valkie wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 9:20pm:

Again you try to throw Christanity at us. And yet how many Christians have been killed in the las 50 years for doing the things you say??

No idea.  Do you have any idea, Valkie?  How about you show us how Apostate most Christians appear to be because they aren't punishing all those breakers of Christianity's laws.    ::)


Quote:

But in any backward, brutal, primitive muzzo country on a daily basis They murder, commit pedophelia (with their CULTS blessing), whip inocent people and generally make life hell on earth for all their devoted followers. Why do they do this? Why do they feel the need to torture, punish, murder continually in these backward, brutal countries  wher this CULT has a hold. And why do they bring this desease into countries that are willing to give them a chance? I dont understand, it makes no logical sense. Perhaps the great CULT desease rots the brain and destroys all humanity.

Well, first up, you really do need to get a spell checker, Valkie.   ::)

Second up, most Muslim countries do not practice pure Sharia law.  They can't.  Sharia law as described in the Koran does not cover many modern circumstances or situations.  So they practice a hybrid form of the law.  Indonesia doesn't practice it at all.  Most of the Central Asian Republics don't practice it.   Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the Gulf States, the North African states, the sub-Saharan states, all use hybrid versions, combining usually, Western colonial laws with Sharia.   Of course, you wouldn't understand that.   Nor does it appear that you want to know it, because of your Islamophobia, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

If they were fake refugees they wouldn't get to stay here, would they?  Unless positively vetted they would be sent off to the Dark Regions for All Eternity... neh?

John Smith wrote on May 19^th, 2017 at 9:48pm:

Frank wrote on May 19th, 2017 at 9:42pm: That's a few more reasons for tightening the system, not letting it slide. I'm all for tightening the system I'm not for discriminatory or racist policy

Tightening the system IS about being more discriminating and I am all for it.

Discrimination is necessary, it is essential, in every aspect of life. Don't turn 'non-discrimination' into a mental fetish, a tick.

Brian Ross wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 12:55am:

[ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::)

The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe.
The 'refugees' are now an industry.

Frank wrote on May 25^th, 2017 at 11:22am:

Brian Ross wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 12:55am: [ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::) The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry.

Oh, really, Soren?  I never took you for an idealist.   In a perfect world, we wouldn't be having this argument, now would we?  Tsk, tsk.   Your Xenophobia is showing again, Soren.  Please get help for it.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 25^th, 2017 at 5:57pm:

Frank wrote on May 25th, 2017 at 11:22am: Brian Ross wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 12:55am: [ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::) The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry. Oh, really, Soren?  I never took you for an idealist.   In a perfect world, we wouldn't be having this argument, now would we?  Tsk, tsk.   Your Xenophobia is showing again, Soren.  Please get help for it.   ::) ::)

Not wanting fake refugees is now xenophobic?

Well, is it?

Frank wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:04pm:

Well, is it?

"fake refugees"    ;D

greggerypeccary wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:18pm:

Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:04pm: Well, is it? "fake refugees"    ;D

Most if not all of them are.

Frank wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:28pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:18pm: Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:04pm: Well, is it? "fake refugees"    ;D Most if not all of them are.

Department of Immigration doesn't believe so, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 12:39am:

Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:18pm: Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:04pm: Well, is it? "fake refugees"    ;D Most if not all of them are. Department of Immigration doesn't believe so, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Well, they believe that most of the 7500 who still hasn't provided any evidence of their claims are fakers. The rest of us believe that most of the rest of the ones granted 'refuge' are fakers: the Iranians, Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Libyans. Non Hazara Afghans, sunni Iraqis and Syrians. It's all a load of BS.

Frank wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 10:45am:

Brian Ross wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 12:39am: Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:18pm: Frank wrote on May 26th, 2017 at 10:04pm: Well, is it? "fake refugees"    ;D Most if not all of them are. Department of Immigration doesn't believe so, Soren.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Well, they believe that most of the 7500 who still hasn't provided any evidence of their claims are fakers. The rest of us believe that most of the rest of the ones granted 'refuge' are fakers: the Iranians, Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Libyans. Non Hazara Afghans, sunni Iraqis and Syrians. It's all a load of BS.

"fake refugees"     ;D

Frank wrote on May 25^th, 2017 at 11:22am:

Brian Ross wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 12:55am: [ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::) The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry.

There was one or two boats where the smugglers collected everyone's passports and threw them OB - the vast majority have some form of legitimate ID and record of qualifications when they arrive.

You just continually perpetuate this lie on every such topic, it is untrue and by now even you should understand this.

Dnarever wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 10:48am:

Frank wrote on May 25th, 2017 at 11:22am: Brian Ross wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 12:55am: [ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::) The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry. There was one or two boats where the smugglers collected everyone's passports and threw them OB - the vast majority have some form of legitimate ID and record of qualifications when they arrive. You just continually perpetuate this lie on every such topic, it is untrue and by now even you should understand this.

How is this untrue: The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry.

Which part is a lie?

Frank wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 1:39pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 10:48am: Frank wrote on May 25th, 2017 at 11:22am: Brian Ross wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 12:55am: [ From the perspective of the People Smugglers - they don't care if you have your documents or not.   They just want to transport people to Australia and then get paid for it, Soren.  Some - note that - some - of the Asylum seekers have been proven to be what did you call them, "chancers"?   The overwhelming majority have not.  Therefore, it matters not if they threw their documents overboard, Soren.  They could prove whom they were and what their circumstances were sufficiently to satisfy the authorities.    ::) The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry. There was one or two boats where the smugglers collected everyone's passports and threw them OB - the vast majority have some form of legitimate ID and record of qualifications when they arrive. You just continually perpetuate this lie on every such topic, it is untrue and by now even you should understand this. How is this untrue: The dodgies threw their IDs away. The genuines are very interested and motivated to prove their genuineness. The dodgies are motivated to hide their IDs. The same story in Europe. The 'refugees' are now an industry. Which part is a lie?

The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth.

Brian Ross wrote on May 21^st, 2017 at 1:16am:

Valkie wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 9:20pm: Again you try to throw Christanity at us. And yet how many Christians have been killed in the las 50 years for doing the things you say?? No idea.  Do you have any idea, Valkie?  How about you show us how Apostate most Christians appear to be because they aren't punishing all those breakers of Christianity's laws.    ::) Quote: But in any backward, brutal, primitive muzzo country on a daily basis They murder, commit pedophelia (with their CULTS blessing), whip inocent people and generally make life hell on earth for all their devoted followers. Why do they do this? Why do they feel the need to torture, punish, murder continually in these backward, brutal countries  wher this CULT has a hold. And why do they bring this desease into countries that are willing to give them a chance? I dont understand, it makes no logical sense. Perhaps the great CULT desease rots the brain and destroys all humanity. Well, first up, you really do need to get a spell checker, Valkie.   ::) Second up, most Muslim countries do not practice pure Sharia law.  They can't.  Sharia law as described in the Koran does not cover many modern circumstances or situations.  So they practice a hybrid form of the law.  Indonesia doesn't practice it at all.  Most of the Central Asian Republics don't practice it.   Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the Gulf States, the North African states, the sub-Saharan states, all use hybrid versions, combining usually, Western colonial laws with Sharia.   Of course, you wouldn't understand that.   Nor does it appear that you want to know it, because of your Islamophobia, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Rubbish.
I have seen sharia law practiced.
It is a barbaric, brutal and primitive practice carried out by sadists and twisted sociopaths.

Islam is a cancer, it must be eradicated before it destroys the world.
Anything else is death to civilization.

Dnarever wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 3:54pm:

The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth.

Prove it, Ducky.

Valkie wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 6:59pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 21st, 2017 at 1:16am: Valkie wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 9:20pm: Again you try to throw Christanity at us. And yet how many Christians have been killed in the las 50 years for doing the things you say?? No idea.  Do you have any idea, Valkie?  How about you show us how Apostate most Christians appear to be because they aren't punishing all those breakers of Christianity's laws.    ::) Quote: But in any backward, brutal, primitive muzzo country on a daily basis They murder, commit pedophelia (with their CULTS blessing), whip inocent people and generally make life hell on earth for all their devoted followers. Why do they do this? Why do they feel the need to torture, punish, murder continually in these backward, brutal countries  wher this CULT has a hold. And why do they bring this desease into countries that are willing to give them a chance? I dont understand, it makes no logical sense. Perhaps the great CULT desease rots the brain and destroys all humanity. Well, first up, you really do need to get a spell checker, Valkie.   ::) Second up, most Muslim countries do not practice pure Sharia law.  They can't.  Sharia law as described in the Koran does not cover many modern circumstances or situations.  So they practice a hybrid form of the law.  Indonesia doesn't practice it at all.  Most of the Central Asian Republics don't practice it.   Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the Gulf States, the North African states, the sub-Saharan states, all use hybrid versions, combining usually, Western colonial laws with Sharia.   Of course, you wouldn't understand that.   Nor does it appear that you want to know it, because of your Islamophobia, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Rubbish. I have seen sharia law practiced. It is a barbaric, brutal and primitive practice carried out by sadists and twisted sociopaths. Islam is a cancer, it must be eradicated before it destroys the world. Anything else is death to civilization.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie me.  Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new to see here, just Valkie's tired old Islamophobia, all over again.   Tsk, tsk,    ::)

You have seen one version of Sharia law, Valkie.  It differs from nation to nation.   Acehian Sharia is difference to Malaysian Sharia, is different to Bangladeshi Sharia, is different to Pakistani Sharia, is different to Afghan Sharia, is different to Iranian Sharia, is different to Iraqi, Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian, Libya, Morocco, etc., etc.   All have the same roots but all have differences covering the modern situations which their societies now encounter which were not covered by Sharia.   Only in Saudi Arabia do you have the removal of hands for thiefs, the caning of adulterous women, the beheading of offenders, and so on.   Koranic jurisprudence is often also markedly different between the various places where Sharia is practised.   Islam is not the Borg that you appear to believe.   Interpretation varies often quite markedly as well.   Something you refuse to acknowledge in your Islamophobia.  Tsk, tsk.    ::) ::)

Frank wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 9:33pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky.

Quote:

Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage.

https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/

Dnarever wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 10:09am:

Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/callofduty/images/6/65/Owned_Stamp.png

Dnarever wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 10:09am:

Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/

that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment.

Dnarever wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 10:09am:

Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/

It's a sham. These are easily forged fakeries - that's why they are not accepted. Even passports are often forged.

Brian Ross wrote on May 27^th, 2017 at 10:34pm:

Valkie wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 6:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on May 21st, 2017 at 1:16am: Valkie wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 9:20pm: Again you try to throw Christanity at us. And yet how many Christians have been killed in the las 50 years for doing the things you say?? No idea.  Do you have any idea, Valkie?  How about you show us how Apostate most Christians appear to be because they aren't punishing all those breakers of Christianity's laws.    ::) Quote: But in any backward, brutal, primitive muzzo country on a daily basis They murder, commit pedophelia (with their CULTS blessing), whip inocent people and generally make life hell on earth for all their devoted followers. Why do they do this? Why do they feel the need to torture, punish, murder continually in these backward, brutal countries  wher this CULT has a hold. And why do they bring this desease into countries that are willing to give them a chance? I dont understand, it makes no logical sense. Perhaps the great CULT desease rots the brain and destroys all humanity. Well, first up, you really do need to get a spell checker, Valkie.   ::) Second up, most Muslim countries do not practice pure Sharia law.  They can't.  Sharia law as described in the Koran does not cover many modern circumstances or situations.  So they practice a hybrid form of the law.  Indonesia doesn't practice it at all.  Most of the Central Asian Republics don't practice it.   Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the Gulf States, the North African states, the sub-Saharan states, all use hybrid versions, combining usually, Western colonial laws with Sharia.   Of course, you wouldn't understand that.   Nor does it appear that you want to know it, because of your Islamophobia, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) Rubbish. I have seen sharia law practiced. It is a barbaric, brutal and primitive practice carried out by sadists and twisted sociopaths. Islam is a cancer, it must be eradicated before it destroys the world. Anything else is death to civilization. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie me.  Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new to see here, just Valkie's tired old Islamophobia, all over again.   Tsk, tsk,    ::) You have seen one version of Sharia law, Valkie.  It differs from nation to nation.   Acehian Sharia is difference to Malaysian Sharia, is different to Bangladeshi Sharia, is different to Pakistani Sharia, is different to Afghan Sharia, is different to Iranian Sharia, is different to Iraqi, Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian, Libya, Morocco, etc., etc.   All have the same roots but all have differences covering the modern situations which their societies now encounter which were not covered by Sharia.   Only in Saudi Arabia do you have the removal of hands for thiefs, the caning of adulterous women, the beheading of offenders, and so on.   Koranic jurisprudence is often also markedly different between the various places where Sharia is practised.   Islam is not the Borg that you appear to believe.   Interpretation varies often quite markedly as well.   Something you refuse to acknowledge in your Islamophobia.  Tsk, tsk.    ::) ::)

How many times must I tell you Bwyannnnnnn.
Islamaphobia is a made up word, propagated by apologists to label aware and sensible people so they think they are denigrating them.

But no amout of name calling Tut Tutting, Tis Tisking or sychophant sympathizer words will ever be as insulting as anyone being called a MUSLIM.

Thst would be an insult as it simply means
PARASITE.
LAZY
CRIMINAL
MENTALLY DEFICIENT
RETARDED
AND

A waste of oxygen

rhino wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 10:57am:

Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:09am: Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/ that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutatable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment.

Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented”


You understand what most asylum seekers arrive with means ???


Quote:

refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable

No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true.

Dnarever wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 6:27pm:

rhino wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:57am: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:09am: Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/ that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutatable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” You understand what most asylum seekers arrive with means ??? [quote]refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable

No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true.[/quote]

Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest?
There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out.
And we all know that muzzos are liars, theives, crooks and potential terrorists.

That is why they are undocumented.
After seeing the same set of fake documens several times over, they start to get suspicious.

Valkie wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 5:13pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 10:34pm: Oh, dearie, dearie me.  Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new to see here, just Valkie's tired old Islamophobia, all over again.   Tsk, tsk,    ::) You have seen one version of Sharia law, Valkie.  It differs from nation to nation.   Acehian Sharia is different to Malaysian Sharia, is different to Bangladeshi Sharia, is different to Pakistani Sharia, is different to Afghan Sharia, is different to Iranian Sharia, is different to Iraqi, Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian, Libya, Morocco, etc., etc.   All have the same roots but all have differences covering the modern situations which their societies now encounter which were not covered by Sharia.   Only in Saudi Arabia do you have the removal of hands for thieves, the caning of adulterous women, the beheading of offenders, and so on.   Koranic jurisprudence is often also markedly different between the various places where Sharia is practised.   Islam is not the Borg that you appear to believe.   Interpretation varies often quite markedly as well.   Something you refuse to acknowledge in your Islamophobia.  Tsk, tsk.    ::) ::) How many times must I tell you Bwyannnnnnn. Islamaphobia is a made up word, propagated by apologists to label aware and sensible people so they think they are denigrating them.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

According to whom?  You?  A noted Islamophobe?  I suppose any excuse will do for you, won't it, Valkie?  Tsk, tsk.    ::)


Quote:

But no amout of name calling Tut Tutting, Tis Tisking or sychophant sympathizer words will ever be as insulting as anyone being called a MUSLIM. Thst would be an insult as it simply means PARASITE. LAZY CRIMINAL MENTALLY DEFICIENT RETARDED AND A waste of oxygen

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Oh, poor, poor, Valkie.  You do really need a spellchecker on your posts.   You also need a logic checker and to check your moral compass more often 'cause you're way off course.   Looks to me like your up flatulent creek, without a paddle in a barbedwire canoe.   Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Dnarever wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 6:27pm:

Quote: refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true.

Rubbish, the source is and was the department of immigration.

Brian Ross wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 12:07am:

Valkie wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 5:13pm: Brian Ross wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 10:34pm: Oh, dearie, dearie me.  Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new to see here, just Valkie's tired old Islamophobia, all over again.   Tsk, tsk,    ::) You have seen one version of Sharia law, Valkie.  It differs from nation to nation.   Acehian Sharia is different to Malaysian Sharia, is different to Bangladeshi Sharia, is different to Pakistani Sharia, is different to Afghan Sharia, is different to Iranian Sharia, is different to Iraqi, Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian, Libya, Morocco, etc., etc.   All have the same roots but all have differences covering the modern situations which their societies now encounter which were not covered by Sharia.   Only in Saudi Arabia do you have the removal of hands for thieves, the caning of adulterous women, the beheading of offenders, and so on.   Koranic jurisprudence is often also markedly different between the various places where Sharia is practised.   Islam is not the Borg that you appear to believe.   Interpretation varies often quite markedly as well.   Something you refuse to acknowledge in your Islamophobia.  Tsk, tsk.    ::) ::) How many times must I tell you Bwyannnnnnn. Islamaphobia is a made up word, propagated by apologists to label aware and sensible people so they think they are denigrating them. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg According to whom?  You?  A noted Islamophobe?  I suppose any excuse will do for you, won't it, Valkie?  Tsk, tsk.    ::) Quote: But no amout of name calling Tut Tutting, Tis Tisking or sychophant sympathizer words will ever be as insulting as anyone being called a MUSLIM. Thst would be an insult as it simply means PARASITE. LAZY CRIMINAL MENTALLY DEFICIENT RETARDED AND A waste of oxygen Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Oh, poor, poor, Valkie.  You do really need a spellchecker on your posts.   You also need a logic checker and to check your moral compass more often 'cause you're way off course.   Looks to me like your up flatulent creek, without a paddle in a barbedwire canoe.   Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Why would I bother with a spellchecker?

Muzzos are too retarded to understand anyway

And now I know Im getting to you because your insults are getting personal,

Keep going bwyannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Islamophobia is a made up word used by sichophants, sympathisers, and traitors to the human race.

Why would you side with a disgusting CULT like this islam?

Do you hate people so much?

Has life been yhat bad to you?

Sad, sad little bwyannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn, I feel sorry for you.

Valkie wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 6:08pm:

Islamophobia is a made up word

All words are made up.

Did you think they grow in the backyard or something?

;D

Silly Islamophobe.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 6:09pm:

Valkie wrote on May 29th, 2017 at 6:08pm: Islamophobia is a made up word All words are made up. Did you think they grow in the backyard or something? ;D Silly Islamophobe.

Some words are just rounded off  caveman grunts Pecca. You are wrong again.

Valkie wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 6:08pm:

Why would I bother with a spellchecker?

Perhaps to make your posts intelligeable to other readers?    ::)


Quote:

Muzzos are too retarded to understand anyway

I must tell that to my friend the Muslim Professor, Valkie.   I'm sure he'll laugh over your little joke.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)


Quote:

And now I know Im getting to you because your insults are getting personal, Keep going bwyannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Islamophobia is a made up word used by sichophants, sympathisers, and traitors to the human race. Why would you side with a disgusting CULT like this islam? Do you hate people so much? Has life been yhat bad to you? Sad, sad little bwyannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn, I feel sorry for you.

[img]http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg[/img]

The only person displaying hatred is you, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk, looks like your moral compass needs more checking.  You're now heading up ordure creek there, Valkie.  You really should have taken a paddle with you...    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 7:21pm:

Valkie wrote on May 29th, 2017 at 6:08pm: Why would I bother with a spellchecker? Perhaps to make your posts intelligeable to other readers?    ::)

;D ;D ;D

greggerypeccary wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 6:09pm:

Valkie wrote on May 29th, 2017 at 6:08pm: Islamophobia is a made up word All words are made up. Did you think they grow in the backyard or something? ;D Silly Islamophobe.

Yes you should plant them next to the cheese bush.

rhino wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 12:08am:

Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 6:27pm: Quote: refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true. Rubbish, the source is and was the department of immigration.

Actually the original claim from the low life of the decade was shown to not have been supported by the department of immigration.

Even the correct figures where the claim that they arrive with no identification was dishonestly used. They are considered undocumented if they do not have the right identification. these people mostly had  birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc they are still considered to be undocumented.

Thus being "undocumented" never meant that they had arrived with no documentation as has been the claim and political inference.

The political intention was that it be taken literally which is dishonestly misleading, intentionally leading people to believe something which is untrue.

Valkie wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 8:14pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 6:27pm: rhino wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:57am: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:09am: Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/ that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutatable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” You understand what most asylum seekers arrive with means ??? [quote]refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true.

Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest?
There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out.
And we all know that muzzos are liars, theives, crooks and potential terrorists.

That is why they are undocumented.
After seeing the same set of fake documens several times over, they start to get suspicious.
[/quote]


Quote:

Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest? There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out.

The claim was that they have no identification ? nobody said anything about it being genuine.

Plenty of immigrants come on false passports in fact why would they claim refugee status when if they have the right fake documents they can immigrate with no restrictions and much less scrutiny ?

And 457 visas provided cover for flying into Australia.

Dnarever wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 8:32pm:

Valkie wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 8:14pm: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 6:27pm: rhino wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:57am: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:09am: Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/ that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutatable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” You understand what most asylum seekers arrive with means ??? [quote]refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true. Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest? There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out. And we all know that muzzos are liars, theives, crooks and potential terrorists. That is why they are undocumented. After seeing the same set of fake documens several times over, they start to get suspicious.

Quote:

Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest? There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out.

The claim was that they have no identification ? nobody said anything about it being genuine.

Plenty of immigrants come on false passports in fact why would they claim refugee status when if they have the right fake documents they can immigrate with no restrictions and much less scrutiny ?[/quote]


Its because they are muzzos,

Even when they dont have to lie, they do, because they cant help themselves.

Its in their inbreed genes.

Valkie wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 9:00pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 29th, 2017 at 8:32pm: Valkie wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 8:14pm: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 6:27pm: rhino wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:57am: Dnarever wrote on May 28th, 2017 at 10:09am: Frank wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 9:33pm: Dnarever wrote on May 27th, 2017 at 3:54pm: The vast majority of refugees who have arrived had identification - this is a fact. The proposition that they didn't was always a politically generated mistruth. Prove it, Ducky. Quote: Burke’s office tells Crikey that a birth certificate or driver’s license can be used as initial identifying documentation, while the Department of Immigration says that’s unlikely, although several documents together may help. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” if they can’t produce reputable state-issued photo identification upon arrival. The other forms of ID are used to help identify them and process their claims at a later stage. https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/07/11/get-fact-how-many-asylum-seekers-turn-up-without-id/ that doesnt prove your claim. All you have done is show the process used. We already know that most of the refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, thats irrefutatable as it has been acknowledged by immigration a number of times, a simple google would have saved you this embarrassment. Most asylum seekers arrive with birth certificates, drivers licences, school certificates, letters from local priests, photocopies of identity cards, etc, however they are officially classified as “undocumented” You understand what most asylum seekers arrive with means ??? [quote]refugees arriving by boat come without identification of any sort, that's irrefutatable irrefutable No that was always a lie made by a dishonest politician and believed with no proof by those who would have prefer it to have be true. Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest? There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out. And we all know that muzzos are liars, theives, crooks and potential terrorists. That is why they are undocumented. After seeing the same set of fake documens several times over, they start to get suspicious. [quote]Yes but exactly whoes birth certificate, and whoes identity cards and letters from what priest? There are many cases of identity thefth, a recen one when a doctor was caught out.

The claim was that they have no identification ? nobody said anything about it being genuine.

Plenty of immigrants come on false passports in fact why would they claim refugee status when if they have the right fake documents they can immigrate with no restrictions and much less scrutiny ?[/quote]


Its because they are muzzos,

Even when they dont have to lie, they do, because they cant help themselves.

Its in their inbreed genes.[/quote]

It seems that the majority who were flying in on fake credentials were Indian - not muzzo's at all ?????

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  More islamophobia it seems, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk, I don't know why you bother.   I really don't.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on May 30^th, 2017 at 9:34pm:

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  More islamophobia it seems, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk, I don't know why you bother.   I really don't.    ::)

Here we go, the yawning jihadi.

Frank wrote on May 30^th, 2017 at 9:43pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 30th, 2017 at 9:34pm: http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  More islamophobia it seems, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk, I don't know why you bother.   I really don't.    ::) Here we go, the yawning jihadi.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Boring as bat poo, Soren.  Sorry, you really do need to lift your game, if this is the best you can do in the ad hominem front.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Frank wrote on May 30^th, 2017 at 9:43pm:

Brian Ross wrote on May 30th, 2017 at 9:34pm: http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  More islamophobia it seems, Valkie.  Tsk, tsk, I don't know why you bother.   I really don't.    ::) Here we go, the yawning jihadi.

You have to understand the poor sod.

When he has no argument.
When he is stuffed
When his tiny brain realizes that he cannot argue againt the truth.

He does his yawn and silly statement.
He probaby heard it or saw it written somewhere and now uses it so often its like a comma.

One day, we can only hope, he will go over to a muzzo country (where he has never been)
And see just how barbaric, primitive, backward, and poor this CULT leaves its people.

No muzzo country has any real industry (other than pedophile marriage celebrants)
No advancement, very little work and no enjoyment of life, or just joy of life.

They live for murder, rape, terrorism and perverted barbaric practices.
No wonder tgey hate human beings, they are so jealous of them.
And that is also why they commit suicide, they have nothing to live for.

It is a CULT of the devil
It is a CULT of hatred
It is a CULT of barbarism
It is a CULT of sick, twisted criminal retards.

Mr bwyannnnnnnnnnnn
Would fit right in

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just Valkie's tired old Islamophobia and ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::)

Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate.

Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 4:11am:

Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 4:43pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::)

You stupid, sad bastard.

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 4:43pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::)

I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute.

Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ?

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 10:00pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute. Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ?

Another possibility is that he is a retarded muzzo who has half a dozen standard phrases that he inserts to stifle debate or annoy posters so much they just leave.

Perhaps he cannot think, has no cerebral capacity for debate and simply states something he heard once and thinks it makes him sound Smart.

Or perhaps he is just an apologist, sycophant,  sympathiser traitor to the human race.

Take your pick

Yawn away bwyannnnnnnnnnnn

Frank wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 8:55pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) You stupid, sad bastard.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Soren, you really need to lift your game, tsk, tsk.    ::)

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 10:00pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute. Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ?

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  UnSubRocky, you're just wasting more electrons by typing bullshit to try and justify your ad hominem argument.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Valkie wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 7:30pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 10:00pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute. Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ? Another possibility is that he is a retarded muzzo who has half a dozen standard phrases that he inserts to stifle debate or annoy posters so much they just leave. Perhaps he cannot think, has no cerebral capacity for debate and simply states something he heard once and thinks it makes him sound Smart. Or perhaps he is just an apologist, sycophant,  sympathiser traitor to the human race. Take your pick Yawn away bwyannnnnnnnnnnn

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Boring as bat poo, really, Valkie.  Why do you even bother posting if all you can do is attack people all the time?  You never post anything constructive, just hatred and bile.  Tsk, tsk.  Are you really that unhappy with the rest of the world?  What is troubling you so much?   Talk to Soren, he's a trick cyclist by trade.  You two should get on like a house on fire...   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 7:52pm:

Frank wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 8:55pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) You stupid, sad bastard. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Soren, you really need to lift your game, tsk, tsk.    ::)

What?? You aren't a semi-literate, pompous, ignorant ass?

Prove it.

Frank wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 8:31pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 2nd, 2017 at 7:52pm: Frank wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 8:55pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) You stupid, sad bastard. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Soren, you really need to lift your game, tsk, tsk.    ::) What?? You aren't a semi-literate, pompous, ignorant ass? Prove it.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Still down in the gutter, hey, Soren?  Is that the best you can do?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 7:54pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 10:00pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute. Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ? http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  UnSubRocky, you're just wasting more electrons by typing bullshit to try and justify your ad hominem argument.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

You are just some automated responder, aren't you?

There are no 'fake' refugees - they are either refugees or they are not.

A person claiming asylum may not have sufficient supporting documentation, or may - in RARE cases - not be a genuine asylum seeker.... but that is precisely why we have a vetting process....

Some of you need to get your heads out of your asses and start looking at government legislation and regulation in this area.....

The people under discussion in this thread have not formally applied for asylum, and that is not the same as being a 'fake'.  On top of that, it appears that unreasonable demands are being placed on persons already permitted access to living in this country, for what may, in the cases of those without documentation, be impossible timelines and standards to meet.

How does an Iranian dissident - and I  have advised some about seeking asylum - who is under the tight control of the government get hold of documentation to prove who and what he/she is?

In simple terms - they don't.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 11:28pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 2nd, 2017 at 7:54pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 10:00pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:43pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1st, 2017 at 4:11am: Move along folks. Move along. Nothing new here. Just Brian's desperate need to cover up and stifle debate. Brian, I can recommend that you take a packet of risperidone 2mg. Just go to your doctor and tell him that you have "I saw Elvis Presley" syndrome and that you're all shook up. Perhaps your mania on these forums will clear up. It's getting monotonous. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Move along folks, move along.  Nothing new here, just UnSubRocky's tired old ad hominem arguments.   Tsk, tsk, makes me wonder why he even bothers to post, its as boring as bat poo.    ::) I am trying to help you... and you want to abuse me over the forum because you have nothing to contribute. Perhaps some new strategy? Instead of implicitly accepting an opponent's argument by entertaining their views with a challenge, perhaps you could reject their argument outright. Or perhaps just agree with part, but disagree with some form of rebuttal. I am kind of sick of hearing your responses as "For whom?" or "Evidence please?". It really vexes me that you want to seem like a speed bump for a debate site. It is no wonder we have only a few new registering forum users every year. They probably look at your 7 post a day average of repetitive droll, and head for other websites. Or is that the actual strategy you are trying to employ? http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  UnSubRocky, you're just wasting more electrons by typing bullshit to try and justify your ad hominem argument.  Tsk, tsk.    ::) You are just some automated responder, aren't you?

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Nope, every answer is individually crafted, UnSubRocky.   Every electron has been lovingly created and bespoke tailored to put the fools who infest these forums in their place.  Tsk, tsk.    ::)

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 12:27am:

There are no 'fake' refugees - they are either refugees or they are not. A person claiming asylum may not have sufficient supporting documentation, or may - in RARE cases - not be a genuine asylum seeker.... but that is precisely why we have a vetting process.... Some of you need to get your heads out of your asses and start looking at government legislation and regulation in this area..... The people under discussion in this thread have not formally applied for asylum, and that is not the same as being a 'fake'.  On top of that, it appears that unreasonable demands are being placed on persons already permitted access to living in this country, for what may, in the cases of those without documentation, be impossible timelines and standards to meet. How does an Iranian dissident - and I  have advised some about seeking asylum - who is under the tight control of the government get hold of documentation to prove who and what he/she is? In simple terms - they don't.

Agreed.   However, they won't, Grappler, they never do.  They prefer prejudice and bigotry over reality.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 12:55am:

Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, UnSubRocky?  Do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 6:26pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 12:55am: Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, UnSubRocky?  Do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::)

You sad, stupid old hag.

Proving that you are silly, confused and often malicious little apologist for every kind of dreadful behaviour is not ad hominem. It is addressing the issue at hand.
You do not even know what ad hominem means, you silly old 'used to a statistician at ANU'. 

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 6:26pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 12:55am: Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, UnSubRocky?  Do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::)

You dug your own debate grave a while ago. I'm just throwing the remainder of the top soil on top of you, and about to apply the lime and/or lawn seeds.

Frank wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 10:13pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 6:26pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 12:55am: Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, UnSubRocky?  Do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::) You sad, stupid old hag. Proving that you are silly, confused and often malicious little apologist for every kind of dreadful behaviour is not ad hominem. It is addressing the issue at hand. You do not even know what ad hominem means, you silly old 'used to a statistician at ANU'.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, Soren?  You do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::)

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 12:28am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 6:26pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 3rd, 2017 at 12:55am: Brian is imploding, and about to disappear up his own asshole. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, resorting to ad hominem again, UnSubRocky?  Do realise that shows you've lost the discussion?    ::) You dug your own debate grave a while ago. I'm just throwing the remainder of the top soil on top of you, and about to apply the lime and/or lawn seeds.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   Tsk, tsk, I don't know why you bother, UnSubRocky?  You've lost.      ::)

Brian's response to anything he has no answer is to copy and paste his previous answers.

if filthy immigrants are on our Terrorist Watch list then that should be grounds to deport the bastards right there and then...

deport them..

and deport the rest of their HATE filled families...

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 1:40pm:

Brian's response to anything he has no answer is to copy and paste his previous answers.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Really?  Oh, my, I must remember to do that, UnSubRocky.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

You don't quote your own jpeg, dummy!

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 1:50pm:

if filthy immigrants are on our Terrorist Watch list then that should be grounds to deport the bastards right there and then... deport them.. and deport the rest of their HATE filled families...

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

And what crime would they have committed to warrant this action, Mechie?   Oh, that's right, they're related to some one on a Terrorist Watch List.   You remember what happened when Yusuf Islam ended up on a US "Terrorist Watch List", for no other crime than expressing an opinion?  He was booted off an aircraft he had a valid ticket on.   Seems hardly fair in a land which you claim believes in Freedom of Speech, right?  Tsk, tsk.  ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 4:49pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jun 4th, 2017 at 1:50pm: if filthy immigrants are on our Terrorist Watch list then that should be grounds to deport the bastards right there and then... deport them.. and deport the rest of their HATE filled families... http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg And what crime would they have committed to warrant this action, Mechie?   Oh, that's right, they're related to some one on a Terrorist Watch List.   You remember what happened when Yusuf Islam ended up on a US "Terrorist Watch List", for no other crime than expressing an opinion?  He was booted off an aircraft he had a valid ticket on.   Seems hardly fair in a land which you claim believes in Freedom of Speech, right?  Tsk, tsk.  ::)

Im all for refugees.
Christian refugees
Buddhist refugees
Chinese refugees

AS LONG AS ITS NOT THOSE FILTHY, TERRORIST, RETARDED, PERVERTED, BARBARIC MUZZO FAKE REFUGEES.

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 10:41am:

Dutton is doing a fantastic job for Australia regardless of these traitors who are working against us... keep up the good work Dutto.... don't let the scum win..

It's time the government changed the laws so that democratically elected ministers are not overruled by unelected swill.