http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/06/14/48/daniel-andrews-tells-pm-malcol...

Who is a more on?

Link.

Armpit, do you get a kick out of seeing children suffer?

Redmond Neck wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 5:54pm:


Reddie, Turdbull is a gutless piece of crap who just does what the RWNJ's in his party tell him to.

I have said for a while now that BOATS was turning into a negative for the Libs. Try as they might details are leaking out of horrendous conditions in our concentration camps.

John Smith wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 5:51pm:


That can be the only explanation.

“There are infants among this group who were born in the country. Sending them to Nauru will needlessly expose them to a life of physical and emotional trauma."

John Smith wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 5:51pm:


No, which is why I support the party that is taking kids out of detention. That is unlike you, who supports the party that put more than 2000 of them into detention. The number would've been higher had the lot you support not caused thousands of people to drown at sea.

Kat wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 6:25pm:


Yes, for the people smugglers.

Like i said in the other forum topic thread... libs won't be happy with the higher moral stance exhibited by a lab.

This is people rejected from getting a visa trying to use their kids to get a visa. F em.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:10pm:
In this world a leader should think with their mind and not their heart. Hearts make mistakes. I know mine has. That's the problem with female leaders.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:14pm:
I wish you would drown.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:16pm:



Report yourself to the Corrections Dept run by perceptions_now.  He banned me for posting 'kill him,' so you are now in strife.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:12pm:


Moral - based on quick google search - principles of right and wrong. 

Many perspectives of right and wrong here.  Is Andrews right to want to immediately protect these refugees/seekers?  From those people's perspective - yes.  From lib perspective no - because it undermines their policy.

Is it right that wants to prevent "more deaths"? Yes it is. 

If you want to truly stop them landing onto our shores, you would have to make the borders a military zone and shoot all illegal boats.  Eventually they would stop coming.  Would that be moral if shooting a few boats down will stop zillions in the future?  Sounds like a sound lib policy in the making.

Sort of like chinese tactic when hitting pedestrians.  Small fine if killed them, but if they survive, then long and expensive medical bills... which is why you hear reports of cars deliberately reversing back their poor victims.

Perhaps armchair is thinking long term - the "short-term" suffering and pain of returning those people and continuous detentions vs. future boats.

What's interesting to me though, is that as libs are after a new slave caste (low paid, if paid at all), why not let these refugees in then.  You know, since libs like Swag are "sick" of being "progressive tax" slaves. 

Here's a great chance to kill off high paying low skilled workers and their unions by putting in people desperate to do anything.  And these people might even vote for libs to thank them for letting them into the country.  Pretty much win-win here.

Oh wait - I forgot - there are xenophobic elements in the lib party.  Must appease them...or they will abandon ship.  Plenty of famous ex-libs already - Slipper, Palmer....hmm fantastic role models?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:24pm:
Peccahead thinks that what happens in the med is somehow our issue.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:25pm:


Yep - Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister of Australia and Greece and Turkey and Italy, etc.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:31pm:


Not just retarded - he's left-wing retarded. That's a dangerous combo.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:37pm:


Merkel and half of Europe wouldn't be in this mess with dodgy, violent refugees if they had followed Abbott's lead.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:46pm:


That's debatable.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:24pm:


"The Turkish coastguard has recovered the bodies of drowned asylum seekers, including children, washed up on a beach after yet another boat sank while trying to reach Europe, leaving at least 37 dead."

"The drownings continue a grim trend that accelerated last year when nearly 4,000 people died trying to reach Europe by sea, according to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM)."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-31/37-asylum-seekers-drown-off-turkey/7127608

Is that getting you aroused, Armpit?

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:51pm:
I've never seen a child drown. I don't know what you are talking about.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:54pm:


It doesn't.  Who told you it does?

"The drownings continue a grim trend that accelerated last year when nearly 4,000 people died trying to reach Europe by sea, according to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM)."

The boats haven't stopped, and the drownings continue.

Moreover, Armpit and Homo continue to celebrate the deaths of young children.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:57pm:


Actually, you do. How? By continuing to try to somehow link the happenings  in Europe with our immigration program. It's about as far-fetched as it gets, even for an idiot like you.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:00pm:


I've done no such thing.

"The drownings continue a grim trend that accelerated last year when nearly 4,000 people died trying to reach Europe by sea, according to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM)."

The boats haven't stopped, and the drownings continue.

Moreover, Armpit and Homo continue to celebrate the deaths of young children.

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:04pm:


Yep. If it wasn't just a pointless political stunt, he'd have told no one about the letter. But that's Labor for you. They love playing political games with other peoples' lives.

Aussie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:15pm:


No, I'm sure he's serious. Just as I'm sure he's an absolute i-d-i-o-t who has no idea what he's trying to get himself or his state into.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:


So, how is it political stunt, if he is serious?  Ought he hide the proposal from Victorians, or let them know exactly what he has offered the PM?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:32pm:


Please explain.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:36pm:


White flag accepted.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:00pm:



no it's not. All you've done is limit the destination countries by one. You stop them coming here, they go there, you haven't stopped any drownings, just moved it along.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:50pm:

that's because you're a dirt bag.

Aussie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:


Would be a stunt if Turnbull accepted the proposal and then Andrews rejected it.  Let's see if Turnbull will first.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 7:27pm:


Plenty of politicians (libs) wrecking the country faster than any terrorist.

I thought that was what security checks are for.

I wouldn't think most of the children/babies going to be terrorists...

I would think most people have a stance on this already on this thread.  What's more interesting is how the swinging voters will decide. 

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:05pm:


Thank you for proving my point.

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:06pm:


He wasn't elected to stand by and do nothing while kids suffer either.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:37pm:


I've not seen it for a long time.

We need more people like him.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:39pm:


Making attempts to save the lives of those less fortunate than us, is everyone's business.

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


Actually, YOU did by supporting the ALP and Greens to keep Labor's appalling policy going. Kids in detention when the Coalition left office in 2007 - ZERO, NONE, NADA, ZIP. Kids in detention when Coalition regained office (i.e. on Labor's watch) - 2,000+. You can play childish games with words all you like, but at the end of the day the truth will remain: Labor locked up more than 2,000 kids (many who are orphans whose parents drowned at sea) while the Coalition is setting them free. By the way, no one invited those people or their kids here and there's nothing preventing them from going home. Those families are free to return home any time they wish. So enough of your faux, politically biased outrage. Time for you to grow a brain and use it.

stunspore wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:04pm:


It's very difficult to do those security checks when those people were encouraged during Labor's reign of terror to throw their passports into the sea to make it nigh on impossible for the weak-kneed Labor government to reject them.

It is not like that at all. One day you might think but I am not holding my breath.

It is about not letting wounded people be moved back to where they were wounded—assault, sexual abuse, rape, daily humiliation by guards etc.

It seems so.

blah blah blah

Why do you want kids and women returned to where they were raped and assaulted, ArmPit? That is a pretty shocking thing to want.

Labor voter wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 6:49am:


The Victoria opposition said it was little more than a stunt and that there are more important things to focus on, like Labor's deficit, the colossal waste of money cancelling a billion-dollar project and other problems affecting Victorians. The Victoria opposition is right on all points.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 6:40am:

Armpit likes to excuse child rape.  Armpit, why do you accept child rape?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 7:08am:

That ‘project’ would have cost much more than $1Bn and created a loss. That compo was needed can be put down to the Vic Lib govt.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 7:12am:


Yup—the turncoat govt won’t spend any money helping those found to have been sexually assualted. Probably thinks the RC into Child Sex abuse is a waste of money.

Hmmm... it can be a win-win situation for andrews except for the hardlline lib supporters.

Win if Turnbull says "no" - winning on the compassion side.
Win if Turnbull says "yes" - winning on the compassion side.  Very little at stakes since generally Andrews/lab won't lose many swinging voters over this and they were never going to win the diehard lib supporters - they will complain and whine though.
If the Vic opposition put too much of a fight/sound, then they might put off swinging voters since Victoria generally is more rational/progressive than NSW, which is what most forum posters are from, I suspect.

double plus good wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:


and yet you're the one who continually brings up what the Muslims are doing in Paris 

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 5:43am:


what about them? You were talking about boat people, what do they have to do with boat people?

stunspore wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 7:21am:


I agree with most of your points Stun, except the term "Vic Opposition"    The only time we see a reply from what's left of them is to carp on about the time taken to fix things their pathetic one term government created.   I have only seen three of them in the public arena since they were booted out.

Vic wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 7:42am:

Yes, the shoebox king is definitely a weakling opposition.