Australian Politics Forum

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #150 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:46pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Sounds like it??? Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Secret Wars

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #151 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:49pm

This old poo again.

Gregg what do you mean when you say there is no queue? its not lines of people on a beach waiting for a people smuggler.

When Gillard, Swann and Rudd talked about going back to the queue they meant boat arrivals not have precedence, the lowest priority in resttlements.

And as you are not aware, queue jumpers refer to those who attempt to circumvent the humanitarian intake by doing a forced migration themselves, this reducing the intake for that year.

It was all fun and games till Gillard and later Rudd got the rude awakening, the sort of awakening the tyou don't get by sitting on your arse on a forum all day, but the awakening from focus groups and talking to people that arrivals washing up in ever increasing amounts is an election loser.

Hence the Rudd principles, tow them back where safe to do so, no resettlement ever in Australia for those that wash up. Principles harsher than the last set of harsh principals from that other great Labor progressive Paul Keating who legislated mandatory detention.

And you buggerwits are not aware of any of it judging by your rubbish where you try to label everything bad as the coalition.

Fact is the coalition couldn't get away with a fraction of the poo that you clowns legislated because Labor knows, it's own rusted on cretins won't say boo.

No sea of hands when Labor is in power. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 131786
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #152 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:50pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:46pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Sounds like it??? Roll Eyes

Yes.

Who wouldn't want to see asylum seekers have a chance to have their claims assessed?

What possible reason could there be to deny them that opportunity?

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #153 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 131786
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #154 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:57pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Nobody is denying there's a quota.

Now, back to the subject.

Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars.

Who told him this lie?

He won't answer, and you keep avoiding the question.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #155 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:58pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:57pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Nobody is denying there's a quota.

Now, back to the subject.

Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars.

Who told him this lie?

He won't answer, and you keep avoiding the question.

See muppet, people smuggling stops the UNCR reffos getting a go and you support that????

Back to top

IP Logged

Secret Wars

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #156 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:59pm

It's going to be interesting the next Labor government. They may still have a legacy load of the last load of unfortunates they laid the sugar put on the table for.

Hopefully they will be gone. And Labor will once again inherit secure borders.

Moreover, unlike Gregg and his fellow travelers in idiocy I am sure that Labor will have enough corporate memory remaining to not revisit the last epic clusterbugger they initiated.

I am pretty confident they will remain as hash as they have been in in the past (apart from the Rudd/Gillard buggerwittery aberration pandering to cretins like those who spend all day here).

We shall see, no doubt people smugglers smelling the change of government will give it another crack. They have a corporate memory as well, and they remember the good times, two boats a day and awash with money.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 131786
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #157 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:00pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:58pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:57pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Nobody is denying there's a quota.

Now, back to the subject.

Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars.

Who told him this lie?

He won't answer, and you keep avoiding the question.

See muppet, people smuggling stops the UNCR reffos getting a go and you support that????

I don't support one method over the other.

I've told you this several times.

Do you have a mental disability?

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 131786 Gender:	Re: Apologise Reply #158 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:00pm Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars. Who told him this lie?
Back to top	IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #159 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:09pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:00pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:58pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:57pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Nobody is denying there's a quota.

Now, back to the subject.

Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars.

Who told him this lie?

He won't answer, and you keep avoiding the question.

See muppet, people smuggling stops the UNCR reffos getting a go and you support that????

I don't support one method over the other.

I've told you this several times.

Do you have a mental disability?

Yes you do. You've been on here for years cheering on people smuggling.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 131786
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #160 - Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:10pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 6:00pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:58pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:57pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:35pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:18pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 5:16pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Nov 21^st, 2017 at 4:37pm:

Are you getting the words 'refugees' and 'poor people' mixed up, Pecker?

No.

Red is.

He maintains that someone with money can't be a refugee.

Where do you suppose he got this misinformation from?

Would you concede that a broke refugee is more desperate and needing of help than a refugee forking out $10,000 + to a people smuggler?

No.

Refugee status has nothing to do with how much money one has.

It seems you and red have both been fed the wrong information.

A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

Having more money won't lessen the effect of the war, political upheaval, persecution, or natural disaster.

And, even if it did, you don't need to be broke to be a refugee, despite what red might believe.

See Pecca, you promote a method of immigration ...

Have to stop you right there.

I don't favour any method over the other.

I've told you this before.

I just like to see that all asylum seekers get a bite at the cherry.

Saying that only those who go to UNHR camps are worthy of having their claims assessed is just nonsense.

Why discriminate against people who have money and ingenuity?

As has already been established, the amount of money one has (or doesn't have) is completely irrelevant when assessing refugee claims.

A multi-billionaire can be a refugee, just the same as a person without a cent to their name can.

Would you concede that when 35,000 people smuggler payers make it into the country the government gets flooded and stops sourcing the UNCR refugees who have no money?

Nobody is denying there's a quota.

Now, back to the subject.

Red says that it's impossible to be a refugee and have ten thousand dollars.

Who told him this lie?

He won't answer, and you keep avoiding the question.

See muppet, people smuggling stops the UNCR reffos getting a go and you support that????

I don't support one method over the other.

I've told you this several times.

Do you have a mental disability?

Yes you do. You've been on here for years cheering on people smuggling.

I cheer on all asylum seekers.

I don't, however, favour one method over another.

You, on the other hand, think they should all just go away and die.

Are you a sociopath, Homo?

I'm curious.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #161 - Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 7:01am

Red.... seems you have Gweggy stuck in a loop... usually that's just his normal obsessive TROLLING... but he's right in that Refugees can be rich people too... country shoppers...

He cheers on all asylum seekers even those who are not genuine refugees... he's rather create bottlenecks in the global refugee system, and see people killed at sea and pay criminals to get here, tying up our Immigration system with appeals and false claims, when they should be deported back home where they were perfectly safe in the first place.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19643
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #162 - Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 7:23am

Australia should not have entered into George W Bushes war on terror that was based on lies and a false premise that invading Iraq would make the world a safer place....Australia has dirty hands all over this disgusting abuse of power and privilege that have created a wave of refugees we refuse to help or take any responsibility for....Dumping innocent people onto a third world country like Papua New Guinea is not beneficial to anyone accept an Australian Government pandering and stoking the fears and prejudice of the Australian people for domestic political gain....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism it is receiving!!!

Angry

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 131786
Gender: male

Re: Apologise
Reply #163 - Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 8:28am

Grendel wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 7:01am:

... even those who are not genuine refugees...

No such thing as a genuine refugee, or non-genuine refugee.

They're either a refugee, or they're not.

Again, please learn the difference between 'asylum seekers' and 'refugees'.

You've been assigned your homework, now don't come back until you've got it right.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Apologise
Reply #164 - Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 8:41am

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2017 at 7:23am:

Australia should not have entered into George W Bushes war on terror that was based on lies and a false premise that invading Iraq would make the world a safer place....Australia has dirty hands all over this disgusting abuse of power and privilege that have created a wave of refugees we refuse to help or take any responsibility for....Dumping innocent people onto a third world country like Papua New Guinea is not beneficial to anyone accept an Australian Government pandering and stoking the fears and prejudice of the Australian people for domestic political gain....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism it is receiving!!!

Angry

trouble with whingeing about what is done is done...

we will never know what would have happened had the war never taken place...

all we see right now is WARS with dictators in charge..

do you think the middle east would be better if the West walked away??......I see where Iran and Saudi Arabia are now eyeing each other off.......do you seriously hold the USA and Australia responsible for the chaos over there??>>.

the dumping of innocent people was rudds idea btw...

dont forget we live in more advanced times....and the middle east is just as up to date with modern times when it comes to WARFARE. Sad

Back to top

IP Logged