Indonesia protests boat push-back policy after asylum seekers found stranded

Date
    November 27, 2015


Tensions have once again flared between Indonesia and Australia over asylum seeker policy after a boat that was pushed back from Christmas Island by the Royal Australian Navy ran out of fuel off Indonesia.   :(   

On Thursday evening - just hours before a two-day summit on refugees began in Jakarta with 14 countries participating including Australia - the boat carrying 16 asylum seekers and an Indonesian captain washed up at a beach in West Kupang.


The whereabouts of the boat had been a mystery after it was towed out to sea when it came within 200 metres of Christmas Island last Friday.

The Indonesian Foreign Ministry on Friday reiterated its opposition to Australia's boat push-back policy, which it says puts lives at risk and is not a sustainable solution.

"Unilateral action is not in line with our spirit of co-operation," Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Muhammad Fachir said outside the meeting.

"Those who were sent back - what about their fate? It should become our common concern."

Mr Fachir said the latest boat incident would not disturb the refugee round table, which would focus on the root causes of the irregular movements of persons. However Indonesia will seek an explanation from the Australian government.

Australia is being represented at the round table by the ambassador for people smuggling issues for Australia, Andrew Goledzinowski, who will chair a panel on Saturday on future co-operation among affected countries.

"Indonesia's stance remains that boat push-backs are endangering," Arrmanatha Nasir, a spokesman from the office of Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi, told Fairfax Media.

"The irregular migrant issue must be addressed comprehensively, it cannot be solved by only one party such as the destination country or source country."

Mr Nasir said the Bali process was the mechanism in the region to discuss asylum seekers.

"So if we want to have a sustainable solution we have to go beyond our own self interest," he said.

One of the police officers who assisted the 16 male asylum seekers off their boat, Farah, at Tablolong beach told Fairfax Media they could have died if no one had found them.

"They were in OK condition, they were given enough food and plenty of water, but they ran out of fuel. They could've died if they sunk or if no one found them," he said.

The asylum seekers, who are from India, Nepal and Bangladesh, say they reached Christmas Island but were turned back by the Royal Australian Navy after being detained for five days.

Bangladeshi man Muhammad Anwar, 22, told Fairfax Media their vessel was leaking water so they were transferred to another boat.

"I don't know about Australia turning back boats before. The agent said Australia is good now, they take immigrants now."

Mr Anwar said he paid a people smuggling agent $USD5000 ($AUD6890) to take him to Australia.

"In my country there are many problems, everything is expensive, wages low, many killings. All I want in Australia is to make a living, and they didn't help," Mr Anwar said.

The Director-General for Multilateral Affairs at Indonesia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hasan Kleib, said there was a principle of protection at sea and a code of disembarkation at a safe place.

"So this is what we would like to see as well when they are already in the middle of high seas with the unseaworthy boat… It must be better to disembark at a safety place and then deal with them (the asylum seekers) afterwards."

However he said he did not wish this incident to become a stumbling block for co-operation between the two countries. 

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton and opposition spokesman Richard Marles refused to comment

Green senator Sarah Hanson-Young said the Turnbull government has "serious questions" to answer if the boat was allowed to run out of fuel before washing up in Indonesia.   :(

Mr Turnbull, did the boat run out of fuel?. 

wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 11:38am:

One of the police officers who assisted the 16 male asylum seekers off their boat, Farah, at Tablolong beach told Fairfax Media they could have died if no one had found them. "They were in OK condition, they were given enough food and plenty of water, but they ran out of fuel. They could've died if they sunk or if no one found them," he said.

That could have happened on the way to Australia.

TOUGH..

how many Syrians are Indonesia taking in????>.. ::) ::)

Bit more than hypocritical of Indonesia to try to generate political capital out of Australia pushing off a boat - considering that they provide little to no assistance to refugees but can afford Su-35s, and actively discourage refugees from staying on Indo soil.

However, they have a point in that once 'pushed off' the passengers and crew of this boat were at the mercy of the elements and could have added to the toll, and they were not permitted to make a legitimate claim for asylum by 'landing' on soil of the country from which they are seeking it.

I still argue that contact with a ship of a sovereign nation at sea being hailed and advised of the intention to seek asylum IS soil of the country from which asylum is being sought, and that the request is being made to an appropriate officer of that country.

Surely there are plenty of ghost towns out West by now with the Mining Collapse - that would serve as way stations for applicants, who could be gainfully employed on breakin' rocks in da hot sun, building roads and infrastructure etc, while receiving training in training camels etc.

Poor Indonesia have found a boat has washed up on their beaches that left their beaches. Poor Indonesia.

Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats

Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died

Indonesia did not sign the refugee convention Australia did....Indonesia are shouldering the burden of Australian domestic policy regarding refugees, where Australia says one thing (we will asses asylum seeker claims) yet in practice we disregard the refugee convention and engage in rebounding refugees without assessing their claims....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism Indonesia are levelling at us...Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!!

[smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:26pm:

Indonesia did not sign the refugee convention Australia did....Indonesia are shouldering the burden of Australian domestic policy regarding refugees, where Australia says one thing (we will asses asylum seeker claims) yet in practice we disregard the refugee convention and engage in rebounding refugees without assessing their claims....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism Indonesia are levelling at us...Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!! [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Have you tried entering Indonesia without a VISA?

When these people entered Indonesia it looks like they had a VISA i.e. Indonesia accepted them i.e. they are LEGAL in Indonesia

Even if they entered Indonesia ILLEGALLY then Indonesia need to deal with this illegal act. So all Australia is doing is bring them back to face Indonesian official.

Does Indonesia care? It does not matter!! It's their problem first

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died

Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats.

Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:39pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:26pm: Indonesia did not sign the refugee convention Australia did....Indonesia are shouldering the burden of Australian domestic policy regarding refugees, where Australia says one thing (we will asses asylum seeker claims) yet in practice we disregard the refugee convention and engage in rebounding refugees without assessing their claims....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism Indonesia are levelling at us...Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!! [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] Have you tried entering Indonesia without a VISA? When these people entered Indonesia it looks like they had a VISA i.e. Indonesia accepted them i.e. they are LEGAL in Indonesia Even if they entered Indonesia ILLEGALLY then Indonesia need to deal with this illegal act. So all Australia is doing is bring them back to face Indonesian official. Does Indonesia care? It does not matter!! It's their problem first

You do not understand the refugee convention that allows refugees to seek a safe haven that will process their asylum claims...Indonesia has not signed the convention and has no obligation to assess their claims unlike Australia....Refugees did not make the rules but are being punished because Australia refuses to honour our commitment...Place the blame where it belongs, with Australia's double standards and exploitation of innocent people for domestic political gain...If we removed our name from the refugee convention asylum seekers would not be in Indonesia trying to get here....We created this problem not Indonesia!!!

[smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:46pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died.

And under Labor there were 500,000 asylum seekers and 50,000 deaths.

See, I can make up figures like you just did.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:48pm:

You do not understand the refugee convention that allows refugees to seek a safe haven that will process their asylum claims...Indonesia has not signed the convention and has no obligation to assess their claims unlike Australia....Refugees did not make the rules but are being punished because Australia refuses to honour our commitment...Place the blame where it belongs, with Australia's double standards and exploitation of innocent people for domestic political gain...If we removed our name from the refugee convention asylum seekers would not be in Indonesia trying to get here....We created this problem not Indonesia!!! [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Which part in particular are you referring to?

The highlighted comment shows you don't understand it.

They don't have the obligation to process the claim - IF the claim was lodged in Indonesia

You've conveniently chose to ignore the fact they entered Indonesia with a VISA. Lets ignore that important fact shall we

Or is it because you don't understand

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ...

... Maqqa did:

"Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats

"Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:56pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ... ... Maqqa did: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

My bad he caught me - only 1 confirmed boat

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-25/log-of-boat-arrivals-and-other-asylum-seeker-incidents/5014496

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:04pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:56pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ... ... Maqqa did: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died" My bad he caught me

Indeed.

Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats.

Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:26pm:

Indonesia did not sign the refugee convention Australia did....Indonesia are shouldering the burden of Australian domestic policy regarding refugees, where Australia says one thing (we will asses asylum seeker claims) yet in practice we disregard the refugee convention and engage in rebounding refugees without assessing their claims....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism Indonesia are levelling at us...Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!! [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

SO not signing it makes them A.OK..  :D :D

typical lefty double standards..


gawd I hope you dont need that explaining to you......like some lefties.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:06pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:04pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:56pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ... ... Maqqa did: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died" My bad he caught me Indeed. Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died.

OK........ LINK PLEASE>

cods wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:13pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:06pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:04pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:56pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ... ... Maqqa did: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died" My bad he caught me Indeed. Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. OK........ LINK PLEASE>

First things first, dear.

First we need to see evidence that proves this claim:

"Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats

"Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died".

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:21pm:

First things first, dear. First we need to see evidence that proves this claim: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=boat+smashed+on+christmas+island&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=899&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip2JTBorLJAhVlMaYKHRyyDgkQsAQIKg

you couldnt possibly have forgotten this nightmare....

http://sievx.com/articles/background/DrowningsTable.pdf



its pretty grim..

its sad you find the need to make mileage out of these tragedies....on the one hand you tell us you are Mother Therse then the next   you  need reminding of the waste of life...

>:( >:( >:(

some how that seem to make you feel superior.. >:(

cods wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:30pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:21pm: First things first, dear. First we need to see evidence that proves this claim: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died" https://www.google.com.au/search?q=boat+smashed+on+christmas+island&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=899&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip2JTBorLJAhVlMaYKHRyyDgkQsAQIKg you couldnt possibly have forgotten this nightmare.... http://sievx.com/articles/background/DrowningsTable.pdf its pretty grim.. its sad you find the need to make mileage out of these tragedies....on the one hand you tell us you are Mother Therse then the next   you  need reminding of the waste of life... >:( >:( >:( some how that seem to make you feel superior.. >:(

Your links do not prove that:

"Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats

"Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

Keep trying.

I think that if you have read one of these fake reffo boat threads you've read them all  ;D

of course gweg.... keep posting in the abuse thread its about all your fit for..

a little aussie champion.. >:(

Pecker you can't be that stupid

Put this letter in the Penski file Mr Costanza.

Another example of a boat reaching safety only to have Australia put the refugees back into risk.

Makes a joke of their claims about protecting them from drowning.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:40pm:

Pecker you can't be that stupid

Who was the stupid one who posted this?

"Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats

"Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

Still no evidence to prove this claim.

I'll take that as a surrender.

innocentbystander. wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:38pm:

I think.

Hitherto, all evidence suggests otherwise.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died

More refugees drowned last year than in previous years. Just because they don't drown on our door step does not mean anything got better.

In fact by forcing them to take more dangerous sea trips we probably caused more to drown

That's grade a bull flop. Putting the responsibility back on Indonesia is definitely part of the solution. If refugees drown in Indonesian waters its a problem;  it's just not OUR problem.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:45pm:

More refugees drowned last year than in previous years. Just because they don't drown on our door step does not mean anything got better. In fact by forcing them to take more dangerous sea trips we probably caused more to drown

There are at least 5 other countries closer to where these people come from that signed the UN Refugee convention

No need to take these dangerous trips across the ocean

double plus good wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:

That's grade a bull flop. Putting the responsibility back on Indonesia is definitely part of the solution. If refugees drown in Indonesian waters its a problem;  it's just not OUR problem.

Once they have reached safety and we put them back into danger I would think we have some responsibility.

We can't say that we want to stop them making the trip because it is too dangerous and to then force them to make it twice.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:54pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:45pm: More refugees drowned last year than in previous years. Just because they don't drown on our door step does not mean anything got better. In fact by forcing them to take more dangerous sea trips we probably caused more to drown There are at least 5 other countries closer to where these people come from that signed the UN Refugee convention No need to take these dangerous trips across the ocean

Name them.

cods wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:12pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:26pm: Indonesia did not sign the refugee convention Australia did....Indonesia are shouldering the burden of Australian domestic policy regarding refugees, where Australia says one thing (we will asses asylum seeker claims) yet in practice we disregard the refugee convention and engage in rebounding refugees without assessing their claims....Australia has nothing to be proud of and deserves the criticism Indonesia are levelling at us...Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!! [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] SO not signing it makes them A.OK..  :D :D typical lefty double standards.. gawd I hope you dont need that explaining to you......like some lefties.

I am not the one with double standards Cods....Indonesia who in a perfect world should sign the refugee convention along with many other countries....If more Muslim countries accepted refugees it would be better for those fleeing persecution to be accepted into moderate societies....However it is their decision to do so not ours....Our decision was to accept asylum seekers and access their claims!!!

I am pointing out Australia is the pull factor not Indonesia yet we burden them with refugees who are only there because of our policy on Immigration....The only solution is for Australia to remove itself from the refugee convention and save billions of dollars....Giving refugees false hope is our fault alone!!!

:) :) :)

double plus good wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:

That's grade a bull flop. Putting the responsibility back on Indonesia is definitely part of the solution. If refugees drown in Indonesian waters its a problem;  it's just not OUR problem.

I have explained my position with reasoning not rhetoric....The only solution is removing Australia from the refugee convention or convincing other nations in our region to sign it....Continuing on with this crap policy does nobody any good....And you think it is not our problem when it costs us billions!!!

It is obvious most Australian's are now against asylum seekers (illegal immigrants) entering the country and it is costing to much to continue with this policy....Removing ourselves from the convention solves the problem....We can then increase our humanitarian intake to help those who are most in need IMO!!!

:-? :-? :-?

They have reached safety once they hit Indonesia. Indonesia shuffle them unto us because they know they can outwit the leftards. THAT'S what's costing us billions.

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 3:43pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:54pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:45pm: More refugees drowned last year than in previous years. Just because they don't drown on our door step does not mean anything got better. In fact by forcing them to take more dangerous sea trips we probably caused more to drown There are at least 5 other countries closer to where these people come from that signed the UN Refugee convention No need to take these dangerous trips across the ocean Name them.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/25677603/images/1372341070455.jpg

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 4:45pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 3:43pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:54pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 2:45pm: More refugees drowned last year than in previous years. Just because they don't drown on our door step does not mean anything got better. In fact by forcing them to take more dangerous sea trips we probably caused more to drown There are at least 5 other countries closer to where these people come from that signed the UN Refugee convention No need to take these dangerous trips across the ocean Name them. http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/25677603/images/1372341070455.jpg

Yeah i figure i'll be waiting a while.

Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset.

double plus good wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:01pm:

Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset.

Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us?

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:04pm:

double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us?

Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen?

double plus good wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:08pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen?

My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them?

From article- "In my country there are many problems, everything is expensive, wages low, many killings. All I want in Australia is to make a living, and they didn't help," Mr Anwar said.
 
He just wants to make a living!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought they were escaping danger!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them?

Because they don't want to work with Australia. Isn't it obvious??

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:56pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. I can make up figures like ... ... Maqqa did: "Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats "Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died"

Yes it was 50,000 illegals and 1100 died.

Your point?

double plus good wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:15pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? Because they don't want to work with Australia. Isn't it obvious??

Why should they support boat turn-backs? Hw does it serve them to keep taking Australia's rejects?

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them?

'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard.

They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take.

I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects?

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:52pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects?

How about Indonesia tighten up their borders. Have you noticed that they are all Muslims coming out of Indonesia. It's because Indonesia have travel arrangements with Muslim countries for Muslim pilgrimages like Mecca. How about getting with the times??

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:52pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects?

OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects.

And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:59pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests.

Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects.

mothra wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:02pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects.

As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:17pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid.

Reprinted with permission.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:17pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid.

Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach.

Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ?

It is obvious were the stupid statement lay.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:26pm:

Take our name off the refugee convention Malcolm and stop the hypocrisy that is costing lives...Otherwise honour the commitment we made over 40 years ago!!!

The government must decide, one or the other and stop this hypocrisy.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:17pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid.

mothra's comment is factual and all longy has to say is she's stupid because he can't handle the truth.

Whenever he/she gets cornered he/she calls 'stupid' or 'idiot' or imbecile', three words that describe him/her to a T.

When our quota for live cattle export to Indo gets reduced again all the RWNJs here will be roaring protest, yet Indo will be fully justified.

Sending ASs back, so they make the dangerous journey twice is cruel. This country is becoming nazified.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:28pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:17pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid. Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay.

How do illegals who left from ANOTHER country become our 'rejects'? They get sent back to where the belong. You can argue the meaning of 'reject' all you like, but the point it that they are NOT our people. They are Indonesia's and they are getting them back.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 12:26pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:17pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid. Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay. How do illegals who left from ANOTHER country become our 'rejects'? They get sent back to where the belong. You can argue the meaning of 'reject' all you like, but the point it that they are NOT our people. They are Indonesia's and they are getting them back.

a) They're not illegals.

b) They were in Australian territory which makes them our problem, rightly.

c) They are not Indonesia's people.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 5:59pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests.

Nor is our right to turn around Indonesian-flagged vessels from entering our waters in question.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 12:26pm:

How do illegals ...

... have anything to do with this thread?

They don't.

Quote:

Nor is our right to turn around Indonesian-flagged vessels from entering our waters in question.

I question it.  We have no right to act as outlaw pirates on the High Seas.

mothra wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 1:13pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 12:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:17pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid. Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay. How do illegals who left from ANOTHER country become our 'rejects'? They get sent back to where the belong. You can argue the meaning of 'reject' all you like, but the point it that they are NOT our people. They are Indonesia's and they are getting them back. a) They're not illegals. Yes, they are. b) They were in Australian territory which makes them our problem, rightly. Which we returned to Indonesia. c) They are not Indonesia's people. The crew and the vessels are.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 6:28pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:17pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid. Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay.

They were still onboard the Indonesian vessel offshore. Definitely not on a beach.

The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved....Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!!

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 2:02pm:

.Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!!

Don't you think the boat turnbacks, deny hope?

lee wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 2:04pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: .Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!! Don't you think the boat turnbacks, deny hope?

No because they place the burden on Indonesia and the boats keep coming....Removing our name from the refugee convention removes all doubt that Australia will accept asylum seekers arriving on our shores....As far as I am concerned it is the only solution with the current political situation in this country....If someone has an alternative as to why this would not work please post your reasons???

:-? :-? :-?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 1:56pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:28pm: Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay. They were still onboard the Indonesian vessel offshore. Definitely not on a beach.

How would you know. You just believe what you are told.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

Nor is our right to turn around Indonesian-flagged vessels from entering our waters in question.

Who is saying that any of these boats have a flag ?

I would think that at even 100 metres from Christmas Island the question of entering Australian waters has long past.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 2:42pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 1:56pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:28pm: Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay. They were still onboard the Indonesian vessel offshore. Definitely not on a beach. How would you know. You just believe what you are told.

Every media outlet, including local eyewitnesses all confirmed that the boat did not make it to shore. Maybe you know better than a few hundred people, but I sincerely doubt it.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 2:02pm:

The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved..

I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it.

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 3:44pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it.

I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN.

The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers.

mothra wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers.

can't look any worse than we're looking now. Sign up to a convention and then ignore it or even worse, do the exact opposite of what we are required to do

John Smith wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 4:05pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. can't look any worse than we're looking now. Sign up to a convention and then ignore it or even worse, do the exact opposite of what we are required to do

I know. But at least we look good on paper. That's all they care about.

mothra wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 3:52pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers.

Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain

Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity

Maqqa wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain

you don't have to be a UN signatory to take them in ... and you remove the biggest pull factor bringing boat people here.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity

There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker.

You have been misinformed.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:09pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed.

Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ?

Dnarever wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:40pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ?

No.

There's no front door, or back door.

No queue, and no illegal activity.

mothra wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 1:13pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 12:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:17pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 6:02pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:59pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:37pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:12pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:08pm: mothra wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:04pm: double plus good wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 5:01pm: Indonesia should be wondering how boat loads of foreigners seem to be able to set sail out of Indonesian ports and go wherever they want. Then again, I believe they know exactly what's going on. Who cares if Indonesia is upset. Yes indeed Double. Why should we worry if our closest neighbour is upset with us? Be fair Mothra. Shouldn't you be criticizing Indonesia for letting boatloads of men , women and children floundering out of their ports while overloaded and then sinking??? What sort of country let's that happen? My problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive. What has that got to do with us needing a working diplomatic relationship with them? 'relationship' is not defined as agreeing to everything they ask for. They are happy to take our aid and anything else we give them but suddenly, when we want something - like commutation of a death sentence - it is all too hard. They need to learn how to give and take instead of just take. I repeat, my problems with Indonesia and human rights are extensive but how does that equate to Indonesia not having the right to protest about being forced to deal with our rejects? OUR rejects???  It is in fact THEIR rejects. And their right to protest is not being questioned, nor is our right to reject their protests. Turned back from Australian waters. Our rejects. As usual, you are a stupid person as only a truly stupid person would say something so monumentally... stupid. Are you trying to say they were not turned back from Australian waters - in fact they were probably on the beach. Why would you accuse someone making a correct statement of being stupid ? It is obvious were the stupid statement lay. How do illegals who left from ANOTHER country become our 'rejects'? They get sent back to where the belong. You can argue the meaning of 'reject' all you like, but the point it that they are NOT our people. They are Indonesia's and they are getting them back. a) They're not illegals. b) They were in Australian territory which makes them our problem, rightly. c) They are not Indonesia's people.

A) committing an illegal act - entering without permision - makes one illegal BY DEFINITION
B) if someone breaks into your home illegally do they then become your problem or do you call the police to come and remove them?  Same will illegal entry to a country
C) They were living in indonesia.  Again, by definition they are indonesia's people.


Wow... you got EVERYTHING wrong.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 2:28pm:

lee wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:04pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: .Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!! Don't you think the boat turnbacks, deny hope? No because they place the burden on Indonesia and the boats keep coming....Removing our name from the refugee convention removes all doubt that Australia will accept asylum seekers arriving on our shores....As far as I am concerned it is the only solution with the current political situation in this country....If someone has an alternative as to why this would not work please post your reasons??? :-? :-? :-?

Do you seriously think any refugees come here because of a UN document?  They want to come here because we are a rich first-world country. That is all.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity

Exactly. Our UN obligations under the convention is NOT to simply take anyone and everyone that arrives by any means. We take them in an orderly process on the queue that everyone says does not exist and yet exists just the same.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 7:17am:

A) committing an illegal act - entering without permision - makes one illegal BY DEFINITION B) if someone breaks into your home illegally do they then become your problem or do you call the police to come and remove them?  Same will illegal entry to a country C) They were living in indonesia.  Again, by definition they are indonesia's people. Wow... you got EVERYTHING wrong.

A) committing an illegal act - entering without permision - makes one illegal BY DEFINITION


We have signed an agreement which allows refugees to arrive to be processed. It is in no way illegal for a refugee to come to Australia and ask for asylum.

C) They were living in indonesia.  Again, by definition they are indonesia's people.


They are not recognised in Indonesia and have no status there. They are considered as illegal in Indonesia and Indonesia are not a signatory to the convention. i.e. they really are illegal there. Indonesia is not a place that refugees can either settle or be adequately processed.

The people we sent to Indonesia are not Indonesian residents or nationals, they have no status at all in Indonesia. Once they reach Australia and ask for refugee status we have an obligation to help them.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 7:20am:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:28pm: lee wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:04pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: .Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!! Don't you think the boat turnbacks, deny hope? No because they place the burden on Indonesia and the boats keep coming....Removing our name from the refugee convention removes all doubt that Australia will accept asylum seekers arriving on our shores....As far as I am concerned it is the only solution with the current political situation in this country....If someone has an alternative as to why this would not work please post your reasons??? :-? :-? :-? Do you seriously think any refugees come here because of a UN document?  They want to come here because we are a rich first-world country. That is all.

If you seriously think asylum seekers are not coming here because we signed the refugee convention then what is the problem with removing our signature from the document....At least then we would not be hypocrites and there would be no chance of asylum seekers ever being settled here unless we want them....I also do not care much for your opinion....Post a link to any research that supports your claim refugees do not seek out signature countries to the convention to support your claim!!!

:-? :-? :-?

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/australia-and-1951-refugee-convention

http://theconversation.com/explainer-australias-obligations-under-the-un-refugee-convention-16195

mariacostel wrote on Nov 28^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:46pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 28th, 2015 at 1:23pm: Since 2013 - there's been one or at best 2 boats Under Labor/Greens 55,000+ illegals and hundreds died Since 2013 there's been dozens of boats. Under Liberal 60,000+ asylum seekers, and thousands have died. And under Labor there were 500,000 asylum seekers and 50,000 deaths. See, I can make up figures like you just did.

We know, because aborigines only arrived in Australia 4000 years ago.  Because you know, it's the closest 10,000th to 40,000.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 7:17am:

A) committing an illegal act - entering without permision - makes one illegal BY DEFINITION

So, you call thieves "illegals", do you?

Murderers - you call them "illegals" too?

Interesting.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 7:31am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 7:20am: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:28pm: lee wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:04pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: .Australia would no longer be offering false hope and save billions of dollars in the process!!! Don't you think the boat turnbacks, deny hope? No because they place the burden on Indonesia and the boats keep coming....Removing our name from the refugee convention removes all doubt that Australia will accept asylum seekers arriving on our shores....As far as I am concerned it is the only solution with the current political situation in this country....If someone has an alternative as to why this would not work please post your reasons??? :-? :-? :-? Do you seriously think any refugees come here because of a UN document?  They want to come here because we are a rich first-world country. That is all. If you seriously think asylum seekers are not coming here because we signed the refugee convention then what is the problem with removing our signature from the document....At least then we would not be hypocrites and there would be no chance of asylum seekers ever being settled here unless we want them....I also do not care much for your opinion....Post a link to any research that supports your claim refugees do not seek out signature countries to the convention to support your claim!!! :-? :-? :-? http://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/australia-and-1951-refugee-convention http://theconversation.com/explainer-australias-obligations-under-the-un-refugee-convention-16195

It is extraordinarily naive to think that that country shoppers choose australia because of a silly UN convention. They choose this country because of what we have to offer.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 7:44am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 7:17am: A) committing an illegal act - entering without permision - makes one illegal BY DEFINITION So, you call thieves "illegals", do you? Murderers - you call them "illegals" too? Interesting.

You want to contend that thieves are NOT illegal?  Or that murderers are not 'illegal?  Yes, we have specific terms for these offences but each of them are ILLEGAL.

Wouldn't it be great if your single super-power wasn't pedantry? Then your continued existence might have value.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2015 at 7:48pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity.

Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'.

Of course there is a queue you daft git.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 4:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git.

There is no queue for resettlement via the UNHCR. You have some research to do.

http://www.amnesty.org.au/refugees/comments/22616/

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 4:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git.

No.  There's no queue.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 4:21pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue.

There is a queue peccahead.

Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in.

Peccerhead relies on a pointless pedantic diversion.  He equates leaving a beach with processing and process and quotas.   

Hence when he says there is no queue he is talking about there being no queue to access and pay a people smuggler or get yourself a dinghy. 

Most people, apart from obfuscating idiots understand what is meant by the queue and being removed from it.  Hell Gillard made promises that country shoppers would go to the back of the queue.  Rudd made it explicit with his promise that if you arrived as a country shopper you would not even get onto the queue.

And yes, every country shopper displaces someone from the intake quota. 

Secret Wars wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:11pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in. Peccerhead relies on a pointless pedantic diversion.  He equates leaving a beach with processing and process and quotas.    Hence when he says there is no queue he is talking about there being no queue to access and pay a people smuggler or get yourself a dinghy.  Most people, apart from obfuscating idiots understand what is meant by the queue and being removed from it.  Hell Gillard made promises that country shoppers would go to the back of the queue.  Rudd made it explicit with his promise that if you arrived as a country shopper you would not even get onto the queue. And yes, every country shopper displaces someone from the intake quota.

Fact 2: There’s no official queue for people coming to Australia seeking a safe place to live

But six out of 10 people think there is.

The United Nations process of resettling refugees in other safe countries doesn’t operate like a queue. It’s not a matter of lining up, waiting for your number to come up – this is not the supermarket deli counter. The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue.

If this mythical global queue did actually exist, based on the number of refugees there are in the world, people joining the end might wait 170 years to get to the front.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/15/theres-no-legal-queue-and-three-other-facts-australians-get-wrong-about-asylum-seekers

mothra wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:25pm:

The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue.

Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery.

lee wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:47pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:25pm: The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery.

I love the pedantry!  Just watch the pecca try and pedant every single fact away. One wonders why he bothers.  Maybe it gives his life purpose, which is perhaps the saddest thing imaginable.

mothra wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:25pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:11pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in. Peccerhead relies on a pointless pedantic diversion.  He equates leaving a beach with processing and process and quotas.    Hence when he says there is no queue he is talking about there being no queue to access and pay a people smuggler or get yourself a dinghy.  Most people, apart from obfuscating idiots understand what is meant by the queue and being removed from it.  Hell Gillard made promises that country shoppers would go to the back of the queue.  Rudd made it explicit with his promise that if you arrived as a country shopper you would not even get onto the queue. And yes, every country shopper displaces someone from the intake quota.  Fact 2: There’s no official queue for people coming to Australia seeking a safe place to live But six out of 10 people think there is. The United Nations process of resettling refugees in other safe countries doesn’t operate like a queue. It’s not a matter of lining up, waiting for your number to come up – this is not the supermarket deli counter. The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. If this mythical global queue did actually exist, based on the number of refugees there are in the world, people joining the end might wait 170 years to get to the front. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/15/theres-no-legal-queue-and-three-other-facts-australians-get-wrong-about-asylum-seekers

Official LOL. 

"If someone seeks to come to Australia, then they are at risk of going to Malaysia and going to the back of the queue"

Gillard. 

Outside of the narrow definitions used by clowns for self serving reasons, there exists lists and priorities, numbers are restricted, people can be moved around on those lists and removed from those lists. 

Country shoppers washing up seek to do so to force their way into that process and by being physically present and thus needing to be processed force their prioritisation over others not present.   

That clowns do not understand that is not my lookout, it just illustrates your idiocy.

http://www.amnesty.org.au/refugees/comments/22616/

mothra wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:25pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:11pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in. Peccerhead relies on a pointless pedantic diversion.  He equates leaving a beach with processing and process and quotas.    Hence when he says there is no queue he is talking about there being no queue to access and pay a people smuggler or get yourself a dinghy.  Most people, apart from obfuscating idiots understand what is meant by the queue and being removed from it.  Hell Gillard made promises that country shoppers would go to the back of the queue.  Rudd made it explicit with his promise that if you arrived as a country shopper you would not even get onto the queue. And yes, every country shopper displaces someone from the intake quota.  Fact 2: There’s no official queue for people coming to Australia seeking a safe place to live But six out of 10 people think there is.

Australia has a UN obligation to take around 14,000 refugees every year, we take over and above our UN obligations.

When we had 10,000 boat people come in we only took 4,000  registered refugees from overseas camps.

Every boat person who came in displaced someone who had registered overseas from our quota of 14,000 refugees we take every year.

This has been the same under both labor and liberal,labor's policy favours the wealthy who can afford people smugglers displacing those poor people who have waited in camps for years to be resettled.

I don't think our refugee intake should be increased around 14,000 a year is reasonable.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:03pm:

There is a queue peccahead.

Nope.

You've been misinformed.

There’s no such thing as a “queue”

http://www.amnesty.org.au/refugees/comments/22616/

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 6:16pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Nope. You've been misinformed.

Should we say quota for the peccahead?

Every boat person displaces a genuine refugee from our quota of around 14,000 a year, the boat people push in displacing genuine reffos.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 6:18pm:

Every boat person displaces a genuine refugee from our quota of around 14,000 a year, the boat people push in displacing genuine reffos.

The majority of asylum seekers who come by boat, turn out to be genuine refugees.

lee wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:47pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:25pm: The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery.

more like where those arriving by boat try to buy a systems entry instead of a regular ticket

John Smith wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 9:12pm:

lee wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:47pm: mothra wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:25pm: The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery. more like where those arriving by boat try to buy a systems entry instead of a regular ticket

Correct.

It's just a different kind of ticket.

Still legitimate, though.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1^st, 2015 at 6:36am:

John Smith wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:12pm: lee wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:47pm: mothra wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:25pm: The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery. more like where those arriving by boat try to buy a systems entry instead of a regular ticket Correct. It's just a different kind of ticket. Still legitimate, though.

Fortunately, better people than you have determined otherwise and will not permit them to join the queue you dont think exists.

Now, go back to playing pedant.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 1^st, 2015 at 7:14am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1st, 2015 at 6:36am: John Smith wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:12pm: lee wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:47pm: mothra wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:25pm: The resettlement system operates as a discretionary process, based on changing criteria. It’s more like a lottery than it is like a queue. Where those arriving by boat try to scam the lottery. more like where those arriving by boat try to buy a systems entry instead of a regular ticket Correct. It's just a different kind of ticket. Still legitimate, though. Fortunately, better people than you ...

That hurt, Longy.


http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/j/k/9/f/0/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gjkf0z.png/1442011323668.jpg

Secret Wars wrote on Nov 30^th, 2015 at 5:11pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 5:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:21pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 4:03pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:40pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:09pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 7:07pm: mothra wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:52pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 3:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 29th, 2015 at 2:02pm: The pull factor and the only reason asylum seekers are in Indonesia is the fact Australia is a signatory to the refugee convention....Remove our signature from the convention and the problem would be solved.. I've never understood why the libs, who were so opposed to asylum seekers, didn't do just that! It doesn't make sense that they ignore the convention and still remain party to it. I'd look really bad if we withdrew form the Convention. We only maintain our signature to save face. We're in the process of trying to schmooze the UN. The kicker is, we are losing it by degrees for our treatment of asylum seekers. Never opposed to asylum seekers. Those who patiently wait inline and not complain Just opposed to country shoppers, queue jumpers, verification avoidance and those who wilfully try to take advantage of Australia's generosity There is no queue that one joins, in order to become an asylum seeker. You have been misinformed. Doesn't it start at Australia's front door ? No. There's no front door, or back door. No queue, and no illegal activity. Because if 10000 people apply for asylum they are all processed at exactly the same time. The government gets 10,000 staff to interview and review them all on the same day and the 30,000 back office people do the same. Because there is 'no queue'. Of course there is a queue you daft git. No.  There's no queue. There is a queue peccahead. Every boat person that arrived displaced someone from the quota we had for taking people in overseas camps, those who could afford to pay people smugglers pushed in. Peccerhead relies on a pointless pedantic diversion.  He equates leaving a beach with processing and process and quotas.    Hence when he says there is no queue he is talking about there being no queue to access and pay a people smuggler or get yourself a dinghy.  Most people, apart from obfuscating idiots understand what is meant by the queue and being removed from it.  Hell Gillard made promises that country shoppers would go to the back of the queue.  Rudd made it explicit with his promise that if you arrived as a country shopper you would not even get onto the queue. And yes, every country shopper displaces someone from the intake quota.

Another one for the plank thick clowns.


Quote:

As a result, he said, it was taking up to six years to process refugee applicants, which also made it more difficult for overseas applicants who had “waited patiently in line to be assessed” and had far more “urgent and compelling” cases than most applicants in Australia. It was another version of the queue-jumping concept cited from Gough Whitlam onwards.

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jan/01/cabinet-papers-1990-91-labor-wrestled-with-rising-asylum-claims