The legality or otherwise is of zero consequence to myself and  the 3 million people who live in suburban Sydney and suburban Melbourne and suburban Brisbane.

if you and Greg and Julian Burnside get excited about it, you obviously have your priorities all wrong.

Julain maybe not so much, because his income to pay for his yacht and his merc depends on issues like this , but why Australian citizens feel more compassion for people they've never met , then for battlers doing it tough in suburbia is beyond me.

My priority is to elevate concern for this , largely silent majority.
There are plenty of pedants voicing concerns for the boaties.
The squeaky wheel gets the oil, so its time for suburban Australia to speak and ask for recognition.
This they did at the last election.
This is democracy in action and should be applauded .
Last time I looked, its not illegal to fulfil the will of the Australian people.

aquascoot wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 9:49am:

The earth is flat argument continues, I see.

Also, barristers typically take on asylum seeker cases on a pro bono basis.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 10:06am:

It's sad when someone who doesn't even understand the word pro bono tries to speak for the majority.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 10:31am:



So you think you, alvine, Julian burnside and SHY are the majority

aquascoot wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 10:56am:



No.

Do you think we are the majority?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 10:31am:



So you think you, alvine, Julian burnside and SHY are the majority .

Gillard and rudd did internal polling that made them change their position and reintroduce off shore processing.
My suspicion is that their polling told them the majority do, indeed, agree with me and not with you.
Thoughts?

refugee convention

Also, I doubt very much that the majority would believe seeking asylum is ILLEGAL


Article 31 includes the term "illegal entry".

It is used in the context of stating that parties to the convention cannot penalise refugees as a result of their "illegal entry or presence" as long as they present to authorities "without delay" and "show good cause for their illegal entry or presence".

The verdict is in.....

Based on the definition set out in the United Nations people smuggling protocol, people who have come to Australia without a valid visa have illegally entered the country. That is the case even though these people have not committed any crime, nor broken any Australian or international law.

Bloody illegals.....

aquascoot wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 10:56am:


death penalty is also supported by a majority.
No taxes would be supported by a majority.
Free beer would be supported by a majority.

But it doesn't mean that any of those are good ideas, just like stepping away from our obligations to the refugee convention, without actually rescinding it.   Democracy is not about majority opinion rules, because democracy is about elected officials governing in our interest. And that includes the fact that many times elected officials need to do things that are "unpopular" by the majority, but it is in our interest. Like the GST, for example.

Also, I doubt very much that the majority would believe seeking asylum is ILLEGAL. Well, at least before the majority was dumbed down even further by this dumb government.