Is the 'Pacific Solution' unravelling?

[Parley]

I am dubious about stories like this that aren't in the mainstream papers or TV.

The Saturday Paper is another lefty rag which I'm sure you love. Whether it has any credibility is highly debatable.

[Harpodom]

I am dubious about stories like this that aren't in the mainstream papers or TV.

The Saturday Paper is another lefty rag which I'm sure you love. Whether it has any credibility is highly debatable.

 

yeah yeah sure, if in doubt, just assume its false.

[Harpodom]

What if its true parley?

[flag of convenience]

Sitting here with my first schooner of the night in the Shakespeare and frankly I don't care what happens on Manus or Nauru. There are enough horror stories about abuse of Aussies kids for me to care about what happens ALLEGEDLY in the camps. Naturally the Grauniad does not give a stuff what happens to Aussie kids.

 

With Aussies implementing the un necessary suffering you should perhaps express more compassion and just a touch of worldliness.

[Guest]

I am dubious about stories like this that aren't in the mainstream papers or TV.

The Saturday Paper is another lefty rag which I'm sure you love. Whether it has any credibility is highly debatable.

 

That's the way PC. As Harpo says, it's probably all made up.

[Guest]

With Aussies implementing the un necessary suffering you should perhaps express more compassion and just a touch of worldliness.

 

I'm still curious at the assertion that The Guardian doesn't care about Australian children. I've read several articles this year on the Guardian's website about the conditions that Indigenous children are living in. The writers seemed pretty concerned to me. Or, is Dave talking about other Australian children whose lives are seemingly more important than Indigenous children, but who the paper is neglecting to focus upon?

[MARYROSE02]

What a strange statement, surely you care because she was a vulnerable child.

 

Why should nationality play a part in whether or not you feel empathy?

 

Because I live in Australia, so I naturally care more about what happens to Australians, just as most people care about their more families more than they do other people.

[Harpodom]

Because I live in Australia, so I naturally care more about what happens to Australians, just as most people care about their more families more than they do other people.

 

Oh I 'see'.

 

I'm guessing (based on your posting history) that you'd care more about an Australian child unknown to you, living happily with their parents, compared to, say an unaccompanied Sri Lankan Tamil child of the same age, also unknown to you, whose guardian is the immigration minister, and who currently lives in an Australian funded prison in, say, Nauru, without charge, and with no end in sight to their imprisonment?

 

Who in your eyes, in the example I've given, seems the more vulnerable to you? Who is more deserving of compassion for their current plight?

[MARYROSE02]

Oh I 'see'.

 

I'm guessing (based on your posting history) that you'd care more about an Australian child unknown to you, living happily with their parents, compared to, say an unaccompanied Sri Lankan Tamil child of the same age, also unknown to you, whose guardian is the immigration minister, and who currently lives in an Australian funded prison in, say, Nauru, without charge, and with no end in sight to their imprisonment?

 

Who in your eyes, in the example I've given, seems the more vulnerable to you? Who is more deserving of compassion for their current plight?

 

You guessed right. What kind of parent would either risk his children on a voyage on an unseaworthy, and overcrowded boat, or send a child on their own? Probably the same sort who tries to have a baby on Australian soil, despite coming here illegally, so they can demand that they all be allowed to stay in Australia.

[Harpodom]

You guessed right. What kind of parent would either risk his children on a voyage on an unseaworthy, and overcrowded boat, or send a child on their own? Probably the same sort who tries to have a baby on Australian soil, despite coming here illegally, so they can demand that they all be allowed to stay in Australia.

 

And what of the innocent child in the scenario I mentioned?

 

I note that you are very quick to damn the parents, but what if the child is an orphan?

 

Even if the child isn't an orphan, a child is still a child, innocent, having committed no crime, yes?

[flag of convenience]

Because I live in Australia, so I naturally care more about what happens to Australians, just as most people care about their more families more than they do other people.

 

As one million Aussies live abroad what happens over there beyond the picket fence can certainly impact. Besides makes life far more interesting knowing in the broader sense what is happening further afield. For someone whose prime declared interest being within the Aussie context you sure seem interested enough in wanting to intervene in Middle East and supporting American foreign agendas.

[flag of convenience]

You guessed right. What kind of parent would either risk his children on a voyage on an unseaworthy, and overcrowded boat, or send a child on their own? Probably the same sort who tries to have a baby on Australian soil, despite coming here illegally, so they can demand that they all be allowed to stay in Australia.

 

Not the sort that throw their kids overboard for starters as the previous conservative Howard regime attempted to suggest in order to tarnish the image of asylum seekers in the worst possible way.

 

Perhaps parents that want the best for their kids out of harms way with life prospects? Not unlike those on here that escape for non war reasons but with the hope of a better life for their kids. Read it all the time.

[flag of convenience]

Because I live in Australia, so I naturally care more about what happens to Australians, just as most people care about their more families more than they do other people.

 

I live in Australia and my sense of caring doesn't cease with Rottnest Island slipping out of sight. Pretty much all inter related these days regardless of colour and creed.

[Harpodom]

Not sure how long Morrison/Abott can continue to behave like there is nothing to see here, but an article from the MJA states that 80% of Australian paediatricians consider mandatory detention a form of child abuse.

 

All this while there is a RC in progress (or has it concluded already?) into institutional responses to child abuse. You couldn't make this $hit up...

 

https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2014/201/7/australias-treatment-refugee-and-asylum-seeker-children-views-australian

 

 

Abstract

Objective: Australia's response to refugees and people seeking asylum is a matter of national debate. We sought to determine the knowledge and attitudes of paediatricians about refugee and asylum seeker issues (both onshore and offshore).

Design, setting and participants: In November 2013, we emailed a questionnaire web link to all Australian general and community paediatricians registered with the Royal Australasian College of Physicians.

Main outcome measures: Proportion of respondents by demographic characteristics using χ2 and Fisher exact test (α = 0.05).

Results: There were 139 respondents (response rate, 40.5%). Respondents' characteristics were broadly representative of all Australian general paediatricians. Over 80% correctly used the term “asylum seeker” rather than “boat person” or “illegal immigrant” for children applying for protection. Over 80% agreed with the Australian Medical Association assertion that mandatory detention of children constitutes child abuse, and disagreed with offshore processing. Less than half knew which subgroups were eligible for Medicare or had had pre-departure HIV and tuberculosis screening tests; or that the average stay in refugee camps before settlement in Australia was more than 10 years. Only about 60% knew that the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship was the legal guardian of detained unaccompanied minors. One in eight knew about the Medicare eligibility hotline. Respondents' sex, where their medical degree was obtained, frequency of seeing refugees and asylum seekers and years of experience had little association with responses.

Conclusions: Australian paediatricians considered mandatory detention a form of child abuse and strongly disagreed with offshore processing. There is a clear need for education about practical issues such as current health screening practices and Medicare eligibility.

[Parley]

That's the way PC. As Harpo says, it's probably all made up.

 

Could well be. Probably unverifiable.

You should ask yourself why this isn't being pursued in Fairfax media and ABC and other channels if it is verifiable. They would be all over it.

 

Sadly it is in the interests of asylum seekers to come up with stuff like this and they often do.

ABC were bitten once before. You might remember the story of boat people having their hands forcibly burnt by the crew.

 

The mainstream media are careful in believing these sorts of reports as true after that experience.

But lefty media will eat it up.

 

I know you desparately want to believe these type of stories are true. It is understandable given your and Harpo's extreme left viewpoints.

But ask yourself why other sources ignore it.

 

Same with all Diane's radical lefty links.

Usually not based in fact at all.

[Bibbs]

Not sure how long Morrison/Abott can continue to behave like there is nothing to see here, but an article from the MJA states that 80% of Australian paediatricians consider mandatory detention a form of child abuse.

 

 

So why not prosecute the parents who forced their children onto the boats, and therefore into the detention centres?

[Harpodom]

So why not prosecute the parents who forced their children onto the boats, and therefore into the detention centres?

Of course, there is always someone else to blame, never the one doing the damage.

 

Using your logic, all sorts of state sanctioned horrors are suddenly justifiable. Bravo.

 

BTW the parents (and by extension the children) haven't broken any laws, they are exercising their legal right to seek asylum.

[MARYROSE02]

Of course, there is always someone else to blame, never the one doing the damage.

 

Using your logic, all sorts of state sanctioned horrors are suddenly justifiable. Bravo.

 

BTW the parents (and by extension the children) haven't broken any laws, they are exercising their legal right to seek asylum.

 

Which means, by extension, that we have to let as many people who can try to get here into Australia. In effect, there are no legal limits, unless of course, they are NOT actually asylum seekers but economic migrants looking for an easy way into Australia.

 

But in your Utopian vision of Australia, we could and should let hundreds of thousands, millions, even of people, as long as they are using their legal right to seek asylum, and of course, any problems this might cause, would be blamed solely on Australian's innate racism.

[Bibbs]

Of course, there is always someone else to blame, never the one doing the damage.

 

Using your logic, all sorts of state sanctioned horrors are suddenly justifiable. Bravo.

 

BTW the parents (and by extension the children) haven't broken any laws, they are exercising their legal right to seek asylum.

 

Ha ha ha ..

[Guest]

Could well be. Probably unverifiable.

You should ask yourself why this isn't being pursued in Fairfax media and ABC and other channels if it is verifiable. They would be all over it.

 

Sadly it is in the interests of asylum seekers to come up with stuff like this and they often do.

ABC were bitten once before. You might remember the story of boat people having their hands forcibly burnt by the crew.

 

The mainstream media are careful in believing these sorts of reports as true after that experience.

But lefty media will eat it up.

 

I know you desparately want to believe these type of stories are true. It is understandable given your and Harpo's extreme left viewpoints.

But ask yourself why other sources ignore it.

 

Same with all Diane's radical lefty links.

Usually not based in fact at all.

 

 

:biglaugh::biglaugh: 'Extreme left?!' Jesus wept!. Well, maybe in today's Australia, criticising government policy on the (ill) treatment of asylum-seekers probably counts as 'extreme left.' Blimey, I don't think I've ever been referred to in those terms before!

 

And to think that I once voted for that renowned Bolshevik Tony Bliar!

[Harpodom]

Leaving aside parley's scepticism of the article concerning the Hazara refugee refouled to Afghanistan (must be fake, Morrison would never authorise the deportation of any Hazaras back there would he?), I wonder what he makes of the 80% of paediatricians who view mandatory detention as child abuse?

 

Would he and others of his ilk boycott doctors for having 'extreme left' political views?

[flag of convenience]

Which means, by extension, that we have to let as many people who can try to get here into Australia. In effect, there are no legal limits, unless of course, they are NOT actually asylum seekers but economic migrants looking for an easy way into Australia.

 

But in your Utopian vision of Australia, we could and should let hundreds of thousands, millions, even of people, as long as they are using their legal right to seek asylum, and of course, any problems this might cause, would be blamed solely on Australian's innate racism.

 

Afraid the misconception continues and the confusion remains. The government through their Ponzi scheme of a Big Australia are already in the process of making immigration a business and a mainstay for the economy. Asylum seekers a but a very small part of the overall intake. In fact these folk can and do breathe new life into country economies. They work hard and generally don't have the possibility of moving on when the going gets tough.

 

No utopian view of Australia just giving a hand to folk in need under the agreement Australia signed up to. Hardly anything to be much concerned about.

[flag of convenience]

So why not prosecute the parents who forced their children onto the boats, and therefore into the detention centres?

 

Perhaps the sense of family in the cultures concerned would find it primitive to abandon kids and feel parents who do should be prosecuted?

[MARYROSE02]

It is irrelevant whether Illegal immigrants work hard or are lazy. They came to Australia illegally. End of. It is the same for Pommies who overstay their visas.

[HappyHeart]

It is irrelevant whether Illegal immigrants work hard or are lazy. They came to Australia illegally. End of. It is the same for Pommies who overstay their visas.

 

Do you think they risk not only their lives but the lives of their children on a selfish whim? Have you any insight into the conditions that true asylum seekers live under? I can't imagine any asylum seeker takes the decsion to enter illegally lightly, I see it a a mark of desperation...one we can have a very limited understanding of in our cosy little existance