Gillard v Rudd, Round 4

So it looks style of substance. So far all Rudd has shown is that he has the style to be PM, but not the substance.

His policy has brought the Syrian civil war to Australia. Home front opens in a foreign war

He is irresponsible on the international stage. Indonesia 'dismisses Rudd claims' Claiming that an Abbott government would risk war with Indonesia. That is the talk of a mad man.
 
Yes, the streets of Sydney are quite clearly in the grip of civil war. A sniper almost got me as I was driving through Bankstown.

His comments about Abbott's absurd asylum sloganeering were that they risked a diplomatic conflict, which is pretty damn obvious. He used militaristic language, but that seems appropriate when talking about naval policy.

I must admit though, there are things more frightening than the thought of Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Such as the thought of Acting Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce.
 
So it looks style of substance. So far all Rudd has shown is that he has the style to be PM, but not the substance.

His policy has brought the Syrian civil war to Australia. Home front opens in a foreign war

He is irresponsible on the international stage. Indonesia 'dismisses Rudd claims' Claiming that an Abbott government would risk war with Indonesia. That is the talk of a mad man.

This post is hysterical and unhinged. Rudd must be doing okay to put the crazy into such overdrive so soon.
 
Please tell us exactly what argument you think you're making.
 
Yes but you see if you tow away all the boats and make refugees someone else's problem, the number drops to zero and that apparently is a thing to be praised.
 
Yes but you see if you tow away all the boats and make refugees someone else's problem, the number drops to zero and that apparently is a thing to be praised.
I think Abbot just doesn't like boats because he's such a keen swimmer. If those refugees were swimming across, he'd be okay with it.
 
Yes but you see if you tow away all the boats and make refugees someone else's problem, the number drops to zero and that apparently is a thing to be praised.

I would say the vast majority of them a not genuine refugees.
 
I would say the vast majority of them a not genuine refugees.
Why is that? Do you have personal experience of being a refugee?
And no, running away from the gays doesn't count.
 
The vast majority that come are not from a persecuted minority and are mostly fleeing for economic reasons. If they want to come here for economic reasons, then just immigrate here.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c125.html
The practice of granting asylum to people fleeing persecution in foreign lands is one of the earliest hallmarks of civilization. References to it have been found in texts written 3,500 years ago, during the blossoming of the great early empires in the Middle East such as the Hittites, Babylonians, Assyrians and ancient Egyptians.

Over three millennia later, protecting refugees was made the core mandate of the UN refugee agency, which was set up to look after refugees, specifically those waiting to return home at the end of World War II.

The 1951 Refugee Convention establishing UNHCR spells out that a refugee is someone who "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country."

Since then, UNHCR has offered protection and assistance to tens of millions of refugees, finding durable solutions for many of them. Global migration patterns have become increasingly complex in modern times, involving not just refugees, but also millions of economic migrants. But refugees and migrants, even if they often travel in the same way, are fundamentally different, and for that reason are treated very differently under modern international law.

Migrants, especially economic migrants, choose to move in order to improve the future prospects of themselves and their families. Refugees have to move if they are to save their lives or preserve their freedom. They have no protection from their own state - indeed it is often their own government that is threatening to persecute them. If other countries do not let them in, and do not help them once they are in, then they may be condemning them to death - or to an intolerable life in the shadows, without sustenance and without rights.

We have a duty to care for refugees, but not for Economic migrants. If you want to see what it is like being a refugee, then go to Africa and go to a refugee camp.
 
The vast majority that come are not from a persecuted minority and are mostly fleeing for economic reasons. If they want to come here for economic reasons, then just immigrate here.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c125.html


We have a duty to care for refugees, but not for Economic migrants. If you want to see what it is like being a refugee, then go to Africa and go to a refugee camp.
Yes, I am aware of what a refugee is. Can you demonstrate that the majority of refugees coming to Australia are actually economic migrants?
 
Top Bottom