What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Children Overboard issue develops

ibeme

First Grade
Messages
6,904
millersnose said:
our prime minister has to take a lie dectector test everytime some halfwit makes a claim??

:lol:

So now you're calling a senior ex-ministerial advisor a halfwit because he's prepared to back up his claims on a lie detector test? Or is anyone who has a differing view to yours a halfwit?

By the way, I specifically said that I didn't expect the PM to take the test.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
^ Pando said:
Seems as though they would be subject to the migration act even if they did land here.


MIGRATION ACT 1958 - SECT 198A
Offshore entry person may be taken to a declared country
(1)
An officer may take an offshore entry person from Australia to a country in respect of which a declaration is in force under subsection (3).

(2)
The power under subsection (1) includes the power to do any of the following things within or outside Australia:

(a) place the person on a vehicle or vessel;
(b) restrain the person on a vehicle or vessel;
(c) remove the person from a vehicle or vessel;
(d) use such force as is necessary and reasonable.

(3)
The Minister may:

(a) declare in writing that a specified country:
(i) provides access, for persons seeking asylum, to effective procedures for assessing their need for protection; and
(ii) provides protection for persons seeking asylum, pending determination of their refugee status; and
(iii) provides protection to persons who are given refugee status, pending their voluntary repatriation to their country of origin or resettlement in another country; and
(iv) meets relevant human rights standards in providing that protection; and
(b) in writing, revoke a declaration made under paragraph (a).

(4)
An offshore entry person who is being dealt with under this section is taken not to be in immigration detention (as defined in subsection 5(1)).

(5)
In this section, officer means an officer within the meaning of section 5, and includes a member of the Australian Defence Force.
There is nothing in there which says they are "illegals".
 
Messages
15,203
By the way, I specifically said that I didn't expect the PM to take the test

well then drop it you halfwit!

andrew flap said:
SS asks besides compassion, why?

Because, as I said above, we signed a UN protocol that says we will accept refugees and assess their claims.

Compassion does not enter into it in this instance. You are either a refugee or you are not. It's a legal status, not an emotional decision based upon pity.

"We" signed a UN protocol saying we'd accept all refugees did we and assess their claims?

And which court enforces this?

And what are the sanctions for non compliance?

Or is all that nonsense part of international law which doesnt exist anyway and therefore we should put our national interest first and enforce the migration act to the satisfaction of our own country and not some people smugglers from Indonesia?
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
And, ShireShark, your "game, set, match" claim has as much credibility as your attempt at kicking the moderator can. One of my pet hates btw.
 

Caged Panther

First Grade
Messages
5,178
I thought I might try and put these claims in the context from which they arose from in the first place.

The following passages are from Dark Victory by David Marr & Marian Wilkinson

Page 184

The Olong’s engine died just after sunrise and the small boat began rolling heavily in the swell. Banks reported several heads bobbing in the water. As the Adelaide’s RHIBs sped to haul them in, more passengers started jumping overboard. Banks counted six, then twelve, then fourteen in the water. The sailors were reporting men and then boys jumping in. The commander feared he was facing a mass exodus from the boat that would force him into a rescue….Suddenly, some of the officers spotted a small girls about five years old in a pink jumper being carried by her father to the top of the wheelhouse. The child was one of the few on board without a life jacket on. Her father now dressed her in one. He then took the child to the guard rail on the upper deck and held her over the side, gesturing to the sailors in the RHIB below to take her.

During the middle of the events above the following happened…

Banks was interrupted by a telephone call from Brigadier Mike Silverstone at Northern Command Headquarters in Darwin…..In any other circumstance, Silverstone would not interrupt a commander in the middle of an operational crisis but needed an update for Canberra because of Reith’s planned television apperance. Banks gave Silverstone some brief facts. He would later recall telling Silverstone some of the passangers were throwing themselves into the water and threatening to throw their children.


The above events were the original basis for the whole children overboard claims. The photos that were used to support these claims were taken sometime later when that boat eventually did sink. Here are the events that led to those photos misrepresentations.

Page 195

Banks had been deeply affected by the events of the past 48 hours and was extremely conscious of the survivor’s welfare…No dount all this was on his mind when he decided to take a call from Channel 10’s Elizabeth Bowdler. Banks described the extraordinary rescue to her in some detail…He told Bowdler there were pictures to go with her story because the Adelaide had emailed to Canberra two graphic photographs of Able seamen Laura Whittle and Leading Seamen Barker rescuing the children from the sea.
The interview was in clear breach of Bank’s orders under operation Relex which barred all military officials speaking to the media without clearance from the Minister for defence…So when channel 10 called defence public relations asking for the photos, alarm bells sounded…
Tim Bloomfield finally had them emailed to him from the navy at about three that afternoon. Attached to each was a colourful commentary by the amateur photographer who had taken the shots. One was tagged ‘whittle courage’ and a long caption read: ‘Laura the hero. During the 08 Oct rescue by 223 SUNC’s from a sinking Indonesian fishing vessel, Able Seamen Laura Whittle again typified this true quality through her immense courage in leaping 12 metres from the ship’s 02 deck into the water to drag women and children to the safety of a life raft…
Bloomfield did not think they were great shots…but Hampton wanted to see them. A flustered staffer in Bloomfield’s office, under pressure to get the job done, copied the photos on his computer desktop and sent them off to Reith’s office stripped of their commentaries.”
 
Messages
15,203
The whole book has an anti Howard slant!! By two professional Howard haters!!

I must admit to having a soft spot for Howard haters though
So much anger, so much rage, so much bitterness!!

I love it!
 

0neye

Guest
Messages
5,540
Sheros los Deros said:
0neye said:
This is old news get over it all you left wing loonies :roll: VOTE 1 for honest JOHN :clap: :clap: :clap:

Open up your left eye, oneye, and see the truth.
my right eye is open
alaguilan_xforce.jpg
 

ibeme

First Grade
Messages
6,904
ShireShark said:
By the way, I specifically said that I didn't expect the PM to take the test

well then drop it you halfwit!

Why? Is it wrong to hope that the PM will exceed my expectations on the odd occasion?

It was reported on SBS last night that Scrafton had taken his polygraph test, and passed. Interesting too, to see that another ex-staff member has supported Scrafton's claims. If only current staff members were able to speak out.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Lang Park said:
Now Scrafton has someone to back his claims :lol: comon gutless Johnny :^o take the polygragh test,what are you scared of? :lol: :lol:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200408/s1178955.htm

Former Defence Department bureaucrat Jenny McKenry has come forward to back the claims of a former ministerial adviser in the children overboard affair.

From the article:
Mr Scrafton says he told Mr Howard three days from the election that there was no evidence asylum seekers threw children into the sea and no-one in defence believed it happened.

Mr Howard denies that version of events.

But Ms McKenry, the former head of defence public affairs, says Mr Scrafton phoned her the morning after he spoke to Mr Howard.

"He told me that there was nothing conclusive in the video and there's no evidence to support the children overboard story and that is what he had conveyed to the prime minister the evening before," Ms McKenry told ABC Radio's AM program.
 

JK

Guest
Messages
5,549
mickdo said:
Jimbo said:
And of course, the rates the smugglers charge are a pittance compared to other means of transport, aren't they?
What exactly is your point?

Jimbo doesn't understand that without papers you have problems boarding a plane or a legitimate boat to get anywhere.

I still can't believe that iraqi refugees (for example) were expected to have papers signed by the Iraqi immigration office or border patrols! Excuse Mr Bloodthirsty Republican Guard, can you please sign here and here and initial there - I'll just jump across the border now :lol:

And this was for refugees from a country you saw fit to invade to change its regime! :lol: :lol:
 

JK

Guest
Messages
5,549
I don't expect the PM to take a polygraph but this is no halfwit making the claim. There are now two public servants who have indicated the PM knew of the truth and chose to ignore it.

As the evidence now stands supported I am convinced that the PM lied and then coverend it up in extraordinary circumstances. Obviously my being convinced changes nothing - an analysis in yesterday's paper indicated that those who would change their vote in this issue probably arleady have but this may have slight impact on his perception as a leader generally and have obvious flow-on effect in swinging voters.

All in all a very interesting issue (as 12+ pages here shows). I hope they are pressured to remove the cabinet directive for public servants not to speak on the matter. They should not hide behind their power.
 

Jimbo

Immortal
Messages
40,107
JK said:
mickdo said:
Jimbo said:
And of course, the rates the smugglers charge are a pittance compared to other means of transport, aren't they?
What exactly is your point?

Jimbo doesn't understand that without papers you have problems boarding a plane or a legitimate boat to get anywhere.

I still can't believe that iraqi refugees (for example) were expected to have papers signed by the Iraqi immigration office or border patrols! Excuse Mr Bloodthirsty Republican Guard, can you please sign here and here and initial there - I'll just jump across the border now :lol:

And this was for refugees from a country you saw fit to invade to change its regime! :lol: :lol:

You said yourself that smugglers charge upwards of $20,000 for a lotto trip on a boat. Given that a return flight to Jakarta costs less than $1,000 these days, this leaves the potential entrant $19,000 to cover the expenses incurred in waiting in the queue like everyone else has to...
 

_Johnsy

Referee
Messages
28,300
I love the lengths you people will go to, to defend this man. he has lied before and he will again. If he has nothing to lose take the test. If he passes the test whats the worst that can happen. See I was right I did not lie (election to him on a platter)

Other side of the coin he takes it and fails, the worst case scenario - all of australia see what a lying germ he is. :clap:

I can see why he wont take the test. Honest John my ass !!! :lol: :lol:
 

ibeme

First Grade
Messages
6,904
Inquiry will find me guilty: PM

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10483902%5E421,00.html

"There will be another Senate inquiry, and they will find me guilty," he told radio 2UE. "Wouldn't that be a surprise?"

Why? The first one didn't. Is it because at that time, Scrafton was gagged?

"I am quite happy to deal with the minutiae of this … because I haven't set out to mislead the Australian public on this issue," the Prime Minister said.

Is this a slight shift in his stance?

"Let's get a bit of perspective about this," he said. "The Senate is being used by the anti-government parties to score political points against me."

Undoubtedly. But I still think the public deserves to know if their PM has been honest with them.
 

Latest posts

Top