|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 6:36:07 GMT 10
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 15, 2013 6:36:07 GMT 10
No abuse till the name calling started by the usual suspects who feel they need to abuse the "left" at any given opportunity.
I note that david didn't use the topic "how the left thinks", but pushed his own ideological bandwagon instead.
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 7:19:25 GMT 10
Post by jody on Jan 15, 2013 7:19:25 GMT 10
oh for petes sake Slarti....you're all as bad as each other with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 7:35:40 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 7:35:40 GMT 10
S L A P !! To use one of Farti's favourites ... or whatever other rubbish he uses to inflame the situation.
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 8:16:13 GMT 10
Post by geopol on Jan 15, 2013 8:16:13 GMT 10
Who needs anyone else to inflame a situation when you are around Stella? You are, after all, the board's most predictable harridan......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 8:24:28 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 8:24:28 GMT 10
Who needs anyone else to inflame a situation when you are around Stella? You are, after all, the board's most predictable harridan......
OK, that was a bit rude, but it was funny, and delivered in the style of a well-established poster who has the decency and wit to laugh at himself. Is it all that hard to write with flair and humour and add to the tone of this community?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 8:31:08 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 8:31:08 GMT 10
It was??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 8:32:16 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 8:32:16 GMT 10
Well, it's better than Farty's drivel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 8:34:48 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 8:34:48 GMT 10
You might have a point.
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 9:02:17 GMT 10
Post by geopol on Jan 15, 2013 9:02:17 GMT 10
Counter that point!
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 17:55:02 GMT 10
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 15, 2013 17:55:02 GMT 10
Well, it's better than Farty's drivel. Love the name calling. But feel free to pick on others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 18:29:23 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 18:29:23 GMT 10
You gotta love David. The "Australian" incorrectly accuses the Government of cutting the free snack program that school students receive when they visit parliament, or wrongly accuses the PM of some wrong doing, and he stays silent, yet when ever RAbbott gets any criticism, he screams blue murder. Where was David, when Howard lied about Refugees when he claimed that they were throwing their children overboard, Even though at the time nothing of the sort was happening ? Yep, as silent as a church mouse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 18:52:16 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 18:52:16 GMT 10
Complaining about what someone has written is one thing; complaining about what someone hasn't written is bizarre. You two are rusted into this technique.
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:19:30 GMT 10
Post by Salem on Jan 15, 2013 19:19:30 GMT 10
Not to mention that at least one child was thrown overboard so the Labor lie about 'children overboard' is just a Labor lie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:23:00 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 19:23:00 GMT 10
Not to mention that at least one child was thrown overboard so the Labor lie about 'children overboard' is just a Labor lie. No one was thrown overboard, why don't you listen to people who were there, such as the naval personal, rather than relying on spin from a racist Liberal spiv for a change ?
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:26:25 GMT 10
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 15, 2013 19:26:25 GMT 10
Complaining about what someone has written is one thing; complaining about what someone hasn't written is bizarre. You two are rusted into this technique. And I think everyone can see your sniping in blue technique. Of course when I pick up your obvious hypocrisy, you fall silent.
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:38:05 GMT 10
Post by Salem on Jan 15, 2013 19:38:05 GMT 10
I did Richo. One of them ADMITTED that a child was indeed thrown overboard. Why don't you listen to those who were there, instead of Labor lies, spin and bullshit?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:53:03 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 19:53:03 GMT 10
I did Richo. One of them ADMITTED that a child was indeed thrown overboard. Why don't you listen to those who were there, instead of Labor lies, spin and bullshit? Inventing history again are we ? It never happened the Naval personnel, who were there, have all sworn that it never happened. The only people who like to fantasize that it did happen are racist scum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 19:56:43 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 19:56:43 GMT 10
Truth overboard? Compiled by Ben Haywood August 30, 2004 The arrival of a boatload of asylum seekers in 2001 whipped up a political storm that refuses to subside. What is the children overboard affair? On October 7, 2001 immigration minister Phillip Ruddock announced that children had been thrown overboard from a boat carrying asylum seekers. The HMAS Adelaide had intercepted the boat as it approached Australia. At the time of the Government's claims, the arrival of asylum seekers by boat was a hot political issue. The Government wanted to stem the flow of "illegal boat people" or "queue-jumpers", as it described them. In the lead-up to a federal election, it needed public support for its border protection policy. The claim that asylum seekers had thrown children overboard had the potential to strengthen this support by demonising asylum seekers. What sort of person would intentionally put a child in harm's way? Do we want people like that in this country? On November 10, the Howard Government won the election. Many believe the "children overboard" claims contributed to the win. However, it was later proved that no children had been thrown overboard. The Howard Government had misled the Australian people in the lead-up to a federal election,[/u] education.theage.com.au/cmspage.php?intid=135&intversion=113So, you were saying Salem ? Surely, you can't be that stupid that you were taken in by Howards Lies ? Oh..wait....
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:00:54 GMT 10
Post by Salem on Jan 15, 2013 20:00:54 GMT 10
The Age?
At the Senate Enquiry, it was shown that at least one child was thrown overboard. Sorry Freddy but those are the facts. You can throw up any 'article' you want and I will if time permits (am waiting on a late dinner to cook) find an article I have in my possession about the Senate enquiry into A Certain Maritime Incident. Not that the truth, facts or proof are important to you, you will believe any Labor Lies you are fed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:01:05 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 20:01:05 GMT 10
See also: Australian federal election, 2001
The Children Overboard affair was an Australian political controversy involving public allegations by Howard government ministers in October 2001, in the lead-up to a federal election, that seafaring asylum seekers had thrown children overboard in a presumed ploy to secure rescue and passage to Australia.
The government's handling of this and other events involving unauthorised arrivals worked to its advantage. The Tampa affair had led the government to adopt stricter border protection measures to prevent unauthorised arrivals from reaching Australia by boat. Polls indicated the measures had public support. The government was able to portray itself as "strong" on border protection measures and opponents as "weak". In November 2001, the Liberal-National coalition was re-elected with an increased majority.
The Australian Senate Select Committee for an inquiry into a certain maritime incident later found that no children had been at risk of being thrown overboard and that the government had known this prior to the election. The government was criticised for misleading the public and cynically "(exploiting) voters' fears of a wave of illegal immigrants by demonising asylum-seekers".[1][2]
Although reports indicated that the strain of being towed was the proximate cause of the asylum seeker boat eventually sinking,[3] in 2007, Australian Prime Minister John Howard asserted that the asylum seekers "irresponsibly sank the damn boat, which put their children in the water".[2]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:06:52 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 20:06:52 GMT 10
The Age? At the Senate Enquiry, it was shown that at least one child was thrown overboard. Sorry Freddy but those are the facts. No it didn't: The Australian Senate Select Committee for an inquiry into a certain maritime incident later found that no children had been at risk of being thrown overboard and that the government had known this prior to the election. The government was criticised for misleading the public and cynically "(exploiting) voters' fears of a wave of illegal immigrants by demonising asylum-seekers".[1][2]
well, hows hansard Salem, or are you going to accuse that of being untruthful ? So, you mean you need time to make up another one of your fantasies then? Face it, if you really had evidence that they really did throw their children overboard, you would have posted it by now considering your pathological need to re-write history, thats something that you could all teach us about
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:08:07 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 20:08:07 GMT 10
So, I can produce Hansard, and all Salem can produce is fiction
|
|
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:12:44 GMT 10
Post by garfield on Jan 15, 2013 20:12:44 GMT 10
Hard to believe that we are still arguing over children overboard after all this time but there ya go, needless to say the left will believe any old shite they are spoon fed, in fact the bigger load of crap it is the more likely they are to believe it. What more can you say about ALP weirdos that think weather only began a few decades ago ... fuckin wacked mate ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:23:15 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 20:23:15 GMT 10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
So ...
Jan 15, 2013 20:24:38 GMT 10
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2013 20:24:38 GMT 10
4.51 The Committee notes, however, that Commander Banks has never equivocated about the fact that he himself did not see a child thrown overboard. He continued on from the paragraph quoted above, saying:
Nevertheless I am prepared to attest to what I saw. For the record quote I saw a child held over the side by a man. I did not see any children in the water. I did see 13 UBAs [unauthorised boat arrivals] voluntarily enter the water from the SIEV and watched their subsequent recovery. I advised CJTF 639 that this had happened and that I could see a man threatening to put a child over the side. I advised that there had been no loss of life. I signalled ashore that SUNCs were making threats to jump overboard and some had done so and that some had been thrown overboard unquote.[293]
---------------------------
4.59 In short, the witness statements provided by the crew of HMAS Adelaide provide no evidentiary support for the report that children had been thrown overboard.
|
|