Could David Jennings please explain why in this thread he stated

"I'm a university academic mate. Whether thats publicly funded anymore is very debatable. I'm also a lawyer with a firm."

Yet a google search shows that on the 22 Jan this year in onlineopinion he stated..

"In another life I would have been a lawyer. But in this life I'm just a very frustrated person as a result of the most glaring examples of regulators playing up!"

To quote spindoc from another thread:

<< The ALP said they would close the “White Elephant” at Christmas Island. Instead they packed it to the rafters and then reopened some more. We already have Military and Customs fully engaged, 18 patrol boats and numerous aircraft, now we are to build another 8 patrol boats at tax payers expense. Don’t tell me that only 3% of immigration is boatpeople; tell me about the proportional costs. >>

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3773#92154

If only Rudd had put that sort of money into improving our offshore input into refugee issues, including bringing a whole lot more to this country, maybe considerably more than have arrived by boat since he stuffed up our national border protection policy, I reckon he'd still be PM.

Now, if Gillard can just tighten border protection right up again and then progressively divert the enormous cost of dealing with onshore asylum seekers into helping refugees via our formal programs, then surely refugee advocates and those who want to see the boats stopped, would all be happy, yes?

I apologise to David, and retract my previous post. On doing another search it appears the above comment was made by another person, not David.

Apology accepted.

CJ, why is it "bogus" to state, quite plainly, that those who show up illegally unfairly relegate those who follow the procedure to wait eternally? There is a quota, whatever the quota is set at, these people are seeking to place themselves at the head of the queue, in most cases unfairly (with very dubious claims indeed).

Quite frankly I am happy that the Federal Government has FINALLY taken notice of the fact that the MAJORITY of Australian's have little to no time for queue-jumping, illegal immigrants posing as asylum seekers. It has been no secret, Pauline made it VERY CLEAR, yet it has been ignored until now? How is it so?

The fact that the MAJORITY of Australian's agree on something doesn't make it the exclusive preserve of either the "LEFT" or "RIGHT", it makes it common ground.

CJ (also runner and the more emotive respondents), have a look around, actually ask around - go ask at a rodeo, a boxing match, a nightclub, a footie club BBQ, whatever... Let's see how many people really support your position, shall we?

I'd be awfully suprised if most people gave two hoots about our agreements with the UN or about refugees in general. Finally the politicians have looked past the 'interest groups' to see what "REAL AUSTRALIAN'S" do and don't want. As REAL AUSSIES are the ones who vote, it is about time.

I'm interested to note that it took a Female, Agnostic PM, who is in a de facto relationship, to state publicly that being non-PC is not "un-Australian", FINALLY (Yes CJ, go on... count the negatives:P)

Because there is no orderly migration queue. People can wait 10-15 years in a refugee camp, and be at the mercy of all sorts of things, with little chance of being accepted anywhere, despite being refugees.

If we can't call the racists "racists" can we now just call them "degenerate parasite trash"... is that non-PC enough? Help me out here, I'm new to gutter abuse.

Gillard will say anything, do anything, to get ahead... just ask Kevin.