Shadow Minister,
I'm positive that you will take this post as evidence that I am a totally cowardly bottle-less ignorant un-scholastic hysterical (oh, no that wasn't you, that was somebody else, never mind) woman who is governed by a kind of religious mania about asylum seekers,causes them to drown, and is so stubborn and willful that she will not, she just will not, damn it, despite all the "evidence" you go to so much trouble to provide her with, listen to you and believe what you've told her.

The Pacific solution does not exist. It is a dead Pacific solution. There is little possibility of it existing under this government. Should it exist again sometime in the future, I have no idea whether or not it would work, depending on your definition of what a "working" Pacific solution is. (I suspect our definitions of this may differ).

If I don't reply to your posts over the next few days, it's not because I've ceased to find them scintillating. I'm going to a family celebration - we are a family that has five day weddings and four day birthday parties, so I'll be gone a while.

But really, I don't care about this argument anymore. I'm very happy to "lose" it to you and move on. If that makes me look, whatever,anything, it's worth it, and I sooo don't care.

I am not in the business of convincing people - if something I say causes someone to think a bit, that's fine. That's all I ask. Nobody who writes for the public seriously expects they're going to convince anyone of anything. You put stuff out there, and people do what they like with it. Sometimes somebody says something nice, but hardly ever. Mostly people carry on like you.

I hope you find something interesting to occupy yourself with while I'm gone.

It is good that you are not in the business of convincing anyone, as by simply restating your position and "beliefs" over and over again does not inspire confidence.

I wish you well with your family

Jennifer, you answered my point about people fleeing through as many countries as they wish, only having to stop if they seek refuge. A statement which I must look into on Google as it is different to the perception of myself and many others.
I think my description of "leaky boat types" is no more insulting or erroneous a leap as your speculation about boat people, guns and what Mr. Abbott might do with them in the context of boat people.
The only statement you make that I agree with is that we should have the courage to withdraw from the UN Convention and change our laws which are a pull factor for boat people and people smugglers.
However, rereading your article, I would think that you would fight to the death to stop any such move.
And as for lacking compassion for genuine refugees marooned in terrible camps, how else should I think when you seem desperate to protect leaky boat types, every one of whom displaces someone in very genuine need of refuge, not just seeking a better life.
Whether or not I have met a "refugee" from a boat is irrelevant and maybe a bit of self-aggrandizement on your part. However, it falls short because anyone who can so hysterically suggest the things you did about Mr. Abbott in your article is lacking a great deal of commonsense.

Guys - eat my dust.

Fair enough Jennifer. I didn't think you had a solution to
the fiasco.

We'll just wear out hearts on our sleeves, but offer no real
solution. It happens time and time again on OLO.

I'm not required to find solutions, Yabby. I write opinion pieces not public policy.
That seems to be a point of confusion amongst posters - someone states their thoughts and you think you have the right to demand they solve extremely complex problems in 350 words.

Why do you think we have to give you solutions? We give you opinion. Don't put your childish need to have everything solved for you on me because I wrote an article. Take responsibility for yourself.

Re the eat my dust comment- that was rude.

I am however, disgusted at the rudeness addressed to me. In the last few posts I've been described as ignorant, hysterical, self-aggrandizing (simply because I've met boat arrivals) not inspiring confidence, lacking compassion, lying, cowardly,afflicted with religious mania, avoidance, being unscholarly, being a liar again, being an "armchair academic" and the rest. Anything to try and put me down - why? Can't you just debate me? Is it because I'm a woman? Is it a gender thing?

Is it because I advocate for asylum seekers? I deserve all that because I care about asylum seekers? I "wear my heart on my sleeve" so you'll do your best to give me a good kicking?

I don't know why you think that because someone writes an opinion piece it gives you the license to freely abuse them. Disagree, by all means. Put up alternatives and robust arguments. But the abuse? The character assassination?

You like authors to engage in the forum. Then you abuse them and attack their characters. I've seen that happen every time I read this journal. It's happened to me just about every time I've written anything.

Well, after this experience, this author won't be engaging in the forums again. Why would anyone bother?