Perhaps the continuation of Australia's 1.2 million a day since 1975 plus some add-on money is an incentive for PNG to accommodate Rudd's wishes to take in those people. But, I can't help the feeling that it is a very disastrously wrong move to put them at our doorstep in larger numbers than anyone would think possible at this stage. Australia is gradually hemming itself in. Luckily too many are too silly to realise so I suppose they won't realise it even when it hits them as long as they have their football.

Apparently there is no ‘add-on’ money, Indi.

Immigration Minister Tony Burke said adamantly this evening on ABC’s 7.30 that there will be no extra expense and that all costs will come from within the existing aid budget to PNG.

Well… he did say it very assertively!!

Ludwig - Is this from the NO CARBON TAX people.

am absolutely morally appalled at the tone of Mirko Bagaric's article about Rudd's so-called refugee solution titled "Rudd's refugee solution: politically brilliant, morally bankrupt".

Without even bothering to dive into the obvious moral sespit that no doubt dwells within the body of the article, the title alone is enough
to alarm, in no way different to a title that hypothetically may have been written by a 1943 Nazi scholar regarding culture and race if it was titled "White Western superiority and the way to Mould the Coloured nations".

First, Mirko claims that Rudd's solution to state to the Australian voters that ANY new refugee boats persons will be forced to settle in Papua and not Australia, without consideration for the implications of this statements, that Papua (to Rudd, Mirko and suporters must be some "dung-heap" that no-one would wish to live in, even if you are apparently fleeing from imminent death and perpetual political persecution.

Second, for Mirko to claim that the scheme is "Politically Brilliant", without even reading the filthy article I already comprehend that this implies that the Australian voters who remain "swing voters" (who also happen to be moslty working class Anglos and other European descendants from Italy, Greece etc whose familys have been here fore generations) are totally stupid and easily manipulated not to mention the presumtions that they are racist is invovled in their calculations.

This is sick, it is classist, prejudiced, biased, and worst of all these are all completely unfounded since what evidence shows that voters who are "concerned" about refugee/immigration policy must be racists also? All that the left ever refer to is some inarticulate and sometimes uneducated persons who may not properly express the meaning of their frustration when they say "send the mussies back to the desert" etc., yet they never stop to consider the possiblity that, like a Palestinian who throws rocks at Israli citizens and openly expresses that "all Jews should die" . . . .

Part II from Moiteeki,

perhaps the so-called "uneducated Aussies" like the "Palestinians" are simply not articalting their concerns enough and the job of the journalist is to press further to attempt to uncover this, as they always and overwhelmingly do and accept with Palestinians and any other seemingly racist, tribal and bigotted fued in non-white nations.

However, ONLY when a white/Western cultural group speaks in such terms does a Mirgic or the Left step forward and proclaim that such behaviour is "racist" and unacceptable. I wonder, do these same Leftists also say that the Papaun's who have nationalistic sentiments and who are against Rudd's proposal, call these "dark natives" racists?

Or, as Mirgic thinks Rudd is brilliant politically, indicating that he thinks that the swinging voters (mostly Anglo Aussies) will be stupified by the words "no more boats and settlements in Aus" such that will give him their vote, does he also believe that Papuans are similarly stupid and sufficiently maleable such that the Rudd plan will eventualy work?

Tell me Mirgic, whose the real Elitis, Nazi, racist, prejudiced nut who thinks the down-trodden can be played with in such politically manner?

Prompete,

I noticed that u actually think the article and the man and ideas to be noble!

How?

How is it acceptable to displace poor native Pauan's so that Australia can build a little piece of Aus (like some gated community) for our refugee guests who will be living an Australian standard of living whilst the Papuan's can barely feed themselves? How is this not going to create future animostiy, jealously and eventual tension?

Note - this same animosity and jealously sometimes voiced by so-called Anglo "bogans" regarding the extra assitance that aboriginals and many ethnics recieve even though their economic and mental health pressures are identical, is no different to this Papuan concer, yet for decades it has been dismissed and even openly mocked via tv shows, comedies etc.

Your type morally disgust me and infuriate me to near madness!