GEoff, there has been a full investigation into you silly claims, they are not true.

However, the border command people today are letting people drown.

Marilyn I apologise, you are are obviously unwell and a figure of pity but I will be reporting you for the comments you have made.

Well Marilyn,

as my brother-in-law was a Chief Petty Officer in charge of a certain department on the good ol' HMAS Adelaide from late 2000 until early 2002 I will check with him as to the veracity of 'your' claims, I am sure he will know the truth, and by the way, he is man of integrity.

I have been on plenty of operations whereby the vessel approached would fail to stop or heed calls to comply with international laws of the sea.

On the odd occasion that this would occur there are certain 'rules of engagement' that need to be complied with.

I can assure you no one and I repeat no one has fired on any refugee vessel in the last 20 years or so, you usually fire a warning shot, initially with a 7.62mm SLR round or the newer 5.56mm round at least 100 to 200 metres in front of the vessel to gain their attention and then ratchet up the threat until they stop. I can assure you the navy has never fired a 76mm round into any international vessel, unless during a time of conflict.

Australian warships do not fire on unarmed civilian vessels, unless you have a psycho Commanding Officer, and the last time I looked this would be an act of career limiting function.

Get your facts straight, the Navy do not operate 56mm 'cannons' and stop trying to pull the wool over real peoples eyes.

Have you ever been on a Patrol Boat in the middle of the night attempting to save peoples lives as they careen about the ocean trying to get to Australia, putting good ol' Australian sailors at risk the entire time, I thought not!

Geoff

It is getting very hard for the refugee advocates. On the one hand to acknowledge that their perspective and policy support has resulted in so many deaths, whilst on the other hand they cannot now support tightening of border security because it would be inhumane.

Tightening policy compromises their “compassion” whilst leaving it as it is, means more deaths.

Tough when you get it wrong and have to accept that you are free to express what you stand for, but in the end are “responsible” for what you express and “accountable” for the “consequences”.

Over a thousand “consequential” deaths seem excusable if it doesn’t get in the way of ideology I guess? You promote it, you wear it. But of course, you don’t have to pick up the body parts do you?

Good luck posters,
I engaged Marilyn Sheperd many times back when the Tampa and Siev x were in the news and found that she lies all the time. she and that Tony Kevin just make up things to suit themselves.

Seems nothing has changed. In my opinion she is best ignored.

Thank you Bruce. Hope you are not dis-spirited by the usual suspects.

I agree it was Howard who started this race to show who is better at getting rid of the boat people, these aliens who are just not one of us.

Reminds me of how the Chinese were treated in the 19th century.

The Chinese are all right now, of course. Both major parties are committed to the continued flow of money from China and both try to buy votes from Chinese Australians at marginal seats. How to treat China and all things Chinese has now become a matter of tacit bi-partisan policy.

We have to do the same for the boat people, if we are to become a mature nation, particularly if we really want a place at the table of the Asian century.

As for Fraser, let's not forget that he was the progenitor of the illegitimacy of an elected government mentality. Had Abbott not succumbed to that mentality since the beginning of Gillard's government we may not have descended to the depths of depravity to feed those of us addicted to inflicting cruelty to these unlovable boat people.