Refugee policy? Methinks this is yet another of his policies which sound good in theory, but don't stand up to implementation.

Yesterday a boat arrived at Christmas island with another contingent, which demonstrates the conditions at sea were good enough to make it safely to shore.

At the same time we were told the flight for the first lot to be forwarded on was delayed due to bad weather.

Weather station figures for Christmas Island were light winds at 4.3 kilometres. PNG weather station had similar figures.

Go figure!!

Now we read there is a large spike in Vietnamese arrivals too. One has to wonder if there is a correlation between that and the Asian massage parlours which are springing up all over the place.
A lady friend went into one to ask for a massage for her back, but was told by the pretty Asian girl it was a massage parlour for men only.

One has to wonder which other opportunists are ready to jump on our gravy train.

Au contraire, SPQR,

"What evidence have you got that << nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing?>>"

The onus is on you to stump up with the "hard evidence" that these people are not refugees.

You're the one disputing official claims.

Poriot,

This is your statement of Wednesday, 31 July 2013 11:43:47 AM:
<<It may be a convenient line but it does not stack up against the evidence that nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing>>

You are telling us --are you not --that you've seen/have the evidence that they are for real?

So, that being the case, it is fair enough for us to ask you to share that evidence with us. I would have thought it BOTH fair --and easy-- since you have it all ready to hand --for you to put up!

I sincerely hope you're not one of those poker players who is holding a dud hand but bluffing about it,ay!

SPQR,

I take official statements on process as evidence.

You are disputing official statements on process.

If you've got some "hard evidence" to debunk official statements on process, then we're waiting with baited breath.

Poirot - Please tell us which one you are?

1) Gullible
or
2) A Hypocrite

I ask this because of your statement Quote "I take official statements on process as evidence."

Here you say you totally believe (as evidence) "official statements" which is gullible - Example please show me where the WMD's were in Iraq after all official statements used that to go to war there are hundreds of more examples that official statements were totally FALSE.

Now it could be hypocritical in you only take as evidence "official statements" on processes only all other official statements are false

Poriot,

<<SPQR,I take official statements on process as evidence>>

Ah, so, I guess you'd include Bob Carr's statements in that --or, do you pick and choose according to what best fits with what you want to believe?