Thank you Belly. I don't think I have taken the 'stick' to you - that sounds a bit violent. We disagree on occasion but I hope mostly we do it with respect even if there is passionate debate involved. :)

OTB
Just to take you up one point. There is nothing wrong with bringing up past misdemeanours if someone is claiming to be as pure as the driven snow or still has questions to answer eg. Battelines.

I don't vote Liberal or Labor so have no allegiance to either, although to be fair I have less affinity with the LNP as they do not, I believe, govern for all Australians, certainly little care is paid to those who are most disadvantaged. Both parties get a big fail as far as the widening gap between rich and poor.

Both are also failing in the area of transparent and accountable government. Any person in politics (or elsewhere) should call out corruption - that is only right. All I ask is that each be honest about their own transgressions instead of trying to blame others or obfuscate when questioned.

If a politician points the finger at another but has not yet fully addressed accusations against themselves, is it not reasonable to point the finger back?

Hi Poirot,

I'll defend to the death your right to post wherever and whenever you please, but just remember that when you get in the ring and take a few swings at somebody, they may - perhaps unreasonably - think that they can take a few swings back at you too. You can't just smack somebody in the chops and then duck out of the ring, until their back is turned again, then dart back in again, ad infinitum.

In other words, if you have something to say, don't whinge if someone holds you to account for it. Yes, you do have the right to make brainless comments, obviously off the top of your head, cheap digs and easy slurs, but equally others have the right to respectfully draw your attention to flaws in your arguments - before you have time to duck out of the ring, as it were.

Back to topic: sixty boats have been intercepted since Rudd's PNG non-solution (which, I'm surprised to say, may just work). Some two thousand people have arrived since that day, but Manus island can currently take only a few hundred, slightly fewer if the people there burn the place down. Well, that's always an option.

So will the smugglers call Rudd's bluff, and persuade enough people to get on boats, in order to over-load the system ? When will Rudd - or Abbott after the election - get around to treating people with dignity and, after making sure they are healthy and well-fed, fly them straight back to their point of departure, with some compensation to the host country for the inconvenience ? And fund better or quicker refugee-processing facilities in Indonesia ?

Just wondering. A dumb idea / Get stuck in, if you like, I can take it ;)

Joe

Yes Pelican it was just a few words not a real difficulty.
I have very few that do not sometimes get my admiration here.
This mornings news Joe, is again telling us boat people are asking to go home and not leaving to come.
How many of us have been involved in resolving a dispute?
Let me tell you this for free.
The opposition is damaging the process.
Saying every thing Rudd try,s will not work, in relation to the boats, then saying they will copy most of it?
Smugglers are sure to use it to sell their product.
Still election of a Liberal government will stall the boats but for how long?
How about some here who insult the Current government, just for a short time.
Look at the other sides likely and promised actions in power?

Pelican,

Agree with your comment above.

................

Loudmouth, your last post here takes the cake. One of your favourite tactics for sledging Poirot is that (according to you) I hardly ever post on topic (wrong)...yet after you gave me a mouthful above:

"Yes, you do have the right to make brainless comments, obviously off the top of your head, cheap digs and easy slurs...."

(which, funnily enough, describes exactly your technique for sniping Poirot)

Then you devote two paragraphs to refugees.

That is "not" the topic of this thread.

(Hypocrite much)

Hi Joe,

A good insightful post.

I particularly liked the way you picked-up on how <<Snouts in the trough and rats in the ranks>> might aptly refer to the gluttonous behavior of the refugee industry as it seeks to benefit from the continual inflow of illegals. And to individuals within that industry's willingness to rat on their own country for person gain.

Cheers

Oh Bravo!, SPQR, for your brave attempt to somehow connect Joe's lapse with the topic at hand.

Actually, I understand exactly what happened in that last post of Joe's.

It was a systems failure....

Most of his supposedly "on topic" spiel to Poirot is an elaborate camouflage for his digs in my direction.

He has a repository full to the brim with disingenuous questions and strawmen which he whips out to fulfill his obligations to "topic".

His usual strategy is to devote a portion of his post to bagging Poirot. However, the problem with his last post was that once he had completed his minimum of bagging, he reached into his cache to collect his cover spiel for the post...but, Quelle Horreur! - he clutched at the wrong spiel! (They all tend to look the same late at night after a couple of red wines)

Hence, we have the commentary on refugees daubed over the bottom of his post.

The upshot being, that if you employ an elaborate "on topic" subterfuge to mask your true intent of sledging a fellow poster, you have to concentrate at all times to make sure you select the right article to complement the sledging at hand.