Foxy and Co - What would you prefer to have another 50,000 plus mostly economic invaders, your taxes raised to support them of course we also get the criminal element among them (lock up your underage sons and daughters).

A hand full of dollars upfront to turn take them BACK to where they came from, sounds good to me and sorry for you most Australians.

No one has actuIally said the PM personally gave the smugglers money CH, so you are being a bit hysterical about that, and far too personal about the views of others here.

The point is that there is no possibility that our dictator PM doesn't know exactly what is happening out there on the high seas to the unfortunate asylum seekers and his war-like naval 'solution' to turning back the boats,

If he didn't know, he would have denied the accusations, but he hasn't.
So, he is lying to the Australian people, just like Howard lied about the 'children overboard' debacle.

Maybe Labor did the same thing, but isn't it a bit convenient for anyone to find that out now? Surely our Indonesian or Journalist friends would have jumped on that long ago if it were true?

I can't stand lying pollies of any party who blatantly lie to their people.

Poirot,

Once again, you have only got it half right. There are a few exceptions where one is allowed to intercept and board a ship in international waters:

1 Where the ship appears to be illegally heading for one's own territory,
2 When the ship is in distress and,
3 When the ship is trafficking people (which dates back to the days when the British were trying to stop the slave trade)

So certainly condition 3 applied, and considering that the boat Looked in trouble and it had left from West Java (the furthest point in Indonesia from NZ and the closest to Xmas Island) the claims to be heading to NZ were somewhat dubious and so conditions 1 and 2 would also have been legitimate. All of which is why the case the activists brought against the Gov for intercepting and detaining the Indian asylum seekers was thrown out of court.

As for returning the asylum seekers to their original destination and nearest port of call, to foil the people smugglers, the activists can huff and puff, but don't have a leg to stand on.

The 'Usual Suspects' on the forum and rusted on Abbott supporters, me old sparing partner Shadow Minister included, who will claim to be a civil libertarian, have little or no regard for the fate that would await refugees return to Iran, a country legendary for its human rights abuse. In negating their international obligations the Abbott government would send these poor people to an unknown fate in Iran, along with a so called "no retribution" promise from the Iranian regime. These Abbott sycophants have the hide to call themselves civil libertarians!

http://www.iranhrdc.org/english/publications/reports/index.1.html?gclid=CjwKEAjwnpSsBRDH3pT2-7q55R4SJABRiNyT5Ek3x0RdMTPUafQ-0evRRHtTADgrBnBxGI041W2MKhoCGunw_wcB

Poirot, "But if the people smugglers were in fact in international waters and heading to New Zealand, these powers of detention would not be triggered, leaving Australia’s government in violation of its own maritime law"

It does not suit the apologists for illegal migrants and their international criminal gang travel agents, however the international expectation and agreement is that any naval vessel can and SHOULD intervene where the master of a ship may be acting unsafely or illegally. That applies to the safety of the vessel, crew and passengers, and other vessels.

Particular attention is paid to the port of departure and the flag of the vessel and nationality of its master.

It is NOT unusual for smaller vessels to be monitored and hailed by naval vessels - which we all respect and doff our flags in respect.

Some here might be aware that a naval vessel WILL intervene where suspected piracy is concerned and may even sink it.

I am not the only one to have posted this information and links before.

It is unlikely that Indonesia, Malaysia and other countries where people smugglers ply their trade are not aware of the economic migrant opportunists and assorted criminal low life who engage them and ensure the high profits that lazy criminals demand to continue their operations.

Indonesia and other countries have always had convenient loss of sight where foreign money is concerned and there is a chance to embarrass the 'white' countries they are prejudiced against. However their corrupt government officials would have an eye for business possibilities anyhow.

It is nothing short of amazing how the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster is unerringly unquestioning of and gives oxygen to, highly questionable and probably politically tainted anecdotal *bleep* from Indonesian and other Asian 'sources'. One wonders whose interests the ABC serves. Bring back independent Auntie, or sell this over-stuffed, redundant media outlet.

We have a new class on the forum 'the wig and gown brigade', who offer so called legal opinions on the doings of the Abbott government, naturally their legal opinions are nothing but codswallop at best, trying to defend the indefensible actions of Abbott and Co.
Fellas where do you pick up your legal outfits, Ludlows of London.

A gem: "their international criminal gang travel agents" Beach are these the same international criminal gang travel agents that the Abbott government has possibly paid thousands of dollars to? Just asking.