Incitement to hatred from a madman

"Poverty forced them seek a better life." They paid smugglers $80,000.


According to Centrelink Child Care Estimator, that family would be entitled about $4,680 per month. That does not include rent assistance and too many other benefits to research and list here.

You, the taxpayer foots the bill for economic refugees and the SBS who presented this beat-up. GC.

Last week a boat carrying economic refugees flipped just 50 metres off an Indonesian beach after setting off for Australia. 

Read more about this story: [Source] Andrew Bolt blog

Special delivery for Tony Burke

Image0055Dear Mr Tony,

please sir have this present for all you done make us people smugglers plenty money. It is make from old boats not burned by your navy and decorate by lovely refugee ladies.

We are plenty worry you have arse kicked in saturday election and new man Rabbit stop our good business that make rich.

Please Mr tony you be very alert with boat, it not good for water because big hole in arse make sinking happen. If your bed sink, call Australian Navy. I make joke like Mr Rudd!

If you not have place in your house for this present your Mr Morrison man give you plenty money for buyback plan. If new Rabbit boss no good you put family and plenty labor friends on bed-boat and come to my house. We make plenty rich doing more people smugglers business.

Your friends, 

Captain Ali-bin-bildin-lotsaboats.

C/- Ali's aussie-tours, Bilgewater Indonesia

Piddling into the wind

New MH2

Let’s buy all the boats in Indonesia

What a jolly good idea, they proudly thought. “Australian taxpayers would purchase leaking fishing boats from poor fishermen where intelligence identified they planned to sell them to people smugglers,” was announced with all the excitement of a first newborn.

Another stupid thought-bubble from Kevin Rudd, I thought with a smile. A final nail in the Labor coffin it would be. No, it was not Rudd’s gaff! This madness came from; Scott Morrison the Coalition’s Shadow Immigration Minister whom I thought had more sense. Where were you during John Howard’s gun buyback Scott?

This stratagem to buy old boats from Indonesian peasants will fail. In fact, it will be a political nightmare, as anyone who has been to Indonesia would know and two words cover it aptly—poverty and corruption. 

Jakarta is furious over Abbott’s buyback plan and has responded already with its customary, “get stuffed Australia” response. Mahfudz Siddiq, the head of Indonesia’s parliamentary commission for foreign affairs said, “The Coalition wants to make Indonesia look inferior because they just want to provide money and ask Indonesians to get the job done for the sake of their interests.”

Image18But Siddiq went further to press a strong diplomatic warning, “It’s an unfriendly idea coming from a candidate who wants to be Australian leader…This is really a crazy idea, unfriendly, derogatory and it shows lack of understanding in this matter.” Indonesia views us as jerks, with increasing good reason.

Poverty and corruption: Australia gives Indonesia aid, upwards of $2 billon with the many “add-ons.” Australia’s 12 largest bilateral aid recipients in Asia and the Pacific are: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, Vietnam, Philippines, Bangladesh, East Timor, Pakistan, Cambodia, Burma and Vanuatu.

Ironically, all (in bold) but Bangladesh featured on are within the top 85 of 180 “Most corrupt countries in the world.” That, of course, raises questions about how our tax money is being spent, rhetorical as that question may be. It's no accident that Bob Carr runs that department.

The Coalition pledged $420 million to stop people smuggling. That includes paying Indonesian villagers for information about smugglers and those who buy anything that might remain afloat for more than an hour at the dockside.  Ineptitude in this matter is astounding.

Scott Morrison: “We want to have a program that reaches out up to 100 villages across Indonesia.” According to Australian Government AusAID more than 120 million Indonesians live on less than $2 per day. They are poorer than church mice, smarter and more desperate.

To poor Indonesians the smell of Australian government money will prove more alluring than the stench of a rotting pig is to a starving blowfly. Such a wild concept will also be a lottery for criminals that will surely out-fox our functionaries – as they always do. Having witnessed firsthand the gun buyback as officials handed out fantasy sums for rubbish without question, I can only imagine the same rules being applied to boats—in a foreign country.

Government buybacks of whatever do not achieve the noble goals promised by their inventors. The John Howard gun buyback, for example, did collect certain firearms from civilian hands but failed to lower private ownership numbers overall. Half a billion dollars were blown via outrageous prices for junk, much of which was well beyond use.

But, to bribe local peasants living on $2 per day with financial reward from a foreign country to rat on their fellow villagers will likely lead to the most violent of reprisals. Don’t forget the corrupt coppers’ grab. Jakarta will be right to view this plan as a very dangerous foreign intervention to their sovereignty—serious stuff.

The immediate and to the point backlash from Indonesia must have the Coalition calling halt to this idiotic notion. And, to its Coalition creator should go dismissal for announcing the madness within days of an important election when bad moves could have cause loss of faith.

Labor gave a figure of some 750,000 boats that would have to be bought. Given that boats for coastal Indonesians are more common the cars that number is a gross underestimate. Also underestimated is Indonesian peasant ingenuity in league with an accommodating Australian bureaucrat.

The promise of instant riches will see every piece of flotsam resembling a boat being paraded for cash. Hulks rotting in the sand and in the jungles will be dragged to the water’s edge regardless of holes and worms. Those that won’t float will be buoyed from beneath by airtight, 20 litre plastic drums to create freeboard.

Others that sunk decades ago will be beached high on the sand and sold there. No boat will be tested in any way, nor will any engine, not that any will work. The cries of a family business of 200 years ended by the sale of what looks like a piece of driftwood will assure top dollar—no argument.

If Australia truly wanted to get serious about securing its borders, and send a message to both smugglers and Indonesia, it needs to get tough which is its absolute right.

Withdraw from the UNHCR either temporarily or permanently.

Place a moratorium on unauthorised entries until the backlog is settled.

Deduct full costs of every boat person processed from our foreign aid to Indonesia.

It’s time to address Australia’s needs, not those who take us for a ride and abuse us in the process.

Rudd’s PNG refugee deal facing collapse


Bryson Farnsworth, Brisbane

On Monday came the tragic news that another refugee boat had capsized about 200 km from Christmas Island drowning at least five although 106 survived due to the prompt action of Australian authorities.

The grim irony is that this latest disaster came on the last day of a conference in Indonesia on regional refugee policy attended by Foreign Minister, Bob Carr, and Immigration Minister, Tony Bourke. The Indonesian media was full of their message that refugees trying to reach Australia would only end up in Papua-New Guinea yet, demonstrably, this message was – and is – having no perceptible impact.

Bourke, who has previously said he has “intelligence” (apparently no irony intended) that the allegedly tough hard-line policy would see the boats stop, grudgingly admitted, “In the past few days, some of the smuggling operations have tried to put together a bit of a surge.”

The ABC reported that Bourke now “concedes that Australia’s PNG deal will not stop people getting on boats.”

Rudd’s PNG deal is unravelling in front of his eyes.

A few days ago, PNG Prime Minister, Peter O’Neill, said that there was no agreement with Australia to resettle genuine asylum seekers after processing on Manus Island and that many of these would end up in Australia.

This prompted a panic phone call from Rudd to O’Neill and the desperate assertion by Rudd that all was just fine and dandy and that the policy was set in concrete.

However, O’Neill has not withdrawn his statement that PNG would work with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees to engage with other countries willing to take part in resettling refugees. He added, “That includes Australia…”

O’Neill said that he believed that Australia had a refugee quota of about 20,000 and, “Under that process, they will get some …”

O’Neill is under increasing domestic political pressure over the deal with Rudd. The Opposition there has relaunched his legal challenge to have it declared unconstitutional and public anger is mounting. In any case, the deal has a life span of only one year which takes it safely past the September 7 election.

Meanwhile, an Australian High Court challenge on behalf of an Iranian asylum seeker has been launched with barrister Mark Robinson SC saying his removal to Manus Island was invalid.

Robinson laid out the basis for the challenge saying that the Immigration Minister had failed to take into account several factors when approving the deal.

“The Minister expressly said that he is not going to take into account issues relating to the domestic law of PNG or the international obligations of PNG. Now these are plainly relevant, and it is incredible that he can make a lawful decision without regard to those factors,” Robinson said.

Attorney-General Dreyfus has said the government believes the deal is perfectly OK and will be defended. Then again, his predecessor as AG, asserted that the “Malaysian solution” was simply wonderful until the High Court threw it out.

Australia’s peak legal body, the Law Council of Australia – a non-partisan body which weighs carefully in the balance any statement it makes – is very critical of the PNG deal.

Their president, Michael Colbran QC, said there were “a number of issues of concern stemming from the lack of clarity about the details of the system of processing claims in PNG and its conformity to Australia’s obligations under the applicable UN Convention.”

Mr Colbran said in its 2011 decision relating to the failed “Malaysian solution”, the Hiogh Court had said “an arrangement that doesn’t legally guarantee rights such as the right to work and education breached Australia’s obligation under the UN Convention and that it was not within the Minister’s power to transfer asylum seekers to Malaysia under the relevant Migration Act provision at that time.”

He added, “These rights do not currently appear to be guaranteed by the PNG agreement … and “… a real question remains regarding Australia’s obligation under the Refugee Convention …”

Colbran cited the recent report of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees which is monitoring Manus Island and which, he said, “highlighted shortcomings in the applicable legal framework” and that, “The Law Council is concerned that the PNG system may lack sufficient safeguards to ensure procedural fairness and access to justice.”

The UNHCR has been even more forthright. Its Regional Representative, Richard Towle, has said that Australia “could ultimately find itself obliged to accept refugees who had been initially settled in PNG under the deal.”

Towle believes that the PNG deal “could breach international law and (Australia’s) human rights obligations” and that the “deal could be tantamount to Australia deflecting its responsibilities under the Refugee Convention.”

While Rudd has refused to reintroduce the successful Howard Government strategy of turning back the boats when possible because it is supposed to be all just too much trouble, consider this statement from retired Vice Admiral Chris Ritchie, Chief of the Navy from 2002 to 2005.

While acknowledging that this policy was “hazardous and risky”, Ritchie added, “But nevertheless it’s a legitimate Navy operation. It’s something that navies have done over centuries. And, in that sense, if the government gives it a direction to do it, the Navy people will do it and they’ll do it well.”

We can only wonder why Rudd and his Ministers don’t, or can’t, trust the Navy to do the job it has done so well in the past.

Hidden agenda—or policy of evil?

New MH2

From Shakespeare’s Julius Cesar are these words by Mark Antony:

The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones…
Amen to that.

In the political sense, The evil that men do lives after them, equates to Kevin Rudd’s unprincipled foray upon our neighbours to the north, Manus Island, and Nauru the world’s smallest Republic. Ironically, Nauru is an island made of solid bird shit.

Only weeks ago the return of Rudd as PM forced him to face the fact that his dismantling of the Howard Pacific Solution to appease the Greens and other socialist idealists had become a disaster.

If Rudd was following the Julia Gillard compilation of asylum seeker policy drawn up during her days as shadow immigration minister, the goal is achieved as more than 50,000 have “rocked up” to our table of plenty since Labor came to power in 2007.

Image9However, Labor seems bereft of a single, original idea and so it remains with mass unauthorised arrivals seeking access to what is widely known in the smuggling trade as Australia’s invitation to a cornucopia of luxurious living forever, free.

To view the long-term results of illegal immigration Australia need only look to Europe, the UK in particular. It was the UK Labour Party that made political capital using lower, socio- economic immigrants intended specifically to alter the demographic and cultural pattern of Britain.

They buggered England for a purpose they kept secret, and their dishonourable template is doing likewise here in Australia.

The average Australian battler goes to bed each night believing the nation’s welfare is safe in the hands of our leaders. We need to believe our elected representatives will act in the country’s best interests and do what is right for their fellow Australians. We can’t allow ourselves to think they might cause great harm—all faith would be lost. But that has now happened.

Why is it after six years in power that Rudd now scrambles to address the border fiasco? The influx of more than 50,000 people is proof that the situation was allowed to fester. But was it the course of a well-scripted agenda? I believe it is!

Under the British Freedom of Information Act, a secret Labour immigration agenda hatched more than a decade ago was uncovered and it mirrors the Australian Labor Party’s policy on immigration and border control. In 13 years they flooded the UK with 3.2 million foreigners. That policy appears to have been lifted by Ms Gillard.

Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett, disclosed a document drawn up by a British Cabinet Office think-tank and a Home Office research unit. It stated unequivocally that Labour’s migration policy over a decade had been aimed at “social objectives” rather than economic ones and intended specifically to alter the demographic and cultural pattern of Britain.

The agenda also showed that Labour had orchestrated a deliberate open-door policy on immigration to boost multi-culturalism. It also noted that because of this policy, migrants and their descendants were inclined to vote Labour, some surveys found up to 80% would vote for labour.

The British government betrayed their voters by breaking the first rule of democracy: the electorate was never told it was voting for that radical agenda just as Australians will never be told why the unauthorised arrivals were ignored for so long.

How peculiar that Bob Carr recently said, “People are coming here, not now as a result of persecution, but because they’re economic refugees who have paid money to people smugglers.” Of course the do-gooders and hankie-wringers cried foul in their usual tradition of ignoring future social ramifications.

It seems that Carr was, or is not privy to his party’s plan for eternal employment. “There’ve been some boats where 100% of them have been people who are fleeing countries where they’re the majority ethnic and religious group, and their motivations is altogether economic,” Carr blurted in early June.

Several TV clips of late have featured boat people praising the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government, “they are good for us and we will vote for them,” is their practised mantra. But Labor’s clone of the UK agenda takes time to reach full advantage—four years in fact.

Contrary to popular lore, immigrants can’t vote immediately, it’s a four-year process to become eligible. The ALP’s early wave from 2008 will now vote; I can’t find numbers on how many but, for the 2016 elections a large percentage of the present 50,000 will be close to voting rights.

The evil in this trick is the number of family reunion members who will also be voters. Nobody seems to know what those multipliers might be. Once this is known, the numbers will be sufficient to change the outcome in many electorates across Australia. And, in a few years, will probably have numbers to seize a majority of Labor seats across the country for a bigger slice of the welfare pie, not to mention religious dominance.

Do you think the ALP thought this through using the same logic as their other failed policies?

And, what mess awaits the strugglers in Nauru and Manus when hope turns to despair? Who will give a stuff?

Rudd’s opportunism is …the evil that men do…

Toby’s Sunday Light


Toby’s Sunday Light is not so light today.

Having babysat UK’s little Prince George and taught him rudimentary oz-speak like “G’day sport”, “a schooner of Tooheys Old thanks Mate” and “stuff the tax office” Toby returned home via Italy where he was struck with déjà vu.

Toby reports:

The little Italian island of Lampedusa is 11 square miles. Its population is about 4,500 – usually.

Until the “refugees” arrive. 50,000 in one year – 2011.

And what they do in Lampedusa is a vision of what is going to happen, happening, in Europe, England, Ireland… and here in Australia.


image is not genuine

Enza Ferreri, writing in a blog, “The Gates of Vienna”, states, “There were many times when the number of newcomers was higher than that of the locals. On those occasions, when natives were outnumbered, there were tales of local women having to be accompanied everywhere to protect them from immigrants’ unwanted attention, sacked shops, apartment doors forced open, people returning home to find Tunisians sitting at the dining table eating and, after the intruders’ departure, some householders even discovering faeces inside saucepans.”

The harbours are blocked with “refugee” boats so that local fishermen often find themselves deprived of access to their livelihood. The reception centre was burned to the ground by a mob of disgruntled illegals – now that rings a bell – and residents keep their children indoors and barricade themselves in their houses during the night.

If it sounds familiar it could be because Oriana Fallaci’s described similar horrific spectacles in “The Rage and the Pride” her book written after 9/11. She described the public squares in Florence having become “refugee”camps reeking of urine and faeces. Or reminiscent of the disgusting messes that “refugees” made in London.

The Pope went to Lampedusa recently and mourned the “globalisation of indifference” to the plight of Third World migrants, describing the island as “the frontier of the desperate.”

It’s the frontier of the desperate, all right, but the desperate ones are the Italians, not these “refugees” who are happy to get on the Government teat and general benefits.

And there is “indifference”, too right, there is. The Holy Father was right there, but it is indifference to the position of the ordinary citizens, and to their betrayal, here, by Rudd, Gillard, and their toadies in Fairfax and the ABC

True, some of the people arriving in any country are “refugees” in the sense that they are persecuted Christians – Christians who are murdered daily in places like Egypt and Pakistan and the Sudan – but the swollen tide of newcomers are increasingly simply “welfare” refugees. To be fair, many are looking for employment and work, though you would have to doubt their chances without knowledge of English.

And as far as the Italians are concerned, these refugees are from Tunisia and Morocco and Libya. They are Muslim and they are being persecuted in a Muslim country? Lampedusans don’t laugh at a sick joke.

So the problem is complicated by the fact that any boat may contain genuine refugees fleeing in fear of their lives.

And who is the man to attack this problem at home?


Rudd is the problem.

Labor’s Refugee update

The interception of the latest boat carrying 67 passengers means that over 50,000 people have now arrived illegally by boat since Mr Rudd dismantled our border protection policies.

This milestone is a terrible indictment of Kevin Rudd’s failed policy.

It has cost over 1,000 lives.

50,032 people on 798 boats have arrived since Mr Rudd changed John Howard’s policies that stopped the boats.

Over 1,900 people have now arrived since Mr Rudd launched his so called ‘PNG solution’. 

It has also resulted in over $11 billion in Budget blowouts – money that should have been spent on hospitals, schools and roads.

It has damaged Australia’s international reputation and weakened our borders.

The Coalition has a clear, consistent plan to stop the boats. 

Mr Rudd is just all talk and has neither the will nor the competence to secure our borders.

The Coalition has a detailed plan for stronger borders which will:

  • Re-establish rigorous and expanded offshore processing for illegal arrivals;
  • Give orders to the Navy and Customs Service to turn back boats where safe to do so;
  • Re-introduce Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs) for asylum seekers found to be genuine refugees, and return them home when it is safe;
  • Deny those asylum seekers – who deliberately discard identification documentation – the benefit of the doubt when determining their refugee status;
  • Work with our neighbours to stop people smugglers and deter their customers from coming into the region; and
  • Guarantee places for offshore humanitarian visa applicants by denying permanent visas to illegal boat arrivals.

If elected, the Coalition will also initiate Operation Sovereign Borders, to be led by a senior military commander. Read more here

At this election there is a choice: between the Coalition’s proven plan that will stop the boats, or a continuation of Labor’s record of failure and misery.


Scott Morrison 

Shadow Minister for Immigration & Citizenship

They will come—long before it’s built!

New MH2

In his “wild erratic fancy” (Banjo) to stage a coup against the Coalition and steal policy, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has simply missed the boat with his PNG “instant cure” to the asylum seeker onslaught. Laughter from smugglers could be heard in distant East Timor—time to make hay, they think, with tens of thousands eager to sail!

Despite Kev’s groundless blather about “smashing the smugglers’ model”, boat arrivals have actually increased. A trivial matter no doubt in the great leader’s grand plan. However, one can only imagine Kev’s tantrums behind closed doors, or does he simply discount it as the failure of others?

Since the anointed one’s recent ascendancy to the throne, and at time of writing, 17 boats transporting some additional 1400 souls have become willing dependents on the vexed Aussie taxpayer. As I have written on prior occasions, people smugglers are several steps ahead of anyone of consequence in the Labor Party.

Poor-kevRudd’s sudden move on the boat people problem, the very fiasco caused by him five years before, is a carbon copy of John Howard’s tactical blow against One Nation of swipe-your-opponent’s-policies. It was effective then. and would work now except for the one great flaw — Rudd can’t implement policies — even rudimentary ones like pink batts.

Solving a problem, especially expensive ones like unauthorised arrivals by boat, and its associated costs demands common sense rather than the elevated thinking of Rudd and Gillard. Recall the failed High Court bid to defend the Malaysian asylum seeker swap deal? The small army of government silks and useless underlings were defeated by an unheralded, Melbourne solicitor with smarts.

According to the UNHCR there are 42.5 million displaced persons worldwide, near double Australia’s entire population. We can’t save the world but we are playing our part in accepting our quota. Were they not a rampant financial liability, and if they showed a willingness to assimilate rather than dominate we could take more of them and be pleased about it. But that’s a matter for another day.

The political flavour-of-the-month is turning the boats back. Something Mr Rudd promised to do during his Kevin07 run for PM. As I have also written previously, turning boats around will be hard. Smugglers now have a handbook detailing the rules of play. Rule one: “There are two types of assistance at sea. Escort, or rescue!”

If we think as a smuggler would; being towed back to Indonesia is bad for business—very bad. The average overloaded boat of late has box-office value of at least $500,000. Smugglers have got to think of a way around this – not hard when comparing a people smuggler with Rudd.

No captain smuggler will risk a tow cable being taken on board, or “escorted” anywhere lest they be tricked and towed into the arms of the Indonesian Navy where the consequences are too evil to document. Perhaps worse would be his passengers with their non-refundable tickets. If the Indonesians didn’t spill the skipper’s brains on his deck the passengers would. More incentive to outthink Rudd – and plenty of opportunity.

Rudd will ignore talk of irksome matters, like sinking and drowning at sea without trace or rescue. Neither will there be words cross his lips about detention centres wallowing in effluent, or being sucked dry by malarial mosquitoes with the attendant fever—no sir—not conducive to the popular lure of a lifetime of idleness on the house. Our house!

Rudd and Abbott have changed their minds about who will end up in Australia and who stands no chance. Like schoolboys chasing each other around the playground bickering over where married ones will go, and where single men under 25 will be put, and the children…and the pregnant ones, and what about the seriously handicapped, where do they go? Will they be lifelong Centrelink favourites?

Meanwhile, opposition in PNG mounts by the day as traditional landowners begin to understand the upheaval that awaits them. School classrooms must be moved for a service road. One group say they will cut the water supply. Another threatens to charge a toll to cross their land.

Mr Rudd has shown many times how he deals with obstacles—he attacks the problem with the national chequebook. Kevin believes money talks. The trouble is; it is our money and the only thing our money is going to say in PNG is, “goodbye suckers!”