[BritishShivans]

I'M SPLIT BETWEEN HAVING A BRAIN ANEURYSM OR VOLUNTARILY LOSING CONSCIOUSNESS 

Context for people lacking it: Recently, Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd had a televised debate. Needless to say, all Tony did was to avoid any and all questions as usual and repeat his catchphrase "STOP THE BOATZ" and mumble vaguely racist/misogynist statements. This picture accurately summarizes the context of these "statements".

I also found the (apparent) source or at least I found more of these: https://www.facebook.com/TheRealToneAbet?_fb

[That Man]

[An4ximandros]

Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?

[The E]

Context, I am missing it. Please provide context.

[Lorric]

Please don't post a title like that for something like this, I thought you were in some sort of trouble.

[NGTM-1R]

What is this and why should I care?

[Phantom Hoover]

it's some kind of australian political thing i guess

[BritishShivans]

What is this and why should I care?

I was terrified earlier because of how accurate this is to what Tony Abbott is like. If you made the comic real somehow, there'd be no difference other than the grammar/appearance. They'd be basically indistinguishable from each other.

it was also kind of mental diarrhea as well so eh

[Polpolion]

I still have no idea what the hell this is about.

[BritishShivans]

stopping the boats and communism apparently

[Aardwolf]

Something something Tony Abbott (something something Australia) something something hunt down and kill asylum-seekers something something.

How about you actually explain the issue instead of using a badly drawn comic with bad grammar?

[Beskargam]

Australian politics. Australia has seen an influx of refugees recently (in the last decade, maybe two?). Frequently they would arrive in boats.There has been a public backlash against refugees and immigrants in general in the country. The previous government policy had been tolerant towards immigrants seeking refugee status. The upcoming/current? policy is to ship any refugees arriving in boats to Papa New Guinea where they will be processed (kept out of the country?). This is from memory of an npr article I read, I'm not the most familiar with the topic. But that's the basics of the topic. Australia is divided on the issue and there are lots of calls of racism, and racial profiling, similar in the US to racism against Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, which in Australia is primarily ttargeted against Indians and I-can't-think-of-a-better-term-so-Oceanians.

Where is Dilmah? Raise the G symbol! He has been vocal about this issue before, and probably would have a much more detailed explanation than I've got, with personal insight.

e: Here is the link
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=203512425

tldr: Kevin Rudd (Australia's Prime Minister) has announced a policy (this was reported on the 15th of July) of settling all refugee seekers who arrive by boats on the islands of Papa New Guinea. The move has been condemned by human rights groups. Refugees most commonly come from Indonesia and Malaysia (replace Oceanians with these), also Iran apparently (Huh did not expect that). Others are Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Vietnam, Iraq, Bangladesh and Myanmar. The concern by human rights groups, moral obligations aside, Papa New Guinea is awash with violence and has constant human rights abuses. I don't know what Papa New Guinea has to say about this. The article says it's a tribal nation (according to google they have a government show this statement is slightly inaccurate/biased/misleading). Correction, Papa New Guinea's government seems down with this.

The term "detention" camp is being used, and I am wary. The word has yet to have any positive context to my limited knowledge.

As of this articles penning, the number of refugees arriving by boat in 2013 is 15,728. Last year the number was 17,202. Current population of Australia is 22.32 million, refugees arriving by boat comprise 0.0009% of the population for last year.

[Hobbie]

Oy.

I deliberately didn't watch the last night. We put on a Dara O'Briain show instead and laughed heartily at that because it's slightly better for comedy gold.

What a lot of Australians don't get is that our elections are not presidential elections. You're not voting for Abbott or Rudd, you're voting for the Coalition or Labor. If you do want to vote based on personality, then Abbott is a little befuddled whereas Rudd is a full-blown psycho hiding behind a thin veneer of slime. I don't care who's leading the Coalition, only that the Coalition ousts Backstabbers Incorporated.

Yeah, I really don't like the Labor Party, Kevin Rudd, or Julia Gillard.

[Black Wolf]

Australian politics. Australia has seen an influx of refugees recently (in the last decade, maybe two?). Frequently they would arrive in boats.There has been a public backlash against refugees and immigrants in general in the country. The previous government policy had been tolerant towards immigrants seeking refugee status. The upcoming/current? policy is to ship any refugees arriving in boats to Papa New Guinea where they will be processed (kept out of the country?). This is from memory of an npr article I read, I'm not the most familiar with the topic. But that's the basics of the topic. Australia is divided on the issue and there are lots of calls of racism, and racial profiling, similar in the US to racism against Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, which in Australia is primarily ttargeted against Indians and I-can't-think-of-a-better-term-so-Oceanians.

Where is Dilmah? Raise the G symbol! He has been vocal about this issue before, and probably would have a much more detailed explanation than I've got, with personal insight.

e: Here is the link
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=203512425

tldr: Kevin Rudd (Australia's Prime Minister) has announced a policy (this was reported on the 15th of July) of settling all refugee seekers who arrive by boats on the islands of Papa New Guinea. The move has been condemned by human rights groups. Refugees most commonly come from Indonesia and Malaysia (replace Oceanians with these), also Iran apparently (Huh did not expect that). Others are Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Vietnam, Iraq, Bangladesh and Myanmar. The concern by human rights groups, moral obligations aside, Papa New Guinea is awash with violence and has constant human rights abuses. I don't know what Papa New Guinea has to say about this. The article says it's a tribal nation (according to google they have a government show this statement is slightly inaccurate/biased/misleading). Correction, Papa New Guinea's government seems down with this.

The term "detention" camp is being used, and I am wary. The word has yet to have any positive context to my limited knowledge.

As of this articles penning, the number of refugees arriving by boat in 2013 is 15,728. Last year the number was 17,202. Current population of Australia is 22.32 million, refugees arriving by boat comprise 0.0009% of the population for last year.

This has a lot of the right words, but misses a lot of the key points. So, the issue, in as small a nutshell as I can do it.

First, Australia has an election in 4 weeks. One of the issues at this election (the second biggest, according to most polls) is what to do about the number of asylum seekers arriving by boat. The reasons for this are a little complicated and hard to summarise in a realistic timeframe, but basically, there are two narratives essentially playing out simultaneously.

The official, politically correct narrative is that these boats have to be stopped because they're basically floating death-traps. The process starts (95% of the time) in Indonesia. Contrary to what Beskagarm posted, AFAIK almost no refugees are coming from Indonesia and Malaysia as countries of origin - these are transit countries, where they are waiting to come to Australia, from other places - mostly Afghanistan and Iran. The options once they get to Indonesia are basically to wait in the refugee camps for the (often slow and lottery-like) official process to play out as their claims for refugee status are assessed and they're brought over by the government or pay thousands to people smugglers to get them into Australia without a visa. The Indo's who run them know that it's a one way trip (the boats are burnt when they arrive), so they use the ****tiest most clapped out fishing boats, which they fill way past capacity to maximise their profits. The result of this has been been deaths at sea - lots of them. Well over a thousand people have died in the last few years since the boat numbers really started increasing. It's a legitimate humanitarian problem, and there's very little the Australian government can do about it since Indonesia is all-but-openly corrupt, and the people smugglers are paid up and effectively ignored over there. All we can do is to try to discourage people from paying the money to get on the boats, hence the harsh policies.

The other narrative is that boat people are dirty foreigners who want to take over the country, spread Islamic law, rape our women and take our jerbs. This is basically the story that a lot of less tolerant people are telling themselves, and it's not being contradicted strongly enough by either side of politics (although, if you were assigning blame, it's been very carefully whipped up into a fever pitch by constant repetition and attack dog politics by Tony Abbot and the opposition). The fact is that Australia is, in a lot (though not all, thankfully) of the population, a weirdly racist country. Or, perhaps xenophobic would be more accurate - people don't like foreigners, especially foreigners with customs that aren't like ours.

In terms of the PNG policy, I'm afraid I  don't like it - PNG is a massive ****hole, basically (tribal is a very accurate term for the country, and they're even more xenophobic than Australia, by a long way), and sending people there is a really bad idea. But so is leaving things as they are and allowing people to make that trip - remember the thousand+ people dead from before? It's a mess of a problem really - and one that Australia can't really expect to solve easily - ultimately, the only people who can do anything about this are the Indonesian government, and they seem happy to just sit on their hands about it.

FWIW I'll be voting for Labor. Hobbie's right that we don;t technically have presidential elections, but given that the leaders, in large part shape the legislative agenda, a vote for the Coalition is effectively a vote for Abbot's kind of Australia. And that is not an Australia I want to risk living in. Abbot's a crazy Christian, for one thing, who has admitted that he lets his faith get in the way of his judgement, Besides, Labor will get us a proper NBN, a chance at getting gay marriage over the line and a sensible carbon trading sceme, instead of Abbot's "Let's use the hundred year old copper" pseudo-NBN, the Gays are goign to hell attitude and the "Let's give money to companies" "Direct Action" carbon plan.

Easy decision for me.

[Hobbie]

FWIW I'll be voting for Labor. Hobbie's right that we don;t technically have presidential elections, but given that the leaders, in large part shape the legislative agenda, a vote for the Coalition is effectively a vote for Abbot's kind of Australia. And that is not an Australia I want to risk living in. Abbot's a crazy Christian, for one thing, who has admitted that he lets his faith get in the way of his judgement, Besides, Labor will get us a proper NBN, a chance at getting gay marriage over the line and a sensible carbon trading sceme, instead of Abbot's "Let's use the hundred year old copper" pseudo-NBN, the Gays are goign to hell attitude and the "Let's give money to companies" "Direct Action" carbon plan.

Easy decision for me.

Labor also said they would get us into surplus and never ever introduce a carbon tax. Plus they've backflipped on the gay rights policy enough times that they could work at a circus. Insert joke about already working at a circus here.

I'm still leery of both sides and hoping that Malcolm Turnbull at some point comes back. Although my ultimate dream would be Peter Costello himself running the show. He may have been power hungry, but when given power he was capable of amazing things such as, I don't know, keeping us in surplus.

EDIT: Found this on the news: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/election-debate-kevin-rudd-accused-of-cheating-after-using-notes-during-debate/story-fnho52ip-1226695152852. Pretty funny, actually.

[Black Wolf]

Labor also said they would get us into surplus and never ever introduce a carbon tax. Plus they've backflipped on the gay rights policy enough times that they could work at a circus. Insert joke about already working at a circus here.

I'm still leery of both sides and hoping that Malcolm Turnbull at some point comes back. Although my ultimate dream would be Peter Costello himself running the show. He may have been power hungry, but when given power he was capable of amazing things such as, I don't know, keeping us in surplus.

Really? Wow. OK. Malcolm Turnbull I get, but Peter Costello? Howard and Costello kept Australia in surplus, yes, but they didn't have the GFC to deal with. They also had a speeding up mining and investment boom, rather than the slowing down one we have now. Plus they generated a lot of the middle class welfare that is now dragging the bottom line down.

I'm down with the Carbon tax, so that doesn't bother me. And the whole idea of political backflips always being a problem... I like the idea that my elected leaders can change their minds if a compelling enough case is made. What Labor have done hasn't been fantastic, by any stretch, but they've made good policy and good government in minority, and I'd be happy to see that continue another three years - although preferably not in minority.

[Hobbie]

Yeah, at least back then anyway. Admittedly I'm a bit out of touch so I will concede there. But yeah, in terms of leadership, Abbott's not quite right. It's unfortunately a case of the leader bringing a party down. Turnbull has an uncharacteristic viewpoint for a politician, namely, it's a job and you can't take it personally. Taking it personally is Australian politics' biggest problem right now.

At least Pauline Hanson isn't running anymore...

[Veers]

Yea, it's a mess of an election this year.

I'll more than likely be voting Shooters & Fishers, but on a two-party preferred base?, Libs. As much as they are not telling us anything, at least they have a track record and a more stable party (so it appears), Labor is backflipping and still ripping itself apart but since Rudd came back, that appears to have slowed slightly.

:/ Kinda a lose/lose situation regardless what happens really. Labor has the NBN (which I'm all for, but still p*ssed I'll never get it) but they'll never stop the boats, won't happen with a Labor government. While the Libs want to ditch the NBN, which will hurt our infrastructure long term, but more than likely stop the boats and bring the budget back to surplus.

I still think it's a lose/lose situation this year. We're going to lose out no matter which party we vote for.

(Just don't vote Green, hypocritical idiots. Worse than Labor has been)

[MP-Ryan]

Hey Black Wolf, didn't Australia used to have a detention facility for asylum seekers off the coast that was on Australian territory, or has it always been PNG?

Also, count your blessings that your asylum system is at least seeing refugees from legitimate refugee countries of origin.  Until very recently, Canada had a massive problem with Mexican and Roma peoples.  I say problem not because I have an issue with refugees - far from it.  I'd prefer to see us take in more legitimate refugees.  The problem with the Roma and a number of the Mexicans is that heir acceptable rate was under 25% - meaning over 75% of the claimants couldn't substantiate the claim.  Meanwhile (when I worked at the CBSA), I met one Roma family being deported that had their refugee claim fail, and then managed to stay in-country for NINE ****ING YEARS before they were finally deported.

It's unfortunate that refugee systems in many democracies seem to suck at getting the legitimate refugees into the country safely and keeping the illegitimate ones the hell out.

[niffiwan]

Hey Black Wolf, didn't Australia used to have a detention facility for asylum seekers off the coast that was on Australian territory, or has it always been PNG?

That was on Christmas Island, not PNG.  I think there was some weird past policy where Christmas Island was declared to not be official Australian territory so that asylum seekers didn't automatically receive certain refugee rights from setting foot on Australian territory.

Ah yes, here it is:

The former Howard Government later secured the passage of legislation through the Australian Parliament that excised Christmas Island from Australia's migration zone, meaning that asylum seekers arriving on Christmas Island could not automatically apply to the Australian government for refugee status. This allowed the Royal Australian Navy to relocate them to other countries (Papua New Guinea's Manus Island and Nauru) as part of the so-called Pacific Solution.

(and yeah, I'm not BW, but I figure he won't mind)


edit:

:/ Kinda a lose/lose situation regardless what happens really.

This, 1000 times over.

I'm lucky enough to be in a stage 2 NBN area, I'm just hoping the incompetent twits can actually install it prior to the election, we've been waiting 6 weeks (without any updates despite repeated calls) for them to fix a collapsed conduit from the pit to our house.  It's pretty bad when you're getting better service from Telstra than NBN Co & their army of subcontractors.