Gough Suppressant posted:

You've heard of animals chewing off a leg to escape Fruity's posting? There's an animal kind of trick. A human would remain in the thread, endure the posts, submitting reports that he might get Fruity banned and remove a threat to his kind.

Fruity Gordo posted:

You can troll with this, or you can troll with that.

Gough Suppressant posted:

I will face Fruity. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.

quote:

Asylum seeker mothers on Christmas Island attempt suicide in bid to help children
July 8, 2014 - 6:59PM
Sarah Whyte
Immigration correspondent


A dozen mothers have reportedly tried to kill themselves on Christmas Island after deciding their children would have more chance of making it to Australia without them.

Fairfax Media has spoken with three independent sources who have confirmed the women tried to end their lives, saying their children would be better off in life if they were dead.

"Their thinking is that if the babies have been born in Australia, they cannot be sent anywhere else, including Manus Island or Nauru," the president of the Christmas Island Shire Council, Gordon Thompson, said.

"It's a shocking conclusion to come to, but that's the state of helplessness in the centre at the moment."

The mothers became inconsolable when told this week that they would be sent to Nauru and Manus Island, saying they would rather die, lawyers told Fairfax Media.

Jacob Varghese, a principal at Maurice Blackburn Lawyers who is representing 72 asylum seeker babies, said the mothers had become extremely distressed when they were told by immigration officials that they would never be resettled in Australia because they had arrived after July 19, 2013.

People who arrived after this date will not be settled in Australia, as enacted by former Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd.

"We are gravely concerned about the welfare of the families on Christmas Island," Mr Varghese said.

"We have heard from our clients there that in the last day several women have attempted suicide or harmed themselves. They are in a state of utter despair. They are concerned about the health of their children."

Mr Varghese said that his clients, many of whom have newborn babies, feel like they are in a "living hell". One woman tried to hang herself, while others starting cutting themselves with glass, he said.

"Keeping children and families on Christmas Island is monstrous," he said.

"It is bad enough that we keep children imprisoned. But there is no sensible reason that families cannot be detained on the mainland where they would have access to the medical and welfare services they require."

According to section 4AA of the Migration Act, children should only be detained as a measure of last resort.

Many of the mothers and their children have been held on the island for nearly 12 months, Mr Varghese said.

Mr Thompson confirmed there had been women attempting suicide in the detention centre.

"They are saying, 'the babies have better chance at life if I am dead'," he said.

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said: “It is longstanding government practice not to confirm or comment on reports of individual acts of self-harm.

It comes as figures show numbers in offshore detention centres have risen sharply with asylum seeker children more likely to be in detention camps than adults.

Figures from the Refugee Council of Australia show nearly a quarter of children (23 per cent of 4331) in Australia's immigration detention system are in detention centres, including 208 children in the Nauru centre.

This is in contrast to 18 per cent of adults being held in detention centres.

Figures also show many more asylum seekers are living in the community on bridging visas than in detention centres.

"The use of mandatory detention as a deterrent to people arriving by boat to seek asylum is one of the most unsuccessful of all Australian government policies,'' said refugee council chief executive, Paul Power.

Lifeline: 13 11 14

Mensline: 1300 78 99 78

Kids helpline: 1800 55 1800

SadisTech posted:

Senor Tron posted:

In response, Abbott has said the government won't be blackmailed.

Seriously.

Mr Abbott, go blackmail yourself.

quote:

Tony Abbott has given a strong response to the reports, though not in the way you might think. The prime minister says: "if true, it is a "harrowing tale" but then says he will not have:

quote:

a policy driven by people who are attempting to hold us over a moral barrel.

Abbott was asked by interviewer Karl Stefanovic: "as a father I'm sure you have great sympathy with these people. If this story turns out to be true, mothers trying to take their own lives in order for their children to stay in this country, it takes it to a whole new level".

quote:

I say if it's true Karl and I haven't seen the reports and look, the fact is the people that are on Nauru, they're being clothed, housed, fed, and above all else, they are safe, they are not going to be subjected to any persecution in Nauru.

Now I don't believe people ought to be able to say to us unless you accept me as a permanent resident, I am going to commit self harm.

Now really and truly, no Australian government should be subjected to the spectacle of people saying, unless you accept us I am going to commit self harm.

And I don's believe any Australian, any thinking Australian would want us to capitulate to moral blackmail.

The other part of this story is revealed by the government in The Australian this morning. The paper's splash says the Coalition had "no intention of sending the 153 asylum seekers at the centre of the High Court challenge back to Sri Lanka" anyway. So what is all the fuss about? There is no minister quoted in the story.

Fruity Gordo posted:

Fat boy skim read.

quote:

Love triangle woman distressed over stabbing
July 9, 2014 - 7:48AM
Emma Partridge and Rachel Olding


The lover of a man charged with fatally stabbing her ex-husband inside a busy shopping mall said her partner was "really good and nice" and she could not understand what had happened.

Kazem Mohammadi Payam, 35, was charged with murder after he allegedly stabbed Nabil Naser, 40, to death in front of horrified workers, shoppers and children inside Westfield Parramatta on Monday morning.

Mr Payam's lawyer said after he was formally refused bail in Parramatta Local Court on Tuesday that he could defend the charges.

His partner sat crying in her Yagoona home on Tuesday and struggled to explain how the love triangle turned deadly.

"Kazem is really nice. Really, I want to help him. He's really good," she said. "I don't know what's happened."

The woman said Mr Naser was her ex-husband.

She said she met Mr Payam, originally from Iran, in 2011 after she separated from Mr Naser in 2010.

Mr Payam came to Australia as an "illegal maritime arrival" and was granted a permanent protection visa in 2010, a spokesman for Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said.

"Yesterday he go to shopping ... I don't know why."

She clutched tissues and turned up the volume on her television in the hope of learning any more news about the attack, which occurred just outside the cosmetic section of Myer.

"I'm waiting for my partner's news," she said.

adamantium|wang posted:

Murdoch article excerpt:

quote:

The number of voters who think Australia is too soft on asylum seekers is now at its lowest level since 2010, with 18% of voters saying we’re too soft, compared to 28% in March and 60% in July last year. The number of voters who say the government’s approach is about right is at its highest ever, 36%, while the number of people saying Australia is too harsh is also at a record high — 27%, compared to 25% in March and 12% in July last year. This is the first time more voters believe the government is too harsh than too soft — although nearly a fifth of voters continue to want even more draconian measures adopted against asylum seekers.

adamantium|wang posted:

Murdoch article excerpt:

adamantium|wang posted:

Murdoch article excerpt:

Anemone Thief posted:

oh for gently caress's sake

nevermind the bogans that stab people all the time, let's turn all the boats back

Sanguine posted:

adamantium|wang posted:

Murdoch article excerpt:

Bifauxnen posted:

WHITEY WENT WACKO

GoldStandardConure posted:

What the gently caress Endman who bought you that?

Reading the reports about whats going on with the Tamils possibly being returned to Sri Lanka today in my office had me actually crying today. Ive had a lovely week or so at work and just couldn't take it. And I don't know what had me feeling worse: that this is happening, or knowing that all the people I work with (and probably half my family too) wouldn't give a poo poo about it.

ROFLBOT posted:

This is basically what Bill Shorten said this morning when asked if recent events will cause a rethink of Labor asylum seeker policy

"no, we believe in doing exactly the same as the government but its all Tony Abbott's fault coz he is in charge"

Jonah Galtberg posted:

Posting from my phone, someone post the Guardian article about Bob Carr's latest bullshit re: the 'urban mythology' of asylum seeker mistreatment

Mithranderp posted:

Damnit, I feel inadequate because I don't even have an avatar, let alone pissing off someone enough for them to give me one someone come argue with me about something.

quote:

IN the current debate on university reform, “Americanisation” has been used as a pejorative term. Yet, by any measure, the American university system is pre-eminent in the world.


It has the lion’s share of the world’s finest universities and Nobel prize-winning scholars, it is the destination of choice for international students the world over, and the model to which other nations adapt. Why shouldn’t Australia try and learn from it too?


If only closed minds came with closed mouths. We read in the media that American college fees cost a fortune. But the majority of Americans attend public universities, where fees in 2012 averaged $US8240 ($8740), or community colleges, where fees averaged $2960.


To be sure, some of the better private universities in the US advertise prices of more than $40,000 a year for tuition. At the tiny Carleton College amid the vast Minnesota cornfields, fees are $46,167 plus board. But in a free market, there is price competition, and in the US no one much pays the “sticker price”.


At Carleton there is a needs-blind admission policy: the college meets 100 per cent of the needs of all admitted students, as demonstrated in a family financial assessment. More than 50 per cent of the students receive scholarships or financial aid, which average $31,000 and Carleton is top in the US for winning national merit scholarships.


In addition, 80 per cent of the students are given paying jobs on campus. In other words, even at this highly selective and remarkably successful college, most students leave with little more than the typical Australian HECS debt.


We are told that American graduates are desperate slaves to massive college debts. But two-thirds of US students receive scholarships, tuition discounts or financial aid, and less than 7 per cent leave with a debt of more than $50,000.


Many leave university with debts of less than $10,000; in 2012 the average college graduate debt was $28,000, not far from Australian levels. In fact the real problem in the US is with dropouts, those who leave before they graduate and thus must take lower-paid jobs in which they struggle to afford repayment of their debts: it is they who suffer hardship and default on their loans in large numbers. Could this happen in Australia? Not likely — thanks to the HECS income threshold principle, the salary of over $50,000 below which no one pays anything back, this problem is deftly sidestepped here.


But in the public debate, deregulation has become confused with the budget cuts and the increased fees which are their con­sequence. To be sure, the commonwealth cuts are very substantial: at the core a 20 per cent cut in the per-student subsidy, and overall about $1.9 billion over the next three years. I had not taken the Liberals as admirers of the finances of former Soviet states, so at a time when Australia’s record for public spending on tertiary education is less than Estonia’s and about equal with that of Slovakia, this is indeed grim news.


Undoubtedly, cuts would have been inevitable whichever government was in power: the $1.9bn of this year’s Liberal budget is less than the $2.3bn “efficiency dividend” of the previous Labor government.


Deregulation is the means by which universities will deal with the cuts. It is now supported by most of the university peak bodies, and disallowing it while there are drastic cuts in the budget would be a disaster: it would add to the current slow starvation of our universities, and would result in a dire fiscal famine.


Some statements from incoming senators in recent days can only have alarmed those in universities. There are those who would oppose deregulation, leaving universities without the flexibility they need to address their present stretched finances, let alone cope with the coming cuts.


There are some who would push the legislation off to committees and prolong the debate into early 2015: an act that would do significant damage to all universities, who are obligated to announce their 2016 fees a year ahead. What we need is for the legislation to be settled swiftly, so the present uncertainty can be swept away.


The Pyne reforms seek to let learning loose. We will see emerging a feast of imagination from university leaders about institutional differences and new college possibilities. None of this will happen quickly: a deregulated higher educational landscape will be the work of a generation. But it offers our universities the hope of a great creative era ahead: participation is higher than ever and will improve even more, the opportunities for global reach are exceptional, the ways of improving teaching through new technology and innovative delivery are exciting, and the public’s thirst for new knowledge and discovery — to vanquish disease and pursue economic growth and prosperity — has never been greater.


Warren Bebbington is vice-chancellor of the University of Adelaide. This is an edited version of a speech delivered to the Sydney Institute last night.

Bifauxnen posted:

Why are you so worried about these imprisoned kids, huh? What are you, some kind of do-gooder? Listen, these people are probably all terrorists and it really scares me, so why are you confusing me with all these suggestions that not letting them in might be kind of bad?!

Mithranderp posted:

This is the part where I get to call you a shitlord, right?

Also, I am weirded out by the fact that "do-gooder" has now become a pejorative according to some people. Yeah, how dare I want our country to do the right thing.

e: all this being said, I'm very deserving of the stupid newbie avatar

Amethyst posted:

Lol at the phrase "attempting to hold us over a moral barrel"

Heh, your "morals" are of no concern to Aussies! I see through your tricks.