War in Afghanistan

Home
Membership
Blog
War in Afghanistan

03 Nov

War in Afghanistan

03, Nov, 2011 (2:01 PM)
The deaths of three Australian soldiers and the wounding of seven others last week in Afghanistan has left the government scrambling to retain public support for the decade-long war.

Despite the tragic loss of life, Prime Minister Julia Gillard says Australia remains committed to the war in Afghanistan.

This week France joined the UK, Canada and Belgium in announcing plans to withdraw troops.

In June this year the US announced its plans to withdraw 33,000 soldiers by the end of 2012.

The Greens are calling for a complete withdrawal of Australian troops.

Is it time Australia pulled out of the war in Afghanistan?

Does the death of Osama bin Laden change the reasons for our involvement?

Disclaimer: The views expressed in these blogs are not necessarily those of National Seniors Australia. This blog is moderated and any content deemed inappropriate by the administrator will be removed, including comments that are offensive or discriminatory; libellous or defamatory; breach copyright, unless we have the owner’s permission to use it; or contain personal or commercially confidential material. Personal attacks will be deleted by the moderator. The use of this blog to broadcast overtly party-political messages is also prohibited. The moderator’s decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into. Any personal details shared here are public and can be found on internet searches.

This blog is now closed.

Comments (223)

National Seniors - 10, November, 2011 (13:09)

John O'Grady- Thank you for your supportive comments about the blog. We aim to continue providing interesting topics for our members to engage in.
ETS - 10, November, 2011 (12:00)

A very good and relevant comment Sue. I will also be remembering the great sacrifices made by so many people over the years, as well as our people currently serving in conflicts.

Arthur, I have never suspected you of being Green, not since the time you complained about not being allowed to burn rubbish in your back yard anymore. I doubt there is any interest in any further response to your request.
Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (11:44)

Well said, Sue.

I will certainly remember tomorrow at 11 am! Lest we forget!
Sue Do-Nim - 10, November, 2011 (11:41)

Maybe we’ve all strayed somewhat from the topic of this blog....War in Afghanistan.
It doesn’t matter your political persuasion or whether you agree or disagree with our involvement in this war, tomorrow at 11o’clock on 11.11.11 surely we must pause and reflect on the sacrifices made by the brave members of our military over such a long period of time.
None have died in vain and we must remember them and their families always.
Arthur Mac - 10, November, 2011 (11:10)

ETS, you say you don't agree with the Greens all the time. I disagree with you often and I am not a greenie. As far as I know you have never criticised the greenies. You are rusted onto them. Tell us when you have ever disagreed with the greens.
Laurakeet - 10, November, 2011 (10:56)

I also slept well last night,despite a storm in the early hours. Thanks ETS and Sue for explaining that word. I doubt I will use it very much but I have it there now in the back of my mind for future reference.

I just read an article on the ABC website that is one of the best bits of news in recent times. It is a few paragraphs about a possible breakthrough in treatment for Parkinson's Disease through stem cell research. It doesn't build up hopes too much because there is so much work still to be done, but it is a much needed positive against so much of the negativity in the world today.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-10/parkinsons-stem-cell-breakthrough/3656630
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (10:55)

One last blast of energy from my sleep deprived, kakitonic brain before I take a friend out for a birthday lunch. Shame I will miss most of crazy Thursday.

I too love the new word. It is so versatile! I hope our next topic gives us much opportunity to use it in its many varied ways. Meanwhile, I will practise on my family and really impress them.

Bye all, until next topic.
ETS - 10, November, 2011 (9:54)

I must be the only person to sleep well last night. It was far from a kakistocratic night for me. I’ll use that word for the rest of the week. Thanks WEG for sharing it with us.

Well Sue Do-Nim (clever pseudonym), the number of comments has built substantially over the past couple of days. Don’t know if we will reach last week’s 255 entries, but curtseying to the Queen was an important topic. In any case, you never know where Crazy Thursday will go before it all vanishes into cyberspace.

Kay, thank you for that nice comment and the fondness is mutual. Can’t help being Green, it’s just the way I am. I don’t agree with everything the Greens do but they are closer to my worldview than the other parties.

Lorikeet, I look forward to reading what you learn about Australia and the world today. Will you get it from googling or from the DLP? :)
Helen - 10, November, 2011 (9:12)

I wish MY only job was to keep up with the world events.
I am glad my brain is wired to to take it all in as I work.
I only get "windows of time" to pop in from time to time too to have a look.
Those who can blog for 98% of their life, I am not sure if they are lucky or not.

The blog is great and I have a fondess for my new friends (but there are other things).

Must be off to deal with some of them. Must be the last for this blog (before it is wiped)...
Lorikeet - 10, November, 2011 (7:43)

A rise in the GST will greatly affect the poor, and those who would not usually have to pay tax through the Australian Taxation Office.

These days all pensioners pay indirect taxes (such as GST) regardless of their income level.

I am hellishly busy at the moment, trying to learn what is happening in our own country and in other parts of the world.

I hope to get back to read WEG's latest link later in the day.

Have a nice day.
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (7:40)

Sounds kakistrophic down your way Helen.
Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (7:34)

Robyn:

Yes, I sometimes have one of those sleepless nights!

I like you too, Robyn, even though you are green and I am blue (well, most of the time I'm blue). But I am not the most predictable blue - I am very liberal on social matters - especially as I am not religious in any way! I just like my finances to be blue!

As for the laptops - who knows? Anybody out there with some actual facts on the matter?
Helen - 10, November, 2011 (7:27)

What a busy night you all had! I even learnt a new word this morning too - Gosh!! AND "Lorikeet" was missing in action - Gosh, gosh!!

Horrible day here today and the sky is about to fall in (it has to be a Political ploy) or could it be.....a message from above?.....

Catch up on the next topic - cheers...
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (7:06)

Sorry Kay. I should have said "not my colour " rather than "wrong colour".
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (6:53)

Good morning Kay.
Yes I had a great 2 hours sleep last night and was going balmy with boredom until Sue came on to talk to me. Dear sweet Sue! I wonder if there is a blog for insomniacs?

Granted, Howard and Costello gave us a surplus, but at a cost. It can't be denied. I feel pretty sure the kids got their laptops, but no, I can't prove it. Maybe someone else can.

By the way, I really like you even though you're the wrong colour.
Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (6:20)

Sue, Robyn:

Gosh - were you both up worrying about the near-miss asteroid? Loved the early morning banter!

WEG: Good on you! Spiced things up with a new word that I, for one, had never heard before!

ETS: Thanks for the education! A 'words' man - pity you are such a Greenie - I think I'd really like you! In fact I do like you and I do enjoy your contributions - always.

Robyn: Messrs Howard and Costello, though not perfect, did give us that wonderful surplus that Labor relied upon to cushion us through the GFC, and have continued to plunder ever since! Plus, for us self-funded retirees - Mr Costello is our hero! Rudd's laptop promise - I thought they had never been provided? But I can stand to be corrected if you have evidence to support your comment.
WEG - 10, November, 2011 (6:01)

An article in The Australian this morning on Afghanistan by Greg Sheridan, Foreign Editor.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/stop-funding-pakistan-while-it-pays-to-kill-diggers/story-e6frg76f-1226190608369
WEG - 10, November, 2011 (5:46)

"kakistocracy" is a very useful, colourful, and descriptive word one uses when the blog content is waning.
It refreshes the debate somewhat, just before it disappears into the ether.
Does this help?
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (4:30)

Oh but Dear Sweet Sue, you are ignoring all that I did have to say about the kaki... Howard Govt.

One nice thing about ageing is not caring what others think! I'm just happy to have enough words left in my memory to still make a modicum of sense.

Are you having a bad night too?
Sue Do-Nim - 10, November, 2011 (4:07)

Dear Sweet Robyn:
Someone uses a word that you aren’t familiar with, in the correct context, on the matter at hand and you deem them a culprit and a showoff .
Wouldn’t it have been more beneficial to your argument to debate the subject rather than to publicly display your lack of vocabulary?
Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (2:22)

Don't blame WEG for this cacky cocky word - "kakistocracy" - Sue is the real culprit.
Thanks for enlightening us ETS. Always good to have a new word to show off :)

Sue:

The kakistocratic Howard Government did not fund our public hospitals and public schools well with the taxes they collected. They did fund our private schools well, which I think was kakistocratic. The states may run the education and health departments but much funding is directed by the federal government. My local hospital has received some excellent funding from the Gillard govt and all local schools appreciated funding through the schools program. The Rudd govt provided laptops for students. What did the Howard govt ever do? Tony Abbott was a woeful Minister for Health - in fact, I think he was kakistocratic!
Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (22:08)

Laurakeet:
A kakistocracy is a term that was used to describe the more unsavoury governments that were formed usually in the deep south of the USA.
The governments were /are run by the least qualified and unprincipled members of the community.
Ineptitude, crony-ism, corruption and mis-management flourished.
You get the drift?
ETS - 9, November, 2011 (22:05)

The first example we know of is dated 1829, in a book called The Misfortunes of Elphin, written by the English satirical writer Thomas Love Peacock. His sarcasm is ponderous and his language obscure:
They were utterly destitute of the blessings of those “schools for all,” the house of correction, and the treadmill, wherein the autochthonal justice of our agrestic kakistocracy now castigates the heinous sins which were then committed with impunity, of treading on old foot-paths, picking up dead wood, and moving on the face of the earth within sound of the whirr of a partridge.
Autochthonal refers to the indigenous people of a country (from Greek words that mean “sprung from the earth”); Agrestic has the sense of “relating to the country” (Latin ager, a field). Peacock meant by agrestic kakistocracy the English landed squirarchy who kept their tenants in line by severe punishments for offences such as poaching.
The word is Greek, from kakistos, the worst.
ETS - 9, November, 2011 (22:05)

Laurakeet, it is a new term to me also but please allow me to answer. I googled the word as one of our other bloggers often does to cure ignorance. I can now show off my new-found knowledge with you and appear to be awfully clever. Kakistocracy is government of a state by its most unprincipled or least qualified or worst citizens. It is clearly a cynical term and the use of the word in the context of Australian governments is an opinion, not a fact.

159 words exactly to follow from the internet.
Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (21:50)

WEG, kakistocratic? I haven't come across this term before. Would you explain the meaning please?
Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (21:43)

Sue, you seem too dismissive of the mining super profits tax. It is not the whole answer but is clearly a step in the right direction of ensuring the community as well as shareholders benefits from super profits.

The mining industry was clearly very effective in having the tax watered down, apparently with the support of many people who now complain about the non-responsiveness of other well heeled industries to the needs of the community.

It does not discourage investment, but is one element of the mining industry business framework. If the resource is good enough the investment will be made.
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (21:34)

All good facts Sue.
It's amazing how some people attempt to rewrite history.
Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (20:57)

Laurakeet:
Most countries that have VAT/GST have a rate between 15-20%. Some over 25%!
N.Z. was merely an example.
Yes the states were supposed to eliminate a whole raft of taxes ,most reneged. This has more to do with the kakistocratic nature of the state governments involved than any reflection on the ability of the GST to provide a continuous income stream.
As state Labor governments drop like flies, with Queensland soon to join the list, chances of proper economic management increase.
A super profits mining tax is short sighted and discourages re-investment .Miners dig a hole extract the resource, pay a tax and disappear.

Robyn:
How did Howard starve the states of taxes? ALL GST monies are distributed back to the states. As for “salting taxes away” ,are you referring to the Future Fund or perhaps to the surpluses left by Costello, for the present embarrassing rabble to annihilate .
Robyn, education and health are STATE issues.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (19:33)

Agree with you Bob B.
Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (19:27)

Robyn

I think your right but I'm not happy with the current approach. All minerals etc mined need to be included. Taxing only coal and iron ore is wimpish.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (19:23)

Sue Do-Nim:

Concur entirely with Laurakeet's response.
Raising GST and decreasing income tax would not be good for those on fixed and low incomes.
Everyone wants better roads, transport , hospitals etc and perhaps we would have better if the previous Howard govt had not starved the states of funds and salted our taxes away to the degree that they did. It was that government that allowed infrastructure, health and education to become run down in this country.

Taxing the mining companies more is the way to go and hopefully that will be our present government's next agenda.
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (19:08)

Carbon Tax (CT) replaces any ‘ill conceived’ increases in GST. No political party in Aust will raise this above 10%

Forget NZ – they’re too small to compare with Aust - less than 4 million people and a different political dynamic.

GST is too expensive to manage at the micro level - small business, contractors etc.

CT is a better tax to administer at the collection level as it goes after a small 500 – 750 ‘so called polluters’ and taxes eletricty.

They’ll pass it onto you & me. So when we complain about our electricity prices going (for example), say another 50% on our already 70%, we can’t blame the Government.

Very simple process, without complicating it with the more complex carbon trading process
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (19:04)

Bob B - your point is noted.
Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (18:57)

WEG

We also have a duty of care to our soldiers even in a war zone . With this deplorable newly introduced situation where the local army cannot be trusted and where they are always in our midst, what do you suggest we do at reasonable cost to provide that duty of care.
Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (18:18)

Wasn't the GST supposed to replace a range of state taxes and duties? Don't think that ever happened. The wholesale sales tax was the main tax to go.

Raise the GST, lower income tax? Can't see that happening either. Maybe the mining super profits tax should be higher and more extensive than currently planned, but don't want to upset big mining, do we, so don't count on that changing.

Finally, what is so great about being in line with New Zealand? Surely we would need a better reason than that, or Bondi would be a ghost town.
Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (17:53)

Robyn 17:09.
I’m not implying I’m stating categorically that I would welcome an increase in GST.
Bring us inline with New Zealand for example which has just lifted its rate to 15% ( AND theirs includes food). Their income tax rates have been lowered to compensate.
Don’t you want better roads ,hospitals ,age care, more police, teachers etc.
People relying on government benefits and low income earners would have to be awarded increases and the states would have to do away with some of their taxes which stifle business growth…Land tax and payroll tax for example.
Robyn, don’t expect the GST to remain at this unsustainable rate for much longer and don’t fear an increase.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (17:09)

Sue Do-Nim: Yes.

Are you implying that you would not care if the current Government increased GST?
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (16:50)

I thought Ralph’s comment / sentiment re our troops was fine (maybe the ‘get real’ to ETS was a bit provocative). I have a young nephew on his second deployment who has no hesitation in going to Afghanistan. As he said to me, that’s what I’m trained for. We need a defence force with this courage, to go when and where they’re instructed.
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (16:02)

Ralfe, with all due respect (it's not our war!...)
My own son was back & forth for a couple of years as a "Techy" with the A/F. He was very much at risk because he was where all the equipment was, not to mention always being in the air in the fighting zones. He still never tells us where or what as it could be a danger if we had "loose lips" to the others over there. We heard nothing & he only told us this info lately without going into too much detail. All we knew was that he would be away & that was often for quite a while.

We have helped enough, it is now time to go...
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (15:05)

I saw a Doco where an Afghan mother of a just 15y/o boy wanted to fight so badly that his mother locked him in his room. He wouldn't eat etc so she let him out and he joined the soldiers (and was killed).

One could never compare the reasoning with a 15y/o boy here in Oz who are still children.

The mother stated that she is SO proud of her son who gave his life this way and is now a "Martyr".
How can we possibly change this thinking when a 15y/o (and a mother) has such views.

As a mother, personally I hate wars. My husband was born in the middle of a war with bombs, fire and near starvation (and they were considered the enemy at the time).
It's not our war, BRING THE TROOPS HOME and send those who don't like us, or our way of life and thinking home...
Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (15:01)

Robyn @ 9:57
Are you implying that a rise in our very modest level of G.S.T. is a bad thing?
Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (13:34)

ETS, I understand what you meant to write. I agree with you and Bob B's comments. Ralfe is the one who was insensitive with his comment and you have both correctly taken him to task over it.
ETS - 9, November, 2011 (13:05)

The use of "waste" in my last sentence was insensitive and I sincerely apologise for any offence. I meant that our servicemen and women should not be put into that sort of danger where they cannot trust the people they are working with. I certainly did not mean to question the importance of the loss of anyone serving in Afghanistan.
ETS - 9, November, 2011 (12:46)

Ralfe, you may have misread my last message. That is my charitable interpretation of your response. Let me be clear. I was not critical in any way of the courage or commitment of Australian forces; their professionalism and bravery are beyond question. They are in a war zone and they do face the reality of death every day, a world away from our lives in Australia. Their job is risky enough without exposing them to unnecessary dangers they should not have to face from the very people they are working with. Ralfe, you tell me to get real. Well the reality is that Australia should value its people above all else and ensure that no more lives are wasted over there.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (11:44)

John O'Grady,

Enjoyed your comment and I agree that NS blogs are interesting and involving, with various intelligent views, levelers, slices of humour and moments of wackiness. I hope NSA takes note of this. Good to have you aboard between your work commitments.
Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (11:20)

Ralphie

Re-read my comment to you and have to add to it "How do you propose the soldiers go about their business under these conditions and where is the money to implement that scheme going to come from"?

My solution is not to be there at all. Its someone elses problem that we should not be involved with now. Initially, yes but definitely not now.
Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (11:08)

Just back from a five hour volunteer shift in the Seaway Tower Southport, nice to catch-up. Its very pleasant to watch the sun rise whilst you work and see another perfect day in paradise emerge.

The Carbon Tax is in done and dusted. Stop crying over spilt milk. I support any scheme that attacks the pollutants we put into the air. Some say CO2 isn't a pollutant. It might not be in small concentrations but is nevertheless something that needs to be controlled. More trees I say.

We need a broader perspective, too, from this start into reducing the harmfull and unnecessary substances we have introduced into our environment. How do we get some responses in this direction as the pollies now seem to think its been achieved. I contend its just the start and hope we have time to react before harm is done. There is a lot more than CO2 out there.
John O'Grady - 9, November, 2011 (10:59)

This has been a beaut forum for lively, interesting discussion. It is the first in which I have participated and enjoyed, displaying the really active and informed minds of a group of senior cits. It is a great leveler - thos who are somewhat and persistently agressive get their 'comeuppence', those dragging a little are generally lifted into the debate and those who just want to cruise along are welcome to so do.Unfortunately I can only access it in small bites at work and would love the opportunity to follow more closely. One day ...
Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (10:58)

Ralfe

Would you fight for this cause under these conditions for the money on offer to our soldiers? I doubt it very much for it takes a special person to do so.

Your stance is quite correct that they are paid to be shot at. I spent 26 years being paid to be shot but never was but would not be at all comfortable when the very people you spend each day with training them to kill effectively cannot be relied upon. What a deplorable situation to be in day and night whilst sleeping even in the modern world of battle. Even in the trenches of WW1 you could rely implicitly on your mate and those around you even when they were battle damaged. Not so anymore.

I suggest you get a little bit of realistic thinking going before spraying like that again!!!! Most unfeeling and insentive.
Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (10:12)

I also agree with you Helen. When the carbon price has been in place for a couple of years and people have been compensated for cost increases the effects on our daily lives is going to be very small indeed. By 2015 when the carbon price becomes market based most people will wonder what all the fuss was about. Life will go on and the doom and gloom, sky is falling scaremongers will lose credibility.

Industry is already factoring carbon emission costs into their business plans and the last thing they need is uncertainty from Trash Talk Tony about winding back the clock. His promise written in blood is nothing more than puff.

I must pick up on WEG’s comment. There is nothing undemocratic about an elected Parliament passing a law. It happens on a regular basis. That’s why Parliament is there.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (9:57)

Well said Helen.

Many who oppose this scheme would prefer Tony Abbott's scheme instead, in spite of the fact that it would cost us all more, favour the large polluters and entail many more public servants. My hunch is he would increase GST to pay for it all.
Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (9:45)

If these 'rogue' soldiers are Taliban who have infiltrated the forces being trained by us, this may be the beginning of many more such incidents.
How many of us would cope with not knowing who are our friends and who are our enemies when they are all posing as friends?
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (9:37)

Don't agree WEG. I also take note of Abbott saying that they "will rescind in blood" at the next election. Do you really think business would let them? After all the Libs rely on big business for their funding. Besides the Greens will be in the Sen at the next election with the balance of power. SO, who will be lying then?

When the benefits start filtering through, are you going to give yours back and opt for a tax on everything instead to pay to the polluters? My prediction is when the scheme is up and running for a couple of years, everyone will be so used to it, life will go on and the Libs have no choice for two elections but to keep it there anyway.

I still believe on all fronts, it will be successful for our country, financially as well as helping to clean up the filth that seems to be of our life now...
Ralfe - 9, November, 2011 (9:10)

ETS, you want Australian troops to get out of Afghanistan because they might be shot? Get real, that is a risk a soldier takes every day. It is part of the job they signed on to do. I agree it is sad when a soldier is wounded and loss of life is tragic, but that is what war is about. It is not all pretty and green in the real world. Fighting and death are real life everyday events. This is what a soldier expects every day even as he hopes it won't happen to him. The fact is soldiers have job to do. Don't cloak them with your own motives. Let them get on and do it.
ETS - 9, November, 2011 (8:24)

Very sad news this morning from Afghanistan. Another cowardly attack by someone who was working with the Australian forces. Three more wounded Aussies. No one killed this time, more through good luck than anything else. A retired Major General on the radio this morning said it is hard enough fighting an enemy in front of you without having to watch behind you at the same time. In these circumstances it is very hard to justify the continued Australian presence. I’m sure the work of the Australian forces is greatly appreciated by many Afghanis but the reality is that it is not our fight and it is a war we cannot “win”, if winning was ever a realistic option. As a nation we owe it to our servicemen and women who literally put their lives on the line every day over there to say this is enough.
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (7:55)

Australia welcomes the arrival of another new tax. A tax brewed and consummated with the Greens and born on a lie.

The Aust. Public will never forgive such an undemocratic act despite the validity of the argument or otherwise.

The Federal Government budget / finances are ill prepared to cope with an extended period of slow global growth / recession and the huge transitional costs to bed this tax down.
Lets hope the Labor Coalition use these $billions to pay down the country’s debt.

Now that will be a first - spending our hard earned money wisely!
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:54)

Not so Lorikeet. I still haven't had YOUR list yet re the Gillard Government and how YOU have suffered in the last 18 mths (as a Senior). I'm still waiting.
You are able to blog all day & night pushing your ideas and huge intelligence down our necks. The former still a matter of debate!

I'm just sick of those who are always so negative but take up all the opportunities available and are atill not happy.

New technology will give more jobs for the future. Those who can't change probably will retire but that's not new. Many ex hardworking senior business people have done just this all along when changes become overwhelming.
As a pensioner your recent tests would have been free or reduced. So what has changed? GIVE US YOUR LIST. I can't wait to see it...
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:41)

More of our troops injured by those they are trying to help. We will never understand the thinking or reasoning of these people and I say bring our troops home. Also send home those who will not fit in here back as well.

Not until we have a disaster here will it be recognised that our way of life just doesn't fit with those of the Muslim faith. They are brainwashed from the cradle and look on these efforts as the mark of a hero. We are not wanted there, so leave them be for they will be forever the same, even after our troops pack up and go.
We have no right to push our ideas on a race who are so apposed to western ideals and their religion.
We have gangs fighting gangs in our major cities here, so the hatreds have crossed our borders.
Well meaning albeit, not working! BRING THEN HOME NOW PLEASE!...
Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:35)

What will we do when there is no work available, the sky has fallen in, and our foreign debt is so high that corporates are demanding several pounds of flesh?

The government will pay back the debt using the Futures Fund and Commonwealth Superannuation Holdings.

Ladies! Get a grip!
Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:31)

$50 says that Helen will be the first person to get a mini oxygen tank, a matching mask for her face, and a microchip implanted in her hand.
Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:29)

Thanks, WEG, that really is horrible news. It's truly a sad day for Australia, which really hurts when combined with a Tax on Air being passed through the parliament.

We must all spare a moment to remember the friends and families, and to thank God it was not one of our sons, daughters or their descendants in the firing line.
Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:25)

RMCN Anything that helps to "clean up" our C/Try & hopefully planet has my vote. It is good to see trees being planted in places where years ago they were cut down. Pollution is a huge problem & I do agree with the science that it is impacting on our C/try.
Cleaning up our backyard is a very positive way to start for those who will follow us in the future.
We need Oxygen to breath (not carbon dioxide). If one day the sun hits the Earth & we are gone, we can't help that BUT we can make life better while we are here. The sky hasn't fallen yet as some have predicted and my hunch is that it won't! Give it a chance I say...
Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:23)

Robyn, the government got the world's communist economists in to help them sell us a furphy.

Last night I heard that there was a hell of a lot of depression and anger among fair minded politicians, and our Senator and his team are really feeling upset with the numerous corporate ghouls who don't care what happens to our nation.

Senator John Madigan, Bob Katter MP and members of the National Party have been out in force checking out what is really happening, particularly in Regional Australia.

They have visited food processing plants which now have no employees, and are only used to store imported Chinese canned fruits. They have visited places where clothing and heavy goods are manufactured.

There is already large scale unemployment in the Latrobe Valley, with corporates not even attempting to set up a proven Clean Coal Technology.

We have been sold a crock, and you and mostly naive young people have bought it!
Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:20)

WEG:

Yes, with this second treacherous act I think we should have a sufficient trigger to justify a 'rethink' on troop withdrawal plans. How can our very brave soldiers continue with the lack of trust that these two incidents must surely engender? These are our precious sons and grandsons.
Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:16)

(cont.)

But, of course, time will tell. I believe that taking a strong stand on forest/rainforest destruction will do more for carbon dioxide reduction than all these other potentially industry-destroying grabs for money - money I might add that is merely being redistributed. I certainly would be happier if the really big polluters with very dirty industry (China, India and even the USA) were to lead the way with carbon reduction. If you have ever been to China, or in fact anywhere in the northern hemisphere, you would see for yourself what pollution really is! For us to lead is ridiculous - all it does is feed the 'feel good' factor.
Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:08)

Robert Duncan:

Well said, Robert. Despite Bob Brown's obvious belief that "people are happy" with the Carbon Tax, there is certainly a very large proportion of the population that are definitely not happy! Probably significantly more than half the population!

I can appreciate the 'feel good' factor in passing this legislation for those who believe it will do something to help fund research into alternative energy sources. But this government does not have a great track record in the implementation side of things. I can see a lot more Canberra-based public servants. No wonder the housing market in Canberra is doing well!
WEG - 9, November, 2011 (5:55)

.......another 3 Aussies shot today by a rogue Afghanistan soldier, and our Government says we must hold the course.
Robert Duncan - 8, November, 2011 (21:00)

Robyn:
The victory today by Dr.Brown and his assistant Ms. Gillard comes at a very great cost, and I’m not just talking money.
Not since the Vietnam war have we seen such a divisive issue. The deniers versus the alarmists. The sceptics versus the Google quoting theorists.
Each “side” has trotted out their experts to try and sway us to their way of thinking .Although I do wonder how many people really had their opinions changed by Carbon Cate and Carbon Caton.
Robyn, of course I want to live in a less polluted world but I also want to live in an Australia where we can work together to find sensible and reasonable ways to solve our dilemmas.
I want honesty from our government and I don’t want to see our political system tweaked and manipulated to the point of implosion.
Yes there were winners today but to me the victory was pyrrhic. Time will tell I guess.
Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (20:31)

Lorikeet:

Re your (19:42). It is not about believing everything the government says. it is about values. Many, like me, voted Green last election because Rudd reneged on the ETS. We voted according to our values . Positive action toward slowing climate change is of the utmost importance to those who value the planet and well-being of all future living creatures.
Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (20:14)

Welcome rmcn,

Who said Seniors have to be staid, serous and boringly "mature" all the time?
It's a myth that is bad for our mental health!

On the carbon tax: don't know about Qantas but in so many areas it will provide incentive for companies to reduce their energy consumption. Will also provide motivation to invest in cleaner energy sources.
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:59)

rmcn:

You sound like a fairly intelligent man.

To answer your question, when Australians are so broke they cannot afford to catch a plane, there won't be very much international or interstate travel.

Once your wallet is empty, your car will go as well, with a bit of help from the increased running costs that a Fuel Tax and Injury Tax will provide (and that's just for starters!).

When the remaining 6% of our manufacturing industries have gone offshore, the carbon will have left with them.

The third world can look forward to massive death rates from pollution, while we get what used to be their peasant lifestyle, planting orange trees on the footpaths and cultivating crops down the back.

What else will there be to do when a huge percentage of jobs are gone?
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:51)

WEG:

The Ukraine will likely join Russia to form another World Sector Economic Union with a corporate neo-communist base. Both Russia and Ukraine are among the few countries which don't belong to the EEU. This would fit in with the formation of a Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) that sits between the EEU and the Asia/Pacific Economic Union (APEU), which we are expected to join by 2020.

Governments should have learned by now that it is folly to take on other countries' debt through Economic Unions.

Australians are particularly vulnerable because our World Sector contains mostly third world nations.

Political commentators are now using the terms World Sector and Global Government on a regular basis. The Carbon Tax is about taking all Australians down before we get a real economic hiding in the APEU.
rmcn - 8, November, 2011 (19:43)

I'm new here, I read the blog all the time to see a bunch of seniors often behaving like a bunch of juniors!! But I have to say, entertaining.
To cover the subject on hand - I dont think we have any right to be in Afghanistan. A complete waste of young lives.
To touch on the carbon tax, can someone tell me just how this is going to reduce carbon. OK, lets presume Qantas has to pay $20 million a year. They need to pass the tax on to consumers. They will still fly the same amount of flights. So where is the reduction of carbon??? Oh, I see, they go out of business as fares are too high. Another country with no carbon tax gets the business. All explained, right???
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:42)

A diverse society is good, but it's a pity that some of the over 50s are naive enough to believe everything the government tells them.

I don't like Liberals either. I am well aware of their intentions because I attended 2 federal pre-election forums.

Several parties have moderate environmental policies that don't include Toxic Levels of Taxation.

Labor's plans will knock small to medium business off the planet, so that corporates can charge whatever they like and eventually rule us all.
Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (19:01)

Sue Do-Nim:

Touché.

Where do you stand on the issue of looking after our planet and cleaning up our destructive acts?
Sue Do-Nim - 8, November, 2011 (18:32)

Robyn : 16:04
So the champagne’s on ice. Okay but DON’T pop the cork ! Please… think of the planet. The sudden release of CO2 from that very bottle could be what tips the world into irreversible decline.
WEG - 8, November, 2011 (18:31)

The NATO-led coalition forces in Afghanistan use supply routes via Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan. Both Russia & America have airbases in Kyrgyzstan.
Pakistan was once the main supply route (90%), but the numerous Taliban attacks on their convoys, reduced this to 35% approx. Kyrgyzstan is now the main supply route in central Asia – guess what?
There was a change in Kyrgyzstan government recently and they’ve asked US to leave by 2014 (maybe before). Seems democracy and independence within Kyrgyzstan is gradually moving back to the old ‘USSR’ collective / influence, now being called ‘Eurasian Union’. Here we go again, the Russian influence is creeping back again.
Laurakeet - 8, November, 2011 (16:49)

Arthur Mac, you must have missed the discussion last week about socialism causing the GFC. I think in the end the consensus came down to corporate greed and poor regulation of the market in the USA.

Socialism really did not have anything to do with it. Can't blame the evil commies this time.
Laurakeet - 8, November, 2011 (16:46)

I don't know if Anna Bligh will call an election this year. It seems unlikely to me and I think she is more likely to have the poll when it is due in 2012.

After all, that is what she said she would do.
Bob B - 8, November, 2011 (16:26)

Lorikeet

Yes a trifecta of elections is possible. Local government is locked in already for March next year and Julia might just run with what she might sees as a surge in popularity from today's outcome.

Will Captain Bligh chance it? On one hand it doesn't seem opportune for her but then again she is Beatty trained and he ran a quickie in with just three weeks notice. That just ran the opposition out and nobody could respond. Ever NSA was unable to prepare election documents in time.

So local elections are certain, feds are unknown and state is unlikely in my view. I'm not betting the trifecta.
Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (16:26)

NSA members cover a wider scope than the few who you might come across Lorikeet. Don't be scared of those who don't agree with you. Diversity is healthy. Would you rather we all be your clones?
Helen - 8, November, 2011 (16:11)

I believe the C/T (ETS) will be good for us. It is also heartening to see farmers doing things better now and planting trees instead of cutting them down.
The scheme will be self funding. 50% is to go back to people to fund various things and 50% to compensate business and for new tech's/jobs.

It took 200yrs to spoil things and this is a positive in restoring and making big business responsible for the pollution that they cause. It will make them do a better job in the end which will benefit us all, so stop crying for H/sake. Ask the Libs re their proposal if they gain office because they have one planned too (don't forget that)...
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (16:10)

Don't worry, Arthur Mac. They will all be wearing a couple of carton of eggs on their faces, and crying rivers of tears, once they realise they falsely believed we needed a Tax on Air.
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (16:07)

My goodness! To find such a naive bunch of people on a seniors blog is scary.

Luckily I attended a couple of pre-election forums before Ju-liar landed a bad government a second term in the parliament, where NSA branch members served a huge raspberry to anyone supporting a Tax on Air.

A Carbon Tax and a Carbon Trading Scheme are about Toxic Levels of Taxation. That's where the real problem lies.

Bob B:

March 2012 is less than 4 months away. We could easily see a rapid trifecta of elections occurring in Queensland.

If Anna Bligh goes to the polls this month, the local councillor will be able to wipe the sweat from his brow. He was so scared of having to go first, after the Red Queens had turned nearly everyone off!
Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (16:04)

"The GFC a stunt by socialists to rob Australians of their savings"???

Arthur Mac, you are Lorikeets twin!

The champagne is on ice. My family and I will be celebrating tonight because the government has acted with foresight to do the right thing for our grandchildren and future generations. Even if the latest research that says it is all too late to turn anything around on our ailing planet, is right, we have still taken RIGHT & ETHICAL action.

CHEERS TO JULIA GILLARD, THE GREENS, THE INDEPENDANTS AND OUR GREAT MINORITY GOVT. Hip hip hooray!
Kay Kelly - 8, November, 2011 (16:01)

(cont.)

A CT for this country alone will only weaken our trading strength. And I don't imagine that any of the 'biggies' (India, USA, China etc) will be concerned about a CT or equivalent as long as the world's economies are in such a parlous state! I imagine even Europe will start backing off now.

Notwithstanding that, it is inevitable that the world's finite supplies of coal and oil will eventually run out. So slowing the use of both of those is good, hence alternative base-load energy sources being required. And there will be a myriad of different energy sources, including nuclear - like it or not.

So yes, I am in favour of efforts being made to further develop alternative energy sources. How much of the funds raised by the CT will be devoted to this? As opposed to just creating more public service jobs?
Bob B - 8, November, 2011 (16:00)

Kay Kelly

You hit the nail on the head there - I was driving with my wife yesterday through a bunch of tree an we both commented how nice it was and that it was a pity to see the forests across the world disappearing at a faster rate than carbon dioxide is growing.
Kay Kelly - 8, November, 2011 (15:48)

Bob Brown grinning from ear to ear - what a depressing sight! I'm more concerned about the wanton destruction of forests and rainforests - the 'lungs of the Earth'! It is a pity Mr Brown doesn't continue his calling of many years back and concentrate on saving forests! Despite all the pitiful efforts of the 'do-gooder' nations and their carbon trading/ETS schemes etc, carbon dioxide levels are rising even faster! And no one has claimed that these CT/ETS measures will lower the Earth's temperature by any measurable amount anyway!
Arthur Mac - 8, November, 2011 (15:20)

It's a sad day for Australia. The carbon tax will sell Australia out through the front door. Our competitors will be poping their champagne corks in celebration that anybody could be so stupid to tax the air we exhale.

We may as well just close all industry down and tell other countries to come in and take us over. Australia will become the Greece of the South Pacific. Everybody else will have a piece of us now that the carbon tax is law. This is worse than the Global Financial Crisis which as most people know was a stunt by the socialists to rob Australians of their savings.
helen - 8, November, 2011 (13:34)

Great day for Australia! I knew the C/Tax would get through and it is a GREAT DAY for democracy and was voted on as thus.

All the shock Jocks and the no no party and their mates failed.

Our PM noted that every member of the parliament Libs as well support an ETS. Personally a "self funded" scheme beats what the Libs will bring in ie a tax on everything!

Before the "Doomsters" get on their high horse, let's all give it an Aussie go before judgement. My prediction just as I said it WOULD get through is that it will be a huge success and when the scheme becomes an ETS as our PM first wanted, the Libs would never repeal it and take all the benefits of their constituents and tax everything we buy.

Abbott was conspicuous by his absence today

Onya Julia Gillard (one tough lady). She did it and the "mining Tax" is next!...
Laurakeet - 8, November, 2011 (13:24)

I am very pleased the Clean Energy Future legislation has passed through the Parliament at last. I am not a prophet of doom about it and I don't believe fearmongering is warranted. Emitters will pay and I don’t expect the impact on most people to be much more than the impact of the GST in 2000. It is nothing to get alarmed about.

http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/2-cheers-1-blood-oath-climate-law?utm_source=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily&utm_source=Climate+Spectator&utm_campaign=a3c6e7d9ee-CSPEC_DAILY&utm_medium=email
Bob B - 8, November, 2011 (13:21)

Just to clarify when Queensland local government elections will be held for all the non Queenslanders - the State Government legislated for them to be held March 2012. That can of course be undone by follow-on legislation but it would be stupid to do so by a Labor Government well and truely on the nose. Players are planning and moving already (as you would expect).
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (12:53)

Yes, Kay, some of the information was discussed in the links I put up. Now everyone will know that Asylum Seeker issues are not as simple as some people think.

I have just heard that the Carbon Tax has passed through the Senate. Unless it is quickly repealed, it will be the beginning of the end of both democracy and the world as we know it.

I am expecting a Queensland State election to be called at any time, with local and federal elections following fairly hard on its heels.

I am also predicting that the next leader of the ALP will be Bill Shorten.
Kay Kelly - 8, November, 2011 (9:24)

Yes, Lorikeet, your definition of an 'unlawful non-citizen' seems correct. I find the Fact Sheets by the Immigration Dept most helpful - www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets. Perhaps they are your references also?

Rosemary: I am one of those people who think that if you hear galloping hooves, it is more likely to be horses than zebras. On the basis of that, if the USA, Al Quaeda, and Pakistan all agree that the person who was killed and looked like Osama bin Laden, was in fact Osama bin Laden, then I am prepared to believe it! But who knows?
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (8:59)

Because we have an Age Pyramid which is top heavy with middle aged and elderly people, the government probably wants to keep as many new arrivals in the younger age groups as possible. This makes good sense, but there are at least 3 problems which mitigate against success.

1. We have a housing shortage, because almost no public housing has been built for decades.

2. The government allows corporates in Aged Care and Agriculture to underpay foreign workers, and they are also being exploited elsewhere.

3. The government is currently denying visa holders citizenship because corporates don't want to lose workers to countries which pay better money. (They mainly use Australia as a "stepping stone" because of the wages issue.)
Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (8:53)

Rosemary:

One of my sons was in Washington DC when the US task force picked off or picked up Bin Laden. He was there to work with their Defence Dept personnel.

Since Saddam Hussein was known to have 11 plastic surgery "clones", it is possible you are right, but who knows?

Kay:

It depends whose side the lawyer is on. The justice system is very corrupt.

So if we get down to the bottom line, the following applies:

An UNLAWFUL NON-CITIZEN fits as a description category in 3 circumstances:

1. Your claim for asylum has been rejected, the appeals process has failed (if attempted) and you are being sent back where you came from.

2. The government doesn't have any record of who you are or where you came from.

3. You have no current visa of any kind.
Kay Kelly - 8, November, 2011 (8:36)

(cont.)

The reference for that last sentence is www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/unpack/Illegal.Immigrant.

Of course, the moment an 'illegal entrant' claims asylum, he/she becomes an 'asylum seeker', a legal status under both Australian and International Laws that Australia is signatory to. So as I said before, the timimg seems crucial - as long as it is clear a person is seeking asylum, his/her arrival is not unlawful.

But, hey, I'm not an immigration expert! I only react to what I can Google - like most other people. Perhaps the word-wizardry is dependent upon the writer's sentiments on the topic. Beware of lawyers! No two ever seem to agree!
Kay Kelly - 8, November, 2011 (8:23)

Well, no wonder I for one find it very difficult to sort out these definitions in relation to 'illegal immigrants'!

I read the reference provided by Laurakeet (7:20) and yes, it clearly states that it is not illegal to come to Australia without a visa.

Yet all the references I have read indicates that no one has a right to enter, without authority, a state' (country) which is not their country of nationality. (www.immi.gov.au/media/letters/letters04/Press_Council_28_J...). I assume an 'authority' would be a visa, assessed refugee status, or having made a claim for asylum. Other readings support this view, and indicate this rule is based on international law. A person trying to enter Australia without any 'authority' is termed an 'illegal entrant', 'unauthorised arrival' or 'unlawful arrival'. "Unlawful immigration' can occur when a person arrives by air or boat without proper documentation or visa, or overstays or breaches a visa.
Laurakeet - 8, November, 2011 (7:20)

If I can enter the asylum seeker debate, ETS is right. It is not illegal to come to Australia without a visa.

This article by immigration lawyer Kerry Murphy outlines some of the serious problems asylum seekers face with the Australian "system". The problems are much deeper than one article can address but it is still worth reading/

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=28698
ETS - 8, November, 2011 (7:10)

Australia should withdraw responsively from Afghanistan. This means talking to our international allies and Afghani contacts (I'm not sure "ally" is the right word for any of the Afghan groups) and outlining the timetable for withdrawal. Hopefully the Afghanis would step up to fill the gaps but you can't rely on too much happening to plan over there.

I'm fairly sure the outcome will not be to our liking as a resurgent Taliban will probably come to the fore again and women and children who have been educated and had a better life over the past ten years will be back where they were before.
rosemary howell - 8, November, 2011 (6:43)

No one could suport soldiers staying in Afganistan as we don't even know why they are there in the first place. Bin Laden died years ago before the official version was portrayed on the media. He was shot and seriously wounded in the chest in 2001 and had a particular disease that affected his kidneys and needed renal dialysis. This was covered in an article by Associated press in 2009 whereupon Albama and Hilary Clinton stated that he was dead, but the public forget what they saw or read 2 seconds ago never mind 2 years ago.
OM Saigal - 7, November, 2011 (22:42)

If the Afghan men & their fanatical system of culture, custom, tradition & religion are against the regiments who are assisting them, it is time to push off. It is so clear that there is no peace, nor will there be peace. Former cricketer Imran Khan's "The Warrior Race" is quite correct about life there.
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (20:38)

Bob B:

Yes, that's right. I'm not sure where the problem lies.

Parakeet:

The last thing this blog needs is copycats whining about nothing and misrepresenting the facts. If you don't like what say, please don't bother to read or comment on it. What you consider boring is highly interesting to some. I am always eager to read everything.

I'm sure we would all like WEG to tell us more about the death of Osama Bin Laden, since it sits at the heart of the topic.

ETS:

My son's job was to implement the policy & guidelines in various sections of the Dept Immigration & Citizenship. This required knowledge of various visas, attendance at citizenship ceremonies, etc.

Yes, we largely agree, so do you have any fresh input? BTW I don't just google things. I have learned quite a bit about this issue over the last 7-8 years.
Bob B - 7, November, 2011 (19:04)

Lorikeet

Unlawful Non citizen - here is a definition from the Dept of Immigration etc Fact Sheet:

Who are lawful and unlawful non-citizens?

A lawful non-citizen is a national from another country who has the right to be in Australia either indefinitely or temporarily because they hold a permanent or temporary visa.

The majority of people who enter Australia either permanently or temporarily remain lawful by complying with the conditions of their visa. Currently, more than 99 per cent of visa holders remain lawful while in Australia.

An unlawful non-citizen is a national from another country who does not have the right to be in Australia. The majority of unlawful non-citizens in Australia at any given time have either overstayed the visa issued to them or are people whose visas have been cancelled. Some unlawful non-citizens will have entered Australia without a visa.

I don't think this includes boat people who are not unlawful entries at that stage.
WEG - 7, November, 2011 (16:59)

I just read this day's input - quite interesting debate at last.

Great article in today's The Australian newspaper on the death of Osama bin Laden, and the myths surrounding the covert operation. Seems he died within 90 secs of the assault.
Parakeet - 7, November, 2011 (16:53)

I am finding this blog is getting very "booring" with Lorikeet always dominating it all the time. She has already contributed more than 30 different opinions in a very short time, mostly against other bloggers and their opinions.

Take a rest please Lorikeet and give someone else a go as it is hard to keep up if we are away to read all the comments and yours dominate with the same "pushy" output which just go on and on!
ETS - 7, November, 2011 (15:39)

Lorikeet, I think you will find there were a number of the Migration Amendment Acts passed in 2007. The basic legislation is the 1958 Act, as amended. But that is just a small clarification.

I really don’t think we differ that asylum seekers and refugees are not illegal immigrants or “unlawful non-citizens”. We do agree on this point, don’t we?

Please tell me, what is your son’s expertise in immigration policy?

I’m still amazed that this debate sprang from me agreeing with your comment about people in detention centres.
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (15:30)

If Julia Gillard manages to do a 5-for-1 swap with Malaysia (after it has become a signatory to the UNHRC), the 5 people she brings to Australia would be PROCESSED REFUGEES BEING RESETTLED.

The same would apply using the DLP's 2-for-1 exchange with the UN camps on the Thai/Burma border. The same would apply to the Coalition plan for processing on Nauru.

Once your claim for asylum has been processed at a recognised facility (onshore or offshore), you either become a REFUGEE or, if you are considered unsuitable, will be returned to your country of origin.

There are appeal processes in place. My son said he always made sure his cases against those being rejected were airtight, so they couldn't waste time and government money in our courts.
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (15:22)

Here's what I said, ETS: (using new term)

I will try to clarify once again the difference between an ASYLUM SEEKER, a REFUGEE and an UNLAWFUL NON-CITIZEN.

If you come to this country (by any means) claiming asylum, or if your visa expires and you come forward claiming asylum seeker status, you are an ASYLUM SEEKER.

When your claim has been processed and you are deemed to be a "keeper", you become a REFUGEE awaiting resettlement.

If you have sneaked into the country, or gone to ground after your visa expired, you are an UNLAWFUL NON-CITIZEN until such time as you either leave (or are deported from the country) or apply for asylum seeker status.

If you sneak in, there is a high chance of being deported. (Legitimate persons do not need to sneak.)
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (15:15)

In the Migration Act 2007, the term for "illegal immigrant" is "unlawful non-citizen". This is the new politically correct, watered down term.

Whether we see it written into the law or not, a "queue jumper" is someone who doesn't wait their turn for a visa to enter Australia. Instead they hitch a ride on a boat or plane, or arrive in a shipping container (sometimes alive and sometimes dead, as seen on "Sixty Minutes" recently).

My son's personal definition of a "queue jumper" is someone who phones the Immigration Dept every day, chucking a mental and demanding his/her visa is processed before everyone else's, thereby holding up the process for everyone.

I am still awaiting a reply from my son.
Bob B - 7, November, 2011 (14:13)

Illegal Immigrant is not pertinent for those immigrants who are not doing anything illegal in International Law at that stage of the process. The term used seems to be 'unauthorised' immigrant. In many respects an 'asylum seeker' is also unauthorised (in as much as this term is still not really appropriate) until application is made for assylum upon which they become an 'assylum seeker'. I'm sure we are now agreed on an assylum seeker becoming a refugee upon their application for refugee status being approved.
ETS - 7, November, 2011 (12:44)

Kay, thanks for your contribution. It does make a lot of sense so you should not regret buying in.

I don’t think there is much difference between Lorikeet and me on this issue. We both agree that refugees and asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants. Where we seem to differ is my contention that the term “illegal immigrant” is not a term used by the Immigration Department.

But even accepting that the term is used in the general community, it should not be applied to refugees and asylum seekers, even when their claims have not been fully processed.

Your point about Labor’s regional solution with Malaysia is reasonable and perhaps if it did have bipartisan support the risky boat trips would stop. It seems more reasonable than the Coalition policy. But with the current intransigence between the Parties the onshore option is the only viable one and all should be done to reduce the trauma as much as possible.
Kay Kelly - 7, November, 2011 (12:35)

(cont.)

I think a lot of opposition to the 'boat people' comes from the concern that they are delaying the resettlement of those who have already been assessed as refugees. Whilst not normally a Gillard supporter, I can see some merit in her 'Malaysian solution'. I think the sentiments behind it are worthwhile. I for one am disappointed to see it fall in a heap. It is a pity Gillard and Abbott can't come to some mutually acceptable solution to this dilemma.

Moderator:

This 160 word limit is a real pain, especially when there is no word count provided as you type. I can't see that it achieves anything!
Kay Kelly - 7, November, 2011 (12:18)

(cont.)

Of course, there are many reasons for seeking asylum. If persecution in their homeland is the reason, then a successful claim for asylum would result in the person (and their family) being accepted as a refugee.

I guess the argument is about where the applicant lives while the claim for asylum is being processed, and clearly there are differing views on this. There is also the issue of the illegal arrival here by people (by boat or plane) delaying the legal arrival of people who have previously been assessed as refugees and are awaiting resettlement in often dreadful conditions in other countries.
Kay Kelly - 7, November, 2011 (11:58)

ETS, Lorikeet:

No doubt I will regret buying into this argument!

I am finding some of this refugee/illegal immigrant issue a bit confusing! Different references give slightly different messages. I am prepared to accept ETS's comment re that the term "illegal immigrant" is not used in the Migration Act 1958, as amended (he seems pretty sure of it, and I certainly am not sufficiently familiar with it to contradict him). Perhaps it is a matter of timing? It seems an 'illegal immigrant' is someone who arrives without any legal claim, such as a visa or a claim for asylum. The moment the new arrival makes application for asylum (verbally or in writing - I'm not sure), they cease to be illegal and become an 'asylum seeker'.
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (11:00)

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/87illegal.htm
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (10:58)

http://www.beyderwellen.com/immigration-practice-areas/unlawful.htm
James S - 7, November, 2011 (10:42)

I think there's more work to do over there. Al qaeda is very dangerous. pulling out now will not achieve anything except letting the terrorists win. that's just my two cents worth
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (10:42)

If the following terms are not in the Migration Act 2007:

Illegal Immigrant
Queue Jumper

this is because the government legislates what it covers, not what it doesn't cover.

I will ask the relevant son what he knows about it.
Ellen - 7, November, 2011 (10:40)

I don't know why we are in Afghnistan. The purpose of this war was to catch Osama Bin Laden and destroy al qaeda. We've got Osama but 10 years on how are we meant to bring down al qaeda when we've made little progress in all this time. A lot of innocent people are dead. Seriously, what have we achieved?
ETS - 7, November, 2011 (9:38)

Some people Google a term then present it as their own knowledge. Lorikeet, I think your reference makes my point. “Illegal immigrant” is not a term used in legislation. If it is used by some people, they have their own reasons for doing so.

You should know very well that the year in the title of an Act of Parliament indicates the year it was first enacted. The Migration Act 1958 has of course been amended many times since then. I suspect you know this already and you are trying to be a bit too cute about it.

I’m not sure why you have raised your Euthanasia Bill and age pyramid again on this topic but it seems to get a run on most issues so nothing unusual there.
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (9:23)

Here is a link:

http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/unpack/Illegal.Immigrant

It is also important to be aware that Acts of Parliament do not necessarily contain all of the relevant information, including guidelines and application.

I think this is mostly because the government does not want us to know its actual agenda. Laws that sound fairly innocuous may be there as a precursor to amendments that are completely untenable.

This is why we should never agree to the passage of a Voluntary Euthanasia Bill, especially not when we have an Age Pyramid that's in fairly rough shape.
Bob B - 7, November, 2011 (9:21)

We seem to fall into this dialogue periodically. A reference providing info is found at:

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/current/asylum.html
Lorikeet - 7, November, 2011 (9:14)

ETS:

If you actually read what I wrote, you would see that I said that an asylum seeker is not an illegal immigrant. Instead of calling someone "loud", please look at the capitalised terms and their meanings.

The Immigration Act has probably been amended several times since 1958. That's 53 years ago!
Robyn - 7, November, 2011 (8:34)

What about those who came from Vietnam by boat in the 1970's. How did we treat them?
ETS - 7, November, 2011 (8:08)

To Sue and Lorikeet the Loud. Thank you for your comments and Lorikeet, for your definitions, but my clarification still stands. Please show me the relevant part of the Migration Act 1958 that refers to illegal immigrants. I think you will find the term is not the Act. That alone should tell you something.

People who come to Australia seeking asylum have done nothing illegal. They are entitled to do that under international conventions to which Australia is a signatory. Calling them illegal only serves to reduce the legitimacy of their claims in the eyes of the general public.

To think all this started because I actually agreed with a comment by Lorikeet about keeping people in detention. I should add that the refugee “problem” for Australia is so miniscule the rest of the world must be scratching their heads at our response.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (19:44)

WEG:

Australia is a signatory of the UNHCR. Under international law, an asylum seeker is not an illegal immigrant.

In answer to your question, maybe Pakistan is low on fields of opium poppies and considered a comparatively safe haven.

It is customary for powerful leaders of destructive cults to be hidden away, as far away from the firing line as possible. I think Osama Bin Laden mostly communicated with his zealots via video links.

Since Adam Bandt is Green, he will support pulling troops out of any war zone.

The Taliban are Sunni Muslims, mostly from the Afghanistani Pashtun tribes.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (19:28)

I capitalised the 3 different terms for clarity. I didn't yell at anyone.
WEG - 6, November, 2011 (18:32)

Getting back to the topic:
The Australian Government has bipartisan support to remain in Afghanistan, except for one minor exception within the house of Reps (don’t mention their name as it’s a contagion).

Most information provided by our Govn. re Afghanistan is scripted, staged and simplistic. No wonder we seniors have vastly different opinions of our involvement in Afghanistan.

Osama Bin Laden was a misguided radical / Muslin / extremist /Afghan. He was protected and resided in Pakistan. I ask you, who is the real enemy?

Iran is probably the next target for UN intervention. The Australian’s Foreign Minister (ex PM) has his job application in, and wants to dominate the UN Security Council in the near future. Now that’s something to be really scared about.
WEG - 6, November, 2011 (18:03)

I agree with the general discussion / theme, but a point of debate though. Only Australian citizens, permanent residents of Australia and New Zealand citizens who have entered Australia on a valid passport are allowed to stay and work in Australia without restriction. All foreign nationals who want to travel to and stay in Australia must obtain visas before arriving. Those arriving without visas and proper documentation (ie the 'boat' people), and those overstaying their visas are termed ‘illegal’ by the immigration dept
John O'Grady - 6, November, 2011 (17:39)

Oh, Lorikeet - why do you YELL at everyone?
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (17:08)

I will try to clarify once again the difference between an ASYLUM SEEKER, a REFUGEE and an ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.

If you come to this country (by any means) claiming asylum, or if your visa expires and you come forward claiming asylum seeker status, you are an ASYLUM SEEKER.

When your claim has been processed and you are deemed to be a "keeper", you become a REFUGEE awaiting resettlement.

If you have sneaked into the country, or gone to ground after your visa expired, you are an ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT until such time as you either leave the country or apply for asylum seeker status.

If you sneak in, there is a high chance of being deported. (Legitimate persons do not need to sneak.)
Sue Do-Nim - 6, November, 2011 (16:55)

ETS:
I would contest your "clarification".
The point is that unauthorised arrivals, asylum seekers, boat people or whatever other euphemistic tag you wish to apply, are here illegally UNTIL they have been properly assessed as refugees.
That..is the reason we have, in the case of boat arrivals, this despicable Keating introduced mandatory detention system to process these unfortunate people.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (16:55)

ETS:

If you overstay your visa, you are an illegal immigrant until such time as you come forward to claim asylum seeker status, probably a lightning process once you are caught.

Some people sneak into the country in shipping containers.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (16:54)

Robert:

Yes, you're probably right. When a pollster phoned the other day and asked me questions, he said I was one of very few people who knew the names of the state candidates in the local electorate.

The ANZUS agreement became AUS many years ago, when NZ withdrew. At the time, I wondered if they were heroes or idiots ... depends what happens I guess.

I'm sure I read in the National Geographic that the Taliban arose in Pakistan. At the time, they were heroes, and a very corrupt police force were the villains of the piece. If people didn't accede to their graft and corruption, they would come over and rape daughters or kill people.

The resultant power base of the Taliban went to someone's head and the status quo spiralled down into the current hellhole.
Robert - 6, November, 2011 (16:15)

I'm certainly not a pacifist when it comes to any possibility of Australia being threatened by a foreign country. But Afghanistan? Prior to our involvement in that horrible country, if the question was asked of most Australians, "Where on the World map is Afghanistan"? I guarantee eight out of ten people asked wouldn't have had a clue or care. When the Yanks say "Jump" we jump. Whether it is in our interest or not Australian governments are like sheep, we follow because we are supposed to under the ANZUS agreement. For too long we have been involved in the problems the Americans cause in this world, and we, without really thinking, follow on regardless of the expense and consequences. Bring home our troops NOW.
Arthur Mac - 6, November, 2011 (15:10)

Ted, my thoughts exactly.
Ted Crow - 6, November, 2011 (14:58)

We should not be there losing our fine young people's lives for a worthless cause. The Afghanistan population is a mish mash of many tribes, all ready to fight each other with no thought for the good of the country. They will never be united and the recent tragic deaths of 4 of our soldiers, killed by the very people they are training, means it's definitely time to get out. Think of the hospitals, schools, roads, age pension increase etc etc that could be done if we were not spending the billions of dollars that it costs to have our troops there.
ETS - 6, November, 2011 (14:02)

A clarification. Refugees are not in Australia illegally. The Refugee Convention provides for entry by refugees. This includes arrivals by plane and boat. Nothing illegal about it at all.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (13:27)

Rob A:

A lot of the current asylum seekers left Afghanistan before the Minister for Immigration signed an agreement to take permanent settlers in January 2011.

The UN plan to redistribute populations and wealth across the globe is reflected in the high rates of civil war occurring across many nations (which drives asylum seekers out), along with the "dumbing down" of kids in Australian schools.

Now that most of our manufacturing industries have gone to the third world, many people with the required expertise have gone too.

For many years, our education system has been going backwards against the OECD.
Rob A. - 6, November, 2011 (12:56)

It's definately time we got our troops out of Afghanistan we should'nt be following America into all these wars. We have no right imposing our ways on other people,i'm sure we wouldn't like it.

Also I must comment on the asylumseeker problem. I have no problem with people wishing to make a better life for themselves but it must be done the right way and through the right channels. It seems to me the people coming here via boat illegally have little regard for our laws and the others who come here through proper channels. Remember that these people deliberately destroy all their papers and identification which imposes great expense to us to determine just who is coming here. Surely we have the right to know who these people are?
ETS - 6, November, 2011 (12:06)

As you say, the plane arrivals mostly have visas but overstay. Their treatment is very different from refugees arriving by boat but they still need to have their claims processed, yet they remain in the community.

Boat arrivals could well be processed in the same way. Working with local refugee NGOs and communities would be more humane than keeping them in detention for an indefinite period. Better for the refugees and for Australia.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (12:01)

John:

Our children are being deliberately "dumbed down" at school, through low disciplinary standards and poor curricula. Schools also don't attract the same calibre of teacher as they once did, because clever people won't put up with abuse from students or their overprotective parents.

These days many kids are also addicted to technological devices, including IPods and computers. This means they are so heavily multi-tasking that they cannot concentrate completely on anything.

I have also noticed that many 18 year olds are already deaf from listening to loud music.

I have worked as a volunteer with both gifted and struggling students, and also helped with a Year 7 Poetry Class, in which most of the kids couldn't spell. Numeracy is even worse.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (11:54)

Ann Ellis:

Well, I did say I thought something rotten was going on in Afghanistan. All I had to do was carefully watch Kevin Rudd when he was speaking.

Helen:

Everybody knew there were problems with Qantas and unions which had been going on for weeks. Quick action by Labor would have contained the problem and averted widespread suffering.

ETS:

The people who arrive by plane are mostly legitimate visa holders. They only become illegal immigrants or asylum seekers if they stay after their visa has expired. These people don't need detention, because if they did, they would never have been granted a visa in the first place.
ETS - 6, November, 2011 (10:46)

Hello Sue. We still have a long way to go before a new topic starts next Thursday. Plenty of time to rack up a lot of comments.

I agree with Lorikeet’s comment “Keeping people in detention for years is also harmful to their mental health, with suicides a regular occurrence”. It would be an interesting approach if refugees who arrive by boat were treated the same way as those who arrive by plane. The Government could even work with community groups from relevant countries to help look after refugees while their claims for asylum were assessed. The cost saving would surely be welcomed by those who worry about their tax dollars and the health and welfare of refugees would also improved, not to mention the reputation of Australia as a compassionate country.

Something to think about as you enjoy your Sunday lunch.
Kay Kelly - 6, November, 2011 (10:39)

Sue:

The blogging week hasn't finished yet. Last week more than half the comments were completely off topic. This week we are trying to stay on topic. That's the difference.
Sue Do-Nim - 6, November, 2011 (10:32)

Deep thinkers aren't we? All of us...

255 Comments on " Curtsey to the Queen"

77 Comments on "War In Afghanistan".
John O'Grady - 6, November, 2011 (10:21)

Lorikeet, Who has "dumbed down" our children? Their parents &/or siblings,the educational system, the T.V., the Internet ... you?

As I see it the current crop of kids has more going for them than was ever the case in our generation or at any time.
Parrakeet - 6, November, 2011 (10:17)

Ross, I learnt a long time ago that we can't force our living standards on to someone else, regardless of the consequences.

What will be, will be regardless of the time factor. Leave them and bring our troops home and save our young people because the majority over there don't want us there anyway.
Ann Ellis - 6, November, 2011 (9:53)

Before allies became involved in Afghanistan the heroine from Afghanistan into American was 7% now it is 60%!!! No bring our beautiful Aussie Anzacs home or better still lets see some more refugees, immigrants volunteering to go. You only have to look at the faces of our fallen soldiers to know what their ethnic background is. Sorree but its true.
Helen - 6, November, 2011 (7:50)

Bring home the Troops. Things will neve change there. We will never change the thinking of a country so steeped in their religious views. What's more, many don't want change or help and from what I can see, don't like us anyway.

As for Qantas and Mr Joyce (and the Unions). How unfair to spring such a move on the innocent travellers. If I had been a patient who reached the top of the list for a new kidney and "missed out" because of such a pre-meditated action, or lost many thousands also because of such an action and was left stranded here or O/S, I would be upset too at this moment.

Joe Hockey was seen entering meetings with Joyce prior and as it turned out all was "hush hush" in case the government found out and great care taken to keep them out of the loop.
If he knew then Abbott knew too prior...
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (6:55)

Most religions (whether Muslim, Christian, or any other) have dangerous breakaway groups. Often this is caused by a weakening of the doctrine, or some lunatic lusting after both money and power.

Then we have warfare between various factions e.g. Protestants/Catholics, Muslims/Jews, Muslims/Other Types of Muslims.

As someone has already mentioned, some countries are finally overthrowing despotic regimes and are adopting a more democratic process which accepts various religious, racial and cultural differences.

When a Cuban woman was living in a detention centre for asylum seekers in Guantanamo Bay, there were plenty of knife-wielding psychiatric cases terrorising everyone, and some people were injured or killed.

Keeping people in detention for years is also harmful to their mental health, with suicides a regular occurrence.
Lorikeet - 6, November, 2011 (6:43)

I think Ross is a very intelligent man. In Australia our children have been "dumbed down" for years so they cannot earn much income as adults. As living costs keep rising due to privatisation, people will vote for communist parties (e.g. Socialist Alliance, Greens, United Australia Party) simply for survival reasons. The CSIRO Energymark program is a move in this direction, along with the ongoing agenda to reduce our consumption of meat and dairy products.

When I sponsored a child in Latin America, he and the other kids got food, clean water, immunisation, shelter, clothing and education. His parents ceased losing their children to starvation and disease (had already lost 4 out of 6!), the mother was given sewing classes so she could earn an income, and the father learned to grow crops. Previously he had been a musician.
Robyn - 6, November, 2011 (0:56)

Alma:"Are we forgetting that not all terrorism has the root in Afghanistan?"
Spot on!

Ross: How does "Spending our taxes" = "Spending our retirement funds"???
And how come the Green's have the say in how our taxes are spent?.
How great is the risk that refugees = terrorist threat?
Alma Kristensen - 5, November, 2011 (22:25)

There has been wars in Afghanistan for centuries, seems like it could go on forever. Are we forgetting that not all terrorism has the root in Afghanistan. I am afraid we never will win that battle, so why not withdraw the Australian soldiers.
Ross - 5, November, 2011 (18:58)

The problem that exists in Afghanistan at the moment is a direct result of the premature withdrawal of aid by the US after the USSR pulled out. No funding for school resulted in radicals being the only force left in the country. A generation later we reap the whirlwind - big surprise. If we do nothing to assist the moderates to regain control of the country we will only see more drug financed terrorism,and more refugees. It is the old story spend money to teach a man to fish and he can feed his family or we can have the Green's alternative of spending our taxes(retirement funds)to feed more and more refugees and expose ourselves to more terrorism in the future. PS. How could any person ignore the abhorrent mistreatment of women under the Taliban regime by allowing it to continue.
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (18:52)

I am not at all xenophobic.
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (18:50)

Yes, I meant "heroin", but every country could use a new hero or heroine.

There are also quite a few countries around trading in very young flesh, whether male or female.

McCains has certainly "done it again". After 2 Senators sorted them out on the Chinese Potato Trade, one had to do it again within 2 weeks.
Sue Do-Nim - 5, November, 2011 (18:04)

@Bob B :13:00

I think what you're really saying is...

Aaaah McCain you've done it again.??
diane - 5, November, 2011 (17:48)

bring our troops home ,this is not a fair war when we have the enemy working with our troops and they can turn on our men
Laurie Keats - 5, November, 2011 (16:46)

I would join John O’Grady in buying a heroine in Afghanistan. Several in fact!
But his view that Indonesians are hungry and covet our northern lands has no basis in fact. Indonesia has much unused land in its eastern Islands and Sumatra, is trying to get Javanese to go there but there is great resistance to moving. The North of Australia is dry and the water seasonal. To develop agriculture there you need the kind of investment which Indonesia could not make. I support the American alliance for other reasons.
I note that my singular homonym makes 11 contributions and seems to be touchy about being contradicted. She supports National Service for xenophobic reasons. I did it at 18 year in the 50s. It detracted from our defence abilities and was scrapped at the military’s request. It came back in for Viet Nam. National service as character building is also a Colonel Blimp delusion
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (16:38)

I have checked some data and found the need to correct a previous comment. Afghanistan has a vast supply of opium crops, but is not one of the oil rich Middle Eastern nations.

I have as yet been unable to find the video address by Kevin Rudd in relation to the war in Afghanistan.
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (15:57)

Here is one useful bit, but not the one I am still searching for:

AFGHANISTAN WAR

"It's time to recognise once and for all that terrorism central is Afghanistan. You see, a lot of Jemaah Islamiah's terrorist operations in South East Asia are financed by the reconstitution of the opium crop in Afghanistan – $2.3 billion a year worth of narco-finance flowing out of Afghanistan into terrorist groups here in our region, our neighbourhood, our backyard."
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (15:49)

John:

Indonesian is not the only overcrowded country in need of new lands. We can easily add India, Japan and parts of Africa to the list, and that's just for starters.

As I remember the UK unloaded its surplus population on Australia via convict settlements, and many of our forebears also came here on Assisted Passages.

I will see if I can search out a link on either Kevin Rudd's speech or the heroine trade. I used to have an excellent map of the Middle East which clearly showed the spread of various religious faiths and the amount of oil produced by each country.
John O'Grady - 5, November, 2011 (15:20)

Lorikeet, 'heroine' trade in Afganistan? Can one actually go there and buy one? Oh, wow!

Our involvement is as a direct result of our alliance with the US. If we had not had such a relationship through WW2 and there had not been US victory at the conclusion of the battle of the Coral Sea, we would have been overun by the Japanese. There is no less a threat on our Northern border right now - 250,000,000 hungry Indonesians looking at a lot of land we do not use intensively in our high rainfull N.T. and North Qld. We really do need to continue that alliance and if our involvement in their battles is all that is required, so be it.
Allan E Ray - 5, November, 2011 (15:04)

The general who was in charge of our troops in Vietnam has alraedy stated that Afganistan is the same sort of debacle as Vietnam was.Every time more Australian Soldiers die the politicians make all this bullshit tough talk becuase they think the voters want to hear that.It is not their lives at risk
Robyn - 5, November, 2011 (14:43)

Bob B,
Thanks for your supportive words at (13:00). I know I did not personally attack Lorikeet at (7:18). Unfortunately those capital letters she uses to misrepresent are what capture the attention. My point was valid. I dislike Tony Abbott but if I grabbed every opportunity to rant and rave against him I'm sure others would find that boring. We all have mixed political persuasions and I truly respect that and enjoy the interesting, intelligent commentary provided by many bloggers regardless of political leanings. There is quite a difference between exposing one's political views, and harping on and on against political parties that others support.

There are some wonderful views being put forward on this topic. Seems most want our troops brought home.
Nairn - 5, November, 2011 (13:43)

Waste of time and a waste of money.
Never got money thrown at me , when I served in Malaysia .
Now , my mates and I are in pain and still on Money or Medal (AASM).
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (13:30)

That's right, Currawong. Alan Joyce dished some back to the Senators as well, a situation which could have been averted by a more timely referral of the matter to Fair Work Australia.

This would have saved the country money, the workers from loss of income and hardship, and lots of Australian and overseas passengers from a lot of frustration, lost opportunities and expense.

The losses of Qantas would have been fewer.

The opportunity for both sides of the parliament to lambast and blame one another yet again also wouldn't have arisen. They would simply have moved onto the next dog fight.
Currawong - 5, November, 2011 (13:05)

Lorikeet

Your agreement with the way Alan Joyce was treated tells is own story about you. The little I saw showed Alan to give some back. I thought an inquiry was supposed to draw out the facts and come to a conclusion to make things better - not lambaste an individual because you happen to disagree with his actions.

Those senators demeaned themselves bigtime.
Bob B - 5, November, 2011 (13:00)

Robyn

I too think the schools veggie gardens are a wonderful idea that provides knowledge and health to our students. Quite far removed from the wholesale control of the population by big business. McCains may have done some bad things in the name of making money but their support here is to be lauded.

Ignore the unreasonable backlash you are experiencing: I found no abuse or personal attack in your words - just plain disagreement which is not unusual.

Now I will likely suffer a similar fate. Such is life.

There seems to be very strong views about pulling out right now by our seniors who are well schooled in the school of hard knocks.
Arabella - 5, November, 2011 (12:36)

I am not sure that Afghanistan was ever a major threat to the security to Australia. There have been so many opinions and articles written about this the truth, if we ever knew it, has sunk into the mist of words. Our defence force personnel have been a wonderful resource, and given much of themselves for Australia in doing a good job. I don't believe we should still be there, and I'm not sure that we should have been there from the start of our involvement. We have a complex region in Asia/thePacific. We need to ensure we understand our own region, encourage trade relations and education exchanges etc. Also, we need a sophisticated surveillance system around Australia, and I wonder if the money for that is going on fighting other country's battles. The PM is doing a great job managing a minority government but any PM needs to keep an eye on our region.
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (11:00)

I think Gareth made some excellent comments about the need for various factions to accept one another's differences in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

I thought Alan Joyce from QANTAS got the grilling he richly deserved. I don't really care who dished it up to him, but the inquiry was mainly designed to get the government off the hook for not taking the matter to Fair Work Australia much sooner.

While Fair Work Australia is a much better proposition than John Howard's "Work Choices" (his main election loser) .... also intelligently dubbed "Worst Choices" by a Greens supporter ... the government has certainly not succeeded in creating Excellent Work Australia, hence the "fair" rating.

It's unusual to find WEG in a bad humour.
ETS - 5, November, 2011 (10:42)

This morning on the news Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Taliban, said any of his forces that killed civilians would be subject to Islamic law. This is the same Omar who gave safe haven to Osama and the Al Qaeda terrorists, so he is complicit in their acts of violence. Now, like Gadaffi, he is trying to look moderate; in Omar’s case with the hope of getting back into power.

It seems the US is now prepared to negotiate with the Taliban if it means stability in the region. I know the Afghanis are responsible for their own fate and we may end up with a government we don’t particularly like. But like Dieter and Robyn, I feel for the Afghani women and children if the Taliban do get back in control.
ETS - 5, November, 2011 (10:41)

Gee, without any provocative comments that I can see this subject has turned into another rant by the Green-hating Gillard-bashing usual suspects. I would have thought this subject was above the usual partisan comments that make up much of this blog, but apparently not.

It seems the overwhelming opinion of most bloggers is that the objectives of going into Afghanistan have been achieved with the winding back of Al Qaeda and the death of Osama bin Laden. The fight now is very much between Afghanis and foreign troops don’t really have a role if all they are doing is propping up one group of Afghanis against another. If there is no longer a security threat to Australia, it could well be time to bring our forces home.
Gareth - 5, November, 2011 (10:29)

As I recall the war in Afghanistan arose out of President George Bush's war on terror following the events of 9/11. That occurred 10 years ago. Osama Bin Laden is dead as are many of his associates. Yet the war drags on. Perhaps were are yet to see the worst that international terrorism has to offer, but staying in Afghanistan probably wont change that. I think that it is time to come home. Many countries are experiencing internal strife but some are managing to find solutions, albeit in many cases, shaky ones. Perhaps it is time for the Afghanis to similarly sort themselves out in a way that accommodates their various cultural and customary norms. We in the West should be supportive of any such attempts, but continuing to wage war would seem to be futile.
John S - 5, November, 2011 (10:10)

A most confusing issue. I've read a couple of novels about the country which throws light on the reasons for the civil war argument. But every time a 'mistake 'is made that results in innocent locals getting maimed or killed, the Taliban exploit it to their advantage. Extremism is promoted by the widespread lack of education and ignorance and the divisions in the country based on tribal ethnicity. Part of me says "Is it worth it to continue risking Australian lives?" Another part of me says we must do something to support those who genuinely want (once again) to create a new, liberated,free society. But the local people need to want us to be there, not just the ineffective and corrupt Afgani government.
Alan Davies - 5, November, 2011 (10:07)

There is plenty to be done in our own country like dealing with child abuse. Get your own society straightened out before you go into other peoples' countries. When you look behind the veil someone is making money and these things start out well-intended but are hijacked by the money-makers. And we are only told what "they" want us to hear.
WEG - 5, November, 2011 (9:49)

Thks Kay - I just had to let it out.....I tried to connect it to the extremist theme.
Kay Kelly - 5, November, 2011 (9:42)

WEG:

I know this is off topic, but I agree entirely with your criticism of Bob Brown's and Doug Cameron's performance in yesterday's QANTAS inquiry! Their questions showed no intelligence or logic, just animosity towards Alan Joyce. And I am not necessarily a Joyce supporter. In fact, I'm not sure what to think of the whole affair! But I do know I found the performance of Bob Brown and Doug Cameron very wanting!
WEG - 5, November, 2011 (9:26)

Sue Do-Nim - 5, November, 2011 (3:54).

Like your comments Sue – especially that one about Australia’s most poisonous brown snake.

Doug Cameron and Bob Brown venomous and vile performance at the Senate enquiry, and we’re paying for these Senators. I’m stumped for words. Their Qs? were inept, and lacked any relevance to the matter. I don’t expected anymore from such blinkered and narrow minded individuals.
Tony Sheldon input was reasonable, but he showed the Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde when he then gave his press interview afterwards. What a dipstick.
David Smart - 5, November, 2011 (9:25)

I believe it is time to go now as we have seen in other situations that these people don`t want us there now, even the top brass said so
Robyn - 5, November, 2011 (7:18)

Lorikeet:

School gardening programs are good. As well as gardening skills, children learn nature study, health and nutrition through these programs.

Compulsory national service for 18 year old boys and girls would not be advantageous in my view. It was last introduced in lottery form in the 1960's for 20 year old boys and created havoc for many young people's lives and worry for their families. It is not necessary.

Please don't hijack the topic yet again to indulge in Green's bashing it gets boring!
Rod Fountain - 5, November, 2011 (7:12)

Why should the death of 3 more of our soldiers make the Government sit up and start taking notice.
The Russians couldnt win the war in Afghanistan so what makes Gillard think our paltry 1500 odd troops will win.
Gillard doesnt get phased by people dying ,you just have to remember the 4 lads that died in installing roof bats and then there are the refugee boat people that keep getting drowned.
The more that die the less pensions Gillard has to pay .
Pull our troops out and do it now
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (6:01)

Sue Do-Nim:

Greens are pacificists who believe those who live on Planet Earth should be one big happy family. They support reducing the size of our army. I'm not sure what makes them believe that heaven is a place on earth, or that human beings will ever be perfect.

Over the years, our ability to defend our own country has been seriously compromised by financial cutbacks and abolition of National Service for 18-year-olds.

I think the part-time Army Reserve used to be larger as well.

Just about every high school used to have an Army, Navy or Air Force Cadet Corps.

In future, I expect we will see a Green Cadet Corps in all high schools. They won't learn how to defend their country, but will learn to grow vegan foods and plant trees.

We already have a School Veggie Patch program in primary schools sponsored by McCains, the same company which imports vegetables from China!
Lorikeet - 5, November, 2011 (5:50)

This blog now has 2 jealous competitive copycats: Laurakeet and Parakeet ... but here is this week's mystery question:

Who is Yuka?
Pat - 5, November, 2011 (5:39)

It is definitely time that Australian troops
were withdrawn from Afghanistan.
I feel for the families of the soldiers killed
and think Australia's assistance is not appreciated.
Merilyn - 5, November, 2011 (4:24)

Enough is enough - it is time to bring our troops home. Being a mother who has had to go through the stress of having a son serving in Afghanistan 2009/2010, our children are human beings with families and it does affect them with their peers being killed and injured.
Afghanistan Must now take control of their own.
Sue Do-Nim - 5, November, 2011 (3:54)

Like so many others I’m a bit confused about our exact role and direction in Afghanistan.
However the issue is one of the few that there is complete bipartisan agreement upon between the two major parties.
Do they know something we don’t or have they simply failed to adequately articulate the reasons for our involvement?
The leader of the potentially most dangerous and extreme political party in Australia’s history ,Dr.Bob Brown, wants immediate withdrawal of our troops.
His previously stated hatred of all things American is the sole basis of his argument although it’s veiled by emotive rhetoric and banal commentary.

In my humble opinion, we have to plan an exit strategy that is both dignified and well reasoned and the sooner the better.
Dulcie - 5, November, 2011 (1:53)

It would be helpful to receive up to date advice
about progress or improvement our troops have made. It is certainly understandable that we feel like withdrawing after such traic loss of life without hearing of any progress being made over there. We also need to be much more selective about who we allow into our country.
People from non-Christian cultures are bound to have different standards from us.
Geoff Rich - 5, November, 2011 (0:23)

Don't whimp out, be firm, stay the distance.
When we want a policeman, we call for help. Who do the Afghanis call? Those who say that we've suffered enough haven't suffered at all. The only ones who will suffer are the Afghan people under the Taliban. Britain (and Australia) didn't mind the yanks coming into the 39/45 war in Europe - or should they have stayed home and minded their own business?
Yuka - 4, November, 2011 (23:44)

I love you lorikeet. Your a woman who knows her own mind and that it very respectible.
olivia pascoe - 4, November, 2011 (23:08)

It seems history has taught us nothing. We should not be involved in other countries' problems, let them sort it out themselves like they did in Libya. Have we not gotten enough grief from previous wars, we are not defending Australia.
Sui Ting Tses - 4, November, 2011 (22:25)

I believe that history tells us that when once the most powerful army on earth, the Soviet Army could not conquer Afghanistan, it is futile for other countries to try to pacify it by mere military force. We must accept that Afghanistan is a tribal society and it is entirely different from our western society. It is wishful thinking to impose or interpolate western democratic system on this country as we are poles apart from the understanding of democracy as the Afghans and the West have completely different values on this issue. The only thing for Australia and other countries is to withdraw its military force from there and let the people of that country to put their own house in order.
gbc - 4, November, 2011 (22:15)

Get out and stay out!! It has been a tribal situation for longer than any of us have been around and it will stay that way well after we have gone. Russia could not get on top of it, America certainly won't so lets get out and leave them to it. The comment some years ago from one of them "we will not win with bullets but we will win with dollars" It is costing America big dollars and they are as good as broke now.
Robyn - 4, November, 2011 (20:27)

Sorry, - Deiter! Don't know what is going on here. Have tried to say sorry Deiter about 6 times and the security code won't pass it. Here goes again
Sorry Deiter! Will try to get your name spelt properly from now on.
Lorikeet - 4, November, 2011 (20:01)

Here is a link on the Taliban and its operations in Afghanistan, for those who are interested in reading it:

http://middleeast.about.com/od/afghanistan/ss/me080914a.htm
Robyn - 4, November, 2011 (19:40)

Agree with you entirely Dieter.
Deiter B - 4, November, 2011 (18:29)

Bucephalas and Bob B make a lot of good points. Our soldiers are fighting bravely in Afghanistan and the cowardly attack by someone the diggers thought they could trust is disgusting. Why are we there after all if that sort of thing is happening?

It is a civil war and the fight is among the Afghan people. The best we can do is pull out and let them get on with it, even if we don't like what happens afterwards.

But I do feel sorry for all the women and children who would have better lives if it weren't for the Taliban.
Lorikeet - 4, November, 2011 (17:53)

WEG:

Yes, I understand where you're coming from. Perhaps the Muslim cleric who bit the hand that feeds him should have to head up the new Islamic Army that Australian sends back to fight in its own war.

I think most people would be aware that a lot of the goings on in other countries are kept secret from the general Australian community.

This is why we must continue to scrutinise the demeanours of our elected representatives, in order to decide whether or not we are being lied to or misled.
WEG - 4, November, 2011 (16:28)

From my reading, the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, and subsequently the Afghan communist government fell in 1992. A civil war followed, as the previously suppressed extremist Islamic group, the Taliban fought against the various tribal groups.
What a mess! Why would Australia willingly send it’s troops to stand in the middle of such a firestorm? There must be a greater cause in the world where we can assist and the population will show some gratitude.

Afghanistan is bounded by Pakistan and Iran. What chance has it got to develop a democratic society with neighbours like these?

A controversial and well known Australian born, Sydney based Muslim extremist and self appointed Islamic cleric has disgraced himself once again by desecrated the memory of fallen Australian soldiers on Facebook yesterday. I suggest we have some of the enemy within.
ETS - 4, November, 2011 (13:37)

http://www.defence.gov.au/op/afghanistan/index.htm

This is the link to information on the Defence Dept website about Australia's commitment in Afghanistan. It is very informative reading, especially the fact sheet link on the right column which shows the extent of Australian involvement.

Unfortunately nothing to answer the questions about withdrawal.
Bob B - 4, November, 2011 (13:04)

Like you, I'm in the dark. I think I have head on TV or radio its over a year to go.
Robyn - 4, November, 2011 (11:50)

Bob B,

How long will that training task take before it is completed?
We are told very little.
Bob B - 4, November, 2011 (11:30)

Robyn

I want out too and the sooner the better. But I think we should finish the training task we have undertaken otherwise all that effort could be lost. As I said earlier, the government should be more open with us and divulge just what is going on along with a withdrawal plan to achieve that in the best way. Hopefully the US is seriously considering a total withdrawal.

Afganistan will then be left to look after itself which is only right and proper and as someone else has said whatever form that takes is non of our business.
Kay Kelly - 4, November, 2011 (11:05)

You make a good point, ETS. Unfortunately, given the constant and wholesale level of terrorism against foreign troops and officials, as well as against the Afghanis themselves, terrorism has indeed become an everyday experience. It will take some time and a great deal of courage by the Afghanis themselves to break that cycle of terrorism, and make it clear that those who perpetrate these criminal acts will be hunted down and tried. A very big ask of a government and a population living in such an unstable environment. But until that happens, terrorism will continue.
Lorikeet - 4, November, 2011 (9:12)

I am really upset to think that Australian families with relatives fighting in Afghanistan now have even more reason to fear for the lives of their loved ones.

A man I know left the army last year after several trips to Afghanistan. He said his participation there was too much of a strain on his family and friends.

I think the federal government will now be experiencing a lot of pressure to get out of Afghanistan ASAP.

There are other things happening in Afghanistan above and beyond a civil war. These involve other nations including The Netherlands.
Robyn - 4, November, 2011 (9:06)

Bucephalus makes good points and I agree with his conclusion .
I think we should begin withdrawal now and let Afghanistan resolve its own civil war. We need to accept whatever that resolution will be.

The death of Osama Bin Laden is meaningless in relation to this conflict.

We always seem to follow America's lead so I expect we will begin withdrawal next year anyway.
ETS - 4, November, 2011 (8:33)

After ten years in Afghanistan it is proper to be looking at continued Australian involvement in the conflict. Other people have made valid points about Australia’s role in protecting Afghanis, training the Afghan army and supporting the social development of the country. The murder of the three Australian servicemen was a gutless and treacherous act by someone who apparently had worked closely with the Aussies for a couple of years. We can only hope it is an isolated incident, otherwise it will undo so much of the good work already done.

I agree with Richard Woolcott that it is a civil war now and the Government should review our ongoing role, especially as other countries have announced their plans to pull out. Our concern has to be to avoid a situation where the extremists can rebuild their positions. It takes more than a strong army to do this; the whole Afghan community has to see terrorism as totally unacceptable.
Lorikeet - 4, November, 2011 (8:04)

Freedom of Religion is one of the cornerstones of democracy. As a former Exit Counsellor of people leaving recognised Destructive Cults, I believe people should be able to practise any religion of their choosing (even if it seems a bit bizarre to others) as long as they don't break any laws or use it to hurt anyone.

What is missing from some Middle Eastern nations (and, in some instances, our own) is mutual respect.
Kay Kelly - 4, November, 2011 (6:20)

Yes, Laurakeet, I too saw the interview with Richard Wolcott. What he said was very sensible. There were good reasons for the US and allies to go into Afghanistan originally, but lately it does seem more like a civil war. I can only hope the Afghanis that have been trained and helped by foreign troops and officials can help form a suitable government. But, you are right, Bucephalas, the government that emerges may not be what we would prefer. The hold of tribalism and religion appears very strong there.
Laurakeet - 3, November, 2011 (19:45)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-03/australia-taking-sides-in-civil-war-woolcott/3620298

This link is to an interview with Richard Wolcott, former DFAT Head. Wolcott sees Afghanistan as a civil war and believes Australia no longer has a valid reason to be there.

An interesting point of view.
Lorikeet - 3, November, 2011 (18:53)

I'm sure something else is going on in Afghanistan besides the good work our personnel are doing.

When Kevin Rudd was speaking about it on TV quite some time ago, he seemed very sincere in speaking about the humanitarian work, but when he was discussing some other aspect, the look on his face did not match the words coming out of his mouth.

Kevin Rudd has since had to be given lessons in how to disguise his true feelings.
Kay Kelly - 3, November, 2011 (17:58)

Yes, Bob, I have the same concerns. What treachery and cowardice! One's first instinct is to just want to get our troops out of there and leave the Afghanis to sort themselves out. In addition, there is so much corruption within the government. Unfortunately it is unlikely that democracy can ever flourish amidst such tribalism and dominance by religion. I do feel sorry for the women and girls in particular.
Bucephalas - 3, November, 2011 (17:57)

The questions re Afghanistan we must ask are
what are our objectives,
have we moved toward achieving them in the last ten years and
is there any chance of achieving them in the next are they attainable in the foreseeable future?
Our objectives were to eliminate el Quaida, to destroy the Taliban, and get a stable and government in Afghanistan. The first has been achieved, the second has seen the Taliban weakened and regrettably the western military presence harms the chances of long term stability.
The conclusion therefore is that we should withdraw militarily as soon as possible and encourage Afghans to achieve a stable Government in Afghanistan which may well involve including the Taliban in the Government. We can help in various ways with aid and discouraging Pakistan from their destabilising activities.
But we must recognise that what emerges will not necessarily be what we prefer and that we cannot solve all the world’s problems
Bob B - 3, November, 2011 (17:04)

Kay

As an ex-serviceman I just cannot come to terms with the murder of our three troops in this way. It was an act of cowardise. For the murderers father to say what he did does not give me any comfort; hopefully it gave him comfort. I really feel for those poor troops over there as they cannot rely on anybody at any time other than themselves. What an environment to be in!!!!!

I am concerned that the immigrants we bring into this country from that part of the world have the same attitude.
Kay Kelly - 3, November, 2011 (16:27)

(cont.)

I fully supported the decision by the US (and Australia) to invade Afghanistan after the atrocities of September 11, 2001. I consider the Taliban rule to be so brutal, archaic and repressive of women that I would support any action to try to prevent their return to power. I don't believe the death of Osama bin Laden has any effect on ongoing terrorism. However, the world is a better place without him.
Kay Kelly - 3, November, 2011 (16:18)

Brian, Bob:

All good comments. You have both made some excellent points as well as highlighting the issues to be considered in deciding to withdraw our troops. The tragic news last week certainly makes one think that we should be planning towards a pull-out in line with US plans.
Brian Storm - 3, November, 2011 (16:11)

When to leave is such a difficult question. I don’t have an answer. As long as our involvement is worthwhile and helping Afghanis to improve their lives, there is a purpose in being there. If Australia is widely resented as an occupying force then our forces are likely to face dangers beyond what the military should expect and it may be time to leave. The difficult political decision to leave will have to made in conjunction with the people our forces are working with to reduce the risk of terrorist forces rising again to fill the vacuum.

To the Moderator, the 160 word limit is unreasonably restrictive when there is a substantial comment to be made. Would you please consider increasing it, possibly to 300 words? Thank you.
Brian Storm - 3, November, 2011 (16:11)

The death of Osama bin Laden is irrelevant to anything now happening in Afghanistan. There are very good reasons for Australia to be serving in Afghanistan and we can all hope that when our forces do leave, the country will be a better place than when they arrived. There is much going on about which we know very little or nothing. What we do know is that our people are involved in education, health, engineering, and many other activities to improve the lives of Afghanis. That involvement includes military training for the Afghanis to defend themselves. I hope the tragic events of last week are an aberration and will not disrupt the good work the Australian forces are doing.
Bob B - 3, November, 2011 (16:00)

Part 2

We mere mortals are not privy to the actual status of the overall operation but as it seems to have changed from conducting war like operations to training the Afgan Army to do so. If that is the case we should complete that task and then get out.

There must be a schedule for this activity and that should be made clear to all Australian citizens. A gradual withdrawal should be planned now and implemented.
Bob B - 3, November, 2011 (15:59)

To answer the question we must look at why we are there in the first place. It is a direct consequence of the terrorist attacks in the US we know as 9/11 and others. The objective is to obliterate al Qaeda and bring the Taliban to its knees (I think). This is not totally clear but seems reasonable.

Concisely, we are in Afghanistan because we believe that freedom is something worth fighting for and “radical Islam” must be defeated or our freedom will be in jeopardy.

See Part 2
Lorikeet - 3, November, 2011 (15:24)

I don't think the death of Osama Bin Laden changes anything at all. They would have had someone promoted to the leadership position overnight.

When Kevin Rudd spoke about our involvement in Afghanistan some time ago on TV, I thought there were some excellent reasons for us to be there, but I felt certain that something was going on that he had no interest in. There's clearly a lot more to it than the Australian public knows about.

I have heard opinions regarding the heroine trade and also access to oil.

Someone from the DLP has an interest in training refugees from Afghanistan into an army and sending them back to fight in their own war.

I think this is quite a good idea, because they would be familiar with the local culture, tactics and terrain. Then when their homeland became safe again, they and their families could return permanently.

Member Login Details

War in Afghanistan

War in Afghanistan

Comments (223)

National Seniors - 10, November, 2011 (13:09)

ETS - 10, November, 2011 (12:00)

Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (11:44)

Sue Do-Nim - 10, November, 2011 (11:41)

Arthur Mac - 10, November, 2011 (11:10)

Laurakeet - 10, November, 2011 (10:56)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (10:55)

ETS - 10, November, 2011 (9:54)

Helen - 10, November, 2011 (9:12)

Lorikeet - 10, November, 2011 (7:43)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (7:40)

Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (7:34)

Helen - 10, November, 2011 (7:27)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (7:06)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (6:53)

Kay Kelly - 10, November, 2011 (6:20)

WEG - 10, November, 2011 (6:01)

WEG - 10, November, 2011 (5:46)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (4:30)

Sue Do-Nim - 10, November, 2011 (4:07)

Robyn - 10, November, 2011 (2:22)

Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (22:08)

ETS - 9, November, 2011 (22:05)

ETS - 9, November, 2011 (22:05)

Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (21:50)

Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (21:43)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (21:34)

Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (20:57)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (19:33)

Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (19:27)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (19:23)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (19:08)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (19:04)

Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (18:57)

Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (18:18)

Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (17:53)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (17:09)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (16:50)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (16:02)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (15:05)

Sue Do-Nim - 9, November, 2011 (15:01)

Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (13:34)

ETS - 9, November, 2011 (13:05)

ETS - 9, November, 2011 (12:46)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (11:44)

Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (11:20)

Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (11:08)

John O'Grady - 9, November, 2011 (10:59)

Bob B - 9, November, 2011 (10:58)

Laurakeet - 9, November, 2011 (10:12)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (9:57)

Robyn - 9, November, 2011 (9:45)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (9:37)

Ralfe - 9, November, 2011 (9:10)

ETS - 9, November, 2011 (8:24)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (7:55)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:54)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:41)

Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:35)

Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:31)

Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:29)

Helen - 9, November, 2011 (7:25)

Lorikeet - 9, November, 2011 (7:23)

Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:20)

Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:16)

Kay Kelly - 9, November, 2011 (7:08)

WEG - 9, November, 2011 (5:55)

Robert Duncan - 8, November, 2011 (21:00)

Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (20:31)

Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (20:14)

Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:59)

Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:51)

rmcn - 8, November, 2011 (19:43)

Lorikeet - 8, November, 2011 (19:42)

Robyn - 8, November, 2011 (19:01)

Sue Do-Nim - 8, November, 2011 (18:32)