Scott Morrison

[freddie*rooster]

Is full of it, how can a Minister go on and on and on, for what about 3/4hr, repeating the same ole over and over again without answering the questions asked of him? All he done was repeat his "crystal clear" slogan when in fact nothing is crystal clear except his Government's failure to stop the boats, as per their election promise.

[tall_bearded]

 guess the you missed the bit where I said  "you can leave anytime you like and go anywhere you like, just not here, which pretty much encapsulates off shore processing"

That is, those on Manus are not seeking a safe haven.  They could have done that elsewhere a lot closer to home and at considerably less cot to themselves. They are seeking residence.  Now we have said we’ll provide one but not the other. 

Therefore if they don’t like what’s on offer here they are free to leave, and join the millions of other refugees in other camps around the world, where they will find, in most cases, living conditions are far worse

[freakiness]

---

@tall_bearded wrote:

Old news.

Isn’t it a case she only witnessed the aftermath.  That is she didn’t actually see anything but simply repeating what she was told

I say again I will wait for the facts.  Not hearsay, innuendo, like the shoot to kill order

---

No, she was there. She said she did not see all the violence on the second night as she was watching from a roof a couple of hundred metres away.

[lakeland27]

she isnt the only witness anyway. mark colvin was in touch with staff members who told the same story a week ago. the same story that emerged yesterday on the ABC site.. that guards had invited rascals in from outside.

[donnashuggy]

We are taking about a specific event.  The protest, the riot or however else you want to refer to it

Were you talking about the protest here:

Three meals a day, a roof over your head, the right to worship as you please, a recreation centre and oh yes you can leave anytime you like and go anywhere you like, just not here, which pretty much encapsulates off shore processing.

I was responding to that. Make up your mind.

[poddster]

I am just going to ask a question that requires no answer but hopefully it might generate some thought.

" What would you do if people forced their way into your home, demanded that you feed them, provide them with shelter, entertain them, and fund their legal defence if you tried to take legal action ?"

[freakiness]

Completely off topic and irrelevant.

[debra9275]

I have thought about it. 

the two scenarios don't even compare.  if someone forced their way into my home, . it is most unlikely that they would be asylum seekers escaping a regime, or seeking safety.

home invaders are more likely to be criminals or thieves.

for example, if somone's home burnt down and they wanted to come into my home for safety. I would allow them to

[tall_bearded]

Ok my bad.

She is perfectly entitled to voice her opinion as to as to conditions in the camp, as I am perfectly entitled to voice an opinion as to what credence it I to be given, which to me is none.   

Furthermore, my comments are directed towards what occurred on the second night, and I think we are now in agreement she was not in compound on that night.

As for direct observation, from a point a couple of hundred meters away and in the dark try that in any court and see how far you get. 

[poddster]

Debra that satisfies my curiosity, in my scenario you have concluded that unlawful entry and demands are criminal in nature with out having prior knowledge of the background of the invaders.

Yet you ar willing to defend others, of whom you have no prior knowledge as to their background, on the ground that you you deem them "asylum seekers" when in fact they are most likely opportunity seekers.

[the_great_she_elephant]

She is perfectly entitled to voice her opinion as to as to conditions in the camp, as I am perfectly entitled to voice an opinion as to what credence it I to be given, which to me is none. 

The bif difference is that hers is an informed first hand opinion, based on personal experience, yours is a second hand  opinion based on information from a source that has already proved itself to be unreliable.