You have kids FB? Because from what I've read it's cheaper and easier for them to get their hands on MDMA than a six pack. I have to say the headline was designed to shock but all it did was intrigue me ;)

You'd be suprised about how many "druggos" are actually middle aged professionals who live in leafy upper middle class suburbs.
Almost 30% of Adults under 30 have used illicit substances recently in Australia according to that article.
It's not just junkies living homeless on the street

I should add as well, no-one deserves to receive a death sentence for private drug use or possession, regardless of their wealth or social status, criminalisation of simple possession and the war on drugs is a giant failure and waste of money, and why nations are beginning to move toward legalisation

Hempy,

Anyone who quotes the eternal words of the great George Carlin is ok in my book....

So it seems Turnbull has had his "Oceanic Viking" moment and given in to emotional blackmail.

Expect a whole lot of burnt babies :(

I wonder though, was the problem that they didn't want to release the baby back into the hands of parents who had deliberately burned their baby to rort the immigration system (sounds more than reasonable) or was it really as the hand wringers would have us beleive? That it was Nauru that was the problem? In which case when was the general election when these doctors were voted into government?

Well, what were the "refugees" going to do?

They'd found that the "If I don't get what I want, I'll hold my breath until my face turns blue" act wasn't working anymore.
Hunger strikes, stitching lips and sitting on roofs seemed to have lost their media appeal as well.

What to do?
"I know,.. that magic, emotive word, "Bay-beee".
"That got 'em moving, didn't it?"
"Scruples?.. What're they?"

As Clare says, expect more of the same.

And there is still the issue of if Nauru is such a "Hell Hole" (I understand the Nauruans are not very happy about the way they and their island are being portrayed) then surely we must take all Nauruan children too.

How about they just deport the people they put there there who are doing the abusing? Then it might not be such a "Hell Hole".

I think the doctors' words are being twisted to suit the hand wringers' agenda.

If it is such a hell hole we had better take everyone off Naru.

I suspect that once the 'Rent-a-crowd' protesters have finished claiming victory and slapping each others backs they will saunter off to the next great moral challenge and quickly forget about the baby and its family.

And then whilst their attention is elsewhere, the Government will quietly send them back to Nauru, most likely by a private charter.

I must have missed something, a headline on BBC news says the baby is going back to Nauru? :confused:

As the good 'ole boys say, never let the facts get in the way of a bigoted rant...:yuk:

Police dismiss claims Baby Asha deliberately hurt by mother in order to leave Nauru | Australia news | The Guardian

Hmm,
While I treat anything I read in the Grauniad with the same caution that I accord anything propagated by Murdoch's acolytes...
A few things make me wonder about this case.

As reported in the (Murdoch) Courier Mail, a security guard had stated that the baby's mother confessed to deliberately causing the injury.
Queensland Police also had confirmed that they'd been notified of a Child Protection Order (although they're being a little coy about when and by whom).

I was talking to a Nepalese couple (neighbours) a little earlier this evening.
They were of the firm opinion that a Nepalese woman could never deliberately harm a child - any child.
Unless, of course, she were mentally unhinged... (hmm).
It's been my life experience, though, that some people will do, or say, anything to achieve what they see, at the time, to be an important goal.

Then, there's the Guardian article itself, which struck me as giving an unduly large amount of space to the 'refugee advocates' et cetera.
Big on emotive language, but a bit short on facts.
One 'advocate' in particular, a Shen Narayanasamy, a human rights director for GetUp, accused (Minister) Dutton of ignoring the medical evidence.
"Dutton is in possession of medical reports which clearly state that Baby Asha's injuries were accidental", Nayaranasamy said.

What??
The medical report simply states.. "There is no clinical evidence that the burn injury was non-accidental".

The Guardian article then goes on to air, at length, the 'advocates' claims that this supposed disingenuousness on the part of the Minister is akin to
Peter Reith's 'Children Overboard' saga from some years ago.
Talk about clutching at straws.
These "Advocates" wouldn't dream of playing with the truth to suit their own agenda, would they?

When this bullsh1t-fest is over, I do hope the poor pawn (sorry, I mean child) suffers no lasting ill-effects.
.

There are plenty of other links carrying the story, that just happened to be the first one in my news feed. Oh, and the mother is from Nepal, that hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism....

4.4% of the Nepalese population is Islamic, so who knows what the mother's thoughts may be. Certain sections of the Muslim population follow the Muslim Brotherhood brand, now there is a fundamentalist group.

The stated goals of the Muslim Brotherhood are as follows:

1. Inform the world about Islam and spread its teachings
2. Unify the world under the banner of Islam
3. Raise the standard of living and achieve social justice
4. Fight disease, poverty, ignorance and hunger
5. Liberate the Ummah (Islamic nation) from foreign rule
6. Establish a worldwide Islamic state (caliphate)
7. Build a new world civilization based on sharia and Islam.

Muslim Brotherhood brand in Nepal

Muslim Mirror » Nepal unrest: No solution in sight, Terai death toll 59

Whatever the rights or wrongs on either side, peaceful it isn't.

http://smartraveller.gov.au/countries/nepal

lol yes, those earthquakes are caused by Muslim fundamentalists.... :D

Well I never, you learn something new every day.

So the Monk and his chief of staff were bumping nasties, what (not) a surprise.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/...f0eaae87a0df27

Credlin was always said to be a piece of work and this certainly speaks to that. Some of the things she is said to have done are absolutely outrageous from any person let alone the chief of staff to the PM.

The journalist that wrote the book, Nikki Savva, writes a column in The Australian and thrives on attacking people she doesn't like with unsupported innuendo, she walks a very fine line between just permissible muck raking and libel.

She was also a Liberal staffer for 9 years.

Yes Hempy, she also hates Abbott and loves Marshmallow Malcolm!

It would seem that Tony Windsor is about to announce today that he will re-enter federal politics by contesting his old seat against Barnaby Joyce.

He's obviously done some number crunching before making such a move and thinks he's in there with a chance. With the University of New England situated in the electorate, there might just be enough leftie academics and brainwashed students in the electorate to swing it for him.

If he succeeds, it will be proof positive that the Australian electorate has the memory span of a gnat. Or should that be a goldfish?

Bit like the larger percentage of the Lib party then.

Either of the two would be a fair description.:ugh:

Pinky, Labor and the Greens are assured of a goodly number of votes in every election from the eighteen to twenty year olds who have no recollection of how badly every last Labor government mishandled the purse strings along with damn near everything else about governing the country because they were kids then.

For too many children these days, dinner consists of scoffing what's put in front of them while watching 'Home and Away' on TV. Few have any real experience of sitting around the dinner table and discussing the events of the day with their parents (and so many of them don't have a father figure in the house), so all most of them have ever heard about politics is what they've been fed by almost totally Left-leaning school teachers.

So they vote for Labor - or even more often, the Greens. I've seen this in my own extended family. If you ask them about Greens' policies, they haven't got a clue - only that they're good for the environment (whatever that means) and are trying to fix... (ascending drum roll and momentous background music) - Global Warming (my capitals), which is a Good Thing (again, my capitals).

This is how Tony Windsor could get up in New England. With a large university in the electorate, there'll be a disproportionate number of 18 to 20 year olds voting in that electorate.

Reporter on TV this morning said it would need at least a 19% swing against Joyce for the Muppet Windsor to beat him, seems unlikely to me, 9% or 10% possibly?

I know by-elections are different to general elections, but wasn't there a 19% swing against the Libs in Joe Hockey's old seat (North Sydney)?

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a swing of that size in primary votes. Many will give their first vote to a no hope of winning independent on the understanding that their preferences will eventually reach the Libs, but hey want to register a protest, and this is the only way they can short of voting informal - or for Labor, as some say they will.

I think you're on the money there, Fubaar.
Joyce's performance WRT local matters has left many of his constituents less than impressed.
He's perceived to have been a bit too busy with matters other than what the voters elected him to attend to.

That said, I do hope the New Englanders have woken up to Tony Windsor and his game.
If they haven't, they deserve everything they get.

Our politics here are refined only to the extent that 'plain brown envelopes' are not accidentally left on the desk..
It's just quietly mentioned over 'drinkies' where they may be found. :=

Apparently your old mate Tony "slaps her on the bum bum "was trying to get Truss to stay on so Joyce wouldn't become deputy, Now that's a ringing endorsement if ever I heard one.

Ah, yes.
Credlin and Abbott - the Dynamic Duo.
Could you imagine waking up next to Credlin?
I'd reckon you'd gnaw your arm off just to get out of there - before swearing off drink for life.

Our valiant leader, he was.
A man of impeccable judgement - in all matters.

I dunno, the smokey eyes and the Bon Jovi hair were enough to melt at least one monastic heart.

You surely can't be serious, and I'm not calling you Shirley. Every photo I've seen of her is just, well, frightening. I'm talking about the "don't even look at me wrongly or I'll cut your naughty bits off" type of look....

Why such silence from our far -> winged brethren? You know, the ones that loved Howard and Abbott.

What's that? John Howard says 'give Turnbull a chance', and that Abbott was stupid keeping Hockey and Credlin on the books?

It's tough saying goodbye, but without our far righters this thread seems to be over. God bless Democracy.

Hemps, do you have supplemental oxygen to maintain consciousness on that incredibly high horse you sit on as you feel so damned superior to everyone whose politics don't agree with yours?

Or do you suffer from hypoxia?

Which might explain your addled thinking.

I'm at the other extreme in politics to you, but, (contrary to what you repeatedly say here, and like quite a few others here), I'm first to agree that Tony Abbott displayed major flaws as Prime Minister. I - along with many other 'right wing reactionaries' - was, and remain, very critical of some (make that many) of the things he did as PM. (Or to be more accurate, of the things he did NOT do as PM.)

But for all his many faults - (faults he should have been allowed to face the electorate and pay for in the opinion of many, but that's water under the political bridge which cannot be fixed, so let's not go there) - those faults pale into insignificance alongside the preening, smug, self-satisfied, do-nothing, incredibly poor excuse for a leader who usurped him.

Look on any number of blog sites and you will see a succession of long term Liberal voters who are saying that they will not vote Liberal while Malcolm Turnbull leads the Party. These numbers might not be large enough to swing the election result, but they must surely be disturbing to Liberal Party insiders, who (in my opinion at least) grossly mis-read their conservative core voters when they opined that they could be ignored.

I'm horrified at the very thought of Prime Minister William Shorten. (Judging by your posts, you may not be.) The man's a prat who doesn't deserve t be a 'humble' back bencher, let alone be the leader of a major political party. However, I fear we may well see with the "nu" Liberals under Turnbull, a repeat of what we saw with that same Party under John Hewson, where they will lose the unloseable election.

Maybe not if we get that Liberals-Greens coalition :E

I'm equally horrified at the thought of Prime Minister Shorten, but "any number of blog sites" is probably the worst possible way of judging electoral sentiment ever. They are a gathering point for generally (with the exception of Jet Blast and a few others) similar views to discuss, debating at length tiny aspects of agreed views, and on the whole are assemblies of groups with very similar leanings.

All too often they are effectively an echo chamber with only minor differences amplified and argued over, taken from that self-selecting population that has a)reliable internet access, b)sufficient free time to waste/spend on the sites, c) the inclination to spend time on those sites as opposed to any other form of leisure activity. From that you get people who take the majority of their information from those sites, raise confirmation bias to its highest level, and then say, and believe, they have a representative view of the entire population. I know quite a few Liberal voters, but none of them are active on the "Liberal" blog sites to my knowledge, or political blogs at all.

Ultimately if 100,000 die-hard Abbott supporters throw their dummy out of the pram and refuse to vote Liberal, but 200,000 wavering or unimpressed Labor voters decide he isn't that bad in comparison to Shorten and swing their vote, that's a net gain of 100,000 votes for the Liberals, and the Liberal party insiders and pollsters would probably say it was worthwhile. The MPs who were looking at a wipeout under Abbott and at this stage look to keep their jobs for another 3 years after the next election, probably think its a good move too although more for reasons of self-interest.

:D:D:D:D:D:E

I am sure the Righties made rumblings about moving to En Zed when magnificent Malcolm was made leader or maybe their applications for the NBN was knocked back:\

I've got to say, I'm a little disappointed that I only got two bites at what was once a fertile fishing spot. At least the ad hominems were predictable, but it's a bit like catching a carp instead of a nice 20lb cod.

I'll be voting Liberal in the HoR, and NXT in the Senate. You see, I'm a centrist (although to most here that puts me one step to the right of Stalin..)

I guess I'm just lucky that I grew up in a generation where we were taught the ability to think for ourselves, instead of voting along a particular line because 'my father voted that way'.

I agree with John Howard. The Liberal caucus are not going to change their mind on Turnbull. Abbott has always been a slimy, despicable little politician, even when he was Health Minister under Howard. He was a terrible Prime Minister and received exactly what he deserved in the end. It's a pity he can't just fade away gracefully, but I wouldn't think that the word 'graceful' exists in his vocabulary.

Turnbull will win the next election guaranteed. I know 'huggy fluffy' lefties who wouldn't vote for Shorten, he doesn't have a 'leadership bone' in his body. Turnbull has successfully attracted people from both sides of the political divide, and will win in a landslide. Watch this space.