By: henrybenj

henrybenj — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 22:02:00 +0000

In reply to ows views. APPROVED

By: henrybenj

henrybenj — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 22:01:00 +0000

In reply to billbo quesac. APPROVED

By: billbo quesac

billbo quesac — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 13:11:00 +0000

In reply to henrybenj. This is great article and as Shakesperare said conscience makes cowards of us all.Since when is is it alright to vist the allleged sins of the parents on the children? This comment only reaffirms that there is no proper defence or justification for this deeeply shameful state of affairs. Regards Billlbo Quesac

By: ows views

ows views — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 12:09:00 +0000

Yet another dramatic, or better still dramatised account of the rampant ideological kind, politically subjective, posing as no less than a considerate scientific report. Fallacies abound and nothing more glaring than the positing of “Government” versus “society”. Where “Government” is determined to against the conscience of the masses, the public, populace, parliamentary democracy – which does define Australia – is excluded, simply is not included in the picture.
A. Rosen indulges in farcical causistics by introducing well obliterated historical data into an argument concerning very current state of affairs. What on earth do sexual slavery, Aboriginal child abduction, the stolen generations, in a report concerning current policies on illegal migration into Australia !!!???
Contrary to Rosen’s tenure, “Administration” of public affairs, GOVERNMENTS are a reflection, indeed THE expression of – at least – the majority of us. There is NO distinction, actual rift, between Governments and people. Individuals, obviously such as A. Rosen, may disagree with what a certain Government ( repeatedly here John Howard’s ) practice, indeed as policies representative of the electorate which installed them.
Security happens to be an important matter and, since the “yellow peril” is no longer an issue, what prevails in the selective entry of intended Australian residence has nothing to do with prejudice of any kind ( racial, religious etc. ) remains clearly the normative consideration of social safety. Only those oblivious to nefarious elements acting in the world would allow themselves to peddle irrational, unjustified theories based on G-d knows what social coagulants they call “human rights”.
Before any criticism or simple suggestions are ventured, it would be instructive to know what precise human rights infractions are being perpetrated by a Government which , so far, has PLEASED its electorate by staving off attempts at breaking borders, social peace and mainly, the law !!!
Under our civilised laws and practices, illegal migrants are cared in far better conditions than the transit places they have traveled and, in many cases, much better than the countries they have originated and left.The staggering costs are a reflection of the care. If criminal elements do exists among the detained community that is not the guilt of the Government nor can the Government be held responsible for the obvious unhappiness of those who falsely thought that Australia can be entered at will against the very will of its own people or, if you want, its Government.

By: henrybenj

henrybenj — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:12:00 +0000

In reply to Eleonora Mostert. Approved

By: Eleonora Mostert

Eleonora Mostert — Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:10:00 +0000

Dear Prof. Rosen. Obvious you support Labor as you seem to think it is all the Liberals fault. Perhaps the parent of these children should be held accountable for the possition they themselves and their kids are in.

Comments on: How the Federal Government is grooming us to be complicit in child abuse…writes Alan Rosen

By: henrybenj

By: henrybenj

By: billbo quesac

By: ows views

By: henrybenj

By: Eleonora Mostert