Home » AGW and climate change » “How Abbott Must Recast Coalition Climate Policy”

“How Abbott Must Recast Coalition Climate Policy”

Thanks to Jennifer Marohasy  for her review of Bob Carter's new book  that appears to be making the same arguments that I have been making here at the Sandpit for years  (CLICK FOR SOURCE)

Thanks to Jennifer Marohasy for her review of Bob Carter’s new book that appears to be making the same arguments that I have been making here at the Sandpit for years (CLICK FOR SOURCE)

A  worthy read at Jennifer Marohasy’s blog of a book by Bob Carter  that seems to be speaking good sense.
Cheers Comrades

stir

About these ads

17 Comments

  1. Richard Ryan says:

    The odds of Liberals winning the Federal Election, with Tony Abbott as leader, would be like winning the lotto twice in the same week, with the same numbers. It just will not happen, I will say it slowly, Abbott will never be President of The United States Of Australia. giggle giggle. You heard it here first.

  2. Richard Ryan says:

    OR in simple language, a non starter has never won the Melbourne Cup.

  3. Tony says:

    The yanks voted for G Dubya twice Richard !

    Don’t think anyone need say any more about people’s predilection on how they will vote ?
    Sort of shoots down, very quickly, your argument Richard, whatever the hell it was ?
    Keep trying, one day you will win one ;)

  4. Richard Ryan says:

    SO TRUE! The Yanks trained Terrorists to fly planes—-the power of the Yankee dollar, hence September 11.

  5. Richard Ryan says:

    You don’t win arguments without firearms,America’s greatness was built on arms deals and slavery, the killing starting off with the American Bison then the American Indian, in the art of killing you can’t beat the Yanks. Direct action, kill them. They used it here also, with the original inhabitants, massacres and killings.

  6. Richard Ryan says:

    “the yanks voted for G Dubya twice Richard”! The Australians voted Howard into power along with an Iraqi war, for 11 years. The cards on the results of that war, have yet to be dealt on Australian soil.

  7. Tony says:

    The cards on the results of that war, have yet to be dealt on Australian soil.

    Don’t know about that Richard ?
    The cards have been dealt, and the hand, played.
    The Iraqis have hit the boats, and are now waiting to get their gold card upon being accepted as refugees here !
    Talking about a no win hand. Should have thrown the cards in years ago ?

  8. Richard Ryan says:

    I will pay that one! With a few TERRORISTS thrown in.

  9. Ray Dixon says:

    The Iraqis have hit the boats, and are now waiting to get their gold card upon being accepted as refugees here !

    That’s an overstatement in the extreme and insultingly patronising of Iraqis. I don’t know the exact numbers (you might care to look it up) but I think you’ll find that the number of Iraqi refugees arriving by boat is relatively small. And those accepted are not “terrorists” and were mainly fleeing due to fear of persecution from the warring Iraqi tribes. Given Australia invaded their country (and set the internal troubles off in so doing), isn’t it only right that we should take some of those who have subsequently fled?

    As for the Iraqis who have been admitted so far, many were well educated and have quickly settled in and found work. I’ve not heard of ANY Iraqi refugees causing a problem here and your implication that they are welfare bludgers seeking a “gold card” is not only prejudicial, it’s plain wrong.

  10. Iain Hall says:

    Ray

    Given Australia invaded their country (and set the internal troubles off in so doing), isn’t it only right that we should take some of those who have subsequently fled?

    A couple of points here if you don’t mind, firstly to suggest that Australia on its own “invaded” Iraq is rather over egging the pudding just as it is to imply that we are responsible for the the internecine conflicts between Sunni and Shia sects in that country. Secondly how would you quantify “some” I suggest that we accept only as many Iraqis as were directly killed by Australian troops,that would be completely fair don;t you think?

  11. Tony says:

    That’s an overstatement in the extreme and insultingly patronising of Iraqis

    I don’t know where you got your b/s about us invading Iraq ? Ray, but might pay for you, to re read a little bit of history perhaps ?
    The multi national force, was not only UN sanctioned, but UN ordered. We just did as we were told !

    As the US has the most mobile of armed forces on the planet, it was chosen ( by the UN ! ) to take lead. Australia, as a signatory in all UN treaties, as well as an ally of the US, was bound to follow, as it did in ww2, Korea, Vietnam yadda yadda ?

    The Iraqi were begging the UN to help get rid of Hussein, which of course they did. What happened then ? As is typical Arabian peninsula history, the warring tribes, fought to fill the power vaccum invariably left behind. Those that lost that fight, or were not willing to fight, with nothing left to lose, hit the boats. It is not only Iraq either. What about Afghanastan, and the remainder of these two bit oil kingdoms, that have suffered the same fate over the last fifty odd years or so ? Remember Kuwait by any chance Ray ? There was justification for an all out raid of Iraq, all on its own ffs ! Then of course, there is Iraq’s wonderfully benevolent neighbour Iran ? Remember them ? The US offered the Shah cancer treatment, and a safe place to die in, and Iran, under that warlord Khomeiny, went off it’s tree, and threatened to use their nukes to blow up the entire bloody planet ?

    Again, you are defending these supposed refugees. Hey, that’s fine. Let them in for certain, BUT their past, as well as their credentials, must be checked first ! If they burn their papers, lose them, or whatever, and the process takes ten years because of, then tough t*tties !
    Maybe the next lot, and don’t get me wrong, there WILL be a next lot, won’t be so hell bent on hiding their identities in the future ?

  12. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, I did not suggest that Australia invaded Iraq on its own. We did it with the US & English forces and, while we were a minor party to the invasion, we were participants nonetheless and subsequently obliged to take in some refugees displaced – whether by our direct actions or by other means. And as I suggested, I think you’ll find the number of Iraqis we’ve taken is relatively small.

    Tony, you’re rewriting history. The second Iraq war was not “UN ordered” and was based on the so-called weapons of mass destruction (that proved to be false). We were not “bound to follow” the US into Iraq. That’s utter crap. No country was “ordered” to invade Iraq.

    And of course Iraqi refugees seeking asylum have been checked out prior to being accepted. What’s your point? We have had no incidence of trouble from Iraqi immigrants be they normal migrants or refugees. And they have by and large integrated into our society and workforce.

  13. Tony says:

    you’re rewriting history. The second Iraq war was not “UN ordered” and was based on the so-called weapons of mass destruction (that proved to be false). We were not “bound to follow” the US into Iraq. That’s utter crap. No country was “ordered” to invade Iraq

    Kofi Anan, UN Secretary General, and his cronies, declared that the invasion was illegal. Fine, so historically, you are paritally correct, however after that one sided vote, came the decision by the major NATO powers, after the conitnual threats of Hussein, the decision to intervene, went ahead anyway ? That was reinforced, immediately after Anan refused the UN to get involved in the invasion, of Iraq, of Kuwait. That is when the UN lost all credibility on this issue, and the reason why NATO told the UN to p*ss off, and play their games elsewhere, and that they were going to go in, and rid the country of Hussein. Remember, he was threatening at the time, to set fire to the oil fields, as well as the mass gassing of civilians, that wouldn’t support him. Remember that by any chance ? Whether or not he actually had the weapons of md is irrelevent, he was still threatening to use them (whether they existed or not) against his own people, as well as his neighbours in the desert ?

    And from the same article ?

    The UN chief had warned the US and its allies a week before the invasion in March 2003 that military action would violate the UN charter. But he has hitherto refrained from using the damning word “illegal”.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq

    BTW ? We are bound to assist in any deployment asked of us, by NATO (even though we are not a member of it ?), as well as other treaties, such as ANZUS, the old SEATO as well as a million others.

    Again, you are glossing over a weak argument, by changing tack, offering no evidence, and hoping like hell no one notices !
    They haven’t been checked out yet Ray. That is the whole argument, and the only reason as to why, they are STILL in detention, after all this time ! If they had been checked out, and found ok, they would already be placed in the community, and now getting on with their lives as Australian citizens, as has been proven to be the case, in the past ?

    WMD so called huh ?
    What about the 500 or so degraded chemical weapons the inspectors found ?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Chemical_Weapons_Recovered

  14. Tony says:

    BTW, as a side note guys ?
    You know why the US knew that Iraq had weapons stashed ?

    During the time of the Iran/Iraq war in the late seventies and eighties, when Iran was threatening Iraq, they asked for help, and guess who sold them the armory in the first place ? It was the US. That is how they knew what Iraq had, and where it was, no matter how hard Hussein attempted to move them around to consequently hide them from the inspectors ?

  15. Tony says:

    Just on the news ?
    150 “refugees” start a riot on Nauru, complaining about their claims taking too long ?

    What did I say above, and previously ?
    Wonder how much this is going to cost the Australia this time ?
    Put em on a bloody plane, see what that does to the complaining.

  16. GD says:

    150 “refugees” start a riot on Nauru, complaining about their claims taking too long ?

    Yes, Tony, this the “refugee” of today. “Give me citizenship and Centrelink payments or else you’re gonna be sorry”.

    After all, that is the muslim way.

    As for Rudd’s latest thought bubble: New Guinea may be able to house asylum seekers but Australia will still be supporting them. Sort of like sending Centrelink payments directly to New Guinea.

    Way to go Rudd, rock’n’roll, cookin’ with gas, gotta zip and all that.

    After six years of this debasement of government, isn’t it time the ageing Milky Bar Kid announced an election?

    Thanks to Kevi and Joolia there is no more money in the piggy bank to pay for these grandiose, ridiculous schemes, but don’t worry Kevie will borrow more money from China.

    Bugger about future generations who have to pay it back.

    Another day in Labor, another Labor failure.

  17. Tony says:

    And the silence from the bleeding heart lefties is deafening ? ;)

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 240 other followers

%d bloggers like this: