It has been 157 years since the last ship taking convicts from the United Kingdom landed in Australia. Now, in a crushing historical irony, Australia is contracting with the small Pacific island of Nauru to resettle foreign-born criminals who the courts have ruled cannot be imprisoned indefinitely. The court rulings show how our allies are facing the same dilemma in dealing with people who enter the country illegally and then oppose efforts to deport them for years in litigation.
Starting with the “First Fleet” in 1788, English courts regularly sentenced convicts to “transportation” to Australia, where they were used for labor in the then-British colony. For years, the British left prisoners in rotting warships called “hulks” in the Thames River. Under Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger, the government solved the problem with the use of Australia. Convicts dreaded the common sentencing line issued by British judges: “The sentence of the court upon you is, that you be transported beyond the seas for the term of your natural life.” It became so common that Historian K. S. Inglis noted that “The founders were not a chosen people except in the old Australian joke that they were chosen by the best judges in England.”
The current move is not to use immigrants for labor, but to remove individuals without a technical deportation. The move follows the 2023 decision by Australia’s High Court that non-citizens who have no viable resettlement options outside of Australia must be released.
These deportees are largely individuals who engaged in criminal conduct. However, the court ruled that some countries, such as Afghanistan, are considered unsafe for their nationals to be repatriated, while others, like Iran, simply refuse to accept them back if they are being transported involuntarily.
One such individual was identified as NZYQ in court papers and came from Myanmar through a smuggler and proceeded to rape a child soon after being released into the Australian community. After serving a prison sentence, he was held by authorities until he was ordered to be released again into the population.
The government is reportedly moving to introduce legislation to strip the right of fairness from deportation decisions under the new Nauru deal. It would negate canceled visas that are under appeal in court.
Like Australia, the United States needs to address an immigration process that allows individuals to game the system for years despite orders of removal. The system is simply not working and, with millions allowed into the country under the Biden Administration, Congress needs to streamline the system for expedited removals.
Looking forward to when all fox/newscorp shills are greeted on the street by thrown sandwiches.
Typical Ano
Another stupid comment.
Truthfully News Corp should be banned from NY, so taking a sandwich to the face on the street is but a small penalty for shilling Russian propaganda and mis/disinformation.
Fox News? You mean Fixed Noise. 🤣
I’m not comfortable with any undocumented expedited removals process. That includes the current American one, which involves unregulated authority to Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi.
On the other hand, I agree totally with Trump’s focus on deporting the millions of people who entered the country illegally, yet were permitted to remain for asylum hearings. I just wish the US could clean up some of the messy excesses that seem to validate Democratic charges of anti-democratic and autocratic abuses.
Maybe someday Congress could pass a resolution or a statute that describes our current process while ensuring that it does not stray from the four corners of the Constitution.
Has anyone bothered to read the babbling incoherent ramblings of John Say below ?????
Does anyone think this guy is playing with a full deck ????
He seems to be a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
@Anonymous
For the third time today, you are an idiot.
James – Idiots usually hide behind the “Anonymous” label. If I posted the garbage they post, I would do so anonymously too.
Nah. You’re just an idiot with no dignity or self respect. Plus you’re a confederate.
Show me on the doll where Johnny hurt your feelings!
Has anyone bothered to read the babbling incoherent ramblings of Anonymous.
Yes we have, it’s trying and boring.
I’m pretty sure Johnny Say took a legit slam to the head at some point.
Yeah well the Aussies brilliantly banned firearms and forced their population into authoritarian submission striping them of the means of self defense, so I wouldn’t expect any blazing trail of genius to arise regarding the implementation of their immigration policies.
———————————————-
–Oddball
“Take it easy Big Joe, some of these people got sensitive feelings.”
Actually the Australian government did not “force” gun control on the people.
The ban was enacted by the conservative government which stayed in power for the next 8 years.
If the Australian people were opposed to this “authoritarian” move they would have voted the conservatives out.
In fact, polls show 90% of the people are in favor of the ban.
And half of those in favor want even stricter gun control.
https://www.ussc.edu.au/explainer-america-australia-gun-control
And who exactly do they need to defend themselves against ????
The kangaroos maybe.
And who exactly do they need to defend themselves against ????
Violent criminals, just like everywhere else. And tyrannical governments, such as they saw during the Wuhan lockdowns, which were worse in Australia than almost anywhere else.
You are delusional.
Australians do not believe their government is tyrannical.
90%of Australians approve of the gun ban and 45% believe there should be even stricter controls.
The violent crime and murder rate in Australia is less than 2% of that in the US.
The need for defense against violent criminals exists only in your delusional mind.
“90%of Australians . . .”
You seem to be confused about the concept of “inalienable rights.” They are not subject to the whims of the majority.
Sam
Unfortunately you are the one who is confused.
It may come as a surprise to you, but the second amendment does not apply in Australia, or anywhere else in the world outside the US.
There is no right to own a gun in Australia.
The conservative Howard government instituted gun control.
90% of the people agreed with the ban, and 45% wanted even stricter controls.
The Howard government stayed in power for the next 8 years so the people were perfectly happy with the controls.
It doesn’t matter what Australians believe. The federal and state governments’ responses to the Wuhan disease was tyrannical, even more so than in most other countries, and if people were armed the governments might have thought twice about what they were doing.
And the violent crime rate in Australia is far more than 2% of the USA’s. It’s at least 20%, if not more, even counting the whole USA. In fact the violent crime rate is higher than that of most of the USA. Try wearing a kippah in the Melbourne CBD on a Sunday and see what happens.
But no matter how high or low it is, even you don’t pretend violent crime doesn’t exist, and therefore people have the inalienable right to defend themselves from it. When you are the victim it’s no comfort to know that it’s a relatively rare occurrence. It’s still happening to you, and you have the right to defend yourself. No government has any right to deprive you of the means to do so, and it doesn’t matter how many of your countrymen think it does have such a right. Even if everyone else in Australia were to tell you you have no right to defend yourself and must just stand there and lump it, they’re wrong and have no right to impose their will on you, any more than they have the right to tell you that you can’t speak your mind, or practice your religion.
milhouse
Your thinking is truly delusional, but typical for a MAGA cultists.
You claim, “It doesn’t matter what Australians believe”, then go on a bizarre rant about what they SHOULD believe according to YOUR beliefs.
This is the very definition of tyranny.
You are saying that YOU know best, despite the fact that 90% of Australians favor gun controls.
If there is any “tyranny” here it is YOURS, in your belief that you would impose YOUR views on the vast majority of Australians.
Rabble:
And, of course, once the “feelings” of the radical left are found to be inadequate to the facts evidenced by society and sane morals, the immediately pivot to ad hominem, refusing to concede even a single inch to those they deem below them.
“. . . did not ‘force’ gun control . . .” In the next breath, you contradict yourself: “The ban was enacted . . .”
A government ban is physical force — the use of the government’s police powers. It doesn’t matter which party did it or how many voted for it.
“And who exactly do they need to defend themselves against ????”
Do you often have an urge to control what others do and don’t need?
@mrddmia
🚨
“A deranged woman threatened on Facebook to kill the President of the United States.
Making it worse, she reaffirmed her intent to kill the President when questioned by Secret Service agents.
A DC federal magistrate judge correctly detained her in jail.
Unbelievably, DC Obama Judge Jeb Boasberg freed her.
This same judge detained Trump supporters—for months—for trespassing into the Capitol on January 6th.
But Jeb Boasberg hands out “Get Out of Jail Free” cards to self-appointed Trump killers.”
https://nypost.com/2025/09/01/us-news/nyc-woman-busted-for-threatening-to-kill-president-trump-quietly-released-by-obama-appointed-judge/
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Actually the DC grand jury refused to indict the woman.
It was the grand jury that effectively released her.
In the absence of other charges it would be illegal to detain her.
Never let a few actual facts stand in the way of a good MAGA rant.
https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/09/02/grand-jury-no-indictment-trump-threats-nathalie-rose-jones/
Anonymous – but she still has outstanding charges (she had a preliminary hearing scheduled for today) and thus can still be detained, if the judge thought she was a danger, or more accurately, if he cared that she is a danger to Trump. She has a preliminary hearing and Judge Boasberg released her on conditions, including an ankle bracelet, which he couldn’t have done if she was scot-free as you falsely portray (perhaps you should broaden your info sources beyond the Daily News, whose reporting is seriously deficient).
She has threatened to kill the president on multiple occasions, but Judge Boasberg doesn’t think she’s a danger beyond an ankle bracelet, in spite of the recommendation of the magistrate judge that she remain confined because she’s a danger. More likely, he thinks she might be but he doesn’t care because he hates Trump.
Are you seriously going to tell me that the Obama-appointed, Trump-hating judge made a neutral and impartial decision in this matter? Or are you going to fall back on the false premise that she had to be released after the grand jury decision, all the while implying that the person you replied to was acting fact-free – when in fact it was your comment that lacked the important facts.
omfk
It seems obvious to me that the grand jury and the judge have finally seen the MAGA light, and come in from the dark side.
They now clearly believe that this defendant should be treated the same way that Trump and MAGA demanded for the J6ers who chanted “Hang Mike Pence” in the hallways of the Capitol and who built a gallows outside.
Just like the J6ers, this woman was clearly just exercising her constitutionally protected free speech rights.
It would be grossly hypocriticaL for MAGA to say that this woman deserves to be in prison.
Don’t you agree ????
I’m sure you do !!!!!
I caught you in a lie and you deflect by bringing up an irrelevancy – whether the federal statute outlawing using an interstate communication device to threaten the life of the president would withstand a First Amendment challenge. Try harder, because your little ploy didn’t work on me.
So you believe that the MAGA claims that the people who wanted to hang Mike Pence were merely exercising their first amendment right are irrelevant.
Interesting !!!
Be careful. Your glorious cult leader may excommunicate you !!
I already told you your attempt at deflection didn’t work.
Now, how about confessing that you lied when you said the grand jury set her free because there was no basis on which she could be held? And then you perversely accused the other person of being fact-free.
How about addressing the actual topic of your lies instead of trying to deflect? The fact that you keep trying to deflect tells me you got nothin’
The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again thinking you might get a different result. That is exactly what you are doing.
As usual you are wrong.
Boasberg released her with conditions, including ankle monitoring on August 27, pending the grand jury decision.
He did not release her AFTER THE FAILURE TO INDICT.
The grand jury returned a no true bill today ON ALL CHARGES.
There are no other charges.
She is now completely free.
“She is now completely free.”
Her ankle bracelet and compulsory psych sessions beg to differ.
No one wanted to hang Pence. The claim that there was anyone there trying to hang him, or hoping to hang him, is an outright lie.
So why were they chanting “Hang Mike Pence”??
And why did they erect a gallows ??
Are you living in an alternate reality and denying that this ever happened ???
There are countless videos online posted by the morons doing the chanting themselves.
Why are there OFTEN chants at political protests calling for this or that person’s execution? No one ever claims that those chanting have any intent of taking the law into their own hands and murdering the person with no trial!
There was NO gallows. There was a piece of art, a DEPICTION of a gallows. Hanging someone in effigy, which has been a standard feature of political protest since even before the USA was founded. It’s expressive conduct which is absolutely protected by the first amendment, and at the very core of that protection. However in this case, they didn’t even hang him in effigy; they merely displayed the empty gallows to invoke the idea of a hanging in effigy, so it’s even less “violent” than that. An actual hanging in effigy is protected speech, how much more so a mere reference to one.
What people? Who said it?
I would probably not have indicted either of these suspects. Neither of their “threats” seem to me to qualify as “true threats” as defined by the Supreme Court, and therefore they seem to qualify as protected speech.
A threat can only be considered criminal if a normal person, on hearing the threat, would seriously believe the person intended to carry it out, and had the means to do so. The person need not actually have either the intent or the means; but it must be the case that a normal person would believe he had them. In these two cases I don’t think any normal person hearing their rants would be at all concerned that they might carry them out.
How many times does it have to be explained to MAGA devotees that the insurrectionists who were held in jail without bail until trial after they battered Capitol Police officers and smashed windows and doors, hunted for Pence, intending to lynch him, and tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power were those: 1. who were already out on bail awaiting trial on other charges; one standard condition of bail is that you don’t get arrested while awaiting trial; if you do get arrested again, your bail is automatically revoked; there were several of these; 2.didn’t qualify for bail based on their past history of skipping bail and a record of serious criminal convictions. If you’ve skipped bail before, you don’t get another chance.
It is a slap in the face of the brave Capitol Police who likely saved Pence’s life and those of Nancy Pelosi and members of Congress to downplay the brutal battering inflicted on them at Trump’s direction as mere “trespassing”. What about the millions of dollars in property damage they did ? That’s NOT mere “trespassing “.
Another sad attempt to create alternative facts.
Cue Twilight Zone music, you live in an alternate universe. Whatever you described, did not happen on this earth.
*. AI doesn’t understand hyperbole nor humor.
*. AI is in control. Left and right media follow the same storyline with antagonist and protagonist. IT’S OBVIOUS. The population is being manipulated. The screeching screeds on conservative radio aren’t different from those on the left. Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity the worst! Just endless babble…
These are noncitizens in this case and can be deported anywhere. Narauna isn’t a prison as is CECOT. It’s a bad practice as it may hinder attempts at exonerated for crimes other than illegal entry.
Repatriation is the option or leaving on the otherhand of choice. If there’s a cost as in Australia cases imprisonment if picked up again is appropriate.
Unfortunately these people have no money in general. As to United States, pick up mayorkas. No autopen pardon.
There was absolutely no attempt to kill Pence, or anyone else. Nor was there anyone there intending to kill Pence, or anyone else. Not a single one of the protesters, even the most violent, either committed or intended murder.
And there was not millions of dollars worth of damages. It simply did not happen. The damage was a lot lighter than that caused by the Democrats who invaded the Wisconsin Capitol and occupied it for weeks. None of whom were charged, if I recall correctly.
It is ironic that Australia may be engaging in transportation as an administrative remedy, although it may be a ploy to deter efforts to protect illegal immigrants. But these enclaves will be open-air prisons rather than new societies. The original settlers of Australia came from a country with a history of lawful government. Many modern illegal immigrants come from countries that are wholly dysfunctional. In other words, the immigrant cannot be divorced from his place of origin.
edwardmahl
Typical stupid comment from a typical MAGA cultist who is completely ignorant of actual facts.
You say, “the original settlers of Australia came from a country with a history of lawful government.”
Really ????
I believe George Washington would have a few thoughts about that.
The first Australian colonists arrived from England in 1788.
The American Revolution started in 1775, just 13 years earlier.
Do you think that the Revolutionaries believed England had a history of lawful government.
Obviously not.
What a maroon. Yes, Washington and ALL the revolutionaries believed England had a long history of lawful government. Not a single one of them ever questioned the legitimacy of the United Kingdom or its government. Nor did any of them ever question the legitimacy of the UK’s rule of its colonies.
They were all 100% in agreement that the colonial governments were legitimate. They decided, for what they considered to be good cause, to change that government. That is all. They recognized the king’s legitimacy, but decided they no longer wanted to be his subjects. That is why they felt the need to publish a declaration of independence, explaining to the world the reasons for their momentous decision.
They inherited all of the UK’s laws, and continued to enforce them until and unless Congress or a state legislature chose to alter them.
“Do you think that the Revolutionaries believed England had a history of lawful government.
Obviously not.”
Many of our founders supported the English government, but did not support how it applied to the states. Look at one of the prime reasons for rebellion: judicial decisions. As an example, imagine having to travel to England to settle a land dispute in the colonies.
“Australia Seeks to Ship Illegal Aliens to Small Pacific Island”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
“[Abraham Lincoln Sought to Ship Illegal Aliens to Small Atlantic Nation]”
– National Archives
_______________________
Abraham Lincoln said “If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.”
Lincoln understood existing immigration law, the Naturalization Act of 1802, which was in full force and effect, and spoke those words in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“THE ONLY PEACEABLE SOLUTION TO AMERICA’S RACE PROBLEM”
“Four days before his death, speaking to Gen. Benjamin Butler, Lincoln still pressed on with deportation as the only peaceable solution to America’s race problem. ‘I can hardly believe that the South and North can live in peace, unless we can get rid of the n—— … I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country…'”
– National Archives https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2010/12/01/lincoln-to-slaves-go-somewhere-else/
If people come here illegally, why is it unfair for the government to deport them?
Anyone picked up for deportation deserves due process in the form of a hearing to make sure the feds got the right guy. But serious question: why is any more process due than that?
I came here illegally. All immigrants come here illegally. Italians, Poles, Irish, Cubans….all illegal. America did not issue any of these groups visas to enter the US, nor were they issued US government papers to allow them entry. They just showed up on the shores and bam…..illegal immigrants. But my illegal entry was over the top illegal. It was so illegal that I was cited multiple times while in transit from Cuba to America.
First there was the citation issued by the US Coast Guard that I created a wake due to my speeding from Cuba to Florida via the backstroke, breast stroke and free style stroke. Americans believe that Diana Nyad was the first to swim from Cuba to Florida. She was not. I was, and only dressed in a Cuban guayabera and skimp fruit of the loom briefs. The mermaids liked my attire though.
Second there was the citation for fishing without a license. There I was minding my own business swimming against the Florida current, when a school of sharks surrounded me. I did what any Cuban would have done. I fought them mano-a-mano, bare hands, a fight to the finish. Alas I won, killed them all, then filleted them, carved them up, and enjoyed a fresh seafood fish dinner. I was accused of fishing without a license due to my large catch, but I could not prevail against the claims of the Yankee.
Third was the fact that I had the audacity to sell my shark fillets at wholesale prices, and sadly I was cited for not owning a restaurant permit to sell my fresh catch. Happily, one of the USCG officers was impressed with my capitalistic fervor that he let me off of the hook (pun intended), as long as I sold him my fish at a bargain price.
I did eventually arrive to the Florida shores, and a big throng of Cubans were on the beach doing the Conga, as they were pulling for me. But it appears my citations incurred while fleeing Communism to Land of the Free was stymied by my USCG issued citations, hence illegal immigrant.
🎶 You’ve got fins to the Left, Fins to the right, and you’re the only bait in town 🎶
Estovir, that’s quite a storyline. The reality is that Cubans often had a much smoother path into the U.S. than others, depending on when they arrived. My wife came from the far harsher side of the Iron Curtain. Before her final escape attempt, her internal passport was already full of violations and arrests. On that attempt, she carried top-secret documents, was arrested by the Russians, and avoided prison only because their jails were overflowing. She had microfilm carefully hidden in her hair: if it had been found, it would have cost her life.
She crossed a minefield into Austria, survived a winter in a tent, and eventually received a U.S. visa. She went through real danger, her life on the line more than once, but today she is proud to be an American. If you asked her about illegal immigration, she would tell you what I also believe: immigrants should come legally. Those who don’t should be sent home unless they qualify for true asylum, and “a better economy” doesn’t count as asylum.
That is the due process and due process is by class action. Asylum is gaming. Lawful entry, embassy, request asylum is the process. Asylum isn’t meant for criminals running from police in a foreign country. It defies logic.
If you actually read Turley’s column, he does not mention the USA until the final paragraph and only likens the Aussi situation to the USA in that they both have problems with deporting criminals. Good grief read with care.
I beleive Turley is incorrect in asserting that we need changes to our immigration laws.
The holy war we are seeing right now is because Trump is enforcing the laws that we currently have and the left is engaged in lawfare to stop that.
While as a matter of POLICY, I would like to see US immigration laws changed, I would NOT be looking to change much regarding deportation.
What I would like to see happen – which SOMETIMES republicans and Trump talk about is MORE LEGAL IMMIGRATION. But more legal immigration can not occur without ending illegal immigration.
Many of those who have fled Venezuela for the US are people that we should welcome to the US. They should be allowed to seek residence in the US legally – After they have been properly vetted.
Venezuela before Chavez had the highest standard of living in south america. Most of these people are skilled and often well educated, and fleeing a country that is an economic and political basketcase.
These are people who have seen the failure of socialism up front and personal, and we should welcome them.
The US shoudl increase legal immigration from 1M people a year to approximately 3M people a year.
But ONLY after we have stopped illegal immigration.
We should be picking and chosing who we allow to immigrate to the US.
We should be rejecting most people from $hithole countries.
Haiti is a complete disaster, it has been that my entire life. The adjacent Dominican republic with the same people has a high standard of living. There is little evidence that Haitians are capable of participating in a functioning society.
Most Venezeulans seeking to immigrate come from a country that was in the past successful and is temporarily a disaster from bad left wing government. Most Venezeulans are immigrants like our forefathers – or often better. After filtering out the drug dealers and criminals, we should be welcoming venezuelans.
Regardless, Trump is having problems deporting people – not because we need new laws, but because the left is using every trick in the book to prevent the enforcement of existing laws.
Eventually that will end. the courts will firmly establish that Trump is following the law – the only US president to enforce US immigration law in several decades.
We do not need knew laws to make deportation easier.
We just need the lawfare to end – and that will happen eventually
“Regardless, Trump is having problems deporting people – not because we need new laws, but because the left is using every trick in the book to prevent the enforcement of existing laws.”
President Trump is having problems deporting people because he’s bypassing constitutional protections and being really sloppy with the deportation process creating unnecessary legal issues. It’s part incompetence and part overzealousness. The left is making sure Trump IS following the law not the other way around. President Trump’s deputy Stephen Miller wants an arbitrary number of people deported daily to achieve President Trump’s overpromise of deporting millions a year. Every legal expert, including some Trump supporters, knew that this would not be possible under the existing law and the capacity of immigration courts.
Every one of the 10 -20 plus million should be deported today or leave voluntarily. Then they could apply for legal immigration. I would be glad to accept many. Steven Miller is offering a way to help organize the deportation system. You want to obstruct those efforts because you are an indecent fellow who supports child molestation, human trafficking, drugs, and destruction.
I gotta agree, 1000%, John Say. The situation with immigration (legal or otherwise) is a problem where our Congress would rather have the issue than the solution. They can and do politicize the issue without lifting a finger to address the cause of the issue. They appeal to their base, and not to the benefit of the country.
To demonize Trump’s administration for simply enforcing existing law is preposterous. If any law is “unfair” then change the law. Until then, follow the law!
“ To demonize Trump’s administration for simply enforcing existing law is preposterous.”
Trump is/has been byassing and avoiding due process whenever it interferes with his need to deport people as quickly as possible. The problem for him was the law itself. Asylum law and the overwhelming backlog of asylum cases and pending cases was/is not going to allow him to achieve the goal he promised. That is why he keeps running into legal problems. Because he has been bypassing due process and legal requirements.
“Because he has been bypassing due process and legal requirements.”
George Svelaz continues down the path of ignorance. Trump has followed the law, and when questions arise, Trump leaves it to the courts to make the final decision. He has been mostly correct, while the left has been proven incompetent.
Let us hear from you, George Svelaz. Where has Trump bypassed the law? You cannot respond because Trump hasn’t, and the left is obstructionist. You continue to be ignorant and a liar.
S. Meyer, who is George Svelaz? What the hell are you talking about?
Trump bypassed due process rights by deporting immigrants faster than the courts could weight in. Forcing immigrants to sign documents without explaining what they are and not afffording them any means contest their deoportaitons. This has already been before courts and the Trump administration has deliberately ignored court orders. That is not following the law.
“He has been mostly correct, while the left has been proven incompetent.”
No he has been mostly incorrect. Just recently an appeals court ruled Trump’s deportations under the Alien Enemies act is illegal.
Ignoring court orders, and defying judges is not following the law.
“Trump bypassed due process rights by deporting immigrants faster”
You don’t understand what due process is, and bypassing it. Questions of legality on this issue constantly go before the courts, like they should. Trump has mostly prevailed. It is the Democrats who are obstructionist, creating court cases without merit. Therefore, if you want to misuse the term bypassing due process, place that label on the Democrats.
“No he has been mostly incorrect.”
You are so ignorant, you don’t even know the definition of “mostly.” The majority of times, Trump wins. Therefore, he is mostly correct. Your inability to understand a short and easy word, “mostly”, demonstrates that you are stupid.
Trump has not ignored court orders. He correctly challenges them and mostly wins. He follows the law, but Democrats fail to follow the intentions of our judiciary. They are anti-American in their actions.
“The US shoudl increase legal immigration from 1M people a year to approximately 3M people a year.”
John, that aligns with replacement theory or a bit more. Is that a satisfactory fix for a low fertility rate? The population’s age structure will skew higher, so it is not a cure for a low fertility rate requiring higher replacement numbers in the future. I am not making any judgment of such a policy, only enterring into discussion what that policy leads to.
Turley was discussing gaming the immigration system and said Congress needs to streamline the system for expedited removals.”
The great replacement theory stems from a xenophobic anxiety about losing cultural supremacy, fueled by the fact that many immigrant communities have higher birth rates than whites. These immigration policies serve as thinly veiled, racist justifications aimed at expelling minority groups, driven by an irrational fear of diminishing majority status.
George Svelaz, this is the definition of xenophobia: “one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin.” Your response indicates a lack of understanding of what you said, and my use of the words replacement theory. This comment of yours goes along with the other posts you made that were equally ignorant and stupid.
My discussion had nothing to do with racism. The closest to an ism you can get might be ageism.
This stupid story is peak MAGA whataboutism from Turley.
He is trying to rationalize the United States deporting aliens to rogue third nations by comparing how Australia deals with asylum seekers.
Turley does not understand the geopolitics of the South Pacific islands. Most of the islands were once colonies of Britain, Australia or New Zealand.
Most of them are now technically independent, but almost completely reliant on Australia or New Zealand.
Until independence in 1968, Nauru was a Protectorate of Australia. After independence the island continues to be almost completely dependent on Australia for its survival. There are only about 10,000 inhabitants on the island. Australia provides $20 million a year in aid to the island. Nauru imports 90% of its food from Australia, because there is very little arable land. There is no fresh water on the island, so they even have to import water by ship.
Nauru uses the Australian dollar, uses the Australian banking system, and is completely dependent on Australia for financial survival.
Even though Nauru technically became independent in 1968, Australia administered the legal system until 2018. The High Court of Australia was the final appellate court for Nauru.
Nauru is “independent” only in a theoretical sense.
Australia has been holding asylum seekers in Nauru for 25 years.
This is nothing new.
So you see, Nauru is not some rogue third world country with no connection to Australia.
Turley is completely ignorant of the facts here.
He is desperately trying to justify the United States deporting people to rogue third nations.
For all intents and purposes, Nauru is a part of Australia.
There is absolutely no comparison between Trump sending people to El Salvador, and Australia sending people to Nauru.
I got as far as the first sentence and stopped because it immediately struck me that the anonymous troll describes a story about Australia as “MAGA.” The troll is too lame-brained to realize that MAGA is an American thing. SMH
OMFK
Watch sky news – there is most definitely a MAGA movement in Austrailia.
Both a “Make Austrailia Great Again” as well as strong support for Making america Great Again”.
But I completely agree regarding the anonymous troll.
Long irrelevant lesson in history.
The relationship of Australia to other pacific islands is little different from that of the US and other western hemisphere countries.
Canada and Mexico today are incapable of independent existance as nations from the US.
They no longer control their own economies.
For all intents and purposes Canada and Mexico are part of the US.
John Say the Stupid
What the hell is wrong with you?
Are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you really that stupid.
The point is not whether Canada and Mexico are really part of the US.
Why do you fly off on such an insanely absurd tangent ???
The point is that Turley is falsely trying to equate, and justify, the US sending deportees to third countries, with Australia holding asylum seekers in Nauru.
There is absolutely no comparison.
Nauru is by most measures a part of Australia.
El Salvador, South Sudan, Uganda, Swaziland have absolutely no connection with the US
ROFL
Canada by most measure is part of the US.
Your thesis is for the most part both FALSE and irrelevant.
You should not be calling anyone else stupid.
As I noted in a different comment – pretty much every nation in the world deports illegal immigrants.
With respect to your Nauru nonsense – Nauru is almost 3,000 miles from Australia.
It is about as far as it is from NYC to SF – it is SLIGHTLY closer than NYC to london.
East Timor, Indonesia, the Phillipines and New Guinea to name a few nations – are much closer to Australia.
Its “Cultural” ties to Australia are actually extremely weak. Nauru is most likely populated by Polynesians – the population of Australia arrived 10’s of thousands of years earlier and from only vaguely related peoples.
These are the same peoples only in the way that Chinese and Australian aborigini’s are “the same people”
For someone who went into a long rant about the recent history of Nauru – you seem to be ignorant of the fact that the various peoples of the Pacific are NOT all the same and NOT all closely related. The People of Nauru are more closely related to Hawaians than Australian aboriginis.
Regardless Nauru is an independent country. You are not getting from Nauru to australia without going through customs.
In theory you could take a polynesian canoe – the polynesians traveled 1000’s of miles of ocean – but the polynesian triangle – the area of polynesian migration does NOT include australia.
Regardless, I doubt that deportees to Nauru are traveling almost 3000 miles by Canoe to return to austrailia – that makes traversing the darian gap look like childs play.
“Canada by most measure is part of the US.”
No, its not. Its a sovereign nation. By your twisted logic the US by most measure is part of Mexico.
Do you left wing nuts know ANYTHING beyond word games.
In left wing nut world – child rapists are “aylum seekers” – most of us see them as pedophiles and criminals.
I do not think there is a country in the world that wants them. Australia like the US has Birthright citizenship – though in AU that is more like What Trump seeks – atleast one parent must be a legal resident or citizen. The children of illegal immigrants are not citizens in AU.
Regardless, pretty much every nation in the world is going to deport child preditors that are not citizens. Precisely where they will end up is a function of international affairs and national laws.
In this case there is pretty much ZERO difference between AU sending criminal illegal immigrants to Nauru and the US sending Criminal illegal immigrants to El Salvador.
In fact in the most public cases – NZYQ is from Myanmar and has no connection at all to Nauru.
Garcia was born in El Salvador and was returned there – though now – who knows where he will end up – but in the long run it will NOT be the US.
YOUR connection between Nauru and austrailia boils down to modern trade in phosphates, and the fact that both are nations in the pacific.
The US has far more ties to El Salvador – or any of the nations you listed.
Not that it matters.
AU is paying Nauru to accept Deportees.
The US is paying El Salvador etc.
Apples and Apples.
Most left wing nuts oppose Both. They should provide personal asylum for those like Garcia or NZYQ in their own homes.
Most of us have little interest in the idiotic views of left wing nuts with no “skin in the game”.
If you wish to keep child predators in your own homes – then you have some basis for argument.
Forcing the rest of any nation to live with dangerous people in their community who have absolutely no right to be there is the height of stupidity.
What is the logical difference between claiming that NYZQ or Garcia can not be deported and claiming that we should import violent criminals and child abusers from other countries ?
Your brain does not seem to grasp that National borders actually exist and they means something.
At the barest minimum they mean that a nation gets to choose who and what can enter or stay.
Pretending that away – has very real consequences.
If a nation has no right to make choices regarding traversing its borders – then why do its laws extend to its borders – but no further ?
If a nation can not make decisions regarding its borders – why can individuals make decisions regarding who can enter their home ?
Individual and national sovereignty are targets of the left. Their “one-world” views are completely at odds with borders, language, and culture.
Your argument is absurd even if correct.
You are essentially claiming that AU is doing the same thing as england was when it sent criminals to rotting hulks in the thames, and the US is doing the same thing as england was when it sent criminals to Australia.
SO WHAT ?
Whether it is Australia or the US or anywhere else – are you really arguing that foreign criminals must be allowed to stay in any country they manage to get into ?
Please, Please continue to take an idiotic position that is morally reprehensible and rejected by 80% of people not only in the US but the entire world.
If you are in any country illegally, you can expect to be removed if and when you are caught.
The precise details of how that occurs and how difficult it is vary a bit from nation to nation, but it is universal.
If you are also a criminal – eventual removal by some means is near certain – EVERYWHERE.
John Say the Stupid
Apparently you really are that stupid.
When Australia holds asylum seekers in Nauru, they are simply holding them in a territory that they almost completely control.
Nauru has a long history as a Protectorate of Australia, is currently completely dependent on Australia, and for all practical purposes is part of Australia. The Nauruans even speak with an Aussie accent.
Turley is ignorantly and falsely and desperately trying to justify Trump deporting people to rogue third nations that have absolutely no connection with the United States.
THAT IS THE POINT !!!!!!
Nauru was also part of Germany at one point – SO WHAT ?
Nauru’s legal ties to AU were short lived and ended about 60 years ago.
It was loosely under the “protection of Australia” as well as the UK and New Zealand from the end of WWI to the start of WWII
after which it was occupied by Japan until the end of the war when AU was directed to move Nauru to independence.
For 90% of the 3000 years that Nauru has been populated its people did not even know that Australia existed.
The fact that for a relatively brief period AU recieved fertilizer from Nauru is close to inconsequential.
Nauu has been independent of Austrialia almost as long as Israel has bee independent of the UK, and Naura was under AU protection about as long as Israel was under the protection of Britian.
No one today would claim that Israel and Britian are not independnet countries.
Nauru’s population is 92% native with 5% from other polynesian nations and 1.2% austrailian.
There are more Irish in the US than Austrailians in Nauru yet no one would claim the US is dominated by Ireland.
ATS – One can UNIVERSALLY KNOW that whatever you post will be garbage and trivial to disprove.
I have thoroughly dismanteled your nonsense that somehow the Nauru AU deal is different from the similar Deals the US has made with other nations.
But I did not KNOW all the details when I started.
What I DID KNOW was that I would have no trouble dismembering your claims.
Why ? Because you are a typical left wing nut.
You are incapable of critical thinking. You ALWAYS take tiny bits of facts ignoring the vast body of facts that do not fit your narative and construct some thesis that fits whatever you wish to claim from a tiny collection of bits and peices – which you usually get wrong too.
You do not even do this with any ideological consistance.
You will take near identical fact patterns and argue completely the opposite – if that challenges something you do not like.
While you are ideologically left – you are a left wing nut without any firm anchor – arguing personalities more than anything else – what is frequently called Trump Derangement syndrome here.
It is therefor possible to KNOW with near certainty that whenever you make an argument or claim that it will fall apart – often under even shallow analysis.
I knew almost nothing about Nauru when I read your post.
But I did KNOW one things with certainty – THAT YOU WERE WRONG.
Not because I knew the truth. But because I knew that YOU are incapable of critical thought.
I do not need your clever (or usually not so clever) word games to dismantle your arguments.
I just need to know that you are so completely unable to think critically that a simple google search will discredit whatever you claim – likely with the very first item found.
I can pretty much count on the fact that even left wing nut wikipedia will undermine whatever you claim.
People who make idiotic claims off the top of their head that they do not bother to keep consistent even with themselves – should not be calling others stupid.
John Say the Stupid.
You really are astoundingly stupid.
You are deliberately obfuscating my point.
You are also factually deficient.
You have a habit of simply making stuff up and listening to the voices in your head.
Nauru is 3000 KILOMETERS from Australia, so about 1800 miles, so less than NYC to Salt Lake.
Native Nauruans are Micronesians, not Polynesians. They are genetically distinct and look different.
I know perfectly well that the peoples of the South Pacific are different.
There are Polynesians in the East Pacific, Micronesians in the West Pacific and Melanesians in the Southwest Pacific.
They are all genetically distinct and have different appearances.
Nauru is “independent” in name only. It has strong cultural ties to Australia.
Australia administered Nauru as an external territory starting in 1920.
After independence in 1968, Australia continued to essentially control the island. Nauru uses the Australian dollar and the Australian banking system.
Australia provides 90% of food in Nauru.
Australia is Nauru’s largest economic, security and development partner.
Australia assumes the responsibility of defending Nauru.
In December 2024, Australia committed to providing $140 million in aid over 5 years to Nauru, an island with only 10,000 inhabitants.
https://www.foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny-wong/media-release/nauru-australia-treaty#:~:text=The%20Nauru%2DAustralia%20Treaty%20builds,to%20the%20international%20financial%20system.
Nauruans speak with an Aussie accent for god’s sake.
And you, in your total ignorance, claim that there are no significant cultural ties between Australia and Nauru.
The point is not whether countries can or should deport illegal immigrants.
There is absolutely no question that this is acceptable.
All countries can and do deport illegal aliens, BUT NOT TO THIRD COUNTRIES WITH WHICH THERE IS NO CONNECTION.
The point is that Trump is sending deportees to third countries with no ties to the US or the deportee.
Australia is holding people on an island that they still control, essentially part of Australia.
Turley is trying to equate these situations in a lame attempt to rationalize and justify what Trump is doing.
THAT IS THE POINT !!!!
Turley is being disingenuous in the extreme trying to placate the MAGA mob.
By the way, I am an Aussie who has spent time in Nauru.
“Distance from Australia to Nauru is 4,494 kilometers. This air travel distance is equal to 2,792 miles.”
https://www.distancefromto.net/distance-from-australia-to-nauru
John Say the Stupid
You are so unbelievably stupid and absurd.
You are measuring from the center of Australia where literally nobody lives.
Measured from the north coast where people actually live, it is about 3,000 km.
Why do you so obsessively try to find ways to score points regarding things of which you know less than nothing.
You have an obsessive compulsion to somehow rationalize the stuff you simply make up, or get from the voices in your head
Here you you arguing with an Aussie who has actually spent time in Nauru, trying to explain that you know more than me.
You are seriously mentally unstable.
This is not normal behavior.
ATS – your being badly pendantic and stupid.
I have used a NUMBER of different distance measures.
Airport to airport is 2.5 hours to El Salvador, and 5.hrs from anywhere consequential in AU.
No I am not measuring from – Google is, you do not like my Query – produce your own. I will bet from the southernmost tip of TX it is even closer to El Salvador.
Regardless a country that requires air travel equal to NYC to London is NOT nextdoor neighbors.
Airfair to Nauru is $1500
you can get tickets from TX to El Salvador for $70.
and NYC to london is $177.
Yeah, Nauru is CLOSELY coupled to AU – right.
“Why do you so obsessively”
Playing mind reader and amateur psychologist does not make you appear either more credible or logical.
I suggest Focusing on the argument and facts.
“Here you you arguing with an Aussie who has actually spent time in Nauru”
I am arguing with an anonymous poster who makes incredulous claims.
If you wish to enhance your credibility you have to get something right.
John Say the Stupid
Your babbling incoherence is beyond belief, and clearly pathological.
Why are you wasting time doing ridiculous internet measurements and searches for air fares to El Salvador and London.
What exactly is the relevance of this absurd nonsense ???
You are clearly not playing with a full deck.
Your obsessive behavior to try to prove some absurd point is truly a sign of deeply seated pathology.
As an aside, you said above “my argument is absurd even if correct”
Any sane person would recognize such a statement as complete insanity.
How can an argument be both correct and absurd?
The facts are very simple.
Nauru is to all intents and purposes a part of Australia.
The Australian government has been responsible for the administration of Nauru since 1920.
Until 2018, the legal system in Nauru was based on Australian law, and the High Court of Australia was the court of final appeal.
Australian English is the official language of Nauru.
Nauruans speak English with an Aussie accent.
Australia provides free higher education for Nauruans, because there is no education beyond high school on the island.
Australia administers high school education in Nauru, ensuring that students meet Australian standards.
Nauru uses the Australian dollar.
The only bank in Nauru is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
Australia provides $28 million a year to support the economy of Nauru, since they no longer have a source of revenue.
There is no fresh water on the island, so Australia brings in water by shipping tankers.
There is very little arable land on Nauru, so they get 90% of their food from Australia.
Australia funds free healthcare for Nauruans, and provides lab equipment and technical supplies, as well as teams of Australian specialists and nurses.
More than half of the Nauruan workforce is employed by the government, and are paid with money that Australia provides.
By any measure Nauru is completely and utterly dependent on Australia.
For all practical purposes Nauru is part of Australia.
Any comparison between what Trump is doing by sending deportees to third countries, and what Australia is doing by holding immigrants on an island that they totally control is absolutely absurd.
END OF DISCUSSION.
ATS – I do not care what you claim to be – so long as you post as anonymous – you can claim to be the reincarnation of Henry the VIII – you still have no credibility.
You continue to make a fool of yourself – whether you are australian or not.
Morons come in all national origens.
“Nauru was one of three great phosphate rock islands in the Pacific Ocean, along with Banaba (Ocean Island), in Kiribati, and Makatea, in French Polynesia.”
Wikipedia.
I do not really give a schiff about the distinction between micronesian and polynesia – the distinction is more geographic than anything else.
The Nauruans are NOT part of the migration that populated Austrailia about 80,000 years ago. They are part of the polynesian migration that rant through islands north of New Guinea as far as Hawaii and likely easter island. that occured about 3000 years ago.
Any common ancestor with australian aboriginis is nearly as old as a common ancestor with caucasians.
Again a long collection of truths, half truths and outright falsehoods to support a claim that is bizarre and arbitrary.
since essentially running out of phospahtes Nauru has been currying favor with anyone it can get money from .
Yes, that is sometimes Austrailia.
You engage in carefully edited versions of semi recent history.
Nauru was a protectorate of AU, NZ, and UK and the league of nations, Later it was a protectorate of AU NZ, UK, the US and the UN.
Absolutely due to proximaty and economic ties – AU was the dominant player.
AU sought to establish the semi autonomous status that you claim Nauru now has in the early 60’s, but they abandon that effort 60 years ago – when it was obvious no one was buying what they were selling.
I have traveled to Japan and China and other countries that does not make them US protectorates.
Canada literally is no longer capable of functioning as a country or economy without the US. They are possibly more economically dependent on the US than Nauru on australia.
They are still an independent country – often acting stupidly against their own interests.
You completely ignore the late 20th and 21st century dealings of Nauru with China, the US, Drug Dealers – and pretty much anyone that will offer them money.
Absolutely Nauru has a serious problem – as phosphates have run out, they do not have the resources to support their population.
You left wing nuts fixate on culture and then pretend that a country that was entirely divorced fromt he rest of the world for most of 3000 years is Magically tied to a culture 3000 miles away with no common ancestors for tens of thousands of years and no interaction for 90% of their history because for a few decades Australia was the most significant country in a protectorate. Naura was officially part of German almost as long as it was a partial protectorate of Austrailia.
I would note – the various fact that I keep coming up with are NOT important EXCEPT in one way – they establish that You are clueless and that your logic and reasoning is driven by the conclusion you seek to reach.
Even your idiotic micronesia/polynesia nonsense works against you – The polynesian triangle extends down moderately close to Austraila. While the distinction between micronesia and polynesia is more geographic than anything else.
Nauru is literally either the south east most part of micronesia or the west most part of Polynesia. Neither connects it with Austrailia or its people.
Your claims of Cultural ties are all based on RECENT history.
And they are weaker than claiming the Irish are English – atleast the Irish share a celtic ancestry within the past 1000 years with england.
I doubt anyone from Nauru had been to Australia prior to 300 years ago.
John Say the Stupid
Your stupidity is beyond belief.
Why are you ranting about the origins of the Aborigines of Australia?
Aborigines have no genetic relationship to the Pacific Islanders.
SO WHAT !!!!!!
That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Australia has long cultural and administrative ties with Nauru.
What makes you think that the origins of the Aborigines has any relevance to Australia’s relationship with Nauru.
These are two completely unrelated things.
You keep ranting about the distinctions between the different races of Pacific Islanders, but everything you say is nonsense and of no relevance to the relationship between Australia and Nauru.
The distinctions between Polynesians, Micronesians and Melanesians is absolutely not just geographic.
They are genetically distinct races with different physical appearances that are obvious to people like me who come from the South Pacific. They came in different waves from different places in Asia at different times.
The Polynesians were not part of the Melanesian migration through New Guinea as you claim. They came much later.
The Polynesians are also distinct because there is evidence that they had contact with Native Americans from South America. Polynesians reached Rapanui (Easter Island) which had been populated by Native Americans.
Polynesians still carry distinctive Native American genetic markers.
Everything you are spouting is nonsensical irrelevant garbage, because you have an obsessive compulsion to somehow prove that you are all knowing, and know everything there is to know about everything.
In reality, by your own admission, you knew nothing about Nauru before today.
Now, after a few minutes on the internet and Wikipedia you apparently know everything there is to know, and are now a world authority on this matter.
Now you are ranting about Nauru’s relationship with Fiji, the US and New Zealand.
This is stupid, irrelevant obfuscation designed to support your psychotic need to prove that you are always infallibly correct.
You truly are a delusional fool.
Your mental stability is very much in doubt.
ATS – you are truly delusional.
YOU started the stupid argument, you defined the terms.
I will be HAPPY to exclude Australian aborignies from the debate.
Presuming that you will continue to accept they have at best very very distant links to the Naurans.
That means your claim of strong cultural ties to Naurans is just saying that the specific flavor of Austrialian english culture has had an influence on Nauru over the past 100 years – before that Nauru was in the hands of the germans, and before that it had almost no contact with the world.
So you are limiting your cultural argument to the past century.
President Munroe told the World powers to F#$K off with the western hemispher 200 years ago – to a greater or lessor extent the Western Hemisphere has been a US protectorate for almost 200 years.
The US drove Spain out of the werstern hemispher in the last years of the 19th century – MORE than 100 years ago – We took posession of the Philipines at that time. While the Philipines dates indepence from 1898, They were a US protectorate until 1946 – actually much longer as full sovereignty did not occur until approximately 40 years ago.
Would you claim the philipine culture is essantially American ?
The nations of the western hemisphere have been US protectorates in some form for 200 years.
Why don;t the arguments you make regarding Nauru apply to the US and El Salvador ?
Again my POINT is not that you are wrong about the facts – though your argument is a collection of facts, half truths and lies.
My point is that you are totally inconsistent in your argument.
If the cultural influences of AU over Nauru are significant – the same influences of the US over El Salvador are equally significant.
You do not get to define things one way for one part of an argument and differently in another.
If Nauru is physically close to Austrailia – El Salvador is twice as close to the US.
You can call 5+hrs by air close or far – I had to travel 18+hrs by air to get to china. 5+hrs is PHL top SEA
No matter what El Salvador is CLOSER.
you can pick almost any significant domain you want, and you can define the terms however you want.
What you can not do is redefine the terms when you change to the other part of the argument.
And you did that in your very first post,
And you are still hiding from it.
You did so PREDICTABLY – it is what left wing nuts do all the time.
“You keep ranting about the distinctions between the different races of Pacific Islanders”
No I discussed shared ancestry and ACTUAL ties.
No matter WHO they are the people of Nauru and the People of Austrialia
have had nothing to do with each other for millenia until VERY RECENTLY.
I find it absolutely hillarious to have a left wing nut trying to argue shared culture with respect to english and asians in the pacific.
You have made clear RECENTLY that you are NOT trying to argue ANY connection between AU and Naurua prior to the last 100 years – when the Germans left Nauru
So long as you do not backtrak on that – I do not care to address the accuracy of your claims regarding the rest of the pacific. While they too suffer from playing word games, it is irrelevant to this discussion.
“Everything you are spouting is nonsensical irrelevant garbage, because you have an obsessive compulsion to somehow prove that you are all knowing, and know everything there is to know about everything.”
Wow – project much ?
There must be a fallacy of argument by clairvoyance – you certainly are up to your neck in it.
NO I do not claim to know everything. What I do know is that left wing nuts LIE and play word games ALL THE TIME.
That you do not think before you post, that you do not check out the facts you assert,
that you do not even notice that you are not arguing the same thing from one part of your argument to the other.
“you knew nothing about Nauru before today.
Now, after a few minutes on the internet and Wikipedia you apparently know everything there is to know, and are now a world authority on this matter.”
No what I know is that Your first (and subsequent) posts are self contradictory illogical garbage. That you sprayed nonsense off the top of your head,
and that you were easily caught.
And that this will happen again and again, because your conceptions of truth and value are unanchored in reality.
You want to debate what constitutes “significant” cultural ties.
While I initially assumed that you were using the NORMAL left wing nut defintions of significance and culture – which do NOT result in significant cultural ties to Nauru.
You have chosen to define significance and culture differently than left wing nuts do in other arguments.
FINE – but using your own standards the US and El Salvador have significant cultural ties.
My CORE point has nothing to do with El Salvador, or Nauru or culture or significance or race or polynesians.
It is that you do not make consistent logically and factually correct arguments.
“Now you are ranting about Nauru’s relationship with ..”
No I am pointing out over and over in many different ways that you are not using the same logic and the same definitions throughout your arguments.
And that you are doing so OBVIOUSLY.
*. Ah, I c, John Say. Nauru has decided to become a prison island for money aka an economy. Ok, that works. What’s the term or duration of contract?
El Salvador was one year? A holding facility for 1 year was the agreement?
2020
SUVA – U.S. Ambassador Joseph Cella hosted Nauruan High Commissioner Michael Aroi at the U.S. Embassy on December 3 to sign the Nauru-United States Investment Incentive Agreement.
If you are Austrailian than you likely know about ANZUS
The US has the same security commitments in the Pacific as Austrailia.
“Nauruans speak with an Aussie accent for god’s sake.”
I have no idea if that is true, no reason to beleive you – and no reason to care even if it is.
English is the second language today for nearly the entire world. That does not make the culture of the entire world english.
Your making a stupid argument even for someone on the left – which I pointed out – logic has NOTHING to do with your arguments.
I doubt anyone here thinks you woul dnot be arguing every single thing that I am – if whatever you were trying to prove was served by that argument.
I do not beleive that YOU beleive what you are saying.
If the issue was different and it benefited YOU to separate Nauruan culture forom austrailian you could do so trivialy – and YOU would do so.
The STUPID part here or more accurately morality free, is that you will argue any set of facts, half truths or lies to support YOUR position on whatever the issue of the moment.
If you are actually australian and you are NOT the moron that you appear then you KNOW that your cultural argument is garbage. The Nauruans have only 3000 years of history.
Less than 20% of that has ANY contact with the vast majority of the world – including austrailia – which for all but the most recent portion of history was itself a completely different culture – neither the same culture as the naruans nor with any consequential connection to modern austrailian culture which is almost entirely a local english derivative culture.
Nauru is not even well connected to that.
Nauru is 92% Nauruan. Australia is only 3% native – natives that are separated from Nauruans by tens of thousands of years.
Julers’s Pizza is the #3 recommended place for US tourists to eat in Nauru – does that Make Nauruan culture Italian ?
As I noted – you left wing nuts will pretzelize logic to argue anything.
I have no problem with your argument that Nauruan culture has been influenced by Austrailia – but that same argument applies to the entire world being equally influenced by american culture.
You can not make one argument without accepting the other.
Back to your absurd claim that the AU Nauru deal is somehow different – by YOUR argument the El Salvador deal is the same – because there are McDonalds in San Salvador.
Either a nations “culture” is a thread back to its origens or it is the combination of modern and foreign influences.
You do NOT get to argue that it is ONE thing for one country and another for another.
Travel time from the US to El Salvador is 2.5 hrs – from Nauru to AU is 5.5hrs.
El Salvador is closer to the US.
The US absolutely domainates the western hemisphere.
Since the time of President Munroe we have told the rest of the world to stay the F#$K out of our hemisphere. While there are likely US security treaties with El Salvador – The Monroe doctrine which predates by a century any AU Nauru agreement would dictate that the US provide security for El Salvador.
The point – which you keep entirely missing – is the arguments you are making can easily be made anywhere.
Nauru is taking money it desparately needs from AU in return for accepting people who do not beleing in SU and that AU does not want.
That is precisely what El Salvador is doing.
When the first President Bush went after Drug Dealer Noriega – a relatively small US force took over the country in days. There are few countries in the world -certainly not El Salvador that the US can not completely take over quickly if it wishes.
If power over other countries is your criteria – AU is barely a player and the US totally domainates.
AGAIN you do not think through your aguments very far.
“And you, in your total ignorance, claim that there are no significant cultural ties between Australia and Nauru.”
No what I have claimed is that you are playing games with words and not using them consistantly in the same way.
How significant is the fact that in the last 50 years Naruans speak english with a Aussie accent ? It is probably more significant than that they also eat Pizza, But it is not nearly as significant as the 2700+ years they spent uninfluenced by any but their nearest neighbors – and that is NOT austrailia.
You want to fight over micornesia vs polynesia – something that does not matter, they are nearly the same and regardless any commonality to native austrailians is tens of thousands of years in the past – and has nothing to do with speaking a language that NEITHER native groups spoke until modern history.
You can define culture – and cultural significance however you wish.
What you can not do is use ONE defintion of culturally significant ties that makes the US deal with El Salvador different from the AU deal with Nauru.
As phosphates in Nauru ran out – Nauru has been whoring itself to most any nation in the world it can.
It briefily was sucking up to China, then it was sucking up to Drug Dealers and money launderers, it then shifted to sucking up to the US and participated in financial Spying on China for the US.
Nauru is a nation of about 11,000 people whose economic foundation has been obliterated, that is desparately looking for a sugar daddy.
Absolutely AU has briefly met that need – but so have drug dealers, money launders, the chinese, ….
This is not about culture – it is about money – AU wants these people gone.
Nauru wants money.
John Say the Stupid.
You are insanely stupid bordering on psychotic.
You ignorantly say, Australia has only briefly met the needs of Nauru.
Australia assumed responsibility for Nauru in 1920.
NAURUANS SPEAK WITH AUSSIE ACCENTS.
Australia has met the needs of Nauru for over 100 years.
Australia just committed $140 million to support 10,000 people in Nauru.
Nauru uses the Australian dollar and is entirely reliant on Australia for food and water that has to be brought in by ship.
For all practical purposes it is part of Australia.
John Say the Stupid.
You said above that you did not know the details of Nauru until today
Unfortunately you still do not know the details .
I would venture to say that you know less than nothing.
On the other hand, as an Aussie who has spent time in Nauru, I have first hand knowledge.
You are an ignorant fool who by your own admission, simply disbelieves anything with which you disagree.
This is psychotic thinking.
ATS – I do not trust what anonymous posters write.
That is a rational position that ANY intelligent person would take.
If you were a banker would you loan money to someone off the street with no ID ?
You are free to post anonymously. I will defend that freedom.
But as long as you do, your credibility is confined to what is verifiable in the instant post.
Being trusted is NOT a right.
While I post Pseudonymous – it takes very little effort to find out exactly who I am – and I have been “doxed” here repeatedly. My identity is know if you care to know it.
MORE importantly – I almost always post as John B Say, and if not as dhlii.
I have never posted under a different name.
There are years of my posts that anyone can review to determine whether I am trustworthy or not.
I make few errors – not because I “Know it all” but because I check most claims I make before posting them. In the rare instances I make errors – I correct them.
While you have done NOTHING to establish your own credibility.
I suspect that you are an Aussie. But neither I nor anyone else have any way of knowing. You demand to be trusted – and assert that because of a small collection of unverifiable claims that you are entitled to be trusted. Yet no one has any reason to trust anything you assert. There is no reason to trust that you are an Aussie, that you have ever been to Nauru, that you are not some 13yr old confused about your identity posting from some apartment in chicago.
Further – actually being an Aussie and actually having been to Nauru if true would give you a SMALL amount of credibility on issues related to this topic. But I am sure there are dozens of Aussies that have been to Nauru that disagree with you.
If your unverifiable claims to credentials were verifiably true – they have a SMALL positive impact on your credibility – they do not inherently make you right. On occasion I write about my actual real world experiences that lend credibility to some of what I write. But MOSTLY I try to avoid that. Life experiences are a SMALL contributor to credibility. As an example I actually have a fairly strong scientific background.
But that does not make me Right about some issue of science.
Most of use should have learned that credentials and documented claims to expertise do not preclude great error from Covid. Almost by the numbers every claim of the experts ultimately proved false. Most were obviously false from the start
If you are among those with sufficient logical skills to have determined that at the start – that is something that would earn my trust and respect. Being right when the experts are wrong, is a strong sign of good logical and analytic abilities.
Doing so over and over and over, is just about the strongest basis for credibility there is.
You can succeed in a post, in a claim, in a venture in life – and that increases the odds of your competence and intelligence. But sometimes people roll boxcars by random chance. Getting it right constantly when the so called experts are wrong is not random chance it is proof of a strong grasp of logic and the facts.
Credibility and trust are earned. You can not do that posting anonymously.
It is not even possible to know that each of the anonymous posts in this thread is from the same person.
This theme of demanding to be trusted – without establishing the precursors for trust flows through ALL your posts.
You claim to be able to read my mind, or diagnose my mental health.
And after spouting nonsense like that you demand to be trusted or taken credibly ?
ATS
You do not appear to be able to avoid undermining your own credibility.
In addition to being an Aussie who has been to NAuru are we to beleive you are clairvoyant and a psychologist capable of diagnosing over the internet ?
I have confined my observations of you to things that are self evident.
That you have no credibility
That you have not checked your facts, or logic,
and that you make arguments that are obviously internally inconsistent.
That is evidence that you are stupid.
“Australia assumed responsibility for Nauru in 1920.”
So what does that mean – until recently – Nauru exported phsophates – AU was dependent on Nauran phosphates. Nauru could have sold them anywhere – and previously they did.
That is not “dependance”.
Nauru was not “dependent” on any nation – until it ran out of phosphates.
Atleast not anymore than any other nation that exports is dependant on the nations that import from it.
Modern Nauru’s so called “Dependence” on AU is primarly western or austrailian guilt.
Nauru went from self suficient with a low standard of living to an unsustainable higher standard of living as a result of selling most of a valuable natural resource that has run out. Is that your definition of dependance ? For a while in the modern era Nauru “depended” on Drug dealers and money launders, and then on China, and the US,
Atleast by YOUR defintion of “dependence”
AU can stop providing to Nauru anytime it wants. The Nauraun economy will suffer but the country will survive – though the standard of living will decline.
Is that your idea of dependance ?
If that is the case – China, Canada – much of the world are F#$Ked by the US.
American will suffer – we will have less toys from the rest of the world if we ended their “dependence” on the US. But our standard of living would not collapse.
Canada is F#$Ked if its “dependence” on the US is ended.
My point is AGAIN you are playing word games.
You rant about Naruan “dependence” on AU.
As if that is real.
just like the relations between individuals the relations between nations are CHOICES.
Often Advantageous choices that we do not WANT to walk away from.
But that does NOT change the fact that we CAN walk away.
Babies are dependant on their mothers. to a lessor extent children on their parents.
For the most part beyond that we are just talking about good choices vs. bad choices.
“NAURUANS SPEAK WITH AUSSIE ACCENTS.”
Been through that already.
Most of the world speaks english.
Indians do so with a british accent.
That is assuming I beleive you.
“Australia has met the needs of Nauru for over 100 years.”
No. Australia has bought Phospate from Nauru raising its standard of living for much of that time.
“Australia just committed $140 million to support 10,000 people in Nauru.”
And the US pisses away billions in foriegn aide – $5B+ to Israel.
You keep making claims as if they are proof of something more.
They aren’t.
They do not change the fact that Nauru is a soveriegn nation – just like El Salvador.
“Nauru uses the Australian dollar and is entirely reliant on Australia for food and water that has to be brought in by ship.”
Much of the world conducts business in US dollars – are they dependent on the US ?
China does not produce enough food to feed its people, the rest must be brought in by ship.
You really do not think before you post.
“When Australia holds asylum seekers in Nauru, they are simply holding them in a territory that they almost completely control.”
That would be another soverign nation ?
If you are saying Australia almost completely controls Nauru by virtue of military might or economic dependence – The US has that degree of dominance over much of the world – certainly El Salvador.
Again you keep comparing apples and apples and finding an orange.
“Nauru has a long history as a Protectorate of Australia,”
From 1920-1968 – that is not even 50 years, and it is more than 50 years ago.
Further that history is shared with NZ, UK, the leauge of nations, the UN and the US.
“is currently completely dependent on Australia”
Again if economic dependence is your argument – you lose.
Most of the world is dependent on the US – certainly El Salvador.
“for all practical purposes is part of Australia.”
Not according to any recognized law.
“The Nauruans even speak with an Aussie accent.”
This is true because YOU anonymous say so, and it is important because ?
Indians speak with an English accent – does that Make india completely dependent on England ?
“Turley is ignorantly and falsely and desperately trying to justify Trump deporting people to rogue third nations that have absolutely no connection with the United States.”
While your claim is false – if True – so what ?
If you are in ANY nation illegally – you are at risk of deportation.
If you commit a crime – that risk rises,
If you commit a serious crime – the risk is near certainty.
That is a near universal, it is not unique to Trump or the US.
If your country of origen refuses to accept you – the country you are in illegally is going to find somewhere else to send you. If you are lucky, you might get a choice.
If you are lucky you might not end up incarcerated in a h311hole.
Again – not unique to the US or Trump.
Much of the west – including AU is having the same issues with illegal immigration.
In most of the world – including AU those problems are small compared to the US,
and the remedies are draconian compared to the US.
And increasingly the people in those countries are even more pissed over illegal immigration that people in the US.
Yet you left wing nuts want to rant about Trump.
Do you understand that in most of the world – including AU, if you are BORN in a country you are only a citizen one of your parents is ?
El Salvador is not a Rogue nation.
It had very serious problems – 40 years ago.
It had problems with drug gangs a decade ago.
Today it has the lowest crime rate in the western hemisphere.
So no, it is not a Rogue nation.
You just do not like the fact that it has agreed to accept criminal illegal immigrants from the US.
That does not make it any more a Rogue nation than Nauru.
About 1/3 of El Salvadors exports go to the US.
Economically it is in an entirely different world than Nauru.
*. It circles around to deception, cheat, or theft. Citizenship can be stolen by deception or cheating. It’s fundamental immorality. It’s cultural. It’s a learned behavior and pervasive, insidious. 16 oz is a pound? 15 oz? 1 oz torn away and yields an extra pound? Ohhhh, your measuring and weights are broken? They must be fixed! Haggling for prices, barter and trade economies are fundamentally unfair and lack equal protection.
Incredible actually.
@Anonymous
Really. You’re an idiot.
This stupid ANON!!
Nowhere in his article did Prof Turley describe Nauru as a “rogue nation”……What he said was “Australia is contracting with the small Pacific island of Nauru”. Maybe if you had the intelligence you think you have you would have actually read it instead of pre-supposing what the article was about.
Get over yourself.
Look at this. Prez Trump wins again.. love it.
Chicago Dem BREAKS with party, backs Trump on crime ‘1000%’