WHY WE SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT THE GREECE DEBT CRISIS
AMERICAN POLITICS: WHO'S RUNNING THE ASYLUM?
THE POWER AND THE PASSION
Worst Baby Names in the World
Celebrity Chefs
DARWIN’S THEORY OF YARD DUTY
THE ART OF THE COMPLAINT LETTER
CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF WORLD BAFFLES BELIEVERS
TEN EMERGENCY JOKES NO COMEDY WRITER SHOULD EVER BE WITHOUT
FROM TROTTER TO TWITTER: A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMAN (MIS) COMMUNICATION
Friday, September 9, 2011 at 6:10PM 
The decrepit asylum seeker debate continues to drag on in Australia and everyone has an opinion on what to should or should not be done with asylum seekers. The 90 to 95 per cent that are found to be genuine refugees fleeing persecution from countries that Australia has had direct involvement in or turned a blind to. I’m talking countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka etc.
Thursday, September 1, 2011 at 5:20PM 
The divisive asylum seeker debate that swings like a wrecking ball through Australian politics looks like it has claimed another scalp, this time it may be the Gillard government itself. The asylum seeker debate has taken another turn after yesterday’s ruling by the High Court. The landslide six to one ruling has put another nail in the coffin of the minority government.
In short, the judgment has found that Australia can’t send asylum seekers to Malaysia because of the absence of legal protection for asylum seekers within the laws of Malaysia thus contriving Australia’s own commitments under the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention. Malaysia, unlike Australia, is not a signatory.
