All News Australia

Australia-U.S. Fake Refugee “Deal” in Doubt Once Again

U.S. President Donald Trump has announced that the previously agreed “deal” whereby America would absorb all the illegal invaders being held in the offshore Australian detention centers, is “dumb”—and that he would now be studying it in detail.

Trump’s announcement—made via Twitter—followed a terse telephone conversation between Trump and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull which was ended early by the U.S. President.

The White House issued this picture on January 28, titled “speaking with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull from the Oval Office.”

Trump’s sudden interest in the details of the fake refugee deal—a plan worked out between the Obama administration and Turnbull—came after the Australian Prime Minister announced that the new U.S. President had undertaken to adhere to the original agreement—a statement made after the telephone conversation on Sunday, January 28.

It is now clear that when Trump had the initial conversation with Turnbull over the matter, he had not been properly apprised of the details—which include an astonishing agreement by the U.S. to simply absorb all the Third World scroungers who tried to invade Australia by sea.

In his tweet—issued on February 2, Trump asked his followers, “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!”

MalAccording to Australian press reports, Trump “hung up” on Turnbull after 25 minutes, when their call was meant to be an hour long. Turnbull denied that the U.S. President had hung up, saying that the call had ended courteously.

After a series of phone calls made on Sunday, Turnbull was the last call that the U.S. president took, but afterward, Trump is alleged to have said that it “was the worst call by far. This is the worst deal ever.”

The Australian report continued:

It is understood that the President complained that he was “going to get killed” politically and accused Australia of seeking to export the “next Boston bombers.”

Turnbull later expressed his regret that details of the conversation had been leaked, but maintained that “President Trump had given an assurance during their conversation that the deal would go ahead.”

White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed that the “refugee deal” would go ahead in a White House press briefing on February 1, and this position was confirmed in a statement from the U.S. embassy in Canberra to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) the same day.

A spokesman for the embassy told ABC that “President Trump’s decision to honor the refugee agreement has not changed and Spokesman Spicer’s comments stand. This was just confirmed to the State Department from the WH [White House] and on to this embassy at 13.15 Canberra time.”

A statement from the U.S. State Department given to ABC added that “out of respect for close ties to our Australian ally and friend, we will honor the agreement to accept some refugees from resettlement centers on Nauru and Papua New Guinea.”

However, in a separate statement sent to ABC the next day, the White House press office said that the “President is still considering whether or not he will move forward with this deal at this time.”

Trump’s tweet has now however raised the prospect that the “deal” might be called off—but there is in fact still no clarity one way or the other.

A Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) article—clearly designed to try and elicit sympathy for the Third Worlders in the detention centers—quoted one of the invaders, a Burmese scrounger named Imran Mohammed, as saying that “It feels like someone is stabbing a knife in our chest when we hear different stories every day.”

Mohammed, the SMH said, “is among the 871 men in Papua New Guinea awaiting resettlement” and was hoping that the “arrangement struck with the US would put an end to his three years in detention.”

Mohammed went on to say that it “makes me feel we are not welcomed into his [Trump’s] country. Many of us [have] lost faith in life and don’t want to live in this world.”

7 Comments

  1. It is somewhat ironic that both left and right leaning Australians I have spoken to agree that it is our (Australia’s) problem. But opinion then divides: these illegals should be either accepted in to Australia (leftist rubbish) or deported back to their hell-hole Islamic cesspits (the option I like). Good on Trumpster for flicking this deal to the wind. And Malcolm ‘piss-weak’ Turnbull, a man better suited to the leftist Labor Party, might want to ready himself for the One Nation (Hanson) deluge about to be unleashed on his failing party.

     
    Reply
  2. It’s encouraging that Trump is taking this line. There must be huge numbers of ‘deals’ arranged by Obama to the detriment of the US. I suspect this is the first of many reconsiderations.

    Is Turnbull a Jew? – I found Michael Mazur of Melbourne on a search. He seems to have got the right idea.

     
    Reply
  3. 45 years ago when I left the Forces, there was employment available if you were prepared to go out and get it. In London you could leave a job on Friday and would pick another up within a week at the most. My happiness at leaving the Forces, obtaining employment and with my weekends playing rugby from September through to March, what could go wrong. Then I woke up, dishonest politicians taking my country into a Trade Deal, which sounded good at the time, but when the true facts of what our membership entailed were known, the country started to slide down to its current state. It may have taken 40 years but it doesn’t alter the fact that until 1975, it was always accepted that the first job of any government was to protect its citizens and control its borders. What Donald Trump is doing, even though it’s a mammoth task, is to rectify many years of uncontrolled immigration, massive holes in border security, and for that, why should he be ridiculed? Obama’s deal with Australia is typical of a man that thinks more of his image and legacy than his countrymen. For Australia, this deal was like a Christmas present, and yes, who would refuse it? Sadly, there seems to be no end in sight to the internal conflicts within many countries over uncontrolled immigration, or where the money is coming from, so tax increases are on the way.

     
    Reply
  4. What the media is being careful not to report is that the majority of the “asylum seekers” – illegal immigrants – are not, as might be expected, from neighbouring Vietnam, Myanmar or Indonesia, but from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. Three of the “rogue” countries in the world most known for extremism, violence and terrorism. It would be an irresponsible leader indeed who didn’t seek to protect his own people from the potential dangers of admitting anyone from these countries.

     
    Reply
    1. One thing that is not reported much is that the deal is a refugee swap whereby Australia is taking several thousand Central and South American refugees from the US in exchange for those on Manus Island. It does go both ways. But it was a dirty deal by Obama who just tried to sabotage Trump and it was opportunistic by Turnbull – I’d be pissed if I was Trump. There’s not much sympathy for Turnbull in Australia – he’s about as popular as a bad case of tinea, but there are a few worries about Trump’s behaviour too.

       
      Reply
  5. What many people forget is that Donald Trump is not a 100% blinkered and brainwashed political activist like the mass majority of those that support all the various political parties – certainly across the whole of Europe. Apart from the immigration issue, he will look at where public money is being spent, on what and is it justifiable, at least that has come out with regards to NATO. Obama has to be remembered, not only the first ‘non-white’ President of the USA, but in many people’s eyes, a biased human being in favour of ethnic minorities and what he arranged with Turnbull, probably done behind the closed doors of Washington, proves that, in my opinion. Even money says the mass majority of politicians will never want their constituents to really know how much public money they spend, who pays for the ‘freeebie trips’ to other countries on so-called fact finding missions which could all be done with research on a computer, and the list will go on. This deal should be scrapped, in fact, one has to question why it was arranged in the first place.

     
    Reply

Post Comment