On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:25:45 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netDespite your denial, the change cannot have anything to do with one rugby player - Australian politicians wouldn't do that and the public wouldn't tolerate it.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcement
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >>entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application >>>fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of >>>restrictions: >>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >>your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Tony
It is indeed hard to tell - the second article says:
"Canberra's strict immigration laws means the Wallabies' No 10 has
apparently only just qualified to apply for Australian citizenship." -
which may have meant just the day before!
It is certainly consistent with the announcement, which actually has
little to do with the worst of the treatment of New Zealanders in
Australia. The Australian government would almost certainly have known
of the issue. The rules for eligibility to play for an Australian team >obviously vvary from sport to sport - and also is seems exceptions can
be made from policy for special cases, which Kayes appers to have been
and which would almost certinly also apply to Cooper who may now be
forced to become an Australian if he eants to go to Rio: >http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/66782697/New-Zealand-water-polo-star-Joseph-Kayes-set-to-represent-Australia-at-Rio-Olympics
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high applicationI assume this is your idea of a joke!
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and
the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions: >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcementI assume this is your idea of a joke!
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and
the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New
Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcement
I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and
the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions: >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Tony
On 20/02/2016 2:25 p.m., Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcementOr do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >> entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and
the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New
Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >> I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >> your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
He won't be joking. Belief in your own bullshit is consistent with
severe paranoia. He will believe it.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:25:45 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netDespite your denial, the change cannot have anything to do with one rugby >player - Australian politicians wouldn't do that and the public wouldn't >tolerate it.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcement
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >>>entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application >>>>fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>>the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of >>>>restrictions: >>>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>>I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >>>your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>>>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Tony
It is indeed hard to tell - the second article says:
"Canberra's strict immigration laws means the Wallabies' No 10 has >>apparently only just qualified to apply for Australian citizenship." - >>which may have meant just the day before!
It is certainly consistent with the announcement, which actually has
little to do with the worst of the treatment of New Zealanders in >>Australia. The Australian government would almost certainly have known
of the issue. The rules for eligibility to play for an Australian team >>obviously vvary from sport to sport - and also is seems exceptions can
be made from policy for special cases, which Kayes appers to have been
and which would almost certinly also apply to Cooper who may now be
forced to become an Australian if he eants to go to Rio: >>http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/66782697/New-Zealand-water-polo-star-Joseph-Kayes-set-to-represent-Australia-at-Rio-Olympics
What a waste of a post when you could have congratulated Australia on this >small but important move forward and NZ officials and politicians who will have
negotiated this concession.
Tony
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 15:19:39 +1300, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20/02/2016 2:25 p.m., Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcementOr do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >>> entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>> the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>> Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>> I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >>> your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
He won't be joking. Belief in your own bullshit is consistent with
severe paranoia. He will believe it.
I don't know why the right are so consistent in avoiding the substance
of a discussion for puerile personal attacks. Are you that lacking in confidence of your position, Fred - but come to think of it, what is
your position?
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:19:35 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netI believe that is an opinion that stems from wishful thinking and desperation and it indicates a certain sourness - why don't you, maybe once in a thousand posts, acknowledge that our current government does sometimes do things at least competently? I think I know why but I would love to know your opinion! Tony
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:25:45 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netDespite your denial, the change cannot have anything to do with one rugby >>player - Australian politicians wouldn't do that and the public wouldn't >>tolerate it.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcement
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an >>>>entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application >>>>>fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>>>the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>>>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of >>>>>restrictions: >>>>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>>>I assume this is your idea of a joke!
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble is >>>>your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>>>>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Tony
It is indeed hard to tell - the second article says:
"Canberra's strict immigration laws means the Wallabies' No 10 has >>>apparently only just qualified to apply for Australian citizenship." - >>>which may have meant just the day before!
It is certainly consistent with the announcement, which actually has >>>little to do with the worst of the treatment of New Zealanders in >>>Australia. The Australian government would almost certainly have known
of the issue. The rules for eligibility to play for an Australian team >>>obviously vvary from sport to sport - and also is seems exceptions can
be made from policy for special cases, which Kayes appers to have been >>>and which would almost certinly also apply to Cooper who may now be >>>forced to become an Australian if he eants to go to Rio: >>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/66782697/New-Zealand-water-polo-star-Joseph-Kayes-set-to-represent-Australia-at-Rio-Olympics
What a waste of a post when you could have congratulated Australia on this >>small but important move forward and NZ officials and politicians who will >>have
negotiated this concession.
Tony
The one off nature of this decision is hard to justify, and you must
know that governments of any stripe in any country will do things for >"popular" reasons, especially if it can be sold as for other reasons
as well, and is really a relatively small concession in any event.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcementI assume this is your idea of a joke!
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and
the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions: >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such an entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble
is
your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull!
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:19:35 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netI believe that is an opinion that stems from wishful thinking and
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:25:45 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:Despite your denial, the change cannot have anything to do with one rugby >>>player - Australian politicians wouldn't do that and the public wouldn't >>>tolerate it.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcement
Or do you really think that the Australian government would change such >>>>>an
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application >>>>>>fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>>>>the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>>>>Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of >>>>>>restrictions: >>>>>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>>>>I assume this is your idea of a joke!
entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the >>>>>trouble is
your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
Tony
Turnbull has been under pressure to learn from Key - if Key did make >>>>>>concessions for this decision, perhaps he should learn from Turnbull! >>>>>
It is indeed hard to tell - the second article says:
"Canberra's strict immigration laws means the Wallabies' No 10 has >>>>apparently only just qualified to apply for Australian citizenship." - >>>>which may have meant just the day before!
It is certainly consistent with the announcement, which actually has >>>>little to do with the worst of the treatment of New Zealanders in >>>>Australia. The Australian government would almost certainly have known >>>>of the issue. The rules for eligibility to play for an Australian team >>>>obviously vvary from sport to sport - and also is seems exceptions can >>>>be made from policy for special cases, which Kayes appers to have been >>>>and which would almost certinly also apply to Cooper who may now be >>>>forced to become an Australian if he eants to go to Rio: >>>>http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/66782697/New-Zealand-water-polo-star-Joseph-Kayes-set-to-represent-Australia-at-Rio-Olympics
What a waste of a post when you could have congratulated Australia on >>>this
small but important move forward and NZ officials and politicians who >>>will
have
negotiated this concession.
Tony
The one off nature of this decision is hard to justify, and you must
know that governments of any stripe in any country will do things for >>"popular" reasons, especially if it can be sold as for other reasons
as well, and is really a relatively small concession in any event.
desperation
and it indicates a certain sourness - why don't you, maybe once in a
thousand
posts, acknowledge that our current government does sometimes do things at least competently? I think I know why but I would love to know your
opinion!
Tony
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 15:19:39 +1300, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20/02/2016 2:25 p.m., Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77076257/how-to-get-your-head-around-the-landmark-aussie-citizenship-announcementOr do you really think that the Australian government would change such
Some of the details do appear a little strange - the high application
fee, the fact that those travelling from now will not be eligible, and >>>> the relatively high income level. There is also no indication that New >>>> Zealand has had to concede anything.
But now we know the real reason for this "one off" easing of
restrictions:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11592856 >>> I assume this is your idea of a joke!
an
entrenched law for the sake of one rugny player?
Come to think of it, it must be an attempted bit of humour - the trouble >>> is
your humour and spin are so similar it is easy to be deceived.
He won't be joking. Belief in your own bullshit is consistent with
severe paranoia. He will believe it.
I don't know why the right are so consistent in avoiding the substance
of a discussion for puerile personal attacks. Are you that lacking in confidence of your position, Fred - but come to think of it, what is
your position?
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 25 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 252:29:15 |
| Calls: | 1,888 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 11,073 |
| Messages: | 933,876 |