Posted on 01/05/2022 2:14:22 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Novak Djokovic had received a medical exemption to compete in the Australian Open without being vaccinated against COVID-19, but that same medical exemption could end up preventing him from entering the country.
Djokovic has reportedly been denied entry to Australia due to a visa mixup. According to the Times of London, a member of Djokovic's team applied for the wrong class of visa — one that doesn't apply to people who have gotten a medical exemption — and Djokovic's stuck at the airport without a way to enter the country.
But Djokovic is presently unable to proceed through passport control after a member of his support team made a critical mistake in requesting a sub-class of visa that does not apply to those who have received medical exemptions from a COVID-19 vaccine. The error had been discovered by the Australian border force while Djokovic was already traveling on a 14-hour commercial flight from Dubai to Melbourne.
After spending hours reviewing the situation, Australia intends to send Djokovic back home Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at sports.yahoo.com ...
Then how did the remote communities achieve a 100% Vax rate as soon as the NT govt stepped in to handle Vaccine hesitancy.
Under Federal intervention, the army has the authority to enter and *regulate* these communities.
Stop posting BS in this site, the reality is Australia has gone crazy and heavy handed in its policies during the pandemic and nothing even remotely comparable to what goes on in the US and elsewhere.
I haven't seen any evidence these communities have got 100% vaccination rates - just you claiming that. It wouldn't surprise me if it's true - because these communities only have very small populations (typically less than 100 people) and so if a concerted effort was made to vaccinate such a community, it would not be hard to get everybody vaccinated in a single day. But you're the first person I've seen make the 100% claim so I'd want to see it somewhere else before I looked into it - especially given some of the other stuff you've said is untrue.
Under Federal intervention, the army has the authority to enter and *regulate* these communities.
Sort of - I've actually been involved in what is sometimes referred to as the 'Intervention', and, yes, the ADF (which includes the Army but isn't the same thing as the Army) does have considerable latitude in particular circumstances to provide particular types of support. But they do not have 'unlimited' power in this regard, or anything like it, as you seem to be implying. Stop posting BS in this site,
I'm not. I'm posting accurate information to try and counter the bullshit people like you are posting. I wasn't going to do this - but I will now. Line by line analysis of your last post and the lies it contains. I'll make it easy and underline the bits that are clear lies - but even a lot of the rest isn't that accurate.
"The aboriginals who are in remote communities were marched off to army camps by the Australian army in the name of a medical emergency, the emergency declaration was done because of the low vacc’nation rate in those communities.
Nobody was taken to an "army camp". A couple of communities were moved to a former mining camp, not an army camp. They were not moved by the Australian Army - the Royal Australian Air Force did have some involvement because two of the communities are almost next door to an RAAF base. The Army might have been used if it had been expedient, as the ADF in general is often used to assist in emergencies, but this was not primarily Army. And it wasn't done because of low vaccination rates - it was done because of active infections in those communities and the fact that these communities due to their isolation are not safe places to leave sick people.
the reality is Australia has gone crazy and heavy handed in its policies during the pandemic and nothing even remotely comparable to what goes on in the US and elsewhere.
That is true of some parts of Australia. Frankly, I think it's also true of some parts of America in general terms, but I would agree that a couple of places in Australia (such as Melbourne, where I live) have gone beyond the point of reason in the past. That was down to the decision of Premier Daniel Andrews and his socialist state government of Victoria. It wasn't the decision of the federal government, and it wasn't Australia, in general. I have been very clear in saying some parts of Australia have had extreme reactions to COVID. I just would like to see the blame for that put on the people who actually made those decisions, and acting like it's all of Australia helps divert attention away from them, and also makes what they did actually not stand as much as it actually deserves to.
As an expat Aussie, I know very well the situation in Australia. I know how crazy Australia has gone recently and how the politicians have grabbed and misused the authority all in the name of the pandemic management strategy.
An emergency was declared to handle to the infection rates in remote communities (infection as declared by a couple of + ve pcr tests and not sure whether it is real and symptomatic), the army stepped in to help the NT govt and the vaccination rates picked to 100% in a few weeks. You connect the dots. This is was what mentioned in the ABC news feed, achieving a 100% rate is statistically impossible without the use of a pressure tactic or force.
That doesn’t prove jack. Guns were confiscated years ago, just not all guns.
That is a far cry from America where in most states you can legally carry a weapon in public, and in many cases not be required to have a permit.
About 3-5% of them. Mostly taken out of the hands of convicted criminals. Another 20% were voluntarily sold by people who could have continued to own them if they had wanted to, and that's what lead to the big piles of guns you saw photos of. But you were lied to when you were told most of the guns in those piles were confiscated, rather than voluntarily sold on.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your manipulated outrage.
I would be embarrassed to have been so easily mislead. I certainly wouldn't be doubling down and insisting the lies you were told were the truth.
Yes, as I have repeatedly said there are actually more guns now than before the restrictions in Australia. But people do not want the truth to affect their own personal agendas.
I admire that you keeping on trying to reason with these people with facts.
Yep, we were hardly locked down where I live and the schools have been open almost of the time, except for two weeks back in 2021 around the Easter break. We have had less restrictions here than most of the USA.
Wow, what an imagination to come up with that story!
Liar. National Review stated that around 1/6th of guns in Australia were confiscated. And since semi-auto weapons were largely banned, that meant that over half my guns would have been siezed. You aren't a very good liar, go back to your propaganda paymasters and have them replace you.
They are wrong. I'm not lying.
What National Review must have done to get that number is assume that all of the approximately 600,000 guns that were handed in as part of the buyback were 'confiscated'. Most of them weren't. The vast majority of guns collected in the buy back remained completely legal. People handed them in voluntarily in exchange for fair market value.
A small proportion of the weapons - probably less than 30,000, definitely less than 100,000 - were guns people could not have continued to own.
And since semi-auto weapons were largely banned, that meant that over half my guns would have been siezed.
Possibly. It would have depended on exact characteristics such as magazine size, etc. But only a small proportion of Australian gun owners had 'large capacity' semi-automatics, there weren't that many of those involved.
You aren't a very good liar, go back to your propaganda paymasters and have them replace you.
I'm not lying. The fact you have obviously been lied to in the past and continue to prefer to believe those lies doesn't make me a liar. It makes you a gullible, easily manipulated, fool, who isn't prepared to accept the possibility he might have been manipulated. Exactly what actual propagandists want.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.