I'm certain that they were born in Australia but were raised in Lebanon.

Maybe, I don't know the legal system there. However, I know the legal system here backs mothers so if what you say is true then they're the same but complete opposite :d

Read somewhere she can get bail if the father and her come to an agreement . The 60 mis crew dont get that deal.

Which he doesn't get if he goes through the courts here.

The mother would get custody despite being a piece of shit.

I'm pretty sure in Australia if a mother kidnapped her children and moved to another state the courts were return the children to the father if he had sole custody. The issue here is that the father lied to the mother and effectively stole the children off her since she had sole custody in Australia. The situation is gender irrelevant I would feel the same if the mother did the same thing to a father - such as those three half Italian sisters who were correctly taken from their mother and returned to father in Italy who was their legal guardian.

Edited by rusty: 15/4/2016 02:45:59 PM

Who she stole first. She doesn't have the morale high ground on this.

How do you know she stole the children? My understanding was they were living in Lebabon, a bomb went off nearby and they mutually agreed to move with the children to Australia, but he was to stay in Lebanon due to continue running business. And why if she stole the children, would she let them go to Lebanon with him and trust him to return them?

Where did a bomb going off from???????

Did you just willfully ignore the bit where she tore up the passports? There is no quote anywhere saying they mutually agreed to move to Australia, the father is on record saying that following that incident, she took the kids to visit her parents but ended up staying there and destroyed her passports, thus expecting the father to have to come to Australia to have a life with them despite having no job there.

She is literally just as bad as the man she is trying to slag off but she is the only one dumb enough to try and actually kidnap the kids of the street.

Whilst they were all living in Beirut, a bomb went off in Beirut, prompting the Mother to take the children and return to Australia under the guise of visiting her parents.

if she tore up the passports, how did they end up on a flight out of the country?

You ignore the statement where she tore them up in Australia once she got out lebanon.

Some point after the Father came back, he asked the mother if he could take the kids to visit their Grandmother in Beirut. She agreed to that, for whatever reason, which means it's very likely that she would have signed off on new passports.

It's hardly out of the question that she is capable of flip flopping on an issue and making retarded decisions like that. It is however becoming clear as day though that you are being willfully ignorant and are just picking the mothers side so you can keep slagging off the middle east. :roll:

Cannot believe a TV crew would be so stupid to get this tied up in this.

The story would have been just as juicy and powerful if they gave her the cash to go over in return for an interview if she made it out ok.

Is that what actually happened though, or are you just making shit up? Although it's possible she abducted the children from Lebanon, tore up their passports, threatened the father he would might not see them again, and then after all this have a sudden change of heart , got the kids brand new shiny passports and happily waived goodbye at the airport to embark on their exciting holiday to Hezbollah bomb territory, the likelier scenario is that after bombs were going off they mutually decided it would safer for the kids to live in Australia, with their mother , rather than risk getting blown to bits in Lebabon. I guess it's his word against hers, but so far he is the one with a proven history of lying.

Yep confirmed rusty is just using this to shit over the middle east again.

I'm basing my theory on quotes and reports from Media sources ranging from the ABC's media watch to Fairfax and even the fkn Daily Mail, all of which are pretty consistent in what sources and evidence they are using. You have provided nothing but your own bollocks to suit your own ridiculous crusade.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4441348.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/national/60-minutes-kidnap-charge-mother-sally-faulkner-was-looking-at-never-seeing-her-babies-again-20160413-go51j1.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3532149/Malcolm-Turnbull-keeps-mum-Sally-Faulkner-60-Minutes-crew.html

Edited by melbourne_terrace: 15/4/2016 04:28:40 PM

Not even trying to hide it.

For people interested in this case, this is a good read: http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/the-role-of-white-privilege-in-the-60-minutes-kidnapping-saga-20160413-go5fq3.html

Some of you won't agree.

Which of those articles supports your fucked theory? Again the notion that she would kidnap the children and rip up their passports only to suddenly do an about face and get them shiny new ones before couriering them back to their father for a fun jolly holiday is doubtful. After all she let him visit his kids in Australia whenever he wanted, and was decent enough to let them go to Lebanon with him, while he hardly lets her speak to her kids at all. So far he is the one proven to lie and to be cruel enough to refuse the mother access to her own children, why should we believe his story that she ripped up the passports?

Sadly these issues often come down to a battle of the sexes, I understand fathers get treated like shit by the courts here but that doenst mean dads are always the victims.

Once again rusty ignoring everything just to shit on the middle east

My colleague and I called it. It's 100 per cent white privilege. The audacity to think you can bypass all legal avenues because you're in a third world country is laughable.

My colleague who is studying to be a lawyer doesn't think they will get the max though.

Unfortunate considering they are looking at a max 30 years hard labour.

Not everything can be dumbed down to white/male/heterosexual priviledge. The simple fact is the kids were living in Australia with their mother, the father took the children to Lebanon under the guise of a holiday and failed to return them. It would be different if she kidnapped the kids into Australia and ripped up their passports, but it must doenst flow logically that she would get them fresh new ones and than them back to their daddy. A woman who steals her kids and rips up passports isnt the kind of woman who hands the kids to father to take on an overseas holiday.

Lol, anyone using the phrase "white privilege" is a dick. More like typical arrogant journos.

The father is well connected in Lebanon and willing to forgive the mother but not 60 minutes. He is wealthy and powerful enough to discourage anyone from taking a bribe to help them. If they are released expect to see a major concession by the government to Hezbollah/ Iran. Possibilities are Hezbollah/ IRGC to be removed from the terrorism list, the ban to be lifted on broadcasting their propaganda in Australia and allowing welfare payments to be made to those who return to Lebanon.

Hwat? ?? Long bow is long

:lol: yeah you cant hide your hatred for the middle east if you tried

I hate it but if there was ever a case for it to be made here it is. This is the textbook example.

It is how things work over there. The only way they will avoid a lengthy prison term is if the legal system is leaned on from above and from the direction of the fathers power base, nothing but a significant political concession will be enough.

Oh i know that, but the rest pf your spiel is just ramblings. Leave your personal agenda aside and speak on the case without bias

What personal agenda and bias? The political concessions will need to be made to Hezbollah, which is an Iranian proxy, because that is the political bloc with which his extended family is aligned. Making a suitable concession to them will isolate him from his power base, appealing to any other faction gives him no incentive to cooperate.