Do any of the stories point out the fact that these "refugees" are illegal aliens? that the ship was on it's way to Indonesia anyway? and that the Australian public are sick of all these "refugees" jumping the queues?

There are several parts to the situation and it easy to confuse them, deliberately or accidentally. It is important that the humane aspects of these people in illness, possibly malnutrition and maybe fleeing an oppressive regime not be confused with the legal aspects that they are attempting to enter Australia illegally, nor with the fact that they have paid people smugglers to assist them to do so. Then there is the simple fact that the conditions that many of them run from are worse that the worst conditions we would by circumstance inflict on them.

The numbers game - i.e. comparing numbers of refugees and/or illegal aliens - is also open to abuse. The numbers of "refugees" is increasing, of that there is little doubt. Then you have to look at how many we accept for one reason or another. I don't have the numbers to hand, but I did hear a discussion about on our national broadcaster, and paid attention because it hadn't occurred to me, either. Their conclusion? It is almost impossible to compare them.

And then there's the apparantly unrelated item I watched a few hours ago, also from [link|http://ww.abc.net.au/|the ABC], about how well the UN doesn't work. :-) How does that fit in? Well, thinking through the Tampa incident some more makes me ask why can't we stop the refugees fleeing wherever they're coming from. The 400 odd on the Tampa are reportedly Afghani, currently ruled by the Taliban. Hmm. I can't see the world doing much right now to address the flood of refugees coming from Afghanistan. One more sign of the world's brokenness, as if we didn't already know.

Now I must admit that the piece of information that the Tampa was requested to aid the stricken Indonesian boat is very interesting.

It is not a simple situation amenable to simple solutions. I don't know what the answer is. Maybe we should accept these "refugees" and put them in detention camps with other "refugees" - sorry, illegal aliens. Maybe we should stonewall until Norway or Indonesia capitulate. Maybe if we wait long enough, they'll all die and the problem will have gone away. Maybe we should just kill them all now. Maybe we should tell the UN to get fscked because they're just a toothless tiger taken over by all those self-serving diplomats and just do what the Australian public wants the country to do anyway.

Wade.

The geography of the continent does not lend itself to just dumping them in the middle somewhere. Besides, that's not where they want to be. They want to be in the cities.

Regarding "queue-jumping"... if they have already applied for immigration permits to Australia, or refugee resettlement in Australia, then they are jumping the queue by bringing themselves here. In fact, even if they haven't or won't apply for such, coming here forces us to process their refugee claims ahead of those elsewhere who have applied. To make it fair, everyone needs to go through the same channels. These type of people are basically saying "we don't care about anyone else - let us in and let us in NOW!" This is at least as selfish - perhaps more so - as the Australian people telling them in return "No, go away, you're causing us problems."

I know these people may well be fleeing for their lives. Or some of them may be. Or perhaps they think they are but didn't hang around long enough to find out. But I also can't see anyone doing anything to stop the situation causing them to flee in the first place. All I can see is people fleeing to us and everyone else saying "They're going to you so you have to take them." Excuse me?

Wade.

not be confused with the legal aspects that they are attempting to enter Australia illegally,

Actually, I don't see it that way.

They are *not* (currently) trying to enter "illegally". They were in a sinking boat, another rendered assistance, and now they're being left there to rot. The immigration issue is another point entirely. Want to deny them immigration? Fine, that's your perogative.

If the Tampa hadn't picked them up, we would have another 400+ illegal aliens to do something with. They were definitely coming to Australian soil. We deny lots of people entry before they get here. We've even turned whole boatloads away before. Why not this lot?

But it would be *humane* to let them get off the damn boat and see doctors, and get food and water. In some of the big influxes, the US has set up tent cities while they processed (and rejected lots) such aliens. (The Haitian ones, most recently) I have a problem with leaving people out there to rot.

We're not leaving them out there to rot. We're giving them food, water and medical aid. What we're not doing is letting them land. If the owner of the ship wants to complain about us turning their cargo ship into a passenger ship, I'm sure we will have great delight in pointing this out. I said before not to confuse the legal and humane issues.

The other point is that it costs us anything from 5 times upwards to process them on our shore as to reject them before they get here. This is the main reason we told them to get lost from the get go. I would guess the cost is probably starting to mount, though, but other factors are now in play.

What does Norway have to do with anything?

It's a Norwegian ship. They are a victim of circumstance. If it was a Dutch ship, or a Brazillian ship, or whatever, we'd have a different country involved.

It was just their boat, who went to the aid of sinking, and about to die, people, and for their humanity, are "stuck" with them while Australia points guns at them and says "Yer problem now, mate, you picked 'em up".

*That's* what I have a problem with. Not accepting them as immigrants, that's your business. But keeping them on a massively overcrowded boat, designed for ~30 to live on?

The captain was told not to enter Australian waters. He had no reason to enter Australian waters - he claimed the refugees threatened to jump overboard again if he did not.

Note, too, the duplicity of Indonesia. The failing boat they were picked up from was indisputably Indonesian. The Tampa's next port of call was in Indonesia. We know these illegal aliens are setting out from Indonesia. Yet Indonesia refuses to discuss the matter with Australia, and has put warships out to prevent the Tampa from docking. Why are we the big ogre? Indonesia must have some responsibility here and they are refusing all of it.

Wade.

Perhaps I was confused, then. I was under the impression they sank going from somewhere to Indonesia.

Nah. Going from there to here.

We're not leaving them out there to rot. We're giving them food, water and medical aid.

That's.. leaving them out there to rot. The medical care is arguable, but I don't know that its lacking.

If we told Willenius Wilhemson that they were their responsibility, that would be "leaving them there to rot".

If the owner of the ship wants to complain about us turning their cargo ship into a passenger ship, I'm sure we will have great delight in pointing this out.

So in other words, after being (directed to be) a Good Samaritan, its not Your Problem. Well, sometimes things *become* a problem.

And this is how we're handling this one.

I still don't see where that has anything to do with Norway, proper, unless you're saying they should sail 1/2 way around the world with people lashed to the deck and deliver them to Norway. Norway's not involved in this.

I think Norway is only really involved because it's being treated as an issue of soveriegnty and the ship is registered as a Norwegian vessel.

The captain was told not to enter Australian waters. He had no reason to enter Australian waters - he claimed the refugees threatened to jump overboard again if he did not.

You're skipping, slightly. AU directed him to a sinking ship, with far more people than he can expect to deal with. Now that he's in that situation, nobody will assist *him*.

I shall have to find out about whether we really directed him to pick them up. In all likelihood, we probably expected him to take them to Indonesia, where he was going anyway.

I'll have to see what I can find out about the location of the sinking. So it was closer to Indonesia than Australia?

I don't know. Possibly. It was definitely in International waters.

Yet Indonesia refuses to discuss the matter with Australia, and has put warships out to prevent the Tampa from docking. Why are we the big ogre? Indonesia must have some responsibility here and they are refusing all of it.

I can agree with that they should also be willing to take some - but right *now* the boat is off the AU shore.

... after we told the captain not to come! :-) What should we do now? Arrest him for disobeying? Could be interesting...

I'd also comment on how the captain probably expected to get a more civilized, humanitarian response from Australia, rather than Indonesia, for the problem that HE now has.

That's why I don't understand why we aren't involving the country these people are coming from.

So the next time a boat is sinking off the AU coast, and all the passing ships are having radio problems... what do you say to them, that they are monsters?

I can't answer that. Certainly it creates a "cry wolf" situation.

Wade.