• Refugee boat carrying 150 capsizes off northwest Australia
    22 replies, posted
[quote] (Reuters) - A boat carrying around 150 suspected asylum seekers capsized on Wednesday between Indonesia and Australia's Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean, the second such incident in less than week, highlighting Australia's struggle to stem the flow of boatpeople. A maritime rescue was underway with two merchant ships on site, said Australian authorities. Last week, a boat carrying around 200 suspected asylum seekers capsized in the same area, killing around 90 lives. "The vessel has capsized, there are people in the water," Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) spokeswoman Jo Meehan told Australian television. "There are survivors and they will be recovering survivors. Reports are the conditions are fair, not ideal." A photograph of the boat before it capsized, released by AMSA, showed a heavily crowded boat, which looks like it is made of timber. The photo showed calm seas in the area, about 200 kilometers (125 miles) north of Christmas Island and 185 kilometers (115 miles) south of Indonesia. The latest incidents have reignited a heated political debate over refugee policy and border security in Australia, despite the fact the country only receives a few thousand asylum-seekers by boat each year. The government has agreement with Malaysia to process asylum seekers, but the opposition refuses to support the plan in Australia's parliament, preferring to re-open an offshore detention center on the remote Pacific Island of Nauru. The waters between Indonesia and Christmas Island are a popular route for asylum seekers, who transit through Indonesia with the help of people smugglers in often overcrowded boats. So far this year, more than 50 boats carrying more than 4,000 asylum seekers have been detected by Australian authorities. The trip is often dangerous. In December 2011, as many as 200 died when an overcrowded boat sank off the coast of East Java. In 2010, 50 asylum seekers died when their boat was thrown onto rocks at Christmas Island. In 2001, a crowded boat known as the SIEV X sank on its way to Australia with the loss of 350 lives.[/quote] [url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-australia-boat-capsizes-idUSBRE85Q02T20120627[/url]
And the best bit is they're thrown in jail with no trial if they actually make it to shore. There's just no winning for these folks.
[QUOTE=Squeaken;36510946]And the best bit is they're thrown in jail with no trial if they actually make it to shore. There's just no winning for these folks.[/QUOTE] Yeah the situation at the detention centres is just awful. Hundreds of families that have been imprisoned for years now, suicide and overcrowding is a huge issue at the moment.
I personally think we should give them the forms to come here, Then send them back to there own country and tell them to wait in the lines.
[QUOTE=MuTAnT;36513395]Yeah the situation at the detention centres is just awful. Hundreds of families that have been imprisoned for years now, suicide and overcrowding is a huge issue at the moment.[/QUOTE] Seriously? Australia is a goddamn first world country, how does this shit even fly?
[QUOTE=Best4bond;36513458]I personally think we should give them the forms to come here, Then send them back to there own country and tell them to wait in the lines.[/QUOTE] Yeah because they're not fleeing their home country because they're likely to be murdered or anything.
[QUOTE=Squeaken;36510946]And the best bit is they're thrown in jail with no trial if they actually make it to shore. There's just no winning for these folks.[/QUOTE] Surely that's illegal?
[QUOTE=Zacca;36514768]Surely that's illegal?[/QUOTE] It's basically because they arrive illegally, so pretty much the same thing the US do with their illegal immigrants I would imagine. The problem is that it seems to take years to process them so they can get out, it's ridiculous.
another one was in the paper this morning. the most ironic thing about all this is that they crash near australia, not the other <distance> they travel
[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;36514363]Seriously? Australia is a goddamn first world country, how does this shit even fly?[/QUOTE] What does Cold War alignment have to do with anything?
[QUOTE=Zacca;36514768]Surely that's illegal?[/QUOTE] Nope, they're not in 'jail', just a 'detention centre' [editline]28th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Pelican;36527654]another one was in the paper this morning. the most ironic thing about all this is that they crash near australia, not the other <distance> they travel[/QUOTE] We never hear about the ones that die far away because nobody ever finds them.
We often talk about these things in SOSE, it's sad and tragic that these things happen. But the fact is they broke the law and after the Bali Bombings immigration laws became much much harder. Mainly due to the fact that the legislation forces them to do a background check on EVERY asylum seeker before they're released to stop terrorism.
[QUOTE=Best4bond;36513458]I personally think we should give them the forms to come here, Then send them back to there own country and tell them to wait in the lines.[/QUOTE] [b]this bloke knows what's what![/b] good thing those damned immigrants didn't make it to Australia, they'd only take our jobs and force their culture on us [editline]28th June 2012[/editline] honestly though it's infuriating that so many people seem to care about the minuscule number of people coming to Australia this way apparently people are only human if they're from you're country
[QUOTE=Best4bond;36513458]I personally think we should give them the forms to come here, Then send them back to there own country and tell them to wait in the lines.[/QUOTE] Yeah lets send them back into a warzone with no government to actually process said forms.
there are two main sides of this spectrum, this is what people will say. Let them in: • they'll take "our" jobs • it's unfair that they don't have to pay to get here, they can just come in (plus there'll be racists frothing about it) Don't let them in: • WHERE ARE THE HUMAN RIGHTS?! • why would you let them stay in <insert hostile environment/government status here> honestly, "letting them in" is the lesser of two evils. I don't really have an opinion on this, as it's pretty hard to make one, but the current system of allowing them to arrive, but detaining them or whatever they do (as stated before it's not jail), a 'half-half solution', if you will, works SOMEWHAT - but it's something like 3 years or something that they can stay up to in there, which is quite inhumane. HOWEVER, children are allowed to leave or something. something like that. maybe mothers too, not too sure though
Cry me a river, from what I hear most of the people are economic refugees who pay thousands of dollars and who intentionally throw their passports overboard so Australia has no idea where they are from. Just so they can pass themselves off as running away from a life threatening situation when all they are really after is a cushy life in a government handout happy country. Why don't they stop at Malaysia? Guess Malaysia isn't "good enough" lol. Australia really needs to let a lot more legitimate people in and make it a lot easier for genuine refugees to come here. Both parties disagree on the issue and the end result is people dying, just great. Meanwhile our idiot prime minister just wants to blame Tony Abbott for all her fuck ups and it's the greens blocking her "solution". *sigh* Now I get to build a fort out of my boxes.
[quote] UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ----------------------------------------------- Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. ----------------------------------------------- Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. ----------------------------------------------- Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. ----------------------------------------------- Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. ----------------------------------------------- Article 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. ----------------------------------------------- Article 14. (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. ----------------------------------------------- [/quote] The above may not be legislated rights, but Australia is a signatory and should ethically uphold them. The HREOC website thoroughly explains this: [url]http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/immigration/asylum_seekers.html[/url] [quote] Australia has obligations to protect the human rights of all asylum seekers and refugees who arrive in Australia, regardless of how or where they arrive and whether they arrive with or without a visa. As a party to the Refugee Convention, Australia has agreed to ensure that people who meet the United Nations definition of refugee are not sent back to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened. This is known as the principle of non-refoulement. [/quote] This might give some perspective.. It's a document from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: [url]http://www.unhcr.org/4fd6f87f9.pdf[/url] [It might take a while to load (4.1mb)] Please do take the time to actually look at it and to get a perspective of just how little our issue really is. We [Australians] can't brandish that we are the financial pinnacle in these times, yet have such a small issue in regards to asylum seekers and refugees when compared to many other nations who are suffering financial hardship.
[QUOTE=King Tiger;36528270]What does Cold War alignment have to do with anything?[/QUOTE] Being a first world country has absolutely nothing to do with Cold War alignment. At all. Also, holy shit, please tell me they're doing something about these boats. Offering asylum or at least trying to work with the Indonesian government to stem the tide of the migrants.
There is no room left in detention centres because of the change in legislation from government, they've even go as far as buying make-shift detention centres in Australia, and renting whole apartment buildings. [QUOTE=Best4bond;36513458]I personally think we should give them the forms to come here, Then send them back to there own country and tell them to wait in the lines.[/QUOTE] They don't take forms, and you can't know what country they came from anyway, and sending them back is costly and just plain stupid. Also the detention centres aren't as bad as people make them out to be. Sure, they're not ideal, but they're pretty good in comparison to other countries.
The ironic thing here is Australia's point of existence to Europe, and especially Britain, in the first place was essentially as a prison island, and now they'd deny these otherwise political prisoners the right to enter.
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;36538417]Being a first world country has absolutely nothing to do with Cold War alignment. At all.[/QUOTE] Except that first/second/third world derives from the Cold War and has a similar geopolitical connotation in modern usage. It is not synonymous with "developed country".
One could probably make a joke here about how the "sailors forgot to account for austrailia's upside-down nature"
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;36543854]Except that first/second/third world derives from the Cold War and has a similar geopolitical connotation in modern usage. It is not synonymous with "developed country".[/QUOTE] Not sure how it is in other places but in California people here no longer use those terms in the way you describe. Over here it's just an indicator of how well off a country is doing and the term "second world" is gone.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.