The Tampa Affair

Now you’ve got right off the rails. The Howard government stopped the boats to stop the people dying. Only idiots can’t see that. There were children overboard. Asylum seekers held small children over the side of their boats threatening naval crews that they would drop them in the water. Is that the action of a loving parent?

The people who died in the process, died because evil people smugglers (I note you’ve made no mention whatsoever of this particular maritime service plying its trade. Why not?) sent unseaworthy boats overcrowded with their paying passengers on dangerous open ocean voyages for exorbitant profits.

Stop preaching to me and Australia about how we handled our crisis. We fixed it. It is fixed today. I note you’ve also made no mention of the Labor government’s policy of more compassion. The boats had stopped under Howard. Labor wanted more compassion and eased the policy. Boats started, asylum seekers flooded in (all totally predicted) and an estimated 1200 PEOPLE DROWNED, but hey, who knows? They drowned unseen at sea.

That’s what your compassion does in practice. Comment about that in particular please.

We’ve learnt our lessons. Paid a severe price and stopped the boats. It works.

Finally, you aren’t going to solve all sides of the ‘refugee boat people crisis’ by reference to maritime law, no matter how old, traditional, international or magnificently moral and compassionate. You just won’t. Stop trying to justify everything by your own morality standards, as wonderful as they are.

Australia accepts about 19,000 immigrants under its humanitarian intake scheme ie legally recognised refugees annually. How many does Norway? Or any other nation?

The Howard version of events have been debunked long time ago:

From witness reports and statement from the refugees/asylum seekers/immigrants on the boat where this incident supposedly happened they held up their babies/toddlers to let the RAN personnel know that there were children on board. They were afraid that they would be fired upon, based on the rumours that had been circulated at the jump-off points in Indonesia.

You know and I know that RAN would not do that, but if you were in a small boat and being approached by a great Gray ships with big guns pointing at you, would you not try anything to protect yourself, your family and your children??

That’s really funny. The Howard Government was eventually defeated by a Kevin Rudd Labor Government which promised a “more compassionate” border policy. That’s the policy that drowned an estimated 1200 asylum seekers, flooded Australia with tens of thousands of the ones who survived the evil people smugglers (whom I again and again note you FAIL TO MENTION, why?), broke their promise to keep the borders controlled, turned public sentiment against high intakes of refugees and, eventually in turn lost them Government to one that promised to “Stop the boats”.

Debunked? Ha ha ha!

And don’t quote the Sydney Morning Herald, know locally as the Silly Moaning Herald, to me as evidence. Have some decency to quote reliable sources.

You write as if there was only one incident. It became known as the “Children Overboard Affair”. And children weren’t actually thrown in that particular one. It became a controversy because the Minister had published photos of children in the water prior to an election but they were not of this particular incident. But there were more than one incidents.

There are plenty of photos of children in the water. There are videos of parents holding their children over the side and threatening to drop them. I’ve seen them. You can probably dig them out but you won’t find them in left wing rags like the SMH.

No weapons were ever fired. Weapons are routinely carried by boarding parties, but to my knowledge never drawn. Weapons on the naval ships were never even manned. They were never trained on the boat. Why would so called refugees flee from a safe place to a nation that was even rumoured to shoot them on sight? Don’t be stupid. That one is debunked.

Again, never pointed at anyone. Bear in mind, these so called refugees WANTED big grey ships to approach them. They WANTED them to take them aboard. That was the entire aim of their voyage.

To do that, they could stay safely in Indonesia. Again, why would they leave a place of safety to face the guns of the Australians?

Now, a reminder of the questions I’ve asked of you.

What is your assessment of the growing maritime trade of people smugglers?

What is your assessment of the ‘more compassionate’ boat people policy of Australia’s Labor Party that drowned 1200 people?

Would you prefer Australia return to that policy from its present strict control supported by both sides of Australia’s politics?

Will ancient and well accepted maritime law alone solve the world’s boat people situation?

Don’t reply if you don’t answer those questions.