OK Bozzie sweetums, in your little world it is justifiable to incarcerate people up in appalling conditions and for indefinte periods despite the fact that we have effectively and humanely assessed boat people in the past.

No one has suggested that refugees be allowed in 'open slather' - just a return to a more humane process.

Sympneology - no you're not too cynical the thought has occurred to me also. I suppose the sinking of SIEV X was OK for bozzie and his ilk as well.

However, the OLO poll flies in the face of anything Bozzie et al have to say.

I see three problems with Alan Anderson’s case that mandatory detention must continue, if we want to protect Australia’s borders from uncontrolled hordes of illegal immigrants:

1. It is factually wrong. It was not mandatory detention that stopped asylum seekers coming in late 2001, it was the fear of death by sabotage of boats. The sinking of SIEV X which drowned 353 people on 19 October 2001 - whoever planned and instigated it - inevitably sent a huge deterrent message that promptly dried up the demand. Sympneology is right. Anyone who doubts the evidence that there was a sting operation to sink this boat and send a deterrent message, which Abu Quassey was either party to or unwitting agent for, should read my prizewinning book “A Certain Maritime Incident: the Sinking of SIEV X” (Scribe, 2004). There is overwhelming evidence set out there that explains why the Senate has called three times in three years for a full-powers judicial inquiry led by an independent judge into the sinking of SIEV X and the Australian Government’s people smuggling disruption program conducted by the AFP/DIMIA People Smuggling Strike Team (which still exists). The book is obtainable from quality bookshops or you can order direct from www.scribepub.com.au .

For a short introduction to the topic, and discussion of some important new evidence that came out of the recent Khaleed Daoed people smuggling trial in Brisbane, listen to the audio of Fran Kelly’s interview with me on Radio National Breakfast last Thursday 9 June:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/brkfast/stories/s1388160.htm (interview segment URL)

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/brkfast/

( “Breakfast” URL )

I urge the people who have contributed to this thread on Alan Anderson’s side of the argument to go out, read my book, and then come back with considered rebuttals. Until then, they lack data to conduct an informed argument about this.

My points 2 and 3 follow in my next post

(continuation of post from Tony Kevin):

2. Even if mandatory detention had stopped the boats coming – which I simply do not believe, as noted in my post above – it would be incompatible with the ethics and values of Australia as I understand them, for our country to hold large numbers of innocent people, men women and children, as hostages in gulags like Baxter in order to serve as a deterrent to others coming. For it is clear what we are doing to these people: indefinitely long detention is driving the adults like Peter Kasim mad , and depriving the children like Naomi Leong of their right to a normal life. No civilised person who had any normal capacity for empathy with other human beings could seriously support such a national policy.

3. Mandatory detention is becoming unworkable now because the Australian people at gut level are beginning to reject it in larger and larger numbers, because there is a basic decency in the Australian people. They know systemic cruelty when they see it. Once the politicians and their hangers-on begin to smell the coffee, it will change very quickly. Petro Georgiou’s group, to their credit, understand this. Their views will win in the end, because they are in the right.

As to what we do about illegal immigrants – I don’t know. I just know that we can neither arrange for others to kill them, nor lock them up forever in gulags as hostages. If we go on doing either or both of those things, we will become monsters.

OK, I'll take the bait Tony,

1. Your arguments on SIEV X have been rebutted in a variety of ways. For a good summary I would go to http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/02/1030953433853.html?oneclick=true/ (reg required). To quote six questions the article asks of Tony's book;

* Why does his paper not concentrate on or at least begin with the key issue involved - international people smuggling?

* Why does he simply assume that all "asylum claimants" are genuine when the evidence strongly indicates that most are not?

* Why does he never apportion any real responsibility or blame to Indonesia for any of the people smuggling problem in general or the SIEV-X and Tampa incidents in particular?

* Why does he never address the question why Australia and New Zealand are the only signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention in the whole Asia-Pacific area, and why after 52 years do our neighbours still refuse to shoulder their international responsibilities in this regard (and apparently escape any condemnation for it)?

* Why does he have such an Australia-centric view in blaming only Australia for seemingly every ramification of what is actually a regional and wider problem?

* Would he be willing to see the longstanding international law regarding the interception of slave-carrying vessels extended to people smuggling vessels (so any naval vessel could intervene anywhere to stamp out the trade)?

continued..

continued...

2. For Tony to equate the Australian immigration system to the horrors of the Soviet gulag is to do the memory of those who died in that system a gross disservice, and he should apologise. To say that 'No civilised person who had any normal capacity for empathy with other human beings could seriously support such a national policy' is to condemn every Australian who voted for John Howard at the last election. I think Australia's response to the Tsunami showed how shallow this view. Think before you type Tony.

3. Demonstrate any evidence for this point. Just because YOU think this way does not mean everyone else does, and in fact I would say most of the Australian electorate does not agree with you. And, as is typical with this point of view, you have no real answers ('As to what we do about illegal immigrants – I don’t know'). The system works, the people support it, get over it.

Lets see you write articles about some real human rights abuses such as Zimbabwe or China.

gw

Well, I will rise to gw’s bait too!

Tam Long’s article in Webdiary on 2 September 2002, “Pamphleteer polemics”, was well rebutted in Webdiary five days later, “Long Comes Up Short On SIEV X”, by Marg Hutton and others - now archived also on Hutton’s website

http://sievx.com/archives/2002_08-09/20020907.shtml

Tam Long has not been heard of since 2002.

Many facts about SIEV X have come to light since September 2002. The Senate has voted three times, in 2002, 2003 and 2004, for a full-powers judicial inquiry into the Australian government’s people smuggling disruption program in Indonesia, conducted by the AFP /DIMIA People Smuggling Strike Team out of the Australian Embassy in Jakarta. Recently, Senators Bartlett and Brown renewed those calls, and Senator Faulkner told me he is ready to do so whenever questioned by media.

The Australian Embassy Jakarta cable sent four days after the sinking, finally released in Fenruary 2003, contained detailed facts about the boat and voyage that can only have come from sources within the people smuggler organisation. Senator Cook then reflected sadly in the Senate on the lies officials had told under oath during the initial Senate enquiry. The smuggler, Abu Quassey, was repatriated to Egypt and sentenced to a laughable 7-year jail term there, after the AFP conspicuously ignored its clear opportunity to bring him to Australia on homicide charges. The AFP admits it has passenger lists for SIEV X, but refuses to release them. There is currently no AFP investigation into the sinking despite the Senate’s expressed concerns. Justice Minister Ellison recently finally admitted the boat sank in international waters, ending three years of official cover-up on that crucial matter. There is new evidence out of the Khaleed Daoed trial in Brisbane strengthening the case that SIEV X was intended to sink.

My book “A Certain Maritime Incident - the Sinking of SIEV X” (Scribe, August 2004) , which just won a NSW Premier’s Award at the 2005 Sydney Writers Festival, is a digestible way to learn this story. It was reviewed in “Online Opinion” by Gavin Mooney in September 2004
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2592

(to continue)