bonmot: thanks...

...Seems the answer to my question: Why Turks ? Is, whatever the national base of the people smuggling syndicates, will determine the nationality of the “potential” illegal immigrant. Obviously Turks are not in need of refugee recognition. Either the smuggling syndicates typically recruit candidates from their home turf, or neighbouring countries. What the presence of a “Turk” indicates, is the incidence of Middle Eastern people smuggling syndicates and their origins.

...The above fact proves the difficulty in proving the status of the legitimate refugee in the host country. The case of the Turks on-board refugee boats to Australia, highlights the incidents of economic refugees simply looking for a better life, not related to personal survival, as in the case of a genuine refugee.

...Of course, the most effective place to determine refugee status, would be Indonesia. If that task were affected effectively prior to “illegals” emigrating from Indonesia on shaky boats, the whole risky process of “boating” the void to Christmas Island, would be avoided. That then puts the “Malaysian solution” somewhere towards the top, I would think: Or at least, a definite thumbs-up to “Off Shore” processing, and urgently!

...The obvious absence of Chinese on these boats also points to the less dramatic, but equally problematic, less-known incidence of “true” people smuggling into Australia; the conventional shipping routes and the Chines connection! Here is another subject for another time

I would say that every post here that blames someone, or several someones, has a point.
There's plenty of blame to go around.
But, so what? How does that help?
Ought we not spend a moment contemplating what is a) morally the right thing to do, b) what is consistent with our international treaty obligations, and c) seeking a sense of perspective about this issue.
Say a thousand boat people a month come all year. That's twelvethousand people a year. Spread that across our major cities and it's a few hundred extra people each city has to accommodate.
I really don't think that contitutes a crisis.
The regular occurrence of Hundreds of people drowning on the other hand, now that a crisis.

Belly, BM, Lexi, LF, et al,

The prime purpose of off shore processing is that the Australian court system has no jurisdiction. This means that if asylum seekers never enter Australian territory, the high court decision is meaningless.

The Malaysian solution requires that asylum seekers are processed in Australia, and some are sent to Malaysia. The High court decision stops this.

The pacific solution where people were transferred from Xmas Island to Nauru has been stopped, but the direct interception and direct transfer to Nauru is not subject to the Australian courts and thus unaffected by the high court decision.

The coalition has offered Juliar the option of the tried and tested pacific solution, and Juliar has rejected this against the advice of her immigration minister. Juliar's arrogance has played a large part in this tragedy.

The "bonmot Solution"

Quote...# Here is another subject for another time! Hypothetical
What would happen if Australia didn’t ‘own’ Christmas Island?
Posted by bonmot, Sunday, 18 December 2011 6:50:30 PM...#

...In this glib remark lies another, yet simpler answer to illegal boat arrivals: Give Christmas Island back to the Indonesians to whom it belongs! Christmas Island is correctly part of the Indonesian archipelago. Why not simply abandon the nightmare as a free Christmas gift to Indonesia? and term the move an “organised” retreat!

...And as a complete solution, and while we are at it, abandon Tasmania in the same vein: A move that would eliminate the destabilizing influence of Bob Brown and the Greens effectively; the other 50% of the illegal immigration problem!

...A far more acceptable solution it would be than the total failure of the existing solution from "end-up land", at the joint house of "Blame-Game" in Canberra.

PS:

...This solution only gets better!!

...Further, ANYBODY admitting to an association with the “Greens”, will, under LAW, be exiled to Tasmania for the “Term of Their Natural Life”!

...I can't believe the simplicity of this! Why didn't you think of this before the Christmas parliamentary recess bonmot?

Dan...

Ludwig <"Onshore processing is killing boatpeople, says Mark Latham"

If that dreadful ex-politician Mark Latham believes in offshore processing, then I think the current Government should stick with onshore processing...

People smugglers are killing boat people. It's as simple as that.