The information in this post I have from a Swedish newspaper, so I'll assume that it's fairly accurate.

In the beginning, the australian polls unambiguously supported PM John Howard in denying access. Why is this? It appears that Australia has been the victim of organized smuggling of people, which is organized from the Indonesian capital Jakarta. The australian police have even identified one Abdul Punjabi as the main organizer. During the last two years, thousands of people from Western Asia have entered Australia in search for higher standards of living.
In addition, journalist Don Greenlees of The Australian is quoted for noting that not all of the people abord the Tampa were afghans, and that it is difficult to tell, because people know that, if they claim to be afghans, their application for asyl (sp?) must be treated.

So, to boil it all down, the Australians are fed up with people smuggling and want it stopped, and their PM acts according to ther wishes. Which is populistic, but understandable. And Australia is not the only country where this goes on.

Now, if you think I'm condemming Sam for his post, I'd like to take a moment with you to examine his post. His point is that it is shameful to turn down refugees on the argument that "there is no room". I couldn't agree more.

I also sympathize with the view that people smugglers should be shot at dawn. No, really: They are toying with human life.

julian