on refugees

i must say that i have great sympathy for those whose home has become so unsafe and antagonistic towards them that they're driven to the point of giving up everything they have in order to flee their country in search of safety. i couldn't imagine how dreadful life would have to be for me to sell my belongings in order to scrape together enough money to pay people smugglers to get me to asylum; usually in a country that wouldn't really want me there. it saddens me that so many australians lack even a basic compassion for these people. assigning them the derogatory term 'queue jumpers' demonstrates just how little the average australian understands.

now, having said this, the current case of the tamil people presently on a boat in indonesia has me baffled. they claim to have escaped from sri lanka to the jungles of malaysia so i'm puzzled as to why they didn't seek asylum there. they're now in indonesia so i don't understand why they're not claiming asylum there. surely if you're a fair dinkum refugee who had no choice but to flee your homeland, you wouldn't be fussy about where you end up but rather gratefully accept shelter in the first country you get to.

as i said, i have sympathy for genuine refugees and certainly feel that we have an obligation to treat them humanely, especially when they've fled countries such as vietnam, iraq or afghanistan which we've invaded. what does cheese me off is when people claiming to be refugees start issuing demands about which country they will accept asylum from. they should never forget that it is the right of each country to decide on whether they will be accepted; it's not their right to pick and choose.

perhaps there's some crucial point i'm missing here and would be more than happy for someone with greater knowledge than me to set me straight