More than 400 refugees 'drown in Mediterranean' after boats capsize crossing from Egypt to Italy
Source: The Independent
Hundreds of refugees are feared to have drowned in the Mediterranean Sea after their boats capsized on the way to Europe, a Somali ambassador has said.
More than 400 refugees are thought to have drowned, the Somali ambassador to Egypt told BBC Arabic.
Reports say the refugees were fleeing to Italy from Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea in four boats which were ill-equipped for the journey.
...
Italy's President Sergio Mattarella said several hundred people appear to have died.
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/more-than-400-refugees-drown-in-mediterranean-after-boats-capsize-crossing-from-egypt-to-italy-a6989046.html
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)Thinks a little wall will stop desperate people.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)not the Mediterranean sea
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)And?
moonbabygo
(281 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)I'm not sure you understood my original comment at all.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)These were always the kind of thought I had when I heard Bush's dipshit dad talking about his New World Disorder.
Now people are fleeing war zones however they can. What a compassionate world the shits created.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)that much (all?) of the mayhem occurring in that region is homegrown. No, stuff doesn't happen in isolation, but if any power broker has responsibility for this, the Saudi's would be near the top of the list, IMO.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)At some point, countries have to take responsibility for their own dysfunction.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349078
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/ethiopia-attack-200-people-dead-100-children-missing-160418045025770.html
A cattle raid from Sudan with casualties in the hundreds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopia
The violence is only growing, and not just in these countries.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)Sudan is what's driving Ethiopian refugees:
"These conflicts lead to strange alliances with the US. Once eager hosts of Osama bin Laden, Sudan's Islamist movement has since split, with the two factions now fighting a proxy war in Darfur. In the 1990s, the U.S. rejected every initiative offered by the Sudanese to cooperate on counter-terrorism issues, including an offer to extradite Osama bin Laden. The Sudanese governments willingness to share its copious intelligence on Al-Qaeda has now bought it some immunity from responsibility for the atrocities in Darfur.
"The CIA has initiated close contacts with Sudanese intelligence director MG Salah Gosh, who has also been identified in Congress as a war crimes suspect for his exploits in Darfur. In a sign of growing cooperation many Sudanese prisoners at Guantanamo Bay have been released to Sudanese authorities. Besides intelligence sharing, the U.S. is also keen to protect the peace agreement that will end the North-South civil war and release vast new reserves of oil onto the market.[2]"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Sudan
Whoops.
The dictator of Eritrea was also up until some point recruited by the CIA:
http://hafash.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2336:2013-01-09&catid=25:english&Itemid=519
People in Africa consider him ex-CIA - at best:
http://mereja.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97102
Notice a trend?
Finally, if you read this, you'll question just how little we are responsible for all of it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Somalia
reddread
(6,896 posts)no longer
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)This is about migrants from Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea, crossing from Egypt to Italy. How are you trying to connect them to Hillary Clinton?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)they can't be everywhere all the time...
And it also creates this ugly snowball effect where the more migrants get saved, the more enabled human traffickers are to send the next overloaded leaky craft across the Med...
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)Akicita
(1,196 posts)are willing to risk their lives to get to Europe even though it has a different culture, climate, and languages. Why is that? Is it because European countries are the only countries in the world willing to take them in.? If so, what does that say about the rest of the world? The refugees in this article had made it safely to Egypt. What made them risk their lives to try to get to Europe?
You read that migrants and refugees who made the boat ride from Turkey to Greece are protesting that some of them may be sent back to Turkey. Why is that? Why aren't countries like Egypt, Turkey, the Arab states, and all the "stans" taking in their brother Muslim refugees? You read that charity to fellow Muslims is a key part of their religion.
Why aren't other countries around the world such as Japan, S. Korea, Vietnam, Australia, and sub-Saharan Africa taking in any refugees? They could sure use the diversity.
Whatever it is about Europe in particular, the people from the Middle East, North Africa, and also the "stans" want it. And they are taking it. Europe is being over run.
A somewhat similar situation exists in our own hemisphere. The vast majority of economic refugees and those fleeing violence or oppressive governments are all coming to the USA. Cubans are escaping to paradise countries like Costa Rica, but then making their way to the US. Why is that? Why not Brazil, Argentina, Chile, or Costa Rica? Why do so many undocumented Asian migrants end up in the US instead of other countries in the Americas Is it because the US is the only country in the hemisphere that does not enforce immigration laws much? If so, what does that say about the other countries in the hemisphere?
For all the criticism and abuse heaped on the European and especially American capitalist societies they sure seem like the places refugees and migrants want to get to. Why is that?
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)in their treatment of them.
Australias high court has rejected a challenge to the countrys practice of holding asylum-seekers at a camp on Nauru, the Pacific island nation, a decision that paves the way for the return of more than 250 peopleincluding dozens of babieswho are now in Australia.
At issue is a case brought by the Human Rights Law Center (HRLC) on behalf of a Bangladeshi woman who entered Australia by sea. She was detained by Australian officials and taken to Nauru, which along with Manus Island, part of Papua New Guinea, is where Australia processes its asylum-seekers. The woman was returned to Australia for medical treatment during the late stages of her pregnancy, but appealed her return to Nauru. Lawyers for the woman challenged Australias right to detain people on foreign soil. On Wednesday, the court said the governments actions were both legal and constitutional.
The decision paves the way for the return of about 267 people, including 37 babies born in Australia, to the detention center on Nauru.
HRLC and other immigrant-rights groups say the conditions on Nauru are poor, citing women who say they have been sexually assaulted at the detention center on the island.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/02/australia-migrants-detention/459714/
However, the numbers arriving by sea plunged after the government introduced tough new policies, including the towing back of boats. The government says only one boat of asylum seekers reached Australia in 2014.
The asylum seekers mostly come from Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Iraq, Iran or Myanmar (Burma) where they say they risked violence or persecution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-28189608
An Iranian asylum seeker has been fined for trying to kill himself during an attempt to move him and his daughter from an Australian-funded detention centre on the island of Nauru.
Sam Nemati, sole guardian of the eight-year-old girl, admitted the charge and was ordered to pay A$200 ($155; £109).
Mr Nemati had been in the detention centre for two years.
...
Prosecutors had originally sought a two-month custodial sentence for Mr Nemati, arguing that such a sentence could be used as a deterrent, Australian media report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36057362
It's largely a question of accessibility. A voyage along coasts and relatively small stretches of open sea to Australia is a lot easier than going thousands of miles more to Korea or Japan (past China, who aren't likely to be welcoming). Or a transatlantic voyage. What this says about migrants inside the Americas is that the USA is the richest place, and thus somewhere a migrant may find a job.
Akicita
(1,196 posts)immigrate. They have to be a positive to Australia. For example, if a doctor wants to immigrate he may have to spend a couple of years in the outback treating the poor first.
I don't expect refugees to migrate to countries like Japan on their own. My question is why those countries don't proactively express humanity like the US does and take in some of the refugees. The US is about as accessible as Japan to the Middle East.
Unicorn
(424 posts)The same people funding Boko Haram in Africa are funding Isis - the house of Saud.
And if you knew anything about South America you would know when you're fleeing gang violence no country down there is safe now. They're going to what they perceive is the closest safest country.
And many happily by pass America for Canada.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)holding anti abortion signs outside of medical life saving clinics I guess...
Stories like this as well as others that continue day after day involving horrific loss of life and or loss of dignity from countries all over this world proves without a doubt that organized religion is nothing more than a scam intended to increase a select few seconds ability to rule freely and amass great wealth...
It is what it is and obviously has been from the beginning.....
dembotoz
(16,808 posts)AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)...
The disaster reportedly happened several miles out to sea, after the smugglers tried to transfer a group of migrants from a smaller to a larger boat, survivors said. The larger boat was already overburdened, and began to sink under the strain of extra passengers. Due to the overcrowding, the large boat sank, UNHCR said in a statement.
...
After the shipwreck, survivors were left to drift in the smaller boat, until they were spotted and rescued by a merchant ship on 16 April and taken to the Greek mainland. The date of the sinking itself is unclear, but by coincidence it would have happened near the anniversary of the Mediterraneans deadliest modern shipwreck.
The survivors testimonies clarify a situation that was the subject of conflicting rumours for several days. Previous versions had variously claimed that the boat left from Egypt, or that survivors had been taken to Italy or a Greek island.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/hundreds-feared-dead-in-migrant-shipwreck-off-libya
AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)Cavallo
(348 posts)Rip.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,350 posts)Is there suspicion that they met some other fate?
muriel_volestrangler
(101,321 posts)at first hand. It's their standard usage. At the time, there were some authorities who said they couldn't confirm it then.