Ship of Sri Lankan Tamils Arrives in Canada

nicky10013 · August 17, 2010

You probably didn't check. Sri Lankans can get here through normal immigration channels. These ones chose not to, they are queue jumpers....

Anyone can. The problem is they're not legally allowed to leave Sri Lanka. So, when you don't have the means to apply overseas, what other options are there?

M.Dancer · August 17, 2010

Anyone can. The problem is they're not legally allowed to leave Sri Lanka.

That is the cabbage in you talking....cite if you can.

M.Dancer · August 17, 2010

Nope, but most of them are. The scary thing is you think we're naive that all of them are in a camp. I think it's naive for you to believe that most of them aren't. That fact alone makes refugee status a fairly convincing case. If most of your people and family who aren't already overseas are being herded into camps, maybe it's a good thing to get out. History is history, and it usually repeats itself.

So are you saying that most of the tamils in sri lanka are in refugee camps?

Given that there are currently about 100K in camps, and the tamil population of Sri Lanka is about 2.5 million...could you explain for me how arithmatic works in your universe?

BTW, if you don't want unintentional comedy arising from your posts, you should avoid using the word, "fact".

DogOnPorch · August 17, 2010

So are you saying that most of the tamils in sri lanka are in refugee camps?

Given that there are currently about 100K in camps, and the tamil population of Sri Lanka is about 2.5 million...could you explain for me how arithmatic works in your universe?

BTW, if you don't want unintentional comedy arising from your posts, you should avoid using the word, "fact".

Apparently the current batch should have 'refugee'd' themselves up a tad before arrival as there were more than a few folks noting that they were healthy, well fed and in good clothes. Not too shabby for a daring escape and several months @ sea.

M.Dancer · August 17, 2010

Apparently the current batch should have 'refugee'd' themselves up a tad before arrival as there were more than a few folks noting that they were healthy, well fed and in good clothes. Not too shabby for a daring escape and several months @ sea.

refugees don't have the collateral to pay the tigers....

DogOnPorch · August 17, 2010

refugees don't have the collateral to pay the tigers....

I'm sure that was lost at sea during the final shark attack...

:lol:

DogOnPorch · August 17, 2010

There was a shark attack...right? Good movie of the week stuff.

capricorn · August 17, 2010

Apparently the current batch should have 'refugee'd' themselves up a tad before arrival as there were more than a few folks noting that they were healthy, well fed and in good clothes. Not too shabby for a daring escape and several months @ sea.

You know what's also laughable? The claim that the 492 passengers on the Sun Sea were restricted to one litre of water per week throughout the 3 months at sea.

According to sources, living conditions were horrific onboard the ship, with several hundred passengers sharing one toilet, and as little as one litre of fresh water allotted for each passenger, per week.

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100816/bc_migrant_hearings_100816/20100816?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

No human being I know could survive on one litre of water per week.

Knowing that water is by far the most important nutrient for the human body (besides oxygen) and, in particular, during a survival situation when finding potable water may not be easy, the question becomes - just how long can the human body survive without adequate water?
To maintain a high level of health and efficiency even in ideal environments, a minimum of two quarts of clean water per day per person is the generally accepted rule of thumb. In very hot or cold or very dry environments, or if you are physically active, two quarts of water a day may not be enough to sustain life over a period of days or weeks.

Water lost through sweating and normal respiration must be replaced in order to stay healthy and function at top efficiency. Water is also needed to process the food you eat, especially if it is salty or you eat heavy foods like meat.

http://www.survivaltopics.com/survival/how-long-can-you-survive-without-water/

If it is true that they survived on one litre of water per week, we must therefore conclude that a miracle took place aboard the Sun Sea that all those on board survived, except one.

I don't believe such a miracle occurred. What is more plausible is that somehow, the Sun Sea was resupplied with potable water at sea by another vessel. Genuine migrants would not have that luxury.

capricorn · August 17, 2010

The problem is they're not legally allowed to leave Sri Lanka.

Neither can Canadians leave Canada if they don't have a passport.

Bonam · August 18, 2010

You know what's also laughable? The claim that the 492 passengers on the Sun Sea were restricted to one litre of water per week throughout the 3 months at sea.

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100816/bc_migrant_hearings_100816/20100816?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

No human being I know could survive on one litre of water per week.

http://www.survivaltopics.com/survival/how-long-can-you-survive-without-water/

If it is true that they survived on one litre of water per week, we must therefore conclude that a miracle took place aboard the Sun Sea that all those on board survived, except one.

I don't believe such a miracle occurred. What is more plausible is that somehow, the Sun Sea was resupplied with potable water at sea by another vessel. Genuine migrants would not have that luxury.

I don't know whether it's actually true that they survived on that little water at any point, but I think it is physiologically possible. Your link has to do with surviving without water, and the two liters (quarts) of water per day recommendation is to do with long term good health. A human can live for protracted periods (a few months) on much much less water than 2 liters a day, as long as they aren't being baked in the sun and are not particularly physically active. Since these guys were all sitting on the boat barely moving, and probably it wasn't too hot, I don't see it as a "miracle".

Also the "as little as" 1L caveat in the story probably means that only some people, some of the time, were restricted to that little water.

capricorn · August 18, 2010

They came here to avoid persecution, discrimination and extermination in the country that used to be their home.

Of course, this will be their claim in order to gain sympathy in the hopes of being accepted as a refugee.

The UNHCR said due to improving conditions in Sri Lanka “claims by asylum seekers from that country should be considered on their individual merits rather than on a group basis.”

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/canada/2010/08/17/15052386.html

Times, they are a-changing.

capricorn · August 18, 2010

I don't know whether it's actually true that they survived on that little water at any point,

At this point, it's difficult to know who to believe.

but I think it is physiologically possible.

I suppose it's possible. But were all 491 fit enough to go with so little water on that voyage without becoming dehydrated or developing other ailments? Why did only 8 of them require medical attention at the hospital on arrival?

Bonam · August 18, 2010

I suppose it's possible. But were all 491 fit enough to go with so little water on that voyage without becoming dehydrated or developing other ailments? Why did only 8 of them require medical attention at the hospital on arrival?

It's not really a matter of physical fitness. In fact, that is probably detrimental. A large fit man in his prime needs more food and water to maintain normal functioning than a tiny scrawny 70 year old lady. Anyway, I don't claim to have any answers or know any special facts about this ship, just saying that we can't toss out the claim of some of them having "as little as" 1 liter per week as 100% certain to be a lie based on physiological impossibility.

M.Dancer · August 18, 2010

just saying that we can't toss out the claim of some of them having "as little as" 1 liter per week as 100% certain to be a lie based on physiological impossibility.

100% nonsense..yes, I agree...even an imp. gallon per 7 days would be a nose puller...

capricorn · August 18, 2010

Anyway, I don't claim to have any answers or know any special facts about this ship, just saying that we can't toss out the claim of some of them having "as little as" 1 liter per week as 100% certain to be a lie based on physiological impossibility.

Well, I am tossing out the claim. Anyone reporting that the passengers on the Sun Sea only had as little as 1 litre of water per week is lying. Even if they actually had 2 litres of water per week, that would still not be enough to keep those passengers healthy following a two or three month voyage on the high seas.

Lack of water can lead to dehydration, a condition that occurs when you don't have enough water in your body to carry out normal functions. Even mild dehydration can drain your energy and make you tired.
----

* Replacement approach. The average urine output for adults is about 1.5 liters (6.3 cups) a day. You lose close to an additional liter (about 4 cups) of water a day through breathing, sweating and bowel movements. Food usually accounts for 20 percent of your total fluid intake, so if you consume 2 liters of water or other beverages a day (a little more than 8 cups) along with your normal diet, you will typically replace your lost fluids.

* Eight 8-ounce glasses of water a day. Another approach to water intake is the "8 x 8 rule" — drink eight 8-ounce glasses of water a day (about 1.9 liters). The rule could also be stated, "Drink eight 8-ounce glasses of fluid a day," as all fluids count toward the daily total. Although the approach really isn't supported by scientific evidence, many people use this easy-to-remember rule as a guideline for how much water and other fluids to drink.

* Dietary recommendations. The Institute of Medicine advises that men consume roughly 3 liters (about 13 cups) of total beverages a day and women consume 2.2 liters (about 9 cups) of total beverages a day.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/water/NU00283

The general good health of the passengers on the Sun Sea is one clue that we are being lied to.

msdogfood · August 18, 2010

ok all of you look at this now!

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177 Date:April 4, 1985

Jack Weber · August 18, 2010

Africa is one of the richest counntries in the world ,isn'it? So why are'nt the rich africans helping out their brothers instead of alway us.

Let's leave aside,for the moment,that you have almost no grasp of the last 300+ years of human history as it relates to Africa...

Did you miss the lesson in grade 5 geography on the difference between a continent and a country?

scribblet · August 18, 2010

Actually the U.N. (High Comm. for refugees) has changed the guidelines for Sri Lanka, it now says that Tamils are no longer at risk of indiscriminate harm and actually, Sri Lankan asylum seekers decreased by 35 per cent during the first six months of this year. They are not genuine refugees there should be returned to their point of departure.

capricorn · August 18, 2010

Actually the U.N. (High Comm. for refugees) has changed the guidelines for Sri Lanka, it now says that Tamils are no longer at risk of indiscriminate harm

Tamils will once again gather in Ottawa this Monday, to protest the racist treatment they suffer at the hands of Canada.

CANADA: STOP JAILING AND DEPORTING REFUGEES, LET THEM STAY!
SUPPORT THE TAMIL MIGRANTS! SAY NO TO RACISM!

---

We encourage you to join us in rejecting repressive, racist, and exclusionary ideologies and policies, and instead encourage compassion, solidarity, respect for life, and justice for all refugees. Release Detained Asylum-Seekers! Let the Boat Stay! Status for All!

http://noii-ottawa.blogspot.com/2010/08/support-tamil-migrants.html

Perhaps they'd feel more secure back in Sri Lanka.

About 2,000 Tamils remained in downtown Ottawa on Tuesday as their protest near Parliament Hill entered its second week, continuing to draw people from Toronto, Montreal, and the United States.

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090414/OTT_tamilprotest_20090414/20090414/?hub=OttawaHome

It's 2009 all over again. I've had just about enough of this. :angry:

scribblet · August 19, 2010

We should all have had enough of their protests and whining. This will cost Canada millions giving human traffickers a boost as there will be many more when they see how Canada handles this.

We welcome genuine refugees which these people are not, they are queue jumpers who are thumbing their noses at legal immigrants and Canadian hospitality. Too late for these people, but any more human trafficking should be turned back and not allowed into our waters.

Visionseeker · August 19, 2010

Did you see a story on the news the other about a Tamil that arrived off Newfoundland 20 years ago and has been in and out of prisons for various acts of violence since then? How about the Tamil that arrived off Newfoundland 20 years ago and has been on welfare ever since? Seen that one? No, of course not. They don't put those sorts of things up on TV because that might lead you to be intolerant.

Have you seen or borne witness to these stories? Of course not because these scenarios derive from your own imagination.

We don't need TV to create intolerance when you're already in the house to represent.

msdogfood · August 19, 2010

All of you remember we can not just send them back!!!!.

See http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16927&view=findpost&p=571029

M.Dancer · August 19, 2010

All of you remember we can not just send them back!!!!.

See http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16927&view=findpost&p=571029

Of course we can and do. Fake refugees are as welcome as farts in a phonebooth.

Your links are in keeping with the great majority of your posts, broken and meaningless.

msdogfood · August 20, 2010

Of course we can and do. Fake refugees are as welcome as farts in a phonebooth.

Your links are in keeping with the great majority of your posts, broken and meaningless.

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R.

The link works! Go try it!!.

M.Dancer · August 20, 2010

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R.

The link works! Go try it!!.

Thank you.

Did you miss this part?

Although appellants are not entitled at this stage to assert rights as Convention refugees, having regard to the potential consequences for them of a denial of that status if they are in fact persons with a "well‑founded fear of persecution", they are entitled to fundamental justice in the adjudication of their status.

I take it you don't undertsand the ruling. They were denied refugee status and apealled. The ministry was not interested in hearing their appeal. The court ruled they were netitled to an appeal.

This does not preclude sendding them back.