Why?

[***super_nova***]

Why would they do this?

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/10/goodwill-letters-to-asylum-seekers-on-nauru-re...

[poddster]

Of course they were, they are potential customers.

[poddster]

I am a bit surprised and concerned that most people are unable to see through these diaphanous plots

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@poddster wrote:

Of course they were, they are potential customers.

---

1) Burnside didn't write the letters.

2) Nobody (except  the writers) has any way of knowing  what their purpose was, because the people responsible for running the centres didn't even bother to open them to check that there was nothing untoward in them, before chucking them into their little "oubliette." 

3) The intentions of the writers have no bearing on the situation anyway.

.4) The letters were addressed to specific individuals,

5) The letters were not given to those individuals,

6) The people responsible for delivering them said they had been delivered.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@poddster wrote:

I am a bit surprised and concerned that most people are unable to see through these diaphanous plots

---

I doubt it was a diaphanous plot. It was more likely either laziness, incompetence, callousness or deliberate cruelty. Whichever, it was a pretty disgusting thing to do to people who were so utterly powerless and dependant.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Even in war, the Germns and Italians had more respect than this for the prisoners of war in their charge. The letters were censored at both ends and sometimes took weeks or even months to arrive, but relatively few of them got completely lost in the system. 

I guess asylum seekers are not covered by the Geneva Convention.

[poddster]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@poddster wrote:

Of course they were, they are potential customers.

---

1) Burnside didn't write the letters.

He organised the letters to further his agenda , what ever that was

2) Nobody (except  the writers) has any way of knowing  what their purpose was, because the people responsible for running the centres didn't even bother to open them to check that there was nothing untoward in them, before chucking them into their little "oubliette." 

Pointless point

3) The intentions of the writers have no bearing on the situation anyway.

Organised writers? the whole lot may have been written bu just a handful of writers.

.4) The letters were addressed to specific individuals,

Provided by the organiser to the writers.

5) The letters were not given to those individuals,

Perhaps it was recognised for the plot that it was.

6) The people responsible for delivering them said they had been delivered.

Covering their butt?

---

[i-need-a-martini · Accepted solution]

It's a cruelty that makes no sense.

It makes me wonder if ANY mail reaches these people. Afetrall, there is no way of telling if a letter is mailed from a stranger or a family member.

Does this mean that they don't get letters from wives, husbands, fathers, mothers?

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@poddster wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@poddster wrote:

Of course they were, they are potential customers.

---

1) Burnside didn't write the letters.

He organised the letters to further his agenda , what ever that was

He organised the letters, but since you have no way of knowing what was in them, saying it was furthering  his agenda' is pure speculation. They could equally well have been furthering as many different agendas as there were different writers - or they could simply have been letters of support and encouragement  from people who genuinely cared about the plight of detainees.

2) Nobody (except  the writers) has any way of knowing  what their purpose was, because the people responsible for running the centres didn't even bother to open them to check that there was nothing untoward in them, before chucking them into their little "oubliette." 

Pointless point. 

The very relevant point is that unless anything offered or suggested inthose those letters posed a  threat either to nationl security ofr the safe and orderly running of the detention centres there was no lgeitimate reason to withold them. those responsible for theri delivery did not bother to ascertain whetheror not they posed any threat before dumping them.

3) The intentions of the writers have no bearing on the situation anyway.

Organised writers? the whole lot may have been written bu just a handful of writers.

3) what has the number of writers got to do with the fact that they were not delivered?

.4) The letters were addressed to specific individuals,

Provided by the organiser to the writers.

Regardless of who provided them, the names of each intended recipient was on each envelope, yet they were not delivered to the adressees.

5) The letters were not given to those individuals,

Perhaps it was recognised for the plot that it was.

Without even reading them to make sure? And you really think that makes it OK?

6) The people responsible for delivering them said they had been delivered.

Covering their butt?

Exactly - because because they knew what they had done was morally idefensible and quite possibly illegal 

[polksaladallie]

---

@poddster wrote:

I have to wonder who the letters were addressed to?

Inmate? Detainee? Asylum seeker? To whome it may concern?

Or were the y to have been distributed at random?

Oh and you mean they were organised to be sent?

---

I would advise you not to join Amnesty International.  You would be asked to write hundreds of letters to strangers.

[cherry*135]

Post 4 - I would advise to inform yourself before commenting.