3 hours ago, PJPom said:

Good for the Italian Government, the so called rescuers are acting as a free taxi service for the illegals. At the height of the boats in Australia the people smugglers were coordinating with Defence in Canberra to ensure there was a Warship handy to pick them up.  The problems caused by this humanitarian act are still costing Australia a fortune and is still a political hot potato that nobody has the nerve to solve.

The rescuers have become a very big part of the problem and they need stopping.

It is NOT ILLEGAL to seek refuge in a safe haven country

https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/what-is-a-refugee/

Remember when branding persons "people smugglers"  that Oskar Schindler was a people smuggler, and he was a humanitarian.

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Wiki disagrees with you: " Human trafficking is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labour, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others. "

 

As does DHS, Interpol, etc.

That is going to happen in Italy. The Mafia will "employ" them. Just ask an Italian.

Hard as it seems but if the Italian Courts make an example of her then others will likely think twice before doing so again. She could have taken them back to North Africa instead of playing politics with European Governments and loosing. This needs to be nipped in the bud as its becoming endemic and less of the human rights crap- they are not unaware of the dangers as they have already traveled illegally through half a dozen countries before they reach the Med.

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The criminalisation of acting with humanity.

 

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

3 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

She was entirely within her rights to pick up as many passengers from the sea as she wished. However, Italy is not, far as I know, obliged to let her off load them on Italian soil.

If the Italian authorities deny her entry, then she did break Italian law by entering. They still, far as I know, have sovereign right to deny anyone entry.

12 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

She broke maritime law by ignoring the instructions of a warship. She is in goal and the ship has been seized. It could be years before the ship is released and only then after hefty costs. The captain will no doubt be found guilty by the Italian courts and if, after exhausting all other leagal means of appeal, finds herself in the ECJ, will have already spent years, not months, behind bars.

 

She and her charity are screwed.

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Is that what you call pulling people out of the sea?

 

They went in the sea to be rescued! No one has the right to illegally migrate to another country just because they fancy it.

44 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

 

Er, doesn't Maritime Law require people picked up and rescued at see to be deposited at the NEAREST port? Now, where exactly were they picked up?

1 hour ago, petemoss said:

She broke maritime law by ignoring the instructions of a warship. She is in goal and the ship has been seized. It could be years before the ship is released and only then after hefty costs. The captain will no doubt be found guilty by the Italian courts and if, after exhausting all other leagal means of appeal, finds herself in the ECJ, will have already spent years, not months, behind bars.

 

She and her charity are screwed.

No, not going to happen. No years jail for the captain and no years before the ship is released.

1 hour ago, petemoss said:

She broke maritime law by ignoring the instructions of a warship. She is in goal and the ship has been seized. It could be years before the ship is released and only then after hefty costs. The captain will no doubt be found guilty by the Italian courts and if, after exhausting all other leagal means of appeal, finds herself in the ECJ, will have already spent years, not months, behind bars.

 

She and her charity are screwed.

Bullshit. She could not break a law by entering Italian waters, as she is obliged to follow international marine law in the first place and is obliged to take the first available port in her situation. There might be legal issues constructed to sue her, but in the end she will succeed. The Italians are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

6 hours ago, billd766 said:

Not really. The best thing to do would be for citizens like yourself is to contact the Italian government to take all of the refugees from this boatload under your own responsibility and let them live with you.

 

You personally would be responsible for obtaining visas for them all, feeding and clothing them, paying for their accommodation and be responsible for their welfare. In addition if they break any laws you will share their punishment.

 

Ian't that what you and others like you want governments in the area to do at the taxpayers expense.

Well said 

Edited June 29, 20197 yr by IssanMichael

3 hours ago, Benmart said:

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The criminalisation of acting with humanity.

 

How many refugees are you taking in?

 

a famous actor with a net worth of 500 million usd has spoken in support of refugees and immigrants extensively yet despite owning multiple mansions in multiple countries including italy has taken in  zero immigrants to stay at his property.  actually seems he is trying to leave areas plagued by crime and people living on the street not far from his italy mansion.

 

google . "george clooney paul joseph watson"

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The criminalisation of acting with humanity.

 

In your dictionary, abetting human trafficking is "humanity", strange.

55 minutes ago, fxe1200 said:

2 hours ago, petemoss said:

She broke maritime law by ignoring the instructions of a warship. She is in goal and the ship has been seized. It could be years before the ship is released and only then after hefty costs. The captain will no doubt be found guilty by the Italian courts and if, after exhausting all other leagal means of appeal, finds herself in the ECJ, will have already spent years, not months, behind bars.

 

She and her charity are screwed.

Bullshit. She could not break a law by entering Italian waters, as she is obliged to follow international marine law in the first place and is obliged to take the first available port in her situation. There might be legal issues constructed to sue her, but in the end she will succeed. The Italians are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

 

which one is an attorney with expertise in maritime law specific to italy ?

Edited June 29, 20197 yr by atyclb

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Is that what you call pulling people out of the sea?

Oh another one... perhaps you should read more and inform yourself.

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

Wiki disagrees with you: " Human trafficking is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labour, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others. "

 

As does DHS, Interpol, etc.

Would people smuggling be good enough for you? That is what that ship has been doing, the "rescue ship" label is simply outrageous.

3 hours ago, RJRS1301 said:

It is NOT ILLEGAL to seek refuge in a safe haven country

https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/what-is-a-refugee/

Remember when branding persons "people smugglers"  that Oskar Schindler was a people smuggler, and he was a humanitarian.

Common mistake: confusing economic migrants with refugees.

2 hours ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

Yes, she violated the law by entering a port when not authorized. The migrants had been "assisted" all right already, food and cover aplenty.

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

No, not going to happen. No years jail for the captain and no years before the ship is released.

Unfortunately you are right, the EU will intervene and patch up with the usual carrot and stick. But at least a strong signal has been sent, and already the taxi/rescue boats are seeing the decline in their business.

39 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

Common mistake: confusing economic migrants with refugees.

What actual information do you have on the individuals on this ship to make that assertion?

 

I doubt you can name a single  individual on the ship beyond the captain who's name  is in the news, and yet you assert you know why these people tried to get to Europe. 

 

 

48 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

Common mistake: confusing economic migrants with refugees.

Up to authorities to make that distinction. We can have our suspicions but don't know.

And let's not forget that Libya is a dangerous country at the moment after western interference. So people escaping there could easily be in danger.

Edited June 29, 20197 yr by stevenl

4 hours ago, jany123 said:

No one in their right mind would consider Tunisia a safe place to disembark refugees from its neighbor.

 

4 hours ago, jany123 said:

No one in their right mind would consider Tunisia a safe place to disembark refugees from its neighbor.

Why ???If its good enough for tourists, its good enough for the so calledd refugees / asylum seekers

A bunch of migrants frothing at the mouth about other migrants in search of a better life. 

 

The hypocrisy is only eclipsed by the total lack of introspection. 

3 hours ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

So you say she could not have taken them back to the nearest port, the nearest safe haven, which seems to be the one they just left, rather than sail all the way across the med to Italy ?

Are you saying she is denying assistance if she takes them back to the nearest port ?

41 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1 hour ago, arithai12 said:

Common mistake: confusing economic migrants with refugees.

What actual information do you have on the individuals on this ship to make that assertion?

 

I doubt you can name a single  individual on the ship beyond the captain who's name  is in the news, and yet you assert you know why these people tried to get to Europe. 

 

as equally a convincing argument as you not having the names and background of at least one person on that ship to show they are refugees.

Just now, atyclb said:

 

as equally a convincing argument as you not having the names and background of at least one person on that ship to show they are refugees.

True, but the process starts with 'refugee application', not with 'economic migrant application'.

4 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

as equally a convincing argument as you not having the names and background of at least one person on that ship to show they are refugees.

Which would be a valid point, if I had ever made the claim. 

25 minutes ago, Joinaman said:

4 hours ago, fxe1200 said:

Absolutely true. Is Madame captain "breaking the law" by entering the Italian port?? If she did not do so, she violates the international marine law and can be sued for denial of assistance, and according to the law that includes migrants too. Some of the posters should have a look at the legal issues first.

So you say she could not have taken them back to the nearest port, the nearest safe haven, which seems to be the one they just left, rather than sail all the way across the med to Italy ?

Are you saying she is denying assistance if she takes them back to the nearest port ?

 

the goal might be to reach a northern euro country that has a generous welfare system and i cannot blame them as that is what i would try to do in their shoes.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

7 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

as equally a convincing argument as you not having the names and background of at least one person on that ship to show they are refugees.

Which would be a valid point, if I had ever made the claim. 

 

 

it's called extrapolation and i never claimed you put that argument into words and posted it. 

 

corollary argument if you will

Edited June 29, 20197 yr by atyclb

Just now, atyclb said:

 

 

it's called extrapolation

It's called putting words in my mouth. 

 

I get to do that, not you.