The Refugee Kafuffle

[Mamlaz]

this is fckn vile. Some people crowdfunded an initiative to prevent NGOs from saving refugees in Mediterranean by obstructing their vessels.

No, they tried to halt mass human trafficking that is going on across the Mediterranean route, to which the NGO's are a part of;




http://www.dw.com/en/italy-prosecutor-claims-ngos-working-with-human-smugglers/a-38554753

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/27/ngo-rescues-off-libya-encourage-traffickers-eu-borders-chief

 

[Feragorn]

Wow, the comments in that video are just what I expected from law-abiding citizens who have the best interests of Europe and Mediterranean voyagers in mind.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

Yeah EU officials demonising NGOs on basis of insufficient evidence does explain why such a thing would happen

 

[Duh]

Yeah EU officials demonising NGOs on basis of insufficient evidence does explain why such a thing would happen

Heh, and the video blames EU officials for not doing anything or even supporting "trafficking". I guess it is "Thanks, EUbama" now.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

More on Frontex's statements on NGOs:
http://www.dpa-international.com/topic/ngos-fire-migrant-rescues-mediterranean-170503-99-304770

 

[kurczak]

Hm, it is a tough one. Does facilitating migration facilitate migration or not? We're gonna need at least 25 years of meticulous research and perhaps we will never know for sure.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

I fail to see your point

 

[kurczak]

My point is that it doesn't really matter if the NGOs do it out of pure well-meaning altruism or for 30 silver pieces and that it doesn't really matter if the powers that be are just unwilling to interfere or if it's incompetence or tacit support.

What matters is that picking them up 30 cm off the Libyan coast incentivizes migration. If you don't like migration, you're not going to like what those NGOs do. "But they don't do it for money" is not really an argument in this situation.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

The point is not that they're not doing it for money. The point is it's not cooperation with smugglers.

But that crowdfunding is positively causing deaths.

 

[kurczak]

The migrants risk their lives because they know/believe they will get picked up pretty much immediately. These rescue operations are not a solution to a random accident on the seas like Titanic or Concordia, they are the cause of a pattern.

I don't think that every time someone somewhere on the planet decided to risk their lives, Europe is obligated to come their rescue or else it is responsible for their death. Just like it's not Europe's responsibility what happens to the migrants from Subsaharan Africa somewhere in Mali or wherever in the deep interior of Sahara on their way to the Mediterranean coast, it is not its responsibility what happens to them in Libyan or Tunisian waters.

Picking them up anywhere but territorial waters of a European country makes as little as sending an airplane for them to their countries of origin.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

We're not discussing an omission here.This is an active act of preventing people from being saved. This is causing dwath of people who would be saved otherwise. It's like going into a patient's room and cutting their life support.
And it's illegal. Not because it kills refugees though. You can't mess around with other vessels like that because of maritime law

 

[Duh]

It is also illegal to pick up migrants in lybian waters and bring them to Italy. Are you arguing for them to stop doing it? Or does legality only matter if it suits your argument?

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

Which NGOs are doing illegal stuff? Or are you arguing saving operations(which are legally required for nearby vessels) are illegal? I find it really difficult to follow

 

[Duh]

Did you not read your own articles?

Zuccaro says "some" NGOs take calls from Libyan smugglers, pick up migrants even when their boats are not in danger, turn off their radio transmitters to hide their trespassing into Libyan waters and "perhaps" receive money from criminal networks.

He has singled out Malta-based MOAS and smaller German, Spanish and Dutch organizations as prime suspects, while bigger NGOs, like Doctors Without Borders (MSF) and Save the Children, are above reproach.

The prosecutor has not pressed any charges. He says his claims are based on material which cannot be used as evidence in a trial. Media reports suggest he has access to foreign intelligence reports which have no legal value in Italy.

If these claims have any bearing that would be illegal behavior.

 

[BenKenobi]

Which NGOs are doing illegal stuff? Or are you arguing saving operations(which are legally required for nearby vessels) are illegal? I find it really difficult to follow

I absolutely love your take on maritime law.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

@Duh
Which returns us to my previous post
[quote author=Calradianın Bilgesi  link=topic=338887.msg8861487#msg8861487 date=1507964886]
Yeah EU officials demonising NGOs on basis of insufficient evidence does explain why such a thing would happen
[/quote]
@Ben
You started to make these 'my time is too valuable to comment and contribute but your argument/you are terrible and that will be all my input' comments very often since you started that internship thing

 

[Duh]

@Duh
Which returns us to my previous post
[quote author=Calradianın Bilgesi  link=topic=338887.msg8861487#msg8861487 date=1507964886]
Yeah EU officials demonising NGOs on basis of insufficient evidence does explain why such a thing would happen

[/quote]
You haven't seen the evidence, which may be quite solid but simply not admissable in an italian court. Your claim, on the other hand, that the obstruction of the NGO vassel must have led to death is a prime example of demonising someone on the basis of insufficient evidence.

 

[BenKenobi]

You haven't seen the evidence, which may be quite solid but simply not admissable in an italian court. Your claim, on the other hand, that the obstruction of the NGO vassel must have led to death is a prime example of demonising someone on the basis of insufficient evidence.

It is very convenient because you can hold this line of argumentation all the way until your side loses at a court, loses the appeal, loses the extraordinary appeal or constitutional complaint if the iurisdicition provides for these, and then is shown the doors by the ECJ / ECHR. Which can very well take 6+ years.

You started to make these 'my time is too valuable to comment and contribute but your argument/you are terrible and that will be all my input' comments very often since you started that internship thing

That thing has pretty much no relevance to anything I have ever written here as to my great dismay, we have never reached the need to discuss Czech procedural law on TW yet. I just think that your arguments try to draw bonus points by essence of being "legal arguments" but are dishonest, because if you are saying A, you need to say B. And as usual, you take your arguments and refuse to do the weighing with both legal and extralegal arguments that sit on the other side of the issue. I don't have problem with your arguments, I have a problem with your way of argumentation. In this case, the maritime law trumping everything in its way.

Not to mention that you and kurczak are talking about different things, because while you are saying that rescue ships ferry migrants because traffickers dump them into water, she says that traffickers dump them into water because rescue ships ferry them. Also, "NGOs are bad" and "Intervening vessels are bad" are two things.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

You haven't seen the evidence, which may be quite solid but simply not admissable in an italian court. Your claim, on the other hand, that the obstruction of the NGO vassel must have led to death is a prime example of demonising someone on the basis of insufficient evidence.

You shouldn't demonise institutions based on some mysterious evidences that you can't bring into public. Your use of 'insufficient' also makes sense to me, but in other contexts. I think evidence might be sufficient(we don't know that though) for Frontex to have an unfavourable view of NGOs, but it's definitely insufficient for this prosecutor to make these public comments.

On obstructing vessel thing, my claim is not about whether this thing literally happened. Maybe they were stopped by authorities before operating, idk. My point is that what this crowdfunding tries to achieve is literally trying to prevent people from being saved and this amounts to causing death positively(and this is fckn vile).

That thing has pretty much no relevance to anything I have ever written here as to my great dismay, we have never reached the need to discuss Czech procedural law on TW yet.

Internship might not have a causal relevance but my impression is that it has a temporal relevance. But you may have been posting like that all the time, that's also possible.

but are dishonest, because if you are saying A, you need to say B. And as usual, you take your arguments and refuse to do the weighing with both legal and extralegal arguments that sit on the other side of the issue

I don't understand this

the maritime law trumping everything in its way.

I never claimed this.

 

[Mamlaz]

But that crowdfunding is positively causing deaths.

Yes, but encouraging sea migration on improvised floating vessels, also is.

The most effective thing to do in order to stop those sea deaths would be to close down the entire sea route with the navy.

Which NGOs are doing illegal stuff?

Not illegal, but the murky water is that there are dozens of safe ports closer than those in Sicily, nearly all of them in Tunisia, and the usual maritime guideline is that you transport rescued people to the closest safe port.