The Aquarius.

[sbgasman]

Collect them, provide food and shelter and medical treatment then some money and back to where they came. Also to take their ID in the form of iris scan and finger prints.

What the hecks going on here,I am going to have to agree with you,and it just does not seem right.

 

[gasbanni]

You asked if they would be illegal immigrants.

I don't think pictures on iphones have any bearing on that.

When they circumvent all the usual protocols and try and just land then they are illegals.........the phone videos are showing what's happening on the streets try looking in the rest of Europe ........you get a truer picture of the chaos than on the media .........look up troubles in Calais ......shocking

 

[EFLImpudence]

When they circumvent all the usual protocols and try and just land then they are illegals.........

That differs from what I said in what way?

the phone videos are showing what's happening on the streets try looking in the rest of Europe ........you get a truer picture of the chaos than on the media .........look up troubles in Calais ......shocking

Different subject, different pictures.
You said we can't blame them for coming because they see nice pictures of Europe on their phones.

Your linked-to videos of violence are nothing to do with my post to which you were replying.

 

[gasbanni]

That differs from what I said in what way?


Different subject, different pictures.
You said we can't blame them for coming because they see nice pictures of Europe on their phones.

Your linked-to videos of violence are nothing to do with my post to which you were replying.

I'm pointing out why Italy won't allow the ships to dock ......they know what to expect.
Europe through the Internet looks like paradise compared with Africa hence the draw.......but when the illegal migrants arrive they find it's not paradise, they feel excluded and frustrated and it leads to problems. I'm diverging and adding a little more info to your post, why is that a problem for you ?

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Italy is saying it would help rescue women and children in distress,

The far-right Italian interior minster has vowed to send migrants home:
"Italy’s interior minister, the far-right firebrand Matteo Salvini, has declared that one of the new populist government’s top priorities will be to “send them home”, signalling that he intends to keep a campaign promise to round up hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants in Italy."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/01/italy-vows-to-send-home-undocumented-immigrants
No mention of women and children!
Italy could have allowed the Aquarius to land the children that were on board, but they refused.

The question is why not rescue them and take them back to their point of departure as you say.......

The reason why such ships as the Aquarius does not return the migrants to their point of departure is because the migrants will be in a more dangerous situation than what they were in unseaworthy boats. Which is why they seek to take the migrants to a place of safety.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I'm diverging and adding a little more info to your post, why is that a problem for you ?

It's not a problem as such.

You asked if these 'rescued' migrants were illegals.

Without expert knowlege on the matter, I attempted to distinguish between unseen immigrants, who definitely would be, and the difference of being rescued and let in.

To reply to my explanation with videos of violent migrants rampaging through the streets is nothing to do with it.

 

[motorbiking]

It still makes no differentiation between a ship going about its normal business and a ship designed to for the purposes of initiating rescue.
Otherwise lifeboats, etc would be under different rules to any other ships effecting rescues.
It is only your interpretation that makes any distinction. Furthermore your description of the rescue ships as 'taxis' gives a whole emotional description to them.
They are taking the rescued migrants to a place of safety, wherever they are allowed to land, not "assisting them t
If the other ships that are making it a busy place, cannot or will not effect a rescue, it does not really matter how many ships are there.
If the coastguards of the EU countries avoid being in that area, they cannot effect a rescue.
The NGO ships cannot hope to rescue all of the migrants in danger, but they feel the need to do something.



What relevance is this?
The migrant boats are hardly likely to be equipped with navigation equipment.
You have demonstrated, however, that you are seeking arguments from far-right organisations to support your assumptions.

It still makes no differentiation between a ship going about its normal business and a ship designed to for the purposes of initiating rescue.
Otherwise lifeboats, etc would be under different rules to any other ships effecting rescues.
It is only your interpretation that makes any distinction. Furthermore your description of the rescue ships as 'taxis' gives a whole emotional description to them.
They are taking the rescued migrants to a place of safety, wherever they are allowed to land, not "assisting them to their journey's end".



If the other ships that are making it a busy place, cannot or will not effect a rescue, it does not really matter how many ships are there.
If the coastguards of the EU countries avoid being in that area, they cannot effect a rescue.
The NGO ships cannot hope to rescue all of the migrants in danger, but they feel the need to do something.



What relevance is this?
The migrant boats are hardly likely to be equipped with navigation equipment.
You have demonstrated, however, that you are seeking arguments from far-right organisations to support your assumptions.

This is pointless - you need to read a bit more than a few paragraphs. Vessels are categorised, masters are required to effect rescue or explain why not. We all rely on each other for our safety at sea.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

This is pointless - you need to read a bit more than a few paragraphs. Vessels are categorised, masters are required to effect rescue or explain why not. We all rely on each other for our safety at sea.

You are claiming your greater understanding of the guidance gives you the benefit of a "legal" argument. When in reality, you are simply applying your far-right interpretation of that guidance, supported by far-right web sites.

It still makes no difference to the category of the vessel whether they can, or will effect a rescue, or the treatment of those rescued afterwards.
The rescue ship is free to choose to transport those rescued to a convenient point of safety, in their opinion, not somewhere dictated by the guidance, unless, of course, there is a medical emergency. But as you say, the master is still free to act as they see fit. Otherwise lifeboats, helicopters etc would simply land those rescued on the nearest bit of land.
A 'normal' freight ship will not divert its course, merely to land rescued seafarers, but will continue to its original destination to land those rescued, unless there is a medical reason for greater urgency.

If the chosen point of safety refuses to allow those rescued access to the point of safety, they are acting unilaterally, and against humane principles.
Italy argued, (their far-right minister decided) that their reason for refusing access for the Aquarius is because the Aquarius and other such ships were merely taxis for traffickers, which of course is nonsense. Which you have supported by your pseudo legal babble. That is the only point at which the category of the vessel comes into the discussion.

The reason why the rescued migrants have been landed in Italy is because there is a reception area there for them, and for expeditiously allowing the rescuers to return to the SAR zone.
While the Aquarius and other boats were en route to Spain another 200 migrants drowned!

If other ships choose to avoid the SAR zone, they cannot effect a rescue.
Additionally, some ships are reporting the presence of migrant boats but not effecting a rescue.

 

[motorbiking]

good. well done for reading in a bit more depth. The bit you are missing is the authority responsible for coordinating the rescue. That is the libyan coast guard in the majority of cases. Now trained and funded by the EU.

 

[Notch7]

You are claiming your greater understanding of the guidance gives you the benefit of a "legal" argument.

Which it does. More so than your zero understanding of the guidance.

When in reality, you are simply applying your far-right interpretation of that guidance

Ha ha: you cant state 'in reality' when you mean 'my biased interpretation'

 

[Notch7]

Now trained and funded by the EU.

In which case Im surprised Juncker doesnt get them to dock at Dover

 

[motorbiking]

I’m sure they will make their way over at some point.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

good. well done for reading in a bit more depth. The bit you are missing is the authority responsible for coordinating the rescue. That is the libyan coast guard in the majority of cases. Now trained and funded by the EU.

Again you are extracting a tiny portion of the reality and splashing it about as though it is the whole picture. It is not!
The Libyan coastguard, who are a fledgling organisation, now financed and trained by EU, is only responsible for their territorial water. They do however 'capture' (it can hardly be described as a rescue) migrants' boats and migrants in international water when they are aware of them.
For the whole Mediterranean international waters, the Rome based maritime rescue coordination center, does what it says, it coordinates the rescue.
Often the migrants' boats have enough fuel to reach international water, but not much further.

Vessels are usually supplied with insufficient fuel for the journey to Lampedusa or Sicily: they merely have enough to reach international waters. Once this runs out, migrants and refugees are simply left drifting on the waves hoping for rescue.

http://rescuesignatures.unglobalpulse.net/mediterranean/
However, the Aquarius and other ships are now being denied the information on the position of these migrants boats in peril, until the Libyan coastguard has effected a "rescue".

Moreover the SOLAS convention states: “The master of a ship at sea, on receiving a signal from any source that a ship… is in distress, is bound to proceed with all speed to the assistance of the persons in distress…” [UN Treaty Collection, 1974]
If ships deny having received such a message they cannot be expected to assist.
Furthermore the convention states:
“assistance [is] provided to any person in distress at sea… regardless of the nationality or status of such a person or the circumstances in which that person is found” and that effort is made to “provide for their initial medical or other needs, and deliver them to a place of safety” [IMO, UNHCR, and ICS, 2015].
Which totally eliminates any argument that you or Italy try to present about the purpose or category of such vessels as the Aquarius.

It is left to the master of the rescuing ship to decide what they consider to be a place of safety.
Aquarius and other ships consider the Libyan coastguard to be more dangerous to migrants than the sea itself.

WHEN A LIBYAN coast guard officer raised his hands and pointed, as if holding a rifle, Thomas Schaible wasn’t too worried. It wasn’t his first violent encounter with the Libyan coast guard, but this time, with a helicopter from the Italian navy overhead and Italian and French warships nearby, Schaible knew it was an empty threat.

Schaible and his four-person crew from the German nonprofit Sea-Watch were working to pull people out of the water after a rubber boat full of migrants partially deflated. Sea-Watch got to the shipwreck first, but when the Libyan coast guard arrived, they threatened the rescuers and motioned for them to leave the scene. That’s when the officer threatened to shoot — with dozens of people still in the water without life jackets. Schaible says he and other Sea-Watch crew saw the Libyan coast guard beat the recently rescued people with long cables. Then, they took off for the coast with a few dozen people aboard, many others still in the water, and one person still hanging onto a ladder on the side of the Libyan ship. Schaible estimates that over 40 people drowned that day. All the while, European authorities were nearby.

This was not an isolated incident: In the last six months, with new support from European governments, the Libyan coast guard has substantially ramped up operations to intercept migrant boats in the international waters off their coast, where most shipwrecks take place.

https://theintercept.com/2017/11/25/libya-coast-guard-europe-refugees/


So you presenting your pseudo legal babble is a cover to hide your total lack of humanity.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Which it does. More so than your zero understanding of the guidance.


Ha ha: you cant state 'in reality' when you mean 'my biased interpretation'

The troll does what it does best and trolls because it does not have the intelligence to provide a logical or reasonable response.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

I’m sure they will make their way over at some point.

This is probably your reason for preferring to leave them to drown in the Mediterranean, or be subjected to torture, abuse, slavery, or death at the hands of the Libyan coastguard.