Should Venezuelan refugees be allowed to live in T&T?

[zoom rader]

Redman, I hear you.
Problem with that approach mostly hinged on a singular shortcoming, in that we simply DON'T have the manpower required to do it. That would require significantly increasing our forces numbers, & that's something that I seriously doubt we as a country can afford.

Well it's prefect time to create some temporary Soilders or SRPs for patrol jobs.

[pugboy]

it’s much easier to set up road checkpoints as places they land all use the same roads to come out

[adnj]

we do not have to sink no boat
we do not have to be cacaholes about this

1 - Intercept vessel as they try to land on shore
2 - Do not allow them to disembark
3 - Call up the Guardia National
4 - Coordinate a pick up at a pre determined location at the border
5 - Give them all the care package and hamper you want
6 - Tow out their boat and hand them over safe and sound
7 - Repeat

don't make a song and dance about it
don't tell the UN or CNC3

The process you outlined is called refoulement and is illegal.

The principle of non-refoulement is applicable whenever a person falls within the jurisdiction of a State

Under refugee and human rights law, it is understood that the principle of non-refoulement protects persons that are under the jurisdiction of a State. This is the case when a person is within a State’s territory, in its territorial sea, or when the State exercises effective control over the person. Under refugee law, there is great support for the view that the principle applies to rejection at a State’s border. Moreover, in recent years human rights bodies and courts have been clear that the principle also applies when States operate extraterritorially, including during interception or rescue operations in the high seas. There is, admittedly, some debate as to when exactly a person falls under the jurisdiction of a State. While it has been argued that in the context of border closures or ‘pushback operations’ the principle of non-refoulement applies because the State aims ‘to exercise effective control over the physical movement of migrants, even if only through the direct prevention of such movement in a certain direction’, the traditional view is that a State needs to exercise effective—meaning physical—control over a person for human rights law to apply.[3]

[Redman]

Redman, I hear you.
Problem with that approach mostly hinged on a singular shortcoming, in that we simply DON'T have the manpower required to do it. That would require significantly increasing our forces numbers, & that's something that I seriously doubt we as a country can afford.

Well the TTDF is already being paid- so the temporary redirect will cost little or nothing.

200 men on nightly patrols along the logical beaches would put a significant deterrent in the right places.
With vehicular support we can easily make it more challenging.

The Mexican use their military to patrol their beaches


I have no issue with legal migration - we are a nation of immigrants.
Point in Fact my great grand mother was a Irish/American girl that was taken from a monastery of some sort in Vene and brought across here...by the indigenous tribe ..traded to an estate overseer, for dry goods, in order to marry his son.
The 1800s version of todays human trafficking.

That said the uncontrolled landing of people is an existential threat today-with Covid as it is.


We can and need to do more than just let the TTCG take the weight.

[Lou Screuz]

we do not have to sink no boat
we do not have to be cacaholes about this

1 - Intercept vessel as they try to land on shore
2 - Do not allow them to disembark
3 - Call up the Guardia National
4 - Coordinate a pick up at a pre determined location at the border
5 - Give them all the care package and hamper you want
6 - Tow out their boat and hand them over safe and sound
7 - Repeat

don't make a song and dance about it
don't tell the UN or CNC3

The process you outlined is called refoulement and is illegal.

The principle of non-refoulement is applicable whenever a person falls within the jurisdiction of a State

Under refugee and human rights law, it is understood that the principle of non-refoulement protects persons that are under the jurisdiction of a State. This is the case when a person is within a State’s territory, in its territorial sea, or when the State exercises effective control over the person. Under refugee law, there is great support for the view that the principle applies to rejection at a State’s border. Moreover, in recent years human rights bodies and courts have been clear that the principle also applies when States operate extraterritorially, including during interception or rescue operations in the high seas. There is, admittedly, some debate as to when exactly a person falls under the jurisdiction of a State. While it has been argued that in the context of border closures or ‘pushback operations’ the principle of non-refoulement applies because the State aims ‘to exercise effective control over the physical movement of migrants, even if only through the direct prevention of such movement in a certain direction’, the traditional view is that a State needs to exercise effective—meaning physical—control over a person for human rights law to apply.[3]

illegal immigration is illegal too

alright well then come one come all and get your amnestey

not like we have a finite small island here with finite resources and opportunities

[matr1x]

The real problem is priority is being given to the venes over local population. When flooding happens, pnm dragging their feet. And no help


Vene bump dey toe, hampers fuh so!

[Deadric]

So much for starvation

http://www.looptt.com/content/police-se ... -venezuela

[MaxPower]

The real problem is priority is being given to the venes over local population. When flooding happens, pnm dragging their feet. And no help


Vene bump dey toe, hampers fuh so!

Slim,

The real problem is that to support someone your size will require about 3 hampers....less for those who need it.

Anyways,

Trinis weren’t the same ones that were coming from areas that did not flood for free hampers?

Or sending out ungrateful videos of hampers that didn’t suit their wants?

Or stealing and taking more than needed?

Don’t TOTE when the Govt or even locals distribute hampers selectively.

[adnj]

So much for starvation

http://www.looptt.com/content/police-se ... -venezuela

Black market barter economy. Venezuelans have been smuggling food and fuel into Colombia and Brazil for more than four years. They use the money to buy medicines and scarce imports.

At one time, 40,000 Venezuelans were crossing into Colombia each day.

Trinidad has about 60,000 Venezuelan refugees -- about 1% of the total that have already fled their country.

------------

By 2019, hyperinflation in Venezuela had reached 10,000,000%, and 9 out of 10 Venezuelans lived in poverty.

To date, 5 million people have fled persecution, poverty and political turmoil in Venezuela – a mass migration rivaling that of war-torn Syria. Around 1.8 million of them settled in Colombia.

https://theconversation.com/venezuelan- ... der-137743

[matr1x]

Wasn't Venezuela coasting on everyone?
When dey had money.

The actual number in Trinidad close to 300,000
Send them back.

Were there a few problem people with hampers? Yeah. Are there a lot of venes that don't have a right here? Absolutely.


Max, you focus only on my weight.

That girl probably didn't pay she pimp fee.

[MaxPower]

Wasn't Venezuela coasting on everyone?
When dey had money.

The actual number in Trinidad close to 300,000
Send them back.

Were there a few problem people with hampers? Yeah. Are there a lot of venes that don't have a right here? Absolutely.


Max, you focus only on my weight.

That girl probably didn't pay she pimp fee.

Slim,

I not into the pimping at all bro.

My heart is good.

[matr1x]

I was referring to the human pincushion

[MaxPower]

I was referring to the human pincushion

Or

[88sins]

well look ting, I ask a question to gauge tuners opinions
i knew I'd ruffle some feathers, but some of allyuh in here showing like allyuh need midol, snickers & tampons & birth control ASAP.

anyway, at least I got a good laugh about our "familial relations" with venezuela


& my dear little max,
I eh mean to "esink" squat. I meant to literally sink said vessel in plain view of it's owners, captain & last occupants. & as I stated before, I don't mean let them drown.
Anyway, the point to my question was this.
There are vessels originating from both here & there that make multiple trips each day, all for a nice chunk of change paid to the owners & operators of these boats. If one were to initiate the practice of disabling said boats heading to T&T with their human cargo of venezuelans, and then tow them back to where they came from & finally sink said vessel in plain view of the owner & last occupants, NOBODY with a boat would be so enthusiastic & willing to be taking the chance to get caught transporting people or contraband here when they know that if they are caught, they will immediately lose said boat & the occupants will end up back at their point of origin, losing all the money they paid to persons back in venezuela to facilitate bringing them here illegally, and losing it all for nothing more than a very short boat ride out and back. Thus, they'd look for easier cheaper lower risk alternative destinations. Yes, I said cheaper, because with the increase in the direct risk and penalty to the vessel owner/operator, the price per head for the trip on a boat headed here will skyrocket, making it too expensive for most that would be willing to make the trip to afford.


What's needed is a deterrent, a means via which to discourage those with the vessels facilitating the illegal movements of people & other items between these countries. If that isn't done, we the problem will persist. My question was just a Q&D example of what could be done to net the desired effect.
And for the resident diplomatic protocol experts, the seizure of an illegal venezuelan vessel in the process of committing a crime in T&T waters does not constitute an act of war, or an act inciting war. Nor is returning n them to their point of origin considered an act of war or hostility. Nor would be the destruction of the seized vessel.

[Redress10]

well look ting, I ask a question to gauge tuners opinions
i knew I'd ruffle some feathers, but some of allyuh in here showing like allyuh need midol, snickers & tampons & birth control ASAP.

anyway, at least I got a good laugh about our "familial relations" with venezuela


& my dear little max,
I eh mean to "esink" squat. I meant to literally sink said vessel in plain view of it's owners, captain & last occupants. & as I stated before, I don't mean let them drown.
Anyway, the point to my question was this.
There are vessels originating from both here & there that make multiple trips each day, all for a nice chunk of change paid to the owners & operators of these boats. If one were to initiate the practice of disabling said boats heading to T&T with their human cargo of venezuelans, and then tow them back to where they came from & finally sink said vessel in plain view of the owner & last occupants, NOBODY with a boat would be so enthusiastic & willing to be taking the chance to get caught transporting people or contraband here when they know that if they are caught, they will immediately lose said boat & the occupants will end up back at their point of origin, losing all the money they paid to persons back in venezuela to facilitate bringing them here illegally, and losing it all for nothing more than a very short boat ride out and back. Thus, they'd look for easier cheaper lower risk alternative destinations. Yes, I said cheaper, because with the increase in the direct risk and penalty to the vessel owner/operator, the price per head for the trip on a boat headed here will skyrocket, making it too expensive for most that would be willing to make the trip to afford.


What's needed is a deterrent, a means via which to discourage those with the vessels facilitating the illegal movements of people & other items between these countries. If that isn't done, we the problem will persist. My question was just a Q&D example of what could be done to net the desired effect.
And for the resident diplomatic protocol experts, the seizure of an illegal venezuelan vessel in the process of committing a crime in T&T waters does not constitute an act of war, or an act inciting war. Nor is returning n them to their point of origin considered an act of war or hostility. Nor would be the destruction of the seized vessel.

Yes bro

Familial ties. Look it up and get a history lesson.

What you are advocating is the coast guard should fire and sink boats containing unarmed women and children. That could never be right but is expected on this forum. A forum filled with a bunch of fantasist pretending to be anything else.

[88sins]

Yes bro

Familial ties. Look it up and get a history lesson.

What you are advocating is the coast guard should fire and sink boats containing unarmed women and children. That could never be right but is expected on this forum. A forum filled with a bunch of fantasist pretending to be anything else.

Look the original question below, read carefully, & then proceed to show us all where I specifically mentioned EITHER of your highlighted claims.

Show of hands.
Besides the resident illegal aliens here, honest opinions wanted.
Which Trinis would be against it if one vessel was to either disable or esink another vessel full of Venezuelans in the midpoint of the small span of open waters between here and Venezuela?
Not necessarily saying to let them drown in open water, but the idea is to sink the vessel they on and pick them up and hand them over to their own guardia nacional.

This is a serious question fellas.

[Redress10]

Once you sink a vessel you can't guarantee that no one will drown. There are too many variables that are beyond your control.

Why do I have to explain this to you?

[88sins]

Once you sink a vessel you can't guarantee that no one will drown. There are too many variables that are beyond your control.

Why do I have to explain this to you?

you could barely read but wanna explain sumn to me?

ok

[MaxPower]

Reek,

All you had to suggest was to intercept the illegal vessel and escort it back to the shore of origin or over the respective authorities.

This sinking and drowning ting you inciting not cool at all Reek.


A question for you only if you have the time 88sins.

You have a good comfortable life and family, and suddenly the economy crashes. You have no other choice but to flee the country....No other choice.

Your wife is pregnant and you also have a 3 year old child with you. There is a mean of transportation from point A to B which costs the very last of your savings.

Along the way, the journey is halted by harsh armed authorities who are instructing you to return to point A and even threaten to hurt you or your family if you do not comply.

Note, Point A has nothing....Point B is a new life and most importantly, food and shelter. The midpoint is imminent danger.

How do you expect to be treated?

[matr1x]

Why didn't they go to other Latin American countries?


Cry me a river. They were riding high when they were making money. Boohoo

[RedVEVO]

Reek,

All you had to suggest was to intercept the illegal vessel and escort it back to the shore of origin or over the respective authorities.

This sinking and drowning ting you inciting not cool at all Reek.


A question for you only if you have the time 88sins.

You have a good comfortable life and family, and suddenly the economy crashes. You have no other choice but to flee the country....No other choice.

Your wife is pregnant and you also have a 3 year old child with you. There is a mean of transportation from point A to B which costs the very last of your savings.

Along the way, the journey is halted by harsh armed authorities who are instructing you to return to point A and even threaten to hurt you or your family if you do not comply.

Note, Point A has nothing....Point B is a new life and most importantly, food and shelter. The midpoint is imminent danger.

How do you expect to be treated?

Few people can be happy unless they hate some other person, nation or creed

[adnj]

Why didn't they go to other Latin American countries?


Cry me a river. They were riding high when they were making money. Boohoo

They did. There are more than 5 million Venezuelan refugees -- tú entiendes.

It's a good excuse for you to brush up on your Spanish because they are coming to your neighborhood.

[mero]

Reek,

All you had to suggest was to intercept the illegal vessel and escort it back to the shore of origin or over the respective authorities.

This sinking and drowning ting you inciting not cool at all Reek.


A question for you only if you have the time 88sins.

You have a good comfortable life and family, and suddenly the economy crashes. You have no other choice but to flee the country....No other choice.

Your wife is pregnant and you also have a 3 year old child with you. There is a mean of transportation from point A to B which costs the very last of your savings.

Along the way, the journey is halted by harsh armed authorities who are instructing you to return to point A and even threaten to hurt you or your family if you do not comply.

Note, Point A has nothing....Point B is a new life and most importantly, food and shelter. The midpoint is imminent danger.

How do you expect to be treated?

Few people can be happy unless they hate some other person, nation or creed

Deep

[RedVEVO]

Why didn't they go to other Latin American countries?


Cry me a river. They were riding high when they were making money. Boohoo

They did. There are more than 5 million Venezuelan refugees -- tú entiendes.

It's a good excuse for you to brush up on your Spanish because they are coming to your neighborhood.

Both Trinidad and Tobago were originally settled by Amerindians who came through South America.

The island of Trinidad was inhabited for centuries by native Amerindian peoples before becoming a colony in the Spanish Empire.

[zoom rader]

Max

You need to tell PNM to put a Vene Senator in the senate.

[RedVEVO]

Max

You need to tell PNM to put a Vene Senator in the senate.

Vene Senator there already .

Think carefully

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

[MaxPower]

Max

You need to tell PNM to put a Vene Senator in the senate.

Hello Zoom,

And would you believe that if this happens Trinis will still vote for PNM?

[88sins]

Reek,

All you had to suggest was to intercept the illegal vessel and escort it back to the shore of origin or over the respective authorities.

This sinking and drowning ting you inciting not cool at all Reek.


A question for you only if you have the time 88sins.

You have a good comfortable life and family, and suddenly the economy crashes. You have no other choice but to flee the country....No other choice.

Your wife is pregnant and you also have a 3 year old child with you. There is a mean of transportation from point A to B which costs the very last of your savings.

Along the way, the journey is halted by harsh armed authorities who are instructing you to return to point A and even threaten to hurt you or your family if you do not comply.

Note, Point A has nothing....Point B is a new life and most importantly, food and shelter. The midpoint is imminent danger.

How do you expect to be treated?

Few people can be happy unless they hate some other person, nation or creed

Deep

I've seen puddles of piss with more depth.

Anyway
Max, to answer your questions.
So you prefer the vessel and its crew and passengers be detained and escorted back home. Ok.
So, what's your plan for when that same vessel is either returned to its owner or operator, who then picks up his business right where he left off? We playing musical chairs or we being serious about this?Or if said vessel ends up in the hands of another person who does the same thing, or instead of moving people he decides to move guns?
The problem is unscrupulous people with access to marine transportation and a greed for fast money. If you arrive at your house, and you see a person that known to pick locks and go in people house to steal coming out your house, when police arrive on the scene you think the police should escort him home and give him back his lock picks?

As per the other part of your question, I might not be the best person for you to ask that question, cuz I doubt you would believe my answer. I don't live my life eager to run from problems at the first hint of hardship. That is something cowards do. Not saying anything right or wrong about being a coward, just saying i ain't built that way. Wouldn't want to leave my homeland, so I'd stay as long as I could, and work toward staying alive and rebuilding my country.
Ask yourself, if all who can afford to leave just up and leave at the first chance they get, who will rebuild their nation? Should they be allowed to return home and claim ownership of things when the situation improves? Considering how easy it was for them to abandon their homeland and their people without nary a thought, and that they had nothing to do with the rebuilding. When everyone runs out, who will show others that may not know how to survive the way to do so? Who will help the weak, and the infirm and the old and the far too young to care for themselves? If they dead they dead and that's not your problem as long as you alive right? See the cowardice in that behavior yet?
Running from a problem doesn't fix the problem, and running out of Venezuela ain't gonna do squat to fix their problems.

[pugboy]

them boatmen making $300usd a head
over and over
eg if boat holding 25, a nice $7500 usd a night