What is 'human trafficking?'

[EP - Ethics Particle]

The recently departed?

:confused2: :confused2: :confused2:

GWB = George W. Bush (I suspect) - Remember that turkey?

 

[Takin Time]

Consent is not a defense to Human Trafficking

To such a degree that "human trafficking" is on my radar I don't regard the Co$ as a major offender. To the degree they do so it's mostly involves moving and abusing willing conscripts. The cult mentality is a bad one but it pales in comparison to the sorts of abuses to which those who are truly "trafficked" in this world are often subjected.

What? The fact that in the Sea Org most people don't get beaten? Or that they aren't pressed into sexual service making $1,000 per day for their pimps?

Instead...

• The Sea Org members are worked for more hours a day than most labor trafficked victims, refused 8 hours sleep almost constantly for years at a time.
  
• Sea Orgers often stay for decades at a time, whereas many other labor trafficked victims seek escape long before that length of time, making the overall effect on their life after escape worse than many trafficked victims.
  
• The Church of Scientology recruits and holds thousands of Sea Orgers at a time, all around the world. (coordinated and global recruitment)

Willingness is not an excuse in the crime of human trafficking.

One issue that has continued to engage the international community is whether trafficking can be legalized by the consent of the person being trafficked. The existence of consent appears to bar the intervention of human rights advocacy since the law presumes that a person who consents to be trafficked knows what she wants and what to expect, and as such has waived any remedies she might otherwise have been entitled to. However, the major problem with this presumption is that it prevents the international community from inquiring into what happens after the contract is formed. ... Using theories of liberty and freedom as well as the doctrinal principles of the law of contract, the analysis explores the potential ramifications of consent in order to illustrate the absence of liberty and freedom that characterize trafficking contracts. ... Part II examines the intersections between trafficking contracts and contracts for slavery. ... although a trafficker is free to raise the consent of the victim as an initial defense, such consent to initial recruitment is not synonymous with consent to the entire course of trafficking.
http://tinyurl.com/pbvcwy

Victims either do not consent to their situations, or if they initially consent, that consent is rendered meaningless by the actions of the traffickers. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/trafficking/about/fact_human.html

It is important to note that the consent of a trafficked person becomes irrelevant whenever any of the ‘means’ of trafficking are used. A child cannot consent even if the ‘means’ are not involved.
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/doc...ICKING_-_BACKGROUND_BRIEFING_NOTE_-_final.pdf

Other references: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&num=30&q=consent+human+trafficking

 

[Feral]

An interesting aspect of human trafficking is that the vast majority of people who end up being trafficked initially agree to what appears to be the terms.

All too often those terms change, once the person being trafficked is in a highly compromised situation, say behind the razor wire in a foreign country (often illegally) and without a passport and not permitted to go away without supervision.

Then they are trapped.

Sound familiar Mark?

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Sound familiar Mark?

I'm not arguing the point. I don't defend abusive practices. Period. My perspective is that I don't view the Co$ as a "major offender" in this regard. Judging by a general lack of indictments neither does the FBI, Interpol, etc..

If they are "major offenders" it shouldn't be all that difficult to make such a case given the established nature of their operations and the number of po'ed former SO. So far it hasn't happened despite law enforcement's periodic investigations of their operations. In case you haven't noticed the church is not all that popular with governments.

If you can make the legal case then by all means go for it.


Mark A. Baker

 

[OTBT]

An interesting aspect of human trafficking is that the vast majority of people who end up being trafficked initially agree to what appears to be the terms.

Old snippet from LBV

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=173392&postcount=13

The often-asked question "why don't people just leave" has another angle to it, too. When that type of life is all you know and you are virtually completely shut off from the rest of the world -- a world which is only described through Scn propaganda filter -- you have no real comparison. After years or decades, it becomes sort of "normal" that things are insane. You are made to believe things are more insane in the world at large. And others around you have the same demands on them, yet they keep on going, so why would you be any different? (Group agreement at its best.)

When you are a Sea Org member, you are an OT. When you are an OT, you are above mere human, so why would you even expect human rights to apply? That's such childish foolishness -- a typically humanoid weakness.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

<snip>
# Believe that they must work against their will
# Be unable to leave their work environment
# Show signs that their movements are being controlled
# Show fear or anxiety
# Be subjected to violence or threats against themselves or against their family members and loved ones
# Suffer injuries that appear to be the result of an assault
# Suffer injuries or impairments typical of certain jobs or control measures
# Be distrustful of the authorities
# Be threatened with being handed over to the authorities
# Be afraid of revealing their immigration status
# Not be in possession of their passports or other travel or identity documents, as those documents are being held by someone else
# Have false identity or travel documents
# Be unfamiliar with the local language
# Not know their home or work address
# Allow others to speak for them when addressed directly
# Act as if they were instructed by someone else
# Be forced to work under certain conditions
# Be disciplined through punishment
# Be unable to negotiate working conditions
# Receive little or no payment
# Have no access to their earnings
# Work excessively long hours over long periods
# Not have any days off
# Live in poor or substandard accommodation
# Have no access to medical care
# Have limited contact with their families or with people outside of their immediate environment
# Be unable to communicate freely with others
# Be under the perception that they are bonded by debt
# Come from a place known to be a source of human trafficking
# Have had the fees for their transport to the country of destination paid for by facilitators, whom they must pay back by working or providing services in the destination
# Have acted on the basis of false promises.
<snip>

It remains that each single point in this list from the OP can be answered in the affirmative with CoS...

We could (should) cite examples for each point.

That the authorities, FBI et al, do not see CoS as a major offender is certainly not same as they aren't. That may just mean that said authorities has been hoodwinked/intimidated by CoS. There are extensive policies on how to, and a fullfledged intelligence/black Ops department to that end.

Recall OP SnowWhite, the IRS deal (and wheel), and the hostile takeover of CAN. And that's just a few of many examples.

Fact is that the cult of Scientology has been embarrasingly successful in intimidating the press, police and legal authrorities for decades. Routinely making a merry mess of the legal proceedings in courts.. Kobrin and Moxon has been regular comedians..

Here in DK the press is still 'shuddered into silence' (though there are signs of improvement.. Albeit not much.)

Hmm.. I still believe that politicians, police and lawyers don't like to be fooled. I expect the scene to change.. Hopefully with the current trials.

 

[OTBT]

UN Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons - Tool 6.4

Labour exploitation

People who have been trafficked for the purpose of labour exploitation are typically made
to work in sectors such as the following: agriculture, construction, entertainment, service
industry and manufacturing (in sweatshops).

People who have been trafficked for labour exploitation may:

Live in groups in the same place where they work and leave those premises infrequently, if at all

Live in degraded, unsuitable places, such as in agricultural or industrial buildings

Not be dressed adequately for the work they do: for example, they may lack protective equipment or warm clothing

Be given only leftovers to eat

Have no access to their earnings

Have no labour contract

Work excessively long hours

Depend on their employer for a number of services, including work, transportation and accommodation

Have no choice of accommodation

Never leave the work premises without their employer

Be unable to move freely

Be subject to security measures designed to keep them on the work premises

Be disciplined through fines

Be subjected to insults, abuse, threats or violence

Lack basic training and professional licences

The following might also indicate that people have been trafficked for labour exploitation:

Notices have been posted in languages other than the local language, except for key notices on health and safety, for example.

There are no health and safety notices.

The employer or manager is unable to show the documents required for employing workers from other countries.

The employer or manager is unable to show records of wages paid to workers.

The health and safety equipment is of poor quality or is missing.

Equipment is designed or has been modified so that it can be operated by children.

There is evidence that labour laws are being breached.

There is evidence that workers must pay for tools, food or accommodation or that those costs are being deducted from their wages.​

​

UN Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons - Tool 6.7

Working conditions

The terms of the employment contract or verbal agreement are not respected by the employer or the person was forced to sign a new contract upon arrival in the receiving country.

The person is forced to perform tasks for which he or she was not recruited and/or which are not stipulated in the employment contract.

The person is working excessive or irregular hours. The person is given no/insufficient leisure time.

The person is exposed to occupational risks which compromise his or her health and safety. The worker is not provided with protective gear or equipment.

The person is not provided with occupational health and safety information or training in his or her own language. The information and training provided are inadequate.

The person is not paid for the work he or she does or the payment is delayed.

The person is underpaid compared to wages promised or to the national minimum wage, where applicable.

Significant deductions are made from the salary (i.e. to pay for placement fees or in the form of “compulsory savings”).

The person is denied benefits which he or she is entitled to (i.e. paid holiday, sick leave, maternity leave).

Medical care is not provided or is inadequate (health-care information and services are inaccessible or do not meet the person’s needs).

Mandatory medical testing, pregnancy tests, forced abortion have been performed on the person/contraceptives were given by force.

The person was dismissed without cause, notice and/or benefits.

The person is accommodated in the same place as he or she works, against his or her will.​

​

Did anyone gloss over forced abortions in this list ^ ^ ^


UN - Online Edition - Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons

 

[Takin Time]

Mandatory medical testing, pregnancy tests, forced abortion have been performed on the person/contraceptives were given by force.

That ^^^^^

 

[degraded being]

OSA attention David Miscaivige attention

Obama been talkin about abortion debate today?


Does some high minded representative of the church of scientology want to get some volunteer ministers and some celebs to make public comments about that? If they can get someone to see that the rpf detainess don't escape while such good works are being done?

 

[Goodbye]

I'm starting to get the idea that Goodbye never intended to make a solid argument regarding human trafficking. I think Goodbye intended to derail and aggravate us.

If pointing out there is no basis, legal or otherwise for "human trafficking" aggrevates you, so be it.

Actually, the Merry-Go-Ron I meant was playing with the hackneyed PR spin cycle. Which I'm overly familiar with.

There are at least 2 Spin cycles, the second one predominantly on these boards. I am not interested in either, and if anything I state is interpreted as belonging to 1 or the other, its neither here nor there to me, since I call it as I see it. Make out of it whatever you like.

Looks like there is no point in digging up and re-posting here more old threads on the topic of Human Trafficking in Scientology for Goodbye to read, because Goodbye is very obviously here just to distract, confuse and obfuscate.

You would like to believe there is a case for "Human Trafficking" when there isn't. Whatever has been cited, or blah-blah references to older threads also does not add up to it. There is no legal, or other basis for it, and nothing conrete whatsoever.

Aside from what I have already mentioned on previous posts, CO$ can produce thousands of statements from EX-SO Members which refute these claims of "Human Trafficking".

Sorry, there is not even as much as a shred of a case for "Human Trafficking", and little more to it then a few people simply agreeing on that point. But that's neither here nor there either.

There may well be labor related issues, but that is an entirely different issue, and I have not commented on that.

 

[Takin Time]

GBye attempts to use "tone scale" to diffuse the thread. Feigns tone level "boredom" in attempt to thwart perceived tone level "antagonism".

To wit:

If pointing out there is no basis, legal or otherwise for "human trafficking" aggrevates you, so be it.

There are at least 2 Spin cycles, the second one predominantly on these boards. I am not interested in either, and if anything I state is interpreted as belonging to 1 or the other, its neither here nor there to me, since I call it as I see it. Make out of it whatever you like.

Then GB continues...

You would like to believe there is a case for "Human Trafficking" when there isn't. Whatever has been cited, or blah-blah references to older threads also does not add up to it. There is no legal, or other basis for it, and nothing conrete whatsoever.

Aside from what I have already mentioned on previous posts, CO$ can produce thousands of statements from EX-SO Members which refute these claims of "Human Trafficking".

Sorry, there is not even as much as a shred of a case for "Human Trafficking", and little more to it then a few people simply agreeing on that point. But that's neither here nor there either.

There may well be labor related issues, but that is an entirely different issue, and I have not commented on that.

In response to red...

No amount of "I never saw it!" will ever be considered "evidence" to contradict the happening of labor trafficking in the Church of Scientology.

The only evidence acceptable will be personal testimonies of those to whom it happened and from those who saw it happen.

I am one such witness. I'll gladly sit on the stand and testify.

GBye, you can go tell your handlers that the time is getting closer to them having to defend their position to authorities on the matter of labor trafficking. Unfortunately for CofS, they are too large and too set in their ways to effectively change their procedures to a NON labor trafficking situation before the authorities catch up with them. They will be caught with their pants down before they can buy a new set of trousers.

 

[Alanzo]

I was a troll, too, Goodbye.

I defended my Church of Scientology on the Internet over and over until I got sick of all the manipulative lying, and the constant losing.

You will, too.

Then we'll all have a creme soda and laugh and laugh together.

Because Scientology can not stand up to scrutiny. You are definitely intelligent, and an admirable, if slippery, debater. But you just can't win debating the side of Scientology.

Someday it will all be funny to you, like it is to me.

I hope that day comes for you soon.

 

[skollie]

Wow - it's so sad reading your posts, Goodbye. I guess it's a really good example of what the COS can do to people.
There are so many people here who will help you when you're ready to get out - all you need to do is ask. Hopefully someday (soon) you'll be able to see what they have done to you.

 

[degraded being]

The Church of scientology and human trafficking.

David Miscaivige and Human trafficking

The Sea Organization and human trafficking.

Observation.

Yes, by the evidence presented, I think human trafficking
occurs in scientology. Especially in the Sea Organization.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Actually worse than human trafficking.. As noted: The victims are caught up in it much longer. They have much more difficulty acting in their own interest and they loose much more money, than the victims of 'ordinary' human trafficking. The mental consequences are more serious as well..

Scientology seems to think that this means that they are not enganging in human trafficking! - That the operation is at an intirely different level 'above' that? - So the legislation doesn't apply?

Amusing....

 

[OTBT]

The Church of scientology and human trafficking.

David Miscavige and Human trafficking

The Sea Organization and human trafficking.

Observation.

Yes, by the evidence presented, I think human trafficking
occurs in scientology. Especially in the Sea Organization.

With apologies to OP, I think that ^ ^ ^ cognition is the EP of this thread.

 

[Feral]

No apologies neccesary.

I'm happy with that.