Americans charged with child trafficking in Haiti.

[The Yosemite Bear]

note the woman has her children's nanny set up in a posh hotel space, with a nice church paid salary (well some of her employee's get paid at least)

makes that rapper's "Charity" work seem down right chairtable

[FSTargetDrone]

note the woman has her children's nanny set up in a posh hotel space, with a nice church paid salary (well some of her employee's get paid at least)

makes that rapper's "Charity" work seem down right chairtable

Shame on me, I missed the "nanny" mention in the WSJ thing I was looking at. Guess the kids aren't home with dad. Heh.

[Broomstick]

What the hell is this woman doing in Haiti, anyway? She is divorced, has all kinds of financial problems AND has 2 "young children" of her own, presumably in the US. They may live with their father, perhaps with a grandparent, but still. An individual with the kind of financial issues she has doesn't belong in a foreign country.

On the other hand, living in Haiti would make it a hell of a lot harder for her creditors and the people suing her to find her, now wouldn't it? She wouldn't be the first person to make a mess of her life then runaway to try and start over elsewhere.

Frankly, these people are damn lucky they aren't being formally charged with kidnapping and child trafficking but are instead legally on the hook for lesser charges. Even a brief time in a Haitian jail can't be fun, but kidnapping carries a life sentence. Being in a Haitian jail and knowing you will NEVER be let out... that's nasty.

I suspect that Silby is the main instigator and many, if not most, of the others were duped by her at least in part. That doesn't mean that what they did was OK, but it could well be a mitigating circumstance. Of course, we don't have all information and my opinion could change if more facts come to light.

[UnderAGreySky]

In a lot of places, getting up to this kind of shit when the whole country is strained for resources could be a fast ticket an appointment with the hangman or a firing squad, foreigner or no. Depending on the place, even more likely if you were a foreigner.

Just toss the bitch in jail and throw away the key.

The thing is, are there any prisons standing in Haiti? And if so, do they have people to take care of them? And IF that is true, can they afford it?

The place where this lot should be is the brig of one of the Naval aid ships. A healthy dose of seasickness along with their confinement won't hurt.

[General Zod]

In a lot of places, getting up to this kind of shit when the whole country is strained for resources could be a fast ticket an appointment with the hangman or a firing squad, foreigner or no. Depending on the place, even more likely if you were a foreigner.

Just toss the bitch in jail and throw away the key.

The thing is, are there any prisons standing in Haiti? And if so, do they have people to take care of them? And IF that is true, can they afford it?

The place where this lot should be is the brig of one of the Naval aid ships. A healthy dose of seasickness along with their confinement won't hurt.

I would expect if they're feeling generous, they'll imprison their leader and deport the rest, permanently barring them from re-entry.

[Edi]

In a lot of places, getting up to this kind of shit when the whole country is strained for resources could be a fast ticket an appointment with the hangman or a firing squad, foreigner or no. Depending on the place, even more likely if you were a foreigner.

Just toss the bitch in jail and throw away the key.

The thing is, are there any prisons standing in Haiti? And if so, do they have people to take care of them? And IF that is true, can they afford it?

The place where this lot should be is the brig of one of the Naval aid ships. A healthy dose of seasickness along with their confinement won't hurt.

That's just the thing: There aren't any prisons intact at least in the PaP area, so they can't even imprison murderers and other similar thugs. The naval aid ships have limited brig space and if they're flying a foreign flag, all kinds of jurisdiction issues would rear their ugly heads when we're talking about a foreign citizen, ending with a tug of war on who gets to deal with them.

In that kind of a situation instituting martial law and simply executing people for serious crimes after a short hearing would not be unreasonable if the evidence is clear. Or putting them on chain gangs to clear the rubble.

A big part of the problem here is (again) that Westerners are simply far too used to the idea that the laws of non-Western countries simply don't apply to them by virtue of their home country. Which is exactly why Singapore, China and other countries tend to execute Westerners caught committing serious crimes in face of pleas for mercy just to make a point.

Were I running things in Haiti, I'd be tempted to do just that with Silby and the best she could expect from me would be a lifetime of forced labor clearing away the destruction of the earthquake. With that solution I could point out the death penalty opponents wouldn't even have anything to go on.

[Edi]

I would expect if they're feeling generous, they'll imprison their leader and deport the rest, permanently barring them from re-entry.

Yep. Make an example of the ringleader and toss the rest out.

[Korto]

I'm inclined to be generous and believe that they sincerely felt they were doing "The Lord's Work" and earthly concerns came secondary to such a Sacred Crusade. That they honestly believed they were doing the right thing.

Of course, the same thing can be said about the bloody Inquisition.

The fact that they were repeatedly warned destroys any mitigating factor of ignorance. According to the TV news I heard about it, they were repeatedly knocked back by orphanages in the city (the people in charge were saying "It stank to us. Where was their paperwork?"), and ended up going to some destroyed village out of town where they got mothers to agree to have their children taken away out of the mess. This, if true, seems to me to be the most evil form of opportunism; you have parents with no house, no food, no water, lives destroyed desperate, and then telling them that they'll take their kids away somewhere safe, and they'll be able to see them again one day.
Lovely airy-fairy verbal promise. How would these people chase them up on it?

[Broomstick]

The fact that they were repeatedly warned destroys any mitigating factor of ignorance. According to the TV news I heard about it, they were repeatedly knocked back by orphanages in the city (the people in charge were saying "It stank to us. Where was their paperwork?")

I can't help but think that they looked at the Haitians and thought: black, poor... they must be ignorant, too. Even illiterate people know about official documents, and despite poor educational systems in Haiti it would be foolish to assume random people you meet are illiterate, or stupid, or lazy, or unaware of larger issues than merely filling their bellies.

Virtually all Haitians have slaves among their ancestors. They are aware of kidnapping and people trafficking as it is a real and present danger in their lives. They're a little hypersensitive on the subject, and why shouldn't they be? In many cases the only thing a Haitian has, the only thing that can be relied on is family... of course they fear someone stealing their children away.

[PKRudeBoy]

How about the fact that many parents would be more than happy to get their kids out of the country? Parents may very well be willing to give up their children to both ease the burden on themselves and to give the child the possibility of a better life. Now, if it is demonstrated that, in fact, they were operating a trafficking ring, then yes, they should get the max, but if it does turn out to be an imbecilic mistake, then it would probably be best for them to let them go with a slap on the wrist. Countries like China and Singapore can get away with meting out harsh punishments to westerners who break their laws because they don't give a rat's ass about other countries public opinion towards them, but Haiti doesn't have that luxury at the moment. It's ability to function at the moment is almost completely dependent on the goodwill of other countries, and a harsh punishment, if it is seen as undeserved by the public in other countries, could result in another catastrophe for Haiti, as relief money slows to a trickle, and aid workers leave. So, while some of you may wish for unbridled punishment to be rained down onto missionaries/alleged child traffickers, unless they find very strong evidence that they were doing this with malicious intent, I wouldn't count on it.

[Anguirus]

Ok, now THIS smells.

SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic – Preparations for the provisional release of 10 Americans detained in Haiti on child kidnapping charges may be on hold after questions arose about a Dominican man who served as their legal adviser.

Officials in the Dominican Republic said Jorge Puello did not have a license to practice law in his native country, and The New York Times reported the Haitian judge might delay the group's release because of questions about the adviser's possible links to a human-trafficking case.

Puello has been a high-profile advocate for the jailed Baptists as they navigate the Haitian justice system. He also now is in apparent violation of Dominican law for failing to register with the local bar association or obtain a license, said Jose Parra, vice president of the Dominican Lawyers Association.

Parra said his organization was investigating the situation and might file a complaint with the Justice Department, which could pursue criminal charges.

Puello declined to comment in a brief telephone interview, saying he would be busy in court representing a U.S. firm seeking to establish a business in the Dominican Republic. He could not be located in court and did not return later phone calls.

The Web site for Puello Consulting says it has offered "full legal services" for businesses in the Dominican Republic and elsewhere since 2005. The site was taken down Friday for unknown reasons.

The New York Times first reported that authorities in El Salvador are investigating whether Puello is a man suspected of leading a trafficking ring in that country involving Central American and Caribbean women and girls.

The newspaper reported that police said his picture appeared to match that of a suspected trafficker.

Puello denied any connection to trafficking in an interview with the newspaper and said he had never been to El Salvador.

Police Commissioner Howard Cotto, deputy director of investigations for the Salvadoran national police, told The Associated Press on Friday that authorities would need to compare fingerprints before they could determine if Puello was the man being investigated.

Late Friday, the Times quoted Haitian Judge Bernard Saint-Vil as saying that before he can let the Americans out of jail he must learn more about Puello.

The judge previously recommended provisional release for the group while their case is investigated.

"I am working as fast as I can, but I must first understand Mr. Puello," the Times quoted the judge as saying Friday.

The Americans were detained in Haiti for allegedly trying to take 33 children out of the country without proper authorization following the country's Jan. 12 earthquake.

Although the judge has recommended provisional release for the Americans, all 10 remain jailed pending a response from the prosecutor. The prosecutor has said he will respond next week.

Puello had said last week that nine of the 10 were about to be released, and he told reporters Wednesday the Haitian court was going to drop all charges against his clients.

Sean Lankford of Meridian, Idaho, whose wife and daughter are among those detained, said Puello provided his services for free.

"He's really shown himself to be completely trustworthy, and I truly believe he has done everything to help our people and to help us," he said in a telephone interview from Idaho.

Lankford said Puello contacted relatives of the Americans to volunteer his services.

Lawyers for another of the detained Americans, Jim Allen of Amarillo, Texas, issued a statement saying that Puello does not represent or speak for their client. They appealed to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to personally intervene in the case.

The lawyers said Allen came to Haiti on two days' notice to help the country recover from the earthquake. "No one benefits from Jim languishing in difficult conditions in a Haitian prison," the statement said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100213/ap_ ... _americans

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Well, it looks now like there's a possibility Silsby didn't just dupe the others but was herself a dupe for an actual child smuggling ring. And why not convince some stupid, naive Idaho farmgirl filled with love for Christ Jesus to fly to a foreign country and 'rescue' orphans from it, taking them to another one where some 'random criminals' can show up and pack them off into crates for shipping for child prostitution purposes or something else heinous like that? Certainly they'd be less likely to get caught than actual criminals and might be able to bluff their way out without proper documents. And of course Silsby brings her friends along and things grow from there. Though it's just all speculation at this point, but I really don't want that idiot getting out of jail one way or another; if she does, she might reproduce. The others should be slapped with fines worth 100,000 USD each (to help pay for reconstruction) and released and kicked out permanently and back to the states, only when the US government promises to hold them accountable for paying said fines.

[Broomstick]

Though it's just all speculation at this point, but I really don't want that idiot getting out of jail one way or another; if she does, she might reproduce.

Too late, she already did.

[The Yosemite Bear]

"Stop persecuting us for our faith" no they should be prosecuted for being part of a slavery ring....

do people have any understanding of history?

[Broomstick]

Of course not. Modern history isn't in the Bible.

[Rogue 9]

I also just saw a similar article to the one on Silby, and I won't reproduce it here because it's basically the same as yours, except this one has this little gem:

According to a document from Ms. Silsby and Ms. Coulter describing New Life, it is "dedicated to rescuing, loving and caring for orphaned, abandoned and impoverished Haitian and Dominican children, demonstrating God's love and helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Christ."

Emphasis mine.

With the above and the stuff from your articles, there is no doubt at all what plans they had in mind for these kids, eh?

Let's pretend that it isn't as bloody obvious as you say it is. So how about you tell us what nefarious plans that statement means they doubtlessly had in mind?

[Darth Wong]

Let's pretend that it isn't as bloody obvious as you say it is. So how about you tell us what nefarious plans that statement means they doubtlessly had in mind?

Tell me, if you replace "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Christ" with "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Scientology", does it sound any creepier?

[Rogue 9]

Let's pretend that it isn't as bloody obvious as you say it is. So how about you tell us what nefarious plans that statement means they doubtlessly had in mind?

Tell me, if you replace "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Christ" with "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Scientology", does it sound any creepier?

Yes, because I know how Scientology treats children in general; Hubbard's teachings state that they are simply miniature adults and they are therefore expected to work as such. In short, that would in fact mean they planned on what amounts to slave labor. I would not have any such reservations about a statement regarding raising them in the teachings of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any of a number of other religious and philosophical beliefs, since none of those essentially automatically mean mistreatment of the children.

What I'm getting at is that as far as I can tell the statement essentially tells us nothing we didn't already know; they're missionaries, for crying out loud. Who honestly thought that they'd run an orphanage and not have prayer services and generally raise the children to believe in Christian teachings? How does one of them saying "a new life in Christ" suddenly make the whole thing more or less sinister than it already was?

[Darth Wong]

Let's pretend that it isn't as bloody obvious as you say it is. So how about you tell us what nefarious plans that statement means they doubtlessly had in mind?

Tell me, if you replace "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Christ" with "helping each child find healing, hope, joy and new life in Scientology", does it sound any creepier?

Yes, because I know how Scientology treats children in general; Hubbard's teachings state that they are simply miniature adults and they are therefore expected to work as such. In short, that would in fact mean they planned on what amounts to slave labor. I would not have any such reservations about a statement regarding raising them in the teachings of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any of a number of other religious and philosophical beliefs, since none of those essentially automatically mean mistreatment of the children.

What I'm getting at is that as far as I can tell the statement essentially tells us nothing we didn't already know; they're missionaries, for crying out loud. Who honestly thought that they'd run an orphanage and not have prayer services and generally raise the children to believe in Christian teachings? How does one of them saying "a new life in Christ" suddenly make the whole thing more or less sinister than it already was?

In other words, you're more comfortable with the exact same sentiment when it comes from a Christian, and you have a lot of bullshit explanations for why it's totally different. Gotcha.

[The Yosemite Bear]

plus the whole Haitian Catholics are really devil worshippers bull shit.

hey at least we haven't heard about those catholic priests fucking little kids.

[Rogue 9]

Yes, because I know how Scientology treats children in general; Hubbard's teachings state that they are simply miniature adults and they are therefore expected to work as such. In short, that would in fact mean they planned on what amounts to slave labor. I would not have any such reservations about a statement regarding raising them in the teachings of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any of a number of other religious and philosophical beliefs, since none of those essentially automatically mean mistreatment of the children.

What I'm getting at is that as far as I can tell the statement essentially tells us nothing we didn't already know; they're missionaries, for crying out loud. Who honestly thought that they'd run an orphanage and not have prayer services and generally raise the children to believe in Christian teachings? How does one of them saying "a new life in Christ" suddenly make the whole thing more or less sinister than it already was?

In other words, you're more comfortable with the exact same sentiment when it comes from a Christian, and you have a lot of bullshit explanations for why it's totally different. Gotcha.

First, that's a load of shit and you know it; you even quoted me stating I'd be just as comfortable with any number of non-Christian beliefs and organizations that aren't known for systematic child exploitation. You deliberately chose an example that any rational person would have perfectly good reasons to be less comfortable with so you could say what you did when I gave the obvious answer. Second, that still doesn't address my original point, which was that it doesn't offer new information, since the statement he's so concerned about is essentially a statement of what missionaries do, and therefore tells us nothing we didn't already know the instant we read the word "missionary."

I am not defending the missionaries' behavior. What they were doing shipping the children around without documentation is already creepy enough; what I'm trying to figure out is how those words compound it in any meaningful way. FSTargetDrone stated that the sentence he emphasized suddenly made clear some sort of plan they had for the children, when from what I read, it doesn't make anything clearer than it already was. Personally, I'd like to hear what he's got to say about it, since it's his meaning that's unclear.

[Darth Wong]

In other words, you're more comfortable with the exact same sentiment when it comes from a Christian, and you have a lot of bullshit explanations for why it's totally different. Gotcha.

First, that's a load of shit and you know it; you even quoted me stating I'd be just as comfortable with any number of non-Christian beliefs and organizations that aren't known for systematic child exploitation. You deliberately chose an example that any rational person would have perfectly good reasons to be less comfortable with so you could say what you did when I gave the obvious answer.

You're full of shit. There is absolutely no reason to declare that Scientology is categorically more dangerous for children than Christianity is, and if you think there is one, you'd better give me a lot more evidence than vague generalizations or scary anecdotes that you know you could match from the Christian world if you tried.

Second, that still doesn't address my original point, which was that it doesn't offer new information, since the statement he's so concerned about is essentially a statement of what missionaries do, and therefore tells us nothing we didn't already know the instant we read the word "missionary."

I am not defending the missionaries' behavior. What they were doing shipping the children around without documentation is already creepy enough; what I'm trying to figure out is how those words compound it in any meaningful way. FSTargetDrone stated that the sentence he emphasized suddenly made clear some sort of plan they had for the children, when from what I read, it doesn't make anything clearer than it already was. Personally, I'd like to hear what he's got to say about it, since it's his meaning that's unclear.

It means they intend to take the children away and indoctrinate them in their beliefs, obviously. Missionaries tend to do that, but usually without actually taking the children away.