In Turkey they have a hotline which clients can call if they think a girl is trafficked.
Printable View
I think this sums up what many of us think of such "rescue" organisations. They are in it, not to "save" fallen women, but to promote their own glory, to polish their souls.
You could call it cognitive dissonance; it's easier to think of it as the difference between the expressed and the espoused positions. That is, listen to what we say, ignore what we do; for what we really believe in isn't the message that we want to get across. Yet politicians accept what they are told at face value when it suits their agendas; and their agendas are informed by such pressure groups. And the result? Clause 6, the Swedish model is passed in N Ireland on the basis it seems, of anecdotal evidence of harm, while the results of a survey, however much the methodology of such surveys can be criticised (and recognised), is totally ignored.
It makes it very difficult for us to know what is fact and what is fiction; there are awful stories around of women who describe their trafficking. Yet, while Rachel Moran describes hers, Gay Dalton (?is that the right name) denies that it could have happened. Who are we to believe? Likewise, "Anna", in the Irish Sun today; can we believe her, or will someone come forward to refute it? And Somaly Mam in Thailand, with her "rescue centre", now recognised as a sham.
And if these stories are fabricated or embellished, why do Ruhama, TORL etc continue to promote them? Cannot they see that sooner or later such stories, if fabricated etc, will be demolished.
My apologies, she is Gaye Dalton.
You can read her response to Rachel Moran here:
http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2...11/played-out/