No, but at this point an extremely restrictive permit quota needs to be established (in conjunction with international law, of course) for certain “at risk” countries. We cannot lump Haitians, Chinese, Americans, Canadians, Africans or Jamaicans together and apply one immigration rule over all of them. Our immigration laws need to be more advanced.The citizens of each of these countries present a distinctly different challenge. If records show that a country has a large immigration population base in The Bahamas already, a mandate that a work permit cannot be given for more than 5 years needs to be set, in addition to a special law that the children of the holder of this 5 year work permit are NOT eligible for citizenship. This ensures that others get the opportunity to work in this country and also limits the amount of children that they will have, knowing that they cannot simply plant themselves here permanently. They will have to leave for a specified time and return home with their spouse and any children that they've had while here. If they violate this 5 year rule and do not leave, they automatically void any future possibility of residency or citizenship. We must protect the sovereignty of our nation. We cannot expect to give out 2000-3000 NEW work permits each year to citizens of certain countries and grant their multiple children automatic citizenship without expecting our own native culture to be circumvented and replaced. Regardless of international law, a country has a right to protect its sovereignty. At this point for The Bahamas, it's a matter of National Security.

Also from this point forward, any persons found to be illegal in this country would be fingerprinted (since they have broken our laws) and are not allowed to get permits or citizenship indefinitely. This also applies to any children that they have who were born here during that illegal time period.

There is a proper procedure to be followed when asylum is applied for. This would involve immediately registering themselves at the Haitian embassy AND the Immigration Department here in Nassau once they get to our shores. Those who do not follow these guidelines are only looking to take advantage of our system and the FULL weight of the law needs to be applied to them.

Moon Angel, even the asylum law has its rules. You have been defending persons who do not want to live in full view of the rules and regulations of this Commonwealth of The Bahamas. They cannot expect to get here illegally, live for a few years and then say that they want asylum after they are caught. It doesn’t work like that. Unless they legitimately register themselves, The Bahamas has the right to send them back to the country of their origin.

OK, you've clarified that, but bear in mind that major developments are in the works (or have already begun) on a few of our major islands. Bahamians will have choices within the next 5-10 years. What you're talking about has already started to happen. Look at Exuma, for example.



Yeah, but the majority of those persons at Guantanamo Bay are suspected terrorists, not immigrants. You are bringing in an argument that cannot be applied to the immigrant situation. If GB was exclusively an immigrant base, then yes, your point would be valid.

We should look to the US, because some of their systems work. I was given a work permit for that country years ago and when it expired, I made sure to get my behind off of their soil. I knew that if I stayed, that I would void any future chance of traveling to or working in that country ever again. Once people are absolutely clear of what will happen to them if they break the laws, they often follow them, if they have RESPECT for that country.

One additional point that I must make (yet again) is that we are dealing with persons who are coming from a lawless, violent society. Do we really want to openly introduce that element into these peaceful shores? As I said before, we are already seeing quite a few warnings signs. Canadians, Americans, Chinese and even Jamaicans do not have large illegal communites here in The Bahamas, nor do they present a growing threat of riotous violence. Many Bahamians are deep in denial and because of the unhindered immigrant situation we now have a generation of Bahamians of Haitian descent, some of whom have little or no loyalty to this country. They have our faces, but are being used to open the immigration gap wider for those in Haiti. Some of these "Bahamians" speak of injustice and prejudice, while simultaneously approving of the continuous flow of illegal immigrants to this nation. To date I have not seen one Haitian official who lives here or Bahamian of Haitian descent who will openly chastise their own for breaking the laws of what is now "their" country! If that's the kind of Bahamian that we have living in this society, then this problem will never be solved.

If you're Bahamian, then you are foresworn to abide by Bahamian law and to uphold those laws. Anything less is treasonous. As they say though, blood is thicker than water, so can we blame them? This why the law must do its job and harshly penalize Bahamians who attempt to thwart our immigration regulations. This country is teetering on a threshold which, once crossed, will change the face of this country forever - literally and figuratively.

My vote next election will go to the party who deals with this immigrant situation. That's the only thing that I am voting on and I'll even campaign for whatever party that solidifies a proper plan of action. That's my word.





And here I thought I was the Drama Queen, clearly, I was mistaken.

So, before the Hatians came the Bahamas was this utopia, right? Those damn Haitians came here and disobeyed all of our laws. I wonder why even have laws if they can’t abide by it, cuz ya know they all violent.

Why do people riot? Don’t tell me, they’re just uncivilized and lawless aren’t they? Or could it be that they are venting built up frustration left by the scars of discrimination. Discrimination because they are different. 　Take a good look at France. Now, you’ve lived in the US, surely you must have experienced some form of discrimination.
Now, am I justifying rioting, no. I’m merely stating what might cause it.

WTF??? what does her 'passion' for child-bearing have to do with either of you???? i also wonder why poor people have children, but guess what??its THEIR choice. you need not have an opinion missy! :sparky:

Easy, now! Hope you haven't taken leave of your senses or something! I would think that if the majority of those people are illegal and poor, they should at least have the sense to practise birth control.

Right now even Bahamians are pactising birth control, some of whom can AFFORD to have more children!

One time (a long time ago) my youngest sister asked our mother Why she had so many of us. She said our mother told her not to get in God's business! [LOL]. But hey, we are Bahamians!!!

No, but at this point an extremely restrictive permit quota needs to be established (in conjunction with international law, of course) for certain “at risk” countries. We cannot lump Haitians, Chinese, Americans, Canadians, Africans or Jamaicans together and apply one immigration rule over all of them. Our immigration laws need to be more advanced.The citizens of each of these countries present a distinctly different challenge. If records show that a country has a large immigration population base in The Bahamas already, a mandate that a work permit cannot be given for more than 5 years needs to be set, in addition to a special law that the children of the holder of this 5 year work permit are NOT eligible for citizenship. This ensures that others get the opportunity to work in this country and also limits the amount of children that they will have, knowing that they cannot simply plant themselves here permanently. They will have to leave for a specified time and return home with their spouse and any children that they've had while here. If they violate this 5 year rule and do not leave, they automatically void any future possibility of residency or citizenship. We must protect the sovereignty of our nation. We cannot expect to give out 2000-3000 NEW work permits each year to citizens of certain countries and grant their multiple children automatic citizenship without expecting our own native culture to be circumvented and replaced. Regardless of international law, a country has a right to protect its sovereignty. At this point for The Bahamas, it's a matter of National Security.

Also from this point forward, any persons found to be illegal in this country would be fingerprinted (since they have broken our laws) and are not allowed to get permits or citizenship indefinitely. This also applies to any children that they have who were born here during that illegal time period.

There is a proper procedure to be followed when asylum is applied for. This would involve immediately registering themselves at the Haitian embassy AND the Immigration Department here in Nassau once they get to our shores. Those who do not follow these guidelines are only looking to take advantage of our system and the FULL weight of the law needs to be applied to them.

Moon Angel, even the asylum law has its rules. You have been defending persons who do not want to live in full view of the rules and regulations of this Commonwealth of The Bahamas. They cannot expect to get here illegally, live for a few years and then say that they want asylum after they are caught. It doesn’t work like that. Unless they legitimately register themselves, The Bahamas has the right to send them back to the country of their origin.

OK, you've clarified that, but bear in mind that major developments are in the works (or have already begun) on a few of our major islands. Bahamians will have choices within the next 5-10 years. What you're talking about has already started to happen. Look at Exuma, for example.



Yeah, but the majority of those persons at Guantanamo Bay are suspected terrorists, not immigrants. You are bringing in an argument that cannot be applied to the immigrant situation. If GB was exclusively an immigrant base, then yes, your point would be valid.

We should look to the US, because some of their systems work. I was given a work permit for that country years ago and when it expired, I made sure to get my behind off of their soil. I knew that if I stayed, that I would void any future chance of traveling to or working in that country ever again. Once people are absolutely clear of what will happen to them if they break the laws, they often follow them, if they have RESPECT for that country.

One additional point that I must make (yet again) is that we are dealing with persons who are coming from a lawless, violent society. Do we really want to openly introduce that element into these peaceful shores? As I said before, we are already seeing quite a few warnings signs. Canadians, Americans, Chinese and even Jamaicans do not have large illegal communites here in The Bahamas, nor do they present a growing threat of riotous violence. Many Bahamians are deep in denial and because of the unhindered immigrant situation we now have a generation of Bahamians of Haitian descent, some of whom have little or no loyalty to this country. They have our faces, but are being used to open the immigration gap wider for those in Haiti. Some of these "Bahamians" speak of injustice and prejudice, while simultaneously approving of the continuous flow of illegal immigrants to this nation. To date I have not seen one Haitian official who lives here or Bahamian of Haitian descent who will openly chastise their own for breaking the laws of what is now "their" country! If that's the kind of Bahamian that we have living in this society, then this problem will never be solved.

If you're Bahamian, then you are foresworn to abide by Bahamian law and to uphold those laws. Anything less is treasonous. As they say though, blood is thicker than water, so can we blame them? This why the law must do its job and harshly penalize Bahamians who attempt to thwart our immigration regulations. This country is teetering on a threshold which, once crossed, will change the face of this country forever - literally and figuratively.

My vote next election will go to the party who deals with this immigrant situation. That's the only thing that I am voting on and I'll even campaign for whatever party that solidifies a proper plan of action. That's my word.



YEAH. What he said.

Its so simple, It just might work!

bahamianz are barbarianz now?

:shaky: LOL
You took what I said out of context. I never said Bahamians.I just don't appreciate Yorricks opinion it is one sided! Please understand and don't switch my words.

I would think that if the majority of those people are illegal and poor, they should at least have the sense to practise birth control.

hmmmm, would be equally as nice if young bahamian girls practiced birth control too....they cant stop poppin (but i know what you will say...theyre in their country....ladadada...) bored of going in circles. :taped2:

Goodness, gracious! This is really bending over backwards WAY too far!!!
I for one would rather break or smash that so-called International law into smithereens and suffer the consequences than allow a bunch of rag tag illegals to completely destroy our Bahamaland! No way Hosay!!!
Why should we imitate those other countries who allowed themselves to become overcrowded!? We'd be even fooler than they to follow their example.
I can't for the life of me understand why we should obey a law which would or could eventually allow our country to be ruined!!! :dgi:

:eek:

And here I thought I was the Drama Queen, clearly, I was mistaken.
So, before the Hatians came the Bahamas was this utopia, right?

Now look where you've attempted to go. Yes, The Bahamas had its problems before this influx of illegal immigrants and it will have problems after.

But ya know what? They are OUR problems, not ones caused and created by foreign persons. This is a point that you must understand.


Why do people riot? Don’t tell me, they’re just uncivilized and lawless aren’t they?

So you obviously think that Haiti is a law-abiding, crime free country right now. Would you take a large group of people from Kemp Road and allow them to move freely into Lyford Cay without finding out whether they are willing to abide by the rules of that community? No.

It sounds discriminatory, but if you're really honest with yourself, you would know that what I am saying has definite logic. There is a social standard that must be upheld in this country. Allowing large groups of immigrants from an impoverished country to create their own illegal slums does have an effect on our general society. These areas never should have been allowed to grow to the extent they are today. Any immigrant to this country should, as a requirement of their permit, legally find and be expected to maintain a certain way of life. Health and Bulding Codes were created for this purpose.


Now, you’ve lived in the US, surely you must have experienced some form of discrimination.
Oh yes, I experienced several instances of the worst forms of discrimination over there. However, there was an obvious awareness that I was not in my own country. I obeyed the laws and rules and made sure that I gave respect to figures of authority when necessary.

Overall, both Bahamians and Haitians who live in the Mudd need to all admit that they are living illegally on that land and make an organized move to other occupancies within the general area. Their boldness in breaking the housing and land laws of this country is amazing. What's even more amazing is the government's allowance of this behaviour.

Every Haitian (legal or illegal) in this country has the power in their hands to show Bahamians that they are only here to better themselves. The first step is to leave their illegal dwellings and incorporate themselves into general society. What kind of opinions do they expect to create when many of them hide themselves away in the back of the bush or in the midst of unsafe illegal slums? Either they are doing this because they do not want to mix with Bahamians and Bahamian society, except to take our money, or they are using the cover of their illegal communities for illegal purposes. And to think that they left Haiti to get away from that type of living.

The Cubans are accepted in the US as political refugees at the urging of a massive Cuban (Republican) lobby group. Also to be able to claim that status the US has a 'wet foot / dry foot' policy in that the refugee has to set foot on US soil. If they are caught on a boat, swimming, or knee deep in water they are repatriated quickly without any real process.


So if the Haitians do not qualify as political refugees in the USA, they cannot qualify for political refugee status in the Bahamas. George Bush Sr. use to turn them around in the middle of the ocean. We should adopt that approach. (with a little food and water ofcourse)

So if the Haitians do not qualify as political refugees in the USA, they cannot qualify for political refugee status in the Bahamas. George Bush Sr. use to turn them around in the middle of the ocean. We should adopt that approach. (with a little food and water ofcourse)

:biggie: what the hell are you talking about??? GB Snr didnt turn them back because they werent political refugees!!! that was the WHOLE ISSUE. that policy precluded that they would not have asylum claims WITHOUT assessing them! this was why their was outrage!:hot:

For reference, the term "refugee", shall apply to any person who:

As a result of events occurring before I January 1951 and owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

But this Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or

(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily reacquired it; or (this is why Haitians here do not want their Haitian Passports)

(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or

(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or

(5) He can no longer, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; (This is why the UN is having such a hard time stabilizing Haiti. They do not want stability. As their country gets on its feet, refugee status will be harder to attain)

Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under section A (I) of this article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality;

(6) Being a person who has no nationality he is, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, able to return to the country of his former habitual residence; (similar to 5 but this is after they lose "status")


The UN is has been more successful in Haiti but: "The general security environment continues to be relatively stable. However, the situation remains volatile and kidnappings continue to be a high risk factor, especially in Port-au-Prince, although their number has been reduced thanks to joint efforts of MINUSTAH and Haitian National Police (HNP)."

CLICK HERE for the latest report (http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/HMYT-6JERQD?OpenDocument)

It's only a matter of time before their elements here begin to clash or we start hearing of kidnappings and other atrocities within their communities here in Nassau.

Yeah Moon Angel, let's just open the door a little bit wider for them, shall we? You have family still here in The Bahamas and yet you still support the influx of illegal persons from this troubled nation?

The safety of Bahamians now and in the future is at stake.

For reference, the term "refugee", shall apply to any person who:

As a result of events occurring before I January 1951 and owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

But this Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or

(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily reacquired it; or (this is why Haitians here do not want their Haitian Passports)

(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or

(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or

(5) He can no longer, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; (This is why the UN is having such a hard time stabilizing Haiti. They do not want stability. As their country gets on its feet, refugee status will be harder to attain)

Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under section A (I) of this article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality;

(6) Being a person who has no nationality he is, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, able to return to the country of his former habitual residence; (similar to 5 but this is after they lose "status")


The UN is has been more successful in Haiti but: "The general security environment continues to be relatively stable. However, the situation remains volatile and kidnappings continue to be a high risk factor, especially in Port-au-Prince, although their number has been reduced thanks to joint efforts of MINUSTAH and Haitian National Police (HNP)."

CLICK HERE for the latest report (http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/HMYT-6JERQD?OpenDocument)

It's only a matter of time before their elements here begin to clash or we start hearing of kidnappings and other atrocities within their communities.

Yeah Moon Angel, let's just open the door a little bit wider for them, shall we? You have family still here in The Bahamas and yet you still support this influx of illegal persons from this troubled nation?

The safety of Bahamians now and in the future is at stake.


i dont quite know where you are going with this Yorick, but i do know you should have spent more time reviewing the definition of who will qualify for refugee status, as opposed to when the convention will cease to apply, simply becuase when determining refugee status, inclusion is the primary issue. exclusion and cessation are secondary. as for the issue of those who fall outside the scope of the convention - well each case is to be dealt with on 'case by case' basis.

your comments are reckless and distorted. you cannot say, 'oh this is why they dont want their haitian passports'! thats pointless. lets just look at the facts:
-based on coi (county of origin info), gang violence and political instability are well documented in haiti;
-they are countless killings, kidnappings, etc - sometimes based on one's political affiliation;
-the bahamas signed the 1951 refugee convention in 1993, thus contracting that it will be (legally) bound by the provisions of the treaty;
-as such, the bahamas has a legal obligation to investigate the claims of those requesting asylum and indeed, must have a structured system in place to deal with such situations;
-the current RBDF 'processing system' (of those apprehended) consists of collecting superficial bio-data on the person, right before repatriation. they claim this procedure is sufficient for determing refugee status, although they lack the human resources and linguistic capabilities to effectively investigate each case. in FACT, the RBDF rarely interview asylum seekers...very often the case is decided on primae facie basis..not to mention asylum seekers are NOT told of their right to claim asylum and have NO recourse to legal advice...in contravention of the convention, might i add.

NOW, thats just the surface. regard the above in light of article 1(a) (ii) of the convention which reads:
"As a result of events occurring before I January 1951 and owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it."

you may think the decision to include people in this group is taken lightly. its not. the asylum seeker has the burden of proof, and many issues must be considered before one is granted refugee status.

again, the problem (i think) in bahamas, is that people continue to confuse the illegal immigration issue with refugee issue. of course they cannot be completely separated, but the issues are different. since we signed the 1951 refugee convention, we have awarded refugee status to less than 25 people (i stand to be corrected-its an average, probably less). not can you explain to me, with the amount of (Haitians in particular) that come to our country illegally - are you saying none of them might have a claim for political asylum? are you saying that, although our neighbours (Jamaica, USA even Cuba...yes, Cuba) have it wrong because even THEY have a higher rate of approval than we do??? dont get me wrong...its not that we shaould be striving to fill refugee quota (or should we?), but you MUST consider: given the amount of immigrants we get & repatriate, compared to those granted asylum - there MUST be something lacking in our refugee policy. im not talking about illegal immigration. im talking about forming an effective, coherent asylum policy which distinguished refugees from illegal immigrants. our current immigration act is so jacked up, it makes no reference to asylum seekers - only criminalises their entry..which subsequently leads to a whole heap disadvantages (like the right to legal advice, imprisonment, fines, etc)...this is wayyyy backward. but i will stop there for tonight, cause im in court in the morning :(

True The Bahamas is a small nation, which can’t absorb a huge influx of immigrants. But perhaps we need to realize that unless there is democratic stability in Haiti, we will continue to have immigrants, who’ll flee their homeland to improve their standard of living. So, simply sending them back will not discourage immigration. Look, Haitians want the same things that you and I do; education, healthcare, employment, sufficient wages (to feed their family), prosperity, peace, justice, political efficacy, etc. Now if they cant get that in their own country, then they will search for it in another, be it the Bahamas, the US, the Dominican Republic, Canada...etc
If The Bahamas really wants to decrease the influx of Haitian immigrants, perhaps, it should work closely with the Haitian Government, other Caribbean nations and UN to help stabilize the country.
A Big Lol @ this Joker.

again, the problem (i think) in bahamas, is that people continue to confuse the illegal immigration issue with refugee issue. of course they cannot be completely separated, but the issues are different. since we signed the 1951 refugee convention, we have awarded refugee status to less than 25 people (i stand to be corrected-its an average, probably less). not can you explain to me, with the amount of (Haitians in particular) that come to our country illegally - are you saying none of them might have a claim for political asylum? are you saying that, although our neighbours (Jamaica, USA even Cuba...yes, Cuba) have it wrong because even THEY have a higher rate of approval than we do??? dont get me wrong...its not that we shaould be striving to fill refugee quota (or should we?), but you MUST consider: given the amount of immigrants we get & repatriate, compared to those granted asylum - there MUST be something lacking in our refugee policy. im not talking about illegal immigration. im talking about forming an effective, coherent asylum policy which distinguished refugees from illegal immigrants. our current immigration act is so jacked up, it makes no reference to asylum seekers - only criminalises their entry..which subsequently leads to a whole heap disadvantages (like the right to legal advice, imprisonment, fines, etc)...this is wayyyy backward. but i will stop there for tonight, cause im in court in the morning :(

Now I see.

Your arguments are based exclusively on separating asylum and immigration issues. Quite frankly though, couldn't almost anyone living in the more violent, high risk portions of Haiti apply for asylum status?

Inclusion is indeed the primary issue in assigning refugee status, but the glaring lack of a proper processing department and the costs included in developing such a venture could be the real reason why the Bahamas doesn't offer this service.

A fairly good number of persons fluent in Haitian Creole would be necessary to interview each and every immigrant to this nation. They then would have to be extensively trained in gathering the necessary information from each applicant. Thus the question arises of the cost incurred by keeping an applicant in the detention center while their asylum status is being determined. The finances involved would be very prohibitive given the number of persons who are caught entering our shores from Haiti. With a new base in the works in Inagua (hopefully) this means that even more will be detained. More persons = more money spent on processing asylum applications, versus simply putting them on a plane and sending them back home.

In addition to the financial challenges, the attitudes of those who have already entered this country illegally would also be prohibitive. They usually hide until they "get straight". Why would they want to risk being sent back due to a failed asylum application when they can simply get a permit and live here as they please?

This matter is a complex one. While I now understand what you are getting at with separating the asylum issue from the immigration one, it is clear that the only time that the processing center would get used is after they are caught. I do not believe that we will have many volunteers, unless they are high profile cases.

The easiest solution to this problem would be the initial processing of all asylum applications in Haiti. Once a Haitian decides to seek status here, they would first have to notify the Bahamian embassy in Haiti before they take any other step towards entering The Bahamas. US embassy workers have just been given permission to go back into that country, so our embassy personnel can return as well. This initial application process would eliminate the costs of developing a processing center here and would make the decision to send Haitian sloops back much easier. RBDF officers would stop Haitian sloops as usual and through satellite technology access the asylum list over the internet while on the seas. They then could instantly board any immigrant who previously applied for asylum status. This can be authenticated by an on-file fingerprint and photo that would have been given at the Bahamian embassy in Haiti. The others on the sloop could immediately be sent back. Perhaps this is the answer while we implement a program for the illegal immigrants who are currently here. I would say that they too should immediately be sent back, but with first priority in applying for asylum status once they arrive in Haiti.

The above solution simplifies the matter a bit, but perhaps there are other considerations of asylum law that would nullify it. Would it be permitted that The Bahamas only allow asylum applications that originate from Haiti? In my limited knowledge, it would be simpler, for the Bahamian embassy in Haiti would have instant access to HNP records, as well as possible eyewitness accounts of threats.

All that should be important to the Bahamian government (pertaining to immigration) is getting a handle on this situation before it gets out of hand. The violent element in Haiti is finding it difficult to thrive with the UN on their backs. They will be looking for newer shores in good time and word on the street is that former Haitian military and police members are already living here in The Bahamas amongst other Haitians. The flow of illegal immigrants must be stemmed and steps taken to ensure that we don't absorb Haiti's more problematic elements. I agree to a minor degree with handling things according to the asylum law, but I can see that it’s going to slow down The Bahamas' efforts against illegal immigration, drastically.

i will stop there for tonight, cause im in court in the morning :(

Did you win?

Did you win?

well its a family case, and they are always ongoing...but we did get the orders we sought, so i guess you can say we 'won'...this time! :cheers: