...and the seashores where she dwells are not real seashores i'm sure.
The Dame is back. The article is here. I toyed with the idea of not commenting since I feel there should be some solidarity with regards to the subject, but I think that an article that kicked off solidly degenerated into fantasy and Dameisms without warning.
So. I had quite forgotten about the possibility of coming across a Lorna thingy on Thursdays. I opened the Times site as per usual clicking directly into the opinion section. My heart leapt with joy as I noticed the notorious name and surname included as one of the contributors among today's opinion churners. The title was as enigmatic as ever "The Second Cause". We will never understand why these three words were chosen to adorn this piece ("the" is surely there in its normal role as a definite article, although it is still unsure what it is being so definite about).
Then came the article per se (forgive me but I always feel that a "per se" is necessary when dealing with the Dame). It turns out to be another passionate appeal to try and get the international community to do something about the irregular immigration issue. As I said earlier I almost felt duty bound to let sleeping grammar lie and allow this article to join the ranks of barkers egging all powers that be on towards a solution. But... I can resist anything except temptation and it was too too large.
Like a scrotum here it is in a nutshell... Lorna is trying to come up with a solution for us to follow. Having ascertained that the Nobel Prize for Literature is within her grasp, TGIL has turned her attention to the Nobel Prize for Peace. Following a brilliant exposé of the main issues and participants we are regaled with a solution sans pareil that will make Salvu Sammut cringe in his Presidential pants. With a lateral thinking summersault worthy of Edward De Bono, TGIL tells us that we focus too much on territory. The equation is as follows:
a. The immigrants search for territory.
b. No existing territory (with seashore) wants them.
c. Let us create a terriotry (the ambitious poroject of alternate shores) to hold them.
d. How? Fixed or mobile man made structures (later we find out that these will be called ships).
Eat your ass out Jules Verne. Somebody has seen Waterworld one time too many. Bring forth Renzo Piano... he has designed a floating airport (Japan) now he must design a floating Ta' Kandja. 'Nuff said... here are the usual juicy excerpts... The usual convention applies (my addition in red & parenthesis).
The Second Cause (abridged)
Having had "our" European dream fulfilled, and rightly expecting EU support, in this context (something which is rarely done) European countries could well deserve to be blamed by us just as much as our southern neighbours do [concentration must begin: after a 10th reading I think it means we should blame Europe as much as we blame Libya]. A lot of time is being spent blaming Africa [Does this include Burundi and Lesotho?] when that same time could be dedicated to making detailed proposals to Europe.
"Why should we accept the guilt of letting people drown in our waters for the sake of not allowing them into our country?" [Why indeed? Think hard. The implication of this question is crucial].
The moral dilemma we should be facing is that we want irregular immigrants to land safely as long as they do not do so on our shores. [Dilemma? I would say we are bound to receive them, bound to help them (morally) but we need help to do so. On the other hand it is immoral to think of any other option – though I admit this could be an opinion and not an absolute truth].
So, an ambitious project [The beginnings of the grand plan] would be to provide alternative shores such migrants could head for [the onset of dementia]. The increase of borders/shores (through the creation of man-made borders/shores) is the solution that comes to the fore [Welcome to Fantasia – looks more like a solution coming from the aft].
But before justifying artificial shores, there is another problem to be addressed [more? I would have thought artificial shores are quite a handful]. The situation as it stands now means that a country identifying [the exact purpose of the word "identifying" in this sentence is being examined by a special board of the OUD] a case of human trafficking will end up with the extra responsibility of taking care of the migrants. If, on the other hand, such interception is not timely, the end result is likely to be a human massacre. This state of affairs is thus multiplying problems to either the irregular immigrants or the receiving state [I do note that TGIL has a love affair with the issue of multiplication – it tends to turn up frequently].
[Le Coup de Grace: ]
The Mediterranean was shaped the way it is by nature [For once we do not blame the Nationalists]. However, the geographical dimensions [one hopes we are still talking within the three-dimensional sphere which us mere mortals are used to] could easily be changed by the establishment of fixed or mobile man-made structures to identify human trafficking before migrants reach any of the European shores [Get it? Outposts at sea to tell us they are coming!]. Such structures (that is, ships) [This idea has a Patent Application Pending - mobile-man made structure to b called ship] could be positioned at chosen geographical points where supervision of the seas would best serve all parties [She means strategically positioned]. They need to be such as to be able to accommodate any irregular immigrants located at sea until their status is established - a platform where all legal and procedural questions can be processed [Yep. You have read right. It's a floating Guantanamo, a Ta' Kandja on Sea, a Manhattan on the Waves]. They will be financed by states that enter into agreement with each other [as against with themselves], applying the same provisions of international law where states are unwilling to cooperate [I wish I had time to explain how useless the last appendage to the sentence (following the comma) is].
These structures could, eventually, be used for purposes other than irregular immigration [She means for purposes other than the prevention of irregular immigration], such as for economic purposes, maritime passage purposes, aviation purposes, regulation of the fishing zones, marine research, smuggling and drug trafficking control and at times of environmental crises such as oil spillages. [And the annual International Literary Seminar entitled "Subject and Predicate in Modern English"].
Such man-made structures should fall under an "international" jurisdiction regime [Or filed under crackpot proposals]. The issue would ultimately boil down to another diplomatic exercise between states once they recognise the matter as being an international and not a national one. Indeed, the issue of international jurisdiction of the high seas justified such a move because no state could be placed at a disadvantage - especially in the case of land-locked states [Madame is saying that countries like Austria could finally have their share in irregular African immigrant management too]. Should countries like ours, surrounded by sea, on the threshold of Africa, be forever placed at a disadvantage just because of our geographical location? [Bloody Mother Nature put us there didn't she… it's her fault innit?]
It is really time for the international fora to be addressed in this manner [1., International Fora, International Fora Street, Forumland]. In this venture we should stop relying on our own resources or those that ooze out of our EU membership [earlier in the article she implied that not much has been forthcoming – not exactly oozing is it Lorna? ]. Unfortunately, none of these, so far, have proved sufficient.
That's it. We build islands in the Med. Shepherd the immigrant boats there (far from what the eye can behold) and in one clean sweep rid ourselves of the big headache. The international artificial shores will be multi-purpose and will float happily ever after.
We've heard of castles in the air, but artificial refugee centres in the Med…. Give me a break please!