What makes you think any of the subjects in any of the articles were not active and willing participants?

Where is the part about force or sale?

What in the article makes you so sure these women were anything other than voluntary participants in an immigrations violation so they could secure jobs?

Nonetheless, why wouldn't a victim say she was being trafficked?

If they didn't know they were being trafficked, how do you know?

So, Kojack, where does the article say forced labor, slavery, sexual exploitation, or removal of organs?

Where does it say force, deception, abuse of power, or payment to achieve any of these?

Where does it say the women were under anyone's control but their own?

Do you feel like a retard now?

Since you know the facts of this case well enough to form a conclusion, tell me which these specific women were being trafficked for.

Was it forced labor or sexual exploitation?

And how were they forced into it? Threats of violence? Trickery?

Surrendered to whom? The Lebanese embassy? For what? To get visas to Lebanon?

If the passports were surrendered, how did the women present them at immigration?

Where is the part about forced labor and sexual exploitation?

What facts in this article show anyone forced these girls to do anything, or were sexually exploited? Or that anyone intended to do either.

Who intended to sell these women?

What work were these girls required to do?

What facts in the article suggest that anyone aimed to restrict the liberty of the women?

But to hold the fake passport of a Filipina who doesn't have a visa IN THE PHILIPPINES?! Where does that prevent her from going?!

Quote from the article which law the accused are alleged to have violated so we can determine that it falls within the meaning of "trafficking".

And quote from the article what acts are alleged to have violated that law.

Welp. LOLOLOL.