DACA, immigration reform whatever

[Biff Tannen 46163]

Would hate for this super important topic to fall off the front page, since it's such a fucking emergency and all.

https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/not-war-zone-veterans-visit-texas-borderlands-military-outdoors-sierra-club?utm_source=insider&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

Quote

On January 10, President Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz stood on the banks of the Rio Grande near Mission, Texas, surrounded by armored vehicles and helmeted Border Patrol officers and agents. During an hour-long press conference, they painted a grim picture of the Rio Grande Valley region, citing violence and what they characterized as a crisis of illegal immigration. Trump criticized opponents of wall funding in Congress, saying, “If they don’t mind death and crime and all of the problems they cause by not having a barrier, then they’ll see what happens: national emergency.” In February, Trump followed through on this threat and declared a national emergency in order to fund the border wall and other border security measures. 

A month later, on a warm, spring afternoon, Robert Vessels launched his canoe down a boat ramp on the Rio Grande at nearly the same spot where President Trump had held his press conference. As he paddled, Vessels noticed little that aligned with Trump’s warnings of a crisis on the border. But the contrast between the two sides of the river was stark: On the Mexican side, people were out picnicking in public parks and playing music from stereos. On the US side, he saw only abandoned buildings, defoliated vegetation, and guard towers.   

“It seemed very much like a one-sided war we’re waging with a nonexistent threat,” Vessels says. “Everyone on the Mexican side is having a great time enjoying the riverfront property, and our side is militarized.” 

Vessels, who spent five years in the army and completed tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan, does not use the term “militarized” lightly. “I did go in thinking everyone talking about the militarized border was exaggerating,” he says. “I know how easy it is to over-exaggerate with such an emotionally charged subject, but it’s definitely militarized down there. Border Patrol had better weapons and personal equipment than I had in Afghanistan, which was kind of infuriating.” 

The paddling trip was part of a fact-finding mission that Vessels and seven other veterans had organized with the Sierra Club Military Outdoors program, because they wanted to see the border region for themselves. Along with paddling a portion of the Rio Grande, the group of eight joined two Indigenous activists from the the Tohono O'odham nation to camp out for over a week in the Rio Grande Valley at the National Butterfly Center, a 100-acre nature reserve that is home to over 200 species of butterflies. Much of that habitat could be lost if the reserve is split by the border wall proposed by the Trump administration. 

For Vessels, who now serves as a senior campaign representative for the Military Outdoors program, the border trip had both humanitarian and environmental components. He was born in Texas and describes himself as an “accidental conservationist” who became involved with the Sierra Club as a way to process his experience overseas. “As a veteran, I know the type of trauma that can persist in everyday life after returning to the states: moral injuries, struggles with transitioning, isolation,” he recently wrote. “I’ve been able to confront my past and heal through travel through American public lands.” 

“You can’t really separate environmental justice and social and racial justice,” he says. “The wall is going up and stealing land [through eminent domain] from communities of color and Indigenous communities and then separating them from friends and family.” 

While at the butterfly center, the group met with a Vietnam War veteran who stands to lose much of his land, which has been in his family since the Spanish land-grant era, to border wall construction. The two Tohono O'odham women also shared stories of how their communities in southern Arizona and northern Sonora have been split by the increasingly fortified US-Mexico border.  

VETERANS AT THE NATIONAL BUTTERFLY CENTER IN THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY

Toward the end of their trip, the veterans witnessed a jarring reminder that families are still being separated along the border: A migrant transport bus sped past, children peering out from its barred windows. 

Karla Terry, another army veteran who participated in the border trip, chokes up when she recalls seeing the bus. “Imagine being a child at the moment when you’re the most scared,” she says, “like losing your mom or dad or sibling at the grocery store and not knowing where they are, even if it’s just for five minutes. I remember how terrified as a child I was to have that happen.” 

Terry grew up not far from the border in Tucson, Arizona, and joined the military when she was 17 in part because she wanted to provide for her young daughter and didn’t feel like she had other options. “My time in the military made me realize that the government is really good at preying on vulnerable populations,” she says. “That’s how they recruit, and that’s kind of their game.” 

After leaving the military, Terry struggled with alcoholism and, like Vessels, found solace in the natural world. She traveled to Alaska to ally with the Gwich'in people who are fighting drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and she sees similarities between what’s happening there and the eminent domain laws being used to take land for the border wall. “We use resources and people and we discard them. We make refugees all over the world and then we fail to take care of them. We create very damaged and broken people as soldiers and sailors and marines.” 

She had been driving a truck for work, but Terry says the border trip helped inspire her to look for a job in Arizona that will allow her to be more involved with border issues. “I don’t have any political affiliations,” she says. “I don’t have any religious affiliations. I did a lot of terrible things as an alcoholic, and I’m doing my best to repair those by doing right by my fellow man. I don’t have to agree with you; I just have to be decent.” 

“There’s a hint of madness to our border policies,” says Amine Tourki, who made his first trip to the border to camp at the butterfly center. Tourki immigrated to New York City from Morocco as a teenager and later served in the Iraq War as a translator. He is currently working to set up a nonprofit transition program for military translators in New York. “I’m used to the idea of trying to explain one side to the other, and trying to extend empathy to both sides and build bridges,” he says. “That’s my background.” 

He notes similarities between the debate over the border wall and the early years of the Iraq War when, he says, military leaders hadn’t yet defined US goals. “Right now we’re just imposing a structure and doing a strategy that is not geared toward the problem,” he says. “[The wall] is a solution in search of a problem. We’re antagonizing a lot of people, just on our side [of the border] alone. We’re treating everyone who is crossing the border as the same and tossing them into a prison system.” 

Tourki thinks using a wall to stop immigration is like trying to stop the rain. “We need moral, robust foreign-policy solutions that are well thought out,” Torka says, including more aid abroad. 

For his part, Vessels is already thinking about the next border trip. “I personally think the crisis isthe militarization of border communities,” he says. “I would like to get back out there with more veterans to help the volunteer-run campaigns who are living that reality daily. Some folks have been fighting that border wall for 20 years. A lot of it is getting people out there and showing them it’s not a war zone.”

 

[4th&Five 41990]

 

[mdmost 43973]

But we got 57 new miles of fencing!!!!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Can we start the Nuremberg trials yet please? 

[retread 2951]

 

[mdmost 43973]

Send kids back to where they came from...from the same assholes that brought you "oops, we lost where we sent your kids". What could go wrong?

[Rimbo 27006]

On 7/10/2018 at 7:39 PM, hayden_horn said:

fuck anyone who supports this shit:

https://www.ajc.com/entertainment/separated-the-border-honduran-dad-and-his-year-old-are-reunited/i3ZmTFEnUufvDmZiieHv9L/

this is just one story. just one fucking story.  there are thousands. and trump today had the fucking temerity to say:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/10/trump-migrant-families-separated-706144

fuck you you fat orange fuckstain. the guy in the story above came seeking asylum. they uproot themselves, endure a dangerous as fuck journey to come and ask us for help. and we say "sorry, seat's taken, fuck you and your family, we are going to use you to send a message that american asylum is closed for fucking business."

anyone who supports this policy can get facefucked.

Their goal is not to stop all illegal immigrants. Their goal is to make all immigrants illegal.

[Smax 3800]

3 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Their goal is not to stop all illegal immigrants. Their goal is to make all immigrants illegal.

just stop

[Rimbo 27006]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

just stop

I will not stop. I will never stop. This affects me and my family directly. This affects whether or not my children get to be raised by their mother or not.

Fuck you for trying to silence me. Fuck you for even approaching supporting this Antichristian, Anti-American policy. Fuck you.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Rimbo

[Smax 3800]

Just now, Rimbo said:

I will not stop. I will never stop. This affects me and my family directly. This affects whether or not my children get to be raised by their mother or not.

Fuck you.

repeat it enough still doesn't make it true and fuck you too

[Rimbo 27006]

Just now, Smax said:

repeat it enough still doesn't make it true and fuck you too

No, it's true because it's what is happening and why it is happening. Immigration law itself has always been about only letting the "right" color of skin in. Always. And in this particular case, it's being used as a Boogeyman and scapegoat to blame America's problems on, when economic analysis generally shows that immigration is *good* for the country.

[Smax 3800]

5 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

No, it's true because it's what is happening and why it is happening. Immigration law itself has always been about only letting the "right" color of skin in. Always. And in this particular case, it's being used as a Boogeyman and scapegoat to blame America's problems on, when economic analysis generally shows that immigration is *good* for the country.

 

 

bull fucking shit and speaking of boogeyman.... "Their goal is not to stop all illegal immigrants. Their goal is to make all immigrants illegal."

 

There he is

[Rimbo 27006]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

 

 

bull fucking shit and speaking of boogeyman.... "Their goal is not to stop all illegal immigrants. Their goal is to make all immigrants illegal."

 

There he is

If that's not the case, then why are legal immigrants being detained indefinitely? Why aren't they only locking up illegals?

[Brisketexan 106884]

2 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

 

bull fucking shit and speaking of boogeyman.... "Their goal is not to stop all illegal immigrants. Their goal is to make all immigrants illegal."

 

There he is

Ummm......so.....all of the statements and actions of the admin and folks inside the admin to reduce and openly attack LEGAL immigration and immigrants as well....

Yeah.  Nobody believes that lie anymore.  Nobody.  You think people do, but nobody is fooled.  You're lying to an audience of you and those like you, and even y'all aren't dumb enough to believe it.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Brisketexan

[Smax 3800]

2 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

If that's not the case, then why are legal immigrants being detained indefinitely? Why aren't they only locking up illegals?

 

 

our legal system isn't perfect mistakes happen, every other month we hear a story of the innocent guy who spent so many years in prison finally being exonerated. This no different 

 

Its not your fault, theres been a concerted effort by those on the left as well pro illegal immigration groups like la raza to blur the line between legal immigrant and illegal, you fell for it

[Brisketexan 106884]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

 

 

our legal system isn't perfect mistakes happen, every other month we hear a story of the innocent guy who spent so many years in prison finally being exonerated. This no different 

 

Its not your fault, theres been a concerted effort by those on the left as well pro illegal immigration groups like la raza to blur the line between legal immigrant and illegal, you fell for it

Do you think that anyone with a lick of sense believes you?  Seriously?

Signed, someone who is assisting a refugee who WAS hard-working and providing for her family until a few weeks ago, when her previously easily-obtained work permit got held up for renewal.  And in talking to the immigration attorney, this is now a systemic issue.

Nevermind the numerous unambiguous public statements and actions by this admin to go after existing LEGAL immigration.

[Smax 3800]

Do you think I care if YOU or anyone here believes me?  

sweet anecdote BTW you sure seem to have a lot of them...

Oh no I wont fit in with the CR kids, zero fucks given

[Rimbo 27006]

10 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

 

our legal system isn't perfect mistakes happen, every other month we hear a story of the innocent guy who spent so many years in prison finally being exonerated. This no different 

 

Its not your fault, theres been a concerted effort by those on the left as well pro illegal immigration groups like la raza to blur the line between legal immigrant and illegal, you fell for it

There's nothing to "fall for" you dense twat. This happened. To me. To my children. To my family. To my LEGAL immigrant wife. Are you trying to tell me I'm making this shit up?

The only one falling for anything is you. Get your head out of the spin machine and look at the facts of what's actually happening. It is not what you think or want to be happening. 

Or maybe it is, and you're okay with it. And if you're okay with it, you're a terrible person.

[ChickenSandwich 9957]

Not sure anyone is ok using tax payer money to reject 800-900,000 asylum requests from the 1million claims they are expecting each year. 

The goal is clear, overwhelm the border and force “catch and release”. Then pray for Amnesty in 2020 from a socialist. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Yeah, I’m sure the people fleeing for their lives are playing 3D chess with our political system.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13727]

Are people coming over in such large numbers because they fear this is the last chance to get into the US?

[WhatTheBuck 28928]

On March 29, 2019 at 3:27 PM, Brisketexan said:

You're lying to an audience of you and those like you, and even y'all aren't dumb enough to believe it.

Don't bet on it. 

[Foosters 18274]

On 3/29/2019 at 1:51 PM, ChickenSandwich said:

Not sure anyone is ok using tax payer money to reject 800-900,000 asylum requests from the 1million claims they are expecting each year. 

The goal is clear, overwhelm the border and force “catch and release”. Then pray for Amnesty in 2020 from a socialist. 

Here's a good example of this. Mother from Honduras clearly gaming the system to overwhelm the border to set things up for 2020:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/opinion/border-honduras-separation-gangs.html

Quote

We fled Honduras to the United States because we feared for our lives. I grew up in the capital, Tegucigalpa. In the past few years, my neighborhood has become one of the deadliest in the city. We had had run-ins with the gangs in the past. On Oct. 18, gang members came to our house looking for my partner, Kevin.

They showed me their guns and told me, “If you don’t leave in 24 hours, you know what will happen to you.” 

I knew what they were capable of. When my eldest daughter was 2 years old and I was pregnant with my son, their father was murdered and his body dismembered by gang members. Even after he was killed, we got death threats. We tried moving to another town until things cooled down, but the gangs found us there and extorted us.

The death threats started again after Kevin and I got together and our daughter Grethshell was born. People who are deported from the United States as he was are targeted by the gangs, because they are presumed to have money. With the new threats, I grabbed the little money we had, around $80, and filled the children’s backpacks with clothes for them and a doll for Grethshell, who was 15 months old. 

 

[lemonlime 5503]

10 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Here's a good example of this. Mother from Honduras clearly gaming the system to overwhelm the border to set things up for 2020:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/opinion/border-honduras-separation-gangs.html

 

That lying bitch.  She just wants to live off the U.S. government teet, get an obamacare phone,  and have her anchor baby son rape some white god-fearing American girls.

[Anastasis 23717]

I think that public policy should be written largely on the basis of anecdotes. I will fight you if you disagree. 

[Brisketexan 106884]

I think that public policy should be written largely on the basis of anecdotes. I will fight you if you disagree. 

Well, that’s what we’re doing right now....anecdotes are literally the basis for our current national immigration policy (cough cough MS-13). Heaven forbid there should be a counter narrative.

[Foosters 18274]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

I think that public policy should be written largely on the basis of anecdotes. I will fight you if you disagree. 

So ignoring the above anecdote then, you join the poster I was responding to in believing that the migrants are rushing the boarder as a strategic move to tip things in 2020?

[Chrispy 132]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-era-dhs-chief-jeh-johnson-says-us-has-a-crisis-at-the-southern-border.amp

4,000 apprehensions in one day. No, no everything’s fine. 

[Captainant 28529]

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-era-dhs-chief-jeh-johnson-says-us-has-a-crisis-at-the-southern-border.amp

4,000 apprehensions in one day. No, no everything’s fine. 

What underlying evidence is fox using to support that claim? I only ask because fox isn't known for its fact-based reporting.

[mdmost 43973]

16 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that public policy should be written largely on the basis of anecdotes. I will fight you if you disagree. 

What if both sides have good anecdotes?

[fattyflattie 4640]

18 hours ago, lemonlime said:

That lying bitch.  She just wants to live off the U.S. government teet, get an obamacare phone,  and have her anchor baby son rape some white god-fearing American girls.

If fleeing for ones life, which is understandable, priority #1 is gtfo. However I guess Nicaragua, Salvador, Guatemala, Belize, and Mexico are too full? 

[Captainant 28529]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

If fleeing for ones life, which is understandable, priority #1 is gtfo. However I guess Nicaragua, Salvador, Guatemala, Belize, and Mexico are too full? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

In the general principle of international law, treaties in force are binding upon the parties to it and must be performed in good faith. Countries that have ratified the Refugee Convention are obliged to protect refugees that are on their territory, in accordance with its terms.^[17] There are a number of provisions that States parties to the Refugee Convention must adhere to.

 

 

Spoiler

 

The contracting states shall not

• discriminate against refugees (Article 3)
• take exceptional measures against a refugee solely on account of his or her nationality (Article 😎
• expect refugees to pay taxes and fiscal charges that are different to those of nationals (Article 29)
• impose penalties on refugees who entered illegally in search of asylum if they present themselves without delay (Article 31), which is commonly interpreted to mean that their unlawful entry and presence ought not to be prosecuted at all^[18]
• expel refugees (Article 32)
• forcibly return or "refoul" refugees to the country they've fled from (Article 33). It is widely accepted that the prohibition of forcible return is part of customary international law. This means that even States that are not party to the 1951 Refugee Convention must respect the principle of non-refoulement.^[17] Therefore, States are obligated under the Convention and under customary international law to respect the principle of non-refoulement. If and when this principle is threatened, UNHCR can respond by intervening with relevant authorities, and if it deems necessary, will inform the public.^[17]

Refugees shall be treated at least like nationals in relation to

• freedom to practice their religion (Article 4)
• the respect and protection of artistic rights and industrial property (Article 14)
• rationing (Article 20)
• elementary education (Article 22)
• public relief and assistance (Article 23)
• labour legislation and social security (Article 24)

Refugees shall be treated at least like other non-nationals in relation to[edit]

• movable and immovable property (Article 13)
• the right of association in unions or other associations (Article 15)
• wage-earning employment (Article 17)
• self-employment (Article 18)
• practice of the liberal professions (Article 19)
• housing (Article 21)
• education higher than elementary (Article 22)
• the right to free movement and free choice of residence within the country (Article 26)

 

TLDR is the US is bound by international treaty to accept refugees regardless of their country of origin. If you don't like it, it's been on the books since when AMERICA WAS GREAT (the 1950's).

[Chrispy 132]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

What underlying evidence is fox using to support that claim? I only ask because fox isn't known for its fact-based reporting.

The Customs and Border Protection commissioner. Fake crisis! 

[David Dennison 19529]

3 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

The Customs and Border Protection commissioner. Fake crisis! 

Correction. Fake national emergency.

[Captainant 28529]

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

The Customs and Border Protection commissioner. Fake crisis! 

So, a single person said it on Fox news without any supporting evidence or numbers. And because of his title (yes, I'm aware he was in the Obama administration), it must be true. Yes, I'm being unreasonable for wanting to see data before I agree with a statement made by an individual who is no longer affiliated with the agency he is talking about. 

[hayden_horn 11402]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So, a single person said it on Fox news without any supporting evidence or numbers. And because of his title (yes, I'm aware he was in the Obama administration), it must be true. Yes, I'm being unreasonable for wanting to see data before I agree with a statement made by an individual who is no longer affiliated with the agency he is talking about. 

those hpd officers said there were drugs in that house they shot up, too. 

i know i always trust law enforcement whose living depends on having bad actors to arrest or murder.

[fattyflattie 4640]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

In the general principle of international law, treaties in force are binding upon the parties to it and must be performed in good faith. Countries that have ratified the Refugee Convention are obliged to protect refugees that are on their territory, in accordance with its terms.^[17] There are a number of provisions that States parties to the Refugee Convention must adhere to.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The contracting states shall not

• discriminate against refugees (Article 3)
• take exceptional measures against a refugee solely on account of his or her nationality (Article 😎
• expect refugees to pay taxes and fiscal charges that are different to those of nationals (Article 29)
• impose penalties on refugees who entered illegally in search of asylum if they present themselves without delay (Article 31), which is commonly interpreted to mean that their unlawful entry and presence ought not to be prosecuted at all^[18]
• expel refugees (Article 32)
• forcibly return or "refoul" refugees to the country they've fled from (Article 33). It is widely accepted that the prohibition of forcible return is part of customary international law. This means that even States that are not party to the 1951 Refugee Convention must respect the principle of non-refoulement.^[17] Therefore, States are obligated under the Convention and under customary international law to respect the principle of non-refoulement. If and when this principle is threatened, UNHCR can respond by intervening with relevant authorities, and if it deems necessary, will inform the public.^[17]

Refugees shall be treated at least like nationals in relation to

• freedom to practice their religion (Article 4)
• the respect and protection of artistic rights and industrial property (Article 14)
• rationing (Article 20)
• elementary education (Article 22)
• public relief and assistance (Article 23)
• labour legislation and social security (Article 24)

Refugees shall be treated at least like other non-nationals in relation to[edit]

• movable and immovable property (Article 13)
• the right of association in unions or other associations (Article 15)
• wage-earning employment (Article 17)
• self-employment (Article 18)
• practice of the liberal professions (Article 19)
• housing (Article 21)
• education higher than elementary (Article 22)
• the right to free movement and free choice of residence within the country (Article 26)

 

TLDR is the US is bound by international treaty to accept refugees regardless of their country of origin. If you don't like it, it's been on the books since when AMERICA WAS GREAT (the 1950's).

I don’t dislike it. I’m trying to think about it logically.  If I was in fear for my life, I’d find the first place away from the threat. There’s several countries this woman could stop in and start a life, but that’s not good enough. 

I find it ironic that the countries I named off all think less of their neighboring peoples, specifically as you travel south. However we are supposed to accept them as “good people”. They sound racist tbh. The Mexicans don’t want the Salvadories or Hondurans in their country (racist, NIMBY) but Americans who even question anything related to immigration are immediately shouted down as racists themselves. We conveniently forget that when they are “good people” looking for a better life here.  Racist in America = scum of earth.  Racist in Mexico = good people looking for a better life.   Just kind of funny to me how that is overlooked to fit the narrative.  

I’ve worked and lived about 18 months in Mexico.  If you don’t think they think down on their neighbors to the south you are kidding yourself. 

[Chrispy 132]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So, a single person said it on Fox news without any supporting evidence or numbers. And because of his title (yes, I'm aware he was in the Obama administration), it must be true. Yes, I'm being unreasonable for wanting to see data before I agree with a statement made by an individual who is no longer affiliated with the agency he is talking about. 

You don’t read too goodly. The senior official is still with the agency, but here’s another article. They’re just dumping these migrants in the Rio Grande Valley. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/27/707297404/immigration-system-at-the-breaking-point-homeland-security-official-warns

 

[Biff Tannen 46163]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t dislike it. I’m trying to think about it logically.  If I was in fear for my life, I’d find the first place away from the threat. There’s several countries this woman could stop in and start a life, but that’s not good enough. 

I find it ironic that the countries I named off all think less of their neighboring peoples, specifically as you travel south. However we are supposed to accept them as “good people”. They sound racist tbh. The Mexicans don’t want the Salvadories or Hondurans in their country (racist, NIMBY) but Americans who even question anything related to immigration are immediately shouted down as racists themselves. We conveniently forget that when they are “good people” looking for a better life here.  Racist in America = scum of earth.  Racist in Mexico = good people looking for a better life.   Just kind of funny to me how that is overlooked to fit the narrative.  

I’ve worked and lived about 18 months in Mexico.  If you don’t think they think down on their neighbors to the south you are kidding yourself. 

This is a decent take and a good question.  Aside from the obvious that the US has a better economy than Mexico.

[David Dennison 19529]

4 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

You don’t read too goodly. The senior official is still with the agency, but here’s another article. They’re just dumping these migrants in the Rio Grande Valley. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/27/707297404/immigration-system-at-the-breaking-point-homeland-security-official-warns

Sounds like the administration isn't doing a very good job.

[Anastasis 23717]

41 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, that’s what we’re doing right now....anecdotes are literally the basis for our current national immigration policy (cough cough MS-13). Heaven forbid there should be a counter narrative.

I would suggest that the what we are doing right now, as well as what we have done in the past wrt to immigration, has been extremely non-productive towards addressing the issue.

28 minutes ago, mdmost said:

What if both sides have good anecdotes?

We get the policy debate that we have today.

41 minutes ago, Foosters said:

So ignoring the above anecdote then, you join the poster I was responding to in believing that the migrants are rushing the boarder as a strategic move to tip things in 2020?

If you want to debate me on my views on immigration policy and specifically wrt how to resource up to humanely process asylum seekers, I have laid them out in this thread.  You don't need to create a narrative of your own design out of thin air.

 

[lemonlime 5503]

13 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t dislike it. I’m trying to think about it logically.  If I was in fear for my life, I’d find the first place away from the threat. There’s several countries this woman could stop in and start a life, but that’s not good enough. 

I find it ironic that the countries I named off all think less of their neighboring peoples, specifically as you travel south. However we are supposed to accept them as “good people”. They sound racist tbh. The Mexicans don’t want the Salvadories or Hondurans in their country (racist, NIMBY) but Americans who even question anything related to immigration are immediately shouted down as racists themselves. We conveniently forget that when they are “good people” looking for a better life here.  Racist in America = scum of earth.  Racist in Mexico = good people looking for a better life.   Just kind of funny to me how that is overlooked to fit the narrative.  

I’ve worked and lived about 18 months in Mexico.  If you don’t think they think down on their neighbors to the south you are kidding yourself. 

So what should we do?  Not what should Mexico do.  Or what should Salvadorian migrants do.  How should we treat them?  Are you okay with separating them from children and locking children up?  Putting families in camps?  What should our response be?

[Incredulity 11875]

Quote

If you want to debate me on my views on immigration policy and specifically wrt how to resource up to humanely process asylum seekers, I have laid them out in this thread.  You don't need to create a narrative of your own design out of thin air.

Are you new here?

[Anastasis 23717]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

So what should we do?  Not what should Mexico do.  Or what should Salvadorian migrants do.  How should we treat them?  Are you okay with separating them from children and locking children up?  Putting families in camps?  What should our response be?

It really isn't difficult.  Resource up asylum application processing capabilities at ports of entry. Move people efficiently through the existing legal framework.  If they meet asylum standards, admit them.  If they do not, deport them. Don't separate families as they work through the process. Don't put people in cages.

[Foosters 18274]

13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

If you want to debate me on my views on immigration policy and specifically wrt how to resource up to humanely process asylum seekers, I have laid them out in this thread.  You don't need to create a narrative of your own design out of thin air.

 

Weird. A poster claims that the migrants are rushing the border. I posted an article about a mother's path to the border. YOU came after me for using an anecdote to refute his assertion.  I assumed, I guess incorrectly, that meant you sided with him.

Let me understand your strategy here:

1) Poster A makes outlandish claim

2) Poster B posts relevant story that casts doubt on Poster A's claim

3) You jump in attacking the use of anecdotes

4) I assume that the above sequence means you support Poster A's claim

5)You lecture me on how to properly debate on a message board and accuse me of creating a narrative.

[Anastasis 23717]

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

YOU came after me

Histrionic much?

[Captainant 28529]

29 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

You don’t read too goodly. The senior official is still with the agency, but here’s another article. They’re just dumping these migrants in the Rio Grande Valley. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/27/707297404/immigration-system-at-the-breaking-point-homeland-security-official-warns

Ah my apologies. A current kidde concentration camp overseer CBP senior official made that claim, again without providing any numbers or hard evidence to back it up. And from reading the article, there's an argument to be made that what's going on at the border is largely self-inflicted because of the trump admin's simplistic strategies to address a complex issue

Quote

"There's no questioning why this is happening," McAleenan said. "The increase in family units is a direct response to the vulnerabilities in our legal framework, where migrants and smugglers know that they will be released and allowed to stay in the U.S. indefinitely pending immigration proceedings that could be many years out."

But immigrant advocates dispute that. They point out that migrants have a legal right to seek asylum once they're in the U.S.

Critics say the Trump administration has been too focused on deterring migrants from coming and has not allocated enough resources for humanitarian assistance or adjudicating the migrants' asylum claims quickly. "The Trump administration's response to the multidimensional refugee and migration challenge posed by deteriorating conditions in Central America is one-dimensional," said Frank Sharry, the director of America's Voice. "No wonder their simplistic and futile strategy has failed so miserably."

As we have previously reported, there may be several reasons the number of migrants has grown in recent months — including the reach of social media, lower smuggling costs, and unintended consequences of the Trump administration's own immigration crackdown.

 But no, you're right, continuing to address the border with the same response strategy and resources will DEFINITELY work out this time, just like it hasn't every other time.

[wildcat09 29579]

All those German Jews that fled Nazi Germany and tried to come to America were rightly turned away, as they should have stopped in France.

[Skyline 325]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

If fleeing for ones life, which is understandable, priority #1 is gtfo. However I guess Nicaragua(Mexico), Salvador (Mexico), Guatemala (Mexico), Belize (Mexico), and Mexico are too full? 

FTFY

[Chrispy 132]

23 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Ah my apologies. A current kidde concentration camp overseer CBP senior official made that claim, again without providing any numbers or hard evidence to back it up. And from reading the article, there's an argument to be made that what's going on at the border is largely self-inflicted because of the trump admin's simplistic strategies to address a complex issue

 But no, you're right, continuing to address the border with the same response strategy and resources will DEFINITELY work out this time, just like it hasn't every other time.

Hard evidence? These numbers are made public. For instance, the number of apprehensions/inadmissibles in February was 76,103. March was on pace for more than 100,000. But if your contention is that these numbers are fabricated, then I suppose there’s not much to discuss here.