Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Mojo Hand 4580]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Foremost of course being the letter behind the name of the person leading the administration.

The detention of asylum seekers and families, specifically to effect the deterrence of further asylum seekers, is not a new approach for DHS. Given the quote above, I guess we know how to score the ca. 2014 detention centers that were established to deter migration from South of the border via systematic detention of families. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/us/homeland-security-chief-opens-largest-immigration-detention-center-in-us.html

Detention Center Presented as Deterrent to Border Crossings

Mr. Johnson tried to leave no doubt that the administration was committed to detaining families. “l believe this is an effective deterrent,” he said.

Many women at Artesia have said they did not expect to be detained if they made it to the United States, Mr. Johnson said. The numbers of people in families detained at the border has dropped to nearly a two-year low, he said.

“Frankly, we want to send a message that our border is not open to illegal migration, and if you come here, you should not expect to simply be released,” Mr. Johnson said.

 

 

Nope, foremost and exclusively that there are several material distinctions having nothing to do with the name of the president.  We've gone through them over and over again here.   But I suppose a couple of superficial similarities make them identical for those who are always looking for false equivalencies. 

[Anastasis 23481]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Nope, foremost and exclusively that there are several material distinctions having nothing to do with the name of the president.  We've gone through them over and over again here.   But I suppose a couple of superficial similarities make them identical for those who are always looking for false equivalencies. 

I just posted the Secretary of DHS' comments from the opening ceremony for the largest immigration detention center at the time, intended to detain immigrant families to deter further immigration, echoing the very core of the definition that you provided for a situation that would reflect the deployment of concentration camps.  Your own definition. Which you now call a superficial similarity.  Quite the moving target.

 

Oh, and "false equivalency!" is hilarious given the subject matter of this conversation. 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Anastasis

[SaucyJack 3500]

9 hours ago, Chrispy said:

Well, um yeah, this current reality show is extremely entertaining. I wonder is this changes when he’s gone or if all of the hyperbole is here to stay. I guess we’ll see. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[EuroHorn 3268]

She gonna get Amazon prime married..,. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

46 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I just posted the Secretary of DHS' comments from the opening ceremony for the largest immigration detention center at the time, intended to detain immigrant families to deter further immigration, echoing the very core of the definition that you provided for a situation that would reflect the deployment of concentration camps.  Your own definition. Which you now call a superficial similarity.  Quite the moving target.

 

Oh, and "false equivalency!" is hilarious given the subject matter of this conversation. 

The core of my "definition" wasn't deterrence; it was internment as a systematic approach to stopping migrants from central/south America.   The squalid camps right now are the point and purpose.   As was the cruelty of stealing kids away from their parents without even keeping records to allow them to reconnect in the future.  Eliminating or forgoing the Obama administration's eventual non-detention solutions (ankle bracelets, the family case managent program).  Unlawfully blocking asylum seekers from ports of entry.  Slashing the grounds under which asylum will be considered and granted.  Reducing the number of immigration judges so that caseloads and wait times skyrocket.    And on and on.   All of it is a systematic approach to force refugees into camps where they'll rot, or an even more dangerous equivalent across the border.

There's no question that Obama hastily responded to a migrant crisis in 2014 with a harsh and ineffective family detention policy.   But it was intended to achieve quick hearings and deportation, not migrants languishing in misery.  Not a single child died in CBP care in 8 years under Obama; what are we up to now under Trump?  Six in the last six months, last I saw?  It's not the same thing in intent or execution, especially when Trump walked into a situation that was already under control. 

And the left did not let it slide.  Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, 100+ House Democrats, and many other Dems publicly called on Johnson to halt family detention in 2014 and 2015, citing the ways in which the policy was failing.   As the problems became more evident, families started getting released more quickly.   Obama was assailed as the deporter in chief.   And activists sued an won.   Pretty much the same exact thing they're doing now.

[Anastasis 23481]

I admire the stubborn persistence in refusing to apply the terminology "concentration camp" consistently, even according to your own definition. I'd like to see AOC's response to someone pressing her on the same point.  I imagine she would be more principled in her response. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Anastasis

[David Dennison 18944]

4 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

You seem to be missing a teeny, tiny, little point here.  The Nazis went out looking for the Jews and rounded them up as part of government policy.  The Jews were not illegally entering Germany.  They were trying to find ways to illegally exit Germany.  The American government is not rounding up legal Hispanic-Americans and putting them in these detention centers.  They are putting people WHO ARE TRYING TO ENTER THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY into them.

Anyone that thinks these two situations are even the slightest bit comparable to each other has mashed potatoes for brains.

They are people seeking asylum there. Seeking asylum is not entering the country illegally.

Try again.

[Message Board User 12396]

 

[EMAWesome 101]

4 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

It’s not illegal to claim asylum. But you knew that.

95% of these are not legitimate asylum claims and anyone with a hat rack for a brain knows it.  This is trying to game the system.  If you want to debate about how shitty the system is fine but that still doesn't change the fact the vast, vast, vast, vast, majority of the people that end up here are trying to scam it.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

51 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I admire the stubborn persistence in refusing to apply the terminology "concentration camp" consistently, even according to your own definition. I'd like to see AOC's response to someone pressing her on the same point.  I imagine she would be more principled in her response. 

You want AOC pressed on this because consistent terminology is the "principle" you are preoccupied with in this humanitarian crisis?  Seriously? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[zork 629]

46 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

95% of these are not legitimate asylum claims and anyone with a hat rack for a brain knows it.  This is trying to game the system.  If you want to debate about how shitty the system is fine but that still doesn't change the fact the vast, vast, vast, vast, majority of the people that end up here are trying to scam it.

What percentage are granted asylum?  Is it different now vs previous years?Hmm:

Spoiler

Quote

Nearly 20,500 individuals in FY 2016. In fiscal year (FY) 2016, the most recent year for which data are available, 20,455 individuals were granted asylum, which is about 28 percent out of the 73,081 cases. Approval rates varied by immigration court from about 10 percent to 80 percent.

USCIS approved 11,729 affirmative asylum applications in FY 2016, representing slightly more than 10 percent out of the 115,399 affirmative asylum applications filed with the agency. This represented a 34 percent decline from the 17,787 affirmative asylum applications granted in FY 2015. The decrease occurred as the administration transferred a large number of USCIS asylum officers from the affirmative interview process to conduct credible and reasonable fear screening interviews. Even with increased overall staffing within the USCIS Asylum Division, the number of affirmative applications granted declined considerably and the number of applications climbed to a 12-year high of almost 200,000, as fewer asylum officers were assigned to review affirmative applications.

In FY 2016, 8,726 individuals were granted asylum defensively by an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals, an increase of 7 percent over the 8,246 defensive asylum grants in FY 2015.

In FY 2017, as instability in Central America’s Northern Triangle showed few signs of ending, immigration judges decided over 30,000 asylum cases, a considerable increase over the roughly 22,300 asylum cases decided in FY 2016, and the most FY 2005.

However, the denial rate grew along with number of asylum cases, climbing to 61.8 percent in FY 2017, up from 56.5 percent in FY 2016. Five years earlier, the denial rate stood at 44.5 percent.

 

https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-u-s-asylum-process/

[David Dennison 18944]

49 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

95% of these are not legitimate asylum claims and anyone with a hat rack for a brain knows it.  This is trying to game the system.  If you want to debate about how shitty the system is fine but that still doesn't change the fact the vast, vast, vast, vast, majority of the people that end up here are trying to scam it.

That's up to a finder of fact in a court of law. It's not up to the administration.

[David Dennison 18944]

55 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

Chuck Todd embarrassed himself today. I watched it. It was bad. 

[Anastasis 23481]

17 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You want AOC pressed on this because consistent terminology is the "principle" you are preoccupied with in this humanitarian crisis?  Seriously? 

You don't do English or logic very well do you? Amazing how hard it is for you to admit that Obama established immigration concentration camps, according to your own definition.  

Edited June 20, 2019 by Anastasis

[David Dennison 18944]

Here's a good question: How are these facilities not concentration camps?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

10 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

You don't do English or logic very well do you? Amazing how hard it is for you to admit that Obama established immigration concentration camps, according to your own definition.  

So begging the question is your take on solid logic? 

[Anastasis 23481]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

So begging the question is your take on solid logic? 

I understand that this is very hard for you to come to grips with. 

[jimmyjazz 46089]

49 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You want AOC pressed on this because consistent terminology is the "principle" you are preoccupied with in this humanitarian crisis?  Seriously? 

Let's focus on the irony of suddenly demanding "principles" in this political climate.

[Anastasis 23481]

Can't even give AOC a compliment on this thread without some posters getting their panties in a wad. 

[Pig Bellmont 8721]

I relish that GOPers are having to defend families separated and imprisoned indefinitely in conditions that resulted in at least 6 child deaths in the last year or so are not *technically* concentration camps. You guys are totally winning the hearts and minds. Good luck in 2020. That’s a hell of a slogan. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33886]

I relish that GOPers are having to defend families separated and imprisoned indefinitely in conditions that resulted in at least 6 child deaths in the last year or so are not *technically* concentration camps. You guys are totally winning the hearts and minds. Good luck in 2020. That’s a hell of a slogan. 

Or really any future election. Millennials already outnumber boomers and that number grows daily, while the other, well - the saying goes they don't make them like they used to. Thank fucking christ for that

[Mojo Hand 4580]

 

[DigglerontheHoof 21212]

I wish pain, misery and death upon every member of Trump’s administration.

[horncyclist 1391]

Can we just build a fucking wall around Alabama and cram all these dispicable pieces of shit in there and be done with it? Let them make the Dotard their King. 

[Nivek 16979]

Can we just build a fucking wall around Alabama and cram all these dispicable pieces of shit in there and be done with it? Let them make the Dotard their King. 

I would prefer we deport all republicans to Liberia.

[horncyclist 1391]

Just now, Nivek said:

I would prefer we deport all republicans to Liberia.

That would be cruel to the Liberians. A majority of Alabamans deserve this. We would provide a relocation program for Bamachick and other decent people.

[RomaVicta 29967]

21 hours ago, Revolution512 said:

Ah the “but he didn’t mean to” defense. 

 

In announcing the fix, Obama again conceded he had exaggerated. "There is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate," he said. "It was not because of my intention not to deliver on that commitment and that promise.  We put a grandfather clause into the law, but it was insufficient."

 

I’m moving on, he lied to get his “legacy” passed. Liberals fell for it. The rest of us will pay for it as usual. Love him all you want.

Negged for lying about lying, tovarich.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

19 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Your position would be better if, in fact, Bozo wasn't right and you weren't a fucking asshole.  Just an observation from another asshole.

Nah yer a fucking asshole. An asshole who lives on a ledge by the way.  Ooooooooohhhhh no we're allllll doooooomed.  And He wasn't right you just play yer little games though. I'm still trying to get an answer to what I was being partisan about, I know the cabals definition, it's anything  you don't agree with.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[Jiggy-Z 3435]

16 hours ago, Jiggy-Z said:

Oh please, these are not concentration camps.. They are encampments which densely populate or distill, if you will, a certain demographic of immigrant for the purpose of indefinite detainment until the ultimate disposal of their  cases.

Oh please, these are not concentration camps.. They are encampments which densely populate or distill, if you will, a certain demographic of immigrant for the purpose of indefinite detainment until the final solution can be implemented in their  cases.

Just a little editing.

[Js1 85523]

47 minutes ago, Nivek said:

I would prefer we deport all republicans to Liberia.

They can finally have their own Christian sanctuary called 'Liberty' 

[Bateshorn 9929]

This is a case study in the phrase “She’s not wrong”

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Reminds me of this satirical bit.

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

12 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

95% of these are not legitimate asylum claims and anyone with a hat rack for a brain knows it.  This is trying to game the system.  If you want to debate about how shitty the system is fine but that still doesn't change the fact the vast, vast, vast, vast, majority of the people that end up here are trying to scam it.

95% of statistics that claim 95% are something are completely made up. 

[Anastasis 23481]

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

95% of statistics that claim 95% are something are completely made up. 

Like standard confidence intervals, for instance. 

[Js1 85523]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

This is a case study in the phrase “She’s not wrong”

Argue the minutiae instead of the big picture.

"Our government is locking up minorities, separating families, denying them even the things they need for basic hygiene like soap and toothbrushes, making them sleep on floors or standing up, no AC"

"BUT THEY ARENT CONCENTRATION CAMPS OMG"

[FondrenRoad 4378]

49 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Like standard confidence intervals, for instance. 

95% of the time, those are in the other 5%.

[Guest Lobo]

60% of the time, it works...everytime.  

[JimmyHoffa 1188]

The more things change the more they remain the same-

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/09/683623555/president-obama-also-faced-a-crisis-at-the-southern-border

 

Trump is having the same problem that Obama had and he clearly isn't learning from the mistakes that Obama made and learned from but the problem remains. 

What annoys the ever loving shit out of me is the double standard everyone seems to take based on what side of the aisle they root for. It's a fucking disgrace and is why shit doesn't get done. 

Call the camps/centers whatever you want but none of that solves that actual problem or offers a legit solution that will make everyone happy. The fact that people are in a pissing match over what they were called and when they were called them tells you all you need to know. It's about my side being better or not as wrong because clearly a political gotcha is better than actually fixing the fucking problem and helping those in need. 

It's a joke. And pretty par for the course on a lot of issues. 

 

[Pig Bellmont 8721]

12 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

Trump is having the same problem that Obama had and he clearly isn't learning from the mistakes that Obama made and learned from but the problem remains. 

 What annoys the ever loving shit out of me is the double standard everyone seems to take based on what side of the aisle they root for. It's a fucking disgrace and is why shit doesn't get done. 

Do not “both sides” this. You’re showing your ass. Use your brain and compare implementation of immigration policies under the two administrations and you can see the criticism of indefinitely holding migrant children in concrete cells with no soap or toothbrushes doesn’t depend on which side of the aisle anyone roots for. 24 people have died in ICE custody under *this* administration, including 6 children.

Obama faced an uptick of migrants from Central America but somehow didn’t have to separate 4 month olds from their mothers or create inhumane detention centers that give millions to the private prison industry 

[hayden_horn 11365]

seriously, some of you need to stop and have a bit of a think about WHY you are choosing to obfuscate or explain away that we have concentration camps on our border.

simple litmus test: is what we are doing at all humane in any way? 

no it's not, and many of you should feel intense shame for trying to somehow come to a way to defend this atrocity.

but trump supporters have no shame, like their orange deity. fucking hell, man. 

[David Dennison 18944]

30 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

The more things change the more they remain the same-

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/09/683623555/president-obama-also-faced-a-crisis-at-the-southern-border

 

Trump is having the same problem that Obama had and he clearly isn't learning from the mistakes that Obama made and learned from but the problem remains. 

What annoys the ever loving shit out of me is the double standard everyone seems to take based on what side of the aisle they root for. It's a fucking disgrace and is why shit doesn't get done. 

Call the camps/centers whatever you want but none of that solves that actual problem or offers a legit solution that will make everyone happy. The fact that people are in a pissing match over what they were called and when they were called them tells you all you need to know. It's about my side being better or not as wrong because clearly a political gotcha is better than actually fixing the fucking problem and helping those in need. 

It's a joke. And pretty par for the course on a lot of issues. 

 

There was a bipartisan deal in place that provided Dreamers with a path to citizenship and $25 billion in border funding, including the wall.

The administration rejected it because of pressure from the right.

 

[jimmyjazz 46089]

21 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Do not “both sides” this.

In the context of the current problem, I couldn't give a flying fuck if Obama had done the exact same thing.  It would have been just as wrong then as it is now.

Sometimes, wrong is just wrong.  This is something we teach our kids:  "if all the other kids in your class jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?"  The fact is that this travesty is right in front of our faces, for myriad reasons, and people are pissed off.  Rightfully so.  The policy needs to change.  It's inhumane.  Fuck that, it's barbaric.  There is no justification for "but what about".  There just isn't.  Hell, I'd be thrilled if this administration took the high road <cough>, reversed their policy, and used it as political fodder AGAINST the Democrats, however weak that argument might be.  Just fix the damn problem.  (It ain't happening.)

[zork 629]

13 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

seriously, some of you need to stop and have a bit of a think about WHY you are choosing to obfuscate or explain away that we have concentration camps on our border.

simple litmus test: is what we are doing at all humane in any way? 

no it's not, and many of you should feel intense shame for trying to somehow come to a way to defend this atrocity.

but trump supporters have no shame, like their orange deity. fucking hell, man. 

Since 2000, according to this graph from an org who tracks these things, ~50% of the amnesty cases are rejected.  Why let those people in who are not deemed worthy of amnesty?  Why keep the people, reportedly 20-30%, with their non-relative children?

They are free to wait on the Mexican side of the border if they so choose but instead are choosing to be given free room, board and government medical care in the detention facilities while their claims are vetted and processed. 

BTW, Britain, Germany, etc, hold people in detention while they are being processed for asylum.  It is pretty common.  

 

 

[David Dennison 18944]

1 minute ago, zork said:

Since 2000, according to this graph from an org who tracks these things, ~50% of the amnesty cases are rejected.  Why let those people in who are not deemed worthy of amnesty?  Why keep the people, reportedly 20-30%, with their non-relative children?

They are free to wait on the Mexican side of the border if they so choose but instead are choosing to be given free room, board and government medical care in the detention facilities while their claims are vetted and processed. 

BTW, Britain, Germany, etc, hold people in detention while they are being processed for asylum.  It is pretty common.  

 

 

Separated from their children.

You left that part out.

[hayden_horn 11365]

Just now, zork said:

Since 2000, according to this graph from an org who tracks these things, ~50% of the amnesty cases are rejected.  Why let those people in who are not deemed worthy of amnesty?  Why keep the people, reportedly 20-30%, with their non-relative children?

They are free to wait on the Mexican side of the border if they so choose but instead are choosing to be given free room, board and government medical care in the detention facilities while their claims are vetted and processed. 

BTW, Britain, Germany, etc, hold people in detention while they are being processed for asylum.  It is pretty common.  

 

 

this is a perfect example of someone who SHOULD feel shame, but does not.

i cannot even wrap my mind around your thought process in defending this policy. usually, i'm empathetic for differing points of view, but i cannot even CONCEIVE why you would make this post in response to my point about the inhumanity with which we are treating these people. 

we can agree or disagree on asylum policy (i'm on record asking why don't we just let them in?), but HOW WE TREAT PEOPLE should be a more universal moral imperative.

but, maybe the problem is that you don't view them as people? i don't know, but i know that i cannot understand this reflex to defend this bullshit that is united states POLICY to put people into DETENTION CAMPS. 

we don't have to treat them this way. it is our choice, after all.

[jimmyjazz 46089]

If 95% of these are not legitimate asylum claims, why are we only rejecting 60% of the cases?  Did Sean Hannity lie to us?

[zork 629]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

this is a perfect example of someone who SHOULD feel shame, but does not.

i cannot even wrap my mind around your thought process in defending this policy. usually, i'm empathetic for differing points of view, but i cannot even CONCEIVE why you would make this post in response to my point about the inhumanity with which we are treating these people. 

we can agree or disagree on asylum policy (i'm on record asking why don't we just let them in?), but HOW WE TREAT PEOPLE should be a more universal moral imperative.

but, maybe the problem is that you don't view them as people? i don't know, but i know that i cannot understand this reflex to defend this bullshit that is united states POLICY to put people into DETENTION CAMPS. 

we don't have to treat them this way. it is our choice, after all.

~50% who are not eligible for asylum are overwhelming the processes for determining who should gain it.  The process to vet and process them is limited by already short funding.  There are not unlimited resources for every poor person in the world who is seemingly showing up on the border in unprecedented numbers.

I believe they should be paying for their chance at asylum.  The government should not be giving them anything.  They should not be eligible for any government provided anything for 10 years or more.  We have limited resources.  We have 300+ million people here now unlike when the statue of liberty was given to us by France when we were less than 100 million with near limitless, at the time, land for the taking(stake your claim just as civil war was ending).

The government isn't giving the homeless free lodging, food, medical care, (tent city.jpg from san fran, seattle, dfw, houston, etc, etc)so why should we provide for non-citizens and those that are not worthy of amnesty?  I know my non-bleeding heart opinion isn't shared here.

They are free to leave the facilities if they want, back across the border.  Concentration camp detainees are not free to leave.

[David Dennison 18944]

1 minute ago, zork said:

~50% who are not eligible for asylum are overwhelming the processes for determining who should gain it.  The process to vet and process them is limited by already short funding.  There are not unlimited resources for every poor person in the world who is seemingly showing up on the border in unprecedented numbers.

I believe they should be paying for their chance at asylum.  The government should not be giving them anything.  They should not be eligible for any government provided anything for 10 years or more.  We have limited resources.  We have 300+ million people here now unlike when the statue of liberty was given to us by France when we were less than 100 million with near limitless, at the time, land for the taking(stake your claim just as civil war was ending).

The government isn't giving the homeless free lodging, food, medical care, (tent city.jpg from san fran, seattle, dfw, houston, etc, etc)so why should we provide for non-citizens and those that are not worthy of amnesty?  I know my non-bleeding heart opinion isn't shared here.

They are free to leave the facilities if they want, back across the border.  Concentration camp detainees are not free to leave.

Once they have crossed the border into the United States, the government should detain them while they process them, give them a court date, and let them go.