The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Serious How much more can America stomach? (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=423080)

Her July 18th, 2019 12:44 AM

How much more can America stomach?
 
For those that have been keeping up with the concentration camp news, and the recent dismissal of the Eric Garner case + the imprisonment of the man who filmed his murder taking place, with the developing story of the Send Her Back rallying chant not dissimilar to scenes from Nuremberg, how much more can be tolerated? How much more can be stomached?

I’m not bothering with objectivity in these examples, because I honestly do not give a shit about cotton-wrapping the inherent horror in these events for the sake of precious decorum. I just ask that you do not yell at each other, and that anyone with queries about post content come talk to erik destler or myself. You can be passionate, but just be cautious about whether it fits on PC.

EnglishALT July 18th, 2019 2:47 AM

It all depends on how it affects the individual person, the Eric Garner case while a miscarriage of justice won't really be noticed in all the noise outside of those that are actively following it.

The "Concentration Camps", well we can disagree on the use of that word to describe those buildings, but I would say the attack on them and the recent raising of the Mexican flag on their property does more damage than helps. Even the use of the word "Concentration Camps" to describe them probably sends most people into eye rolls.

As for the "Send her back" chants, while wrong, I am interested to see how it plays out, the "Squad" has said some pretty outrageous things, that the GOP has now made a campaign video of, and her sponsoring a BDS vote certainly will not help her in the eyes of the American public.

Anyway to answer your question, Americans are quite resilient when it comes to the outrageous outrage of politics, and usually pretty quick to forget and move on. What may seem shocking and anger educing to you or I will be forgotten by this time next year.

TailsMK4 July 18th, 2019 9:09 AM

These days it is very hard to keep up with what is going on, and I tend to get disgusted by what I read now in the news (anything involving the "Squad" is of particular disgust to me). But the one that got my attention the most is the planned raids on Area 51. Why are people even considering this, even if the idea itself is a joke? Even if most people tell it as a joke, there are others out there that may very well attempt to do it...it is human nature after all to be curious, and perhaps be stubborn. If this raid really happens, there's going to be a line crossed between protecting secrets and protecting lives, and which one could cause more harm to the country if lost? Imagine if other countries happened to get information from whatever testing is being done at Area 51...

Nah July 18th, 2019 11:27 AM

This is all going to continue to go on for a lot longer than anyone would like really

Some of us are tired of this shit. Been tired for years. Been getting more tired. But unfortunately, we don't really have the power to do anything about it--which just makes us even more tired. For every person who wants to see these things stop, there's another one who thinks these sorts of things are ok.

Country's too divided for any positive change to come anytime soon, if ever

Roxas July 18th, 2019 11:33 PM

They very much so are concentration camps. The ICE is the new Gestapo. It's really sickening, any American citizen, hell, any world citizen with any knowledge of basic history can tell you this is the beginning of something awful. I hope it all goes down in flames honestly. If people are too daft / unobservant / ignorant to observe the pattern of Nazi camps repeating itself, then that's their loss.

I don't know how much more the American people can take. The lower and middle classes are too busy being droned to death with work, barely enough time to go out and vote, let alone research their political candidates. Imagine how little time there is for us struggling to make it in a world that highly favors the one percent for anyone to organize social action. It's truly awful. If we can't get it done, other countries probably will try to speak out against what's becoming a very obvious racist regime.

Ellis Island eventually started turning away Jewish folks, look what our borders are doing now, turning away brown refugees. There are many other comparisons to make, but this is just one recent one. So many undeniable and scary parallels. Brushing this issue off and saying that it's no big deal is ignorant IMO.

EnglishALT July 19th, 2019 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10045622)
They very much so are concentration camps. The ICE is the new Gestapo. It's really sickening, any American citizen, hell, any world citizen with any knowledge of basic history can tell you this is the beginning of something awful. I hope it all goes down in flames honestly. If people are too daft / unobservant / ignorant to observe the pattern of Nazi camps repeating itself, then that's their loss.

I don't know how much more the American people can take. The lower and middle classes are too busy being droned to death with work, barely enough time to go out and vote, let alone research their political candidates. Imagine how little time there is for us struggling to make it in a world that highly favors the one percent for anyone to organize social action. It's truly awful. If we can't get it done, other countries probably will try to speak out against what's becoming a very obvious racist regime.

Ellis Island eventually started turning away Jewish folks, look what our borders are doing now, turning away brown refugees. There are many other comparisons to make, but this is just one recent one. So many undeniable and scary parallels. Brushing this issue off and saying that it's no big deal is ignorant IMO.

Since it is being brought up again, I am honestly curious, could you expand on how you believe they are Nazi concentration camps? Are there gas chambers? Medical experiments? Forced labor? Did they come to those places on their own free will or were they forced there?

Those that are being turned away, do they not have a safe country that has offered them protection? Do they face murder by their government if they return home?

If you want to throw out the Nazi imagery I am interested where you get the comparisons.

And to tie further back into the topic, why do you think the vast majority of Americans disagree with that opinion?

Miss Wendighost July 19th, 2019 3:58 PM

Judging by recent outcry on social media, I don't think that the average American can take this madness any longer. Can't do much until 2020, however beyond voicing our displeasure with events and hoping for something to change, even if it's small.

Maedar July 27th, 2019 5:02 AM

I admit nothing Trump does affects me personally, although his constant dominance of the news with his inane tweets gives me a headache.

And as someone who has supported civil rights my entire life, I recognize bigotry and human rights violation when I see it. Trump is the bigot committing the violations, NOT the "Squad".

Roxas July 27th, 2019 4:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10045630)
Since it is being brought up again, I am honestly curious, could you expand on how you believe they are Nazi concentration camps? Are there gas chambers? Medical experiments? Forced labor? Did they come to those places on their own free will or were they forced there?

Those that are being turned away, do they not have a safe country that has offered them protection? Do they face murder by their government if they return home?

If you want to throw out the Nazi imagery I am interested where you get the comparisons.

And to tie further back into the topic, why do you think the vast majority of Americans disagree with that opinion?

This is truly baffling. Never once did I say they were Nazi concentration camps, you drew that conclusion yourself by trying to defend them. I alluded they were similar to Nazi camps. There are no gas chambers, medical experiments, or forced labor. However, these people were forced there. No one willingly goes to a concentration camp, if they do, they must do so in fear of their life. I urge you to read up on the victims of ICE. If you are not a member of a marginalized group, I'm afraid you don't quite understand the fear ICE strikes into a majority of this country, akin to the fear the gestapo used to strike into that of the jewish and etc people from Europe.

I get these comparisons from the fact that JEWISH PEOPLE, who have survived the Holocaust, have come up and said that we're approaching a dangerous level of racism once again. If we don't listen to the survivors telling us the signs are all here, then who do we listen to? I'd really love to know.

"The vast majority of Americans disagree," Okay, sure, show me the polling, the research paper, the evidence. Just don't throw a Stormer article at me, or some crud from a right wing reddit lmao.

EnglishALT July 27th, 2019 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10048907)
This is truly baffling. Never once did I say they were Nazi concentration camps, you drew that conclusion yourself by trying to defend them. I alluded they were similar to Nazi camps. There are no gas chambers, medical experiments, or forced labor. However, these people were forced there. No one willingly goes to a concentration camp, if they do, they must do so in fear of their life. I urge you to read up on the victims of ICE. If you are not a member of a marginalized group, I'm afraid you don't quite understand the fear ICE strikes into a majority of this country, akin to the fear the gestapo used to strike into that of the jewish and etc people from Europe.

You compared ICE to Gestapo, it is pretty clear that you were speaking of Nazi Concentration Camps, however, if you wish to go further, yes people are going to these "camps" on their own free will. They are crossing the border illegally on their own free will, they are trying to evade authorities on their own free will, they are refusing to stay in Mexico which has offered them asylum on their own free will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10048907)
I get these comparisons from the fact that JEWISH PEOPLE, who have survived the Holocaust, have come up and said that we're approaching a dangerous level of racism once again. If we don't listen to the survivors telling us the signs are all here, then who do we listen to? I'd really love to know.

"Celina Biniaz doesn’t think so. To her, a concentration camp is a place where captives live in daily fear of being killed.

She should know.

At 13, she was in Auschwitz. She came face to face with the notorious Josef Mengele and saw the smoke from the chimneys as the sky darkened with ash of fellow Jews burned in ovens. She escaped with the help of Oskar Schindler, whose story was told in the Steven Spielberg film “Schindler’s List.”"

The U.S. Holocaust Museum issued a statement this week saying it “unequivocally rejects efforts to create analogies between the Holocaust and other events, whether historical or contemporary.”

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-concentration-camps-holocaust-immigrants-detention-20190628-story.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10048907)
"The vast majority of Americans disagree," Okay, sure, show me the polling, the research paper, the evidence. Just don't throw a Stormer article at me, or some crud from a right wing reddit lmao.

I did, the link was in the post, if you want here it is again.

https://www.businessinsider.com/quarter-of-americans-think-detention-centers-are-concentration-camps-2019-7

Her July 27th, 2019 6:10 PM

Arguing over semantics is one reason why the debate is remaining a debate and not a call of order to ending the atrocities - I believe they are concentration camps in name, purpose and intent, but for those who don’t, doesn’t the possibility of your beliefs being likened to ‘putting people in concentration camps’ summon an urge deep in your heart to try put an end to this process? Regardless of semantics, it’s still happening. It’s all still going on, no matter what you call it. So long as people keep the cyclical discussion of ‘BUT ARE THEY REALLY ‘CAMPS?’ going round and round in the media, people will be too busy debating the banality of evil, and no criticism will be applied beyond semantics and subsequently there will be no political capital expended on ending these events.

EnglishALT July 27th, 2019 6:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10048924)
Arguing over semantics is one reason why the debate is remaining a debate and not a call of order to ending the atrocities - I believe they are concentration camps in name, purpose and intent, but for those who don’t, doesn’t the possibility of your beliefs being likened to ‘putting people in concentration camps’ summon an urge deep in your heart to try put an end to this process? Regardless of semantics, it’s still happening. It’s all still going on, no matter what you call it. So long as people keep the cyclical discussion of ‘BUT ARE THEY REALLY ‘CAMPS?’ going round and round in the media, people will be too busy debating the banality of evil, and no criticism will be applied beyond semantics and subsequently there will be no political capital expended on ending these events.

Alright let me ask, what do you purpose as an alternative? Catch and Release? Congress was told that nearly 9 and 10 currently do not show up for court hearings. In essence it would be open borders to allow for that to happen. So I am curious as to what other solutions you would suggest.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/8/87-immigrant-families-are-no-shows-hearings/

Her July 27th, 2019 6:35 PM

Yeah, shockingly, people that are aware of the ghetto-level conditions that await them are going to be inclined towards risking going it on their own than the possibility of being locked away in an area where there is a serious debate about to what degree they aesthetically and legally resemble concentration camps. I don’t blame them at all.

I don’t pretend to know the golden policy that will solve this issue - but I am aware of the Golden Rule, and I’m pretty sure that intentionally making the process of seeking asylum as inhumane as possible to justify the state treatment of brown people does not follow that rule. I would start with facing the reality that decades of destabilisation of the surrounding nations is going to have the consequence of those people flocking towards the only geographically feasible stable power in that region, and pulling money away from a disastrous wall and into humane vetting and residency procedure policies. I would also give up the ghost that ICE are anything more than secret police, and redirect its funding towards humane settling of migrants and helping them contribute to the economy they so desperately want to be a part of. It’ll be slow, but it won’t be torturing the fucking people.

Edit: fwiw I am aware I broke my rule of calmness so I will take that into consideration

EnglishALT July 27th, 2019 6:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10048930)
Yeah, shockingly, people that are aware of the ghetto-level conditions that await them are going to be inclined towards risking going it on their own than the possibility of being locked away in an area where there is a serious debate about to what degree they aesthetically and legally resemble concentration camps. I don’t blame them at all.

I am pretty sure, that those that are currently in the "camps" are those that cross illegally, and are not those that go to a point of entry and wait in Mexico they also have turned down Mexico's offer for asylum. However I may be wrong, I thought the Remain in Mexico policy pretty much contains those who are going through the proper process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10048930)
I don’t pretend to know the golden policy that will solve this issue - but I am aware of the Golden Rule, and I’m pretty sure that intentionally making the process of seeking asylum as inhumane as possible to justify the state treatment of brown people does not follow that rule. I would start with facing the reality that decades of destabilisation of the surrounding nations is going to have the consequence of those people flocking towards the only geographically feasible stable power in that region, and pulling money away from a disastrous wall and into humane vetting and residency procedure policies.

If they wish to seek asylum then why have they not taken up Mexico's offer? Why do they not present themselves at a point of entry and wait in Mexico for their chance to go in front of an immigration judge? If anything a wall would stop those from coming in illegally and push them to points of entry, thus stopping the need for the camps.

However a significant if not vast majority of people coming are not doing so out of fear, but for economic reasons, thus making their asylum claim frivolous.

Edit: If you need evidence of this look no further than this article from yesterday showing many returning home after finding out they would not be allowed into the US while their asylum claim was processed and instead would be waiting in Mexico.

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/07/26/migrants-giving-asylum-after-trump-policies-slow-them-down/

moon July 27th, 2019 11:35 PM

It seems like this has been growing and growing, slowly enough that parts of the American population now accepts this as normal political measures. Much of the rest of the world has not yet normalized these kind of rhetorics, thankfully, and as such are able to criticize what's going on.

So I fear that the US can take a lot more and even worse developments than this, as they've been lulled into thinking it is humanely acceptable. It's scary. History is repeating itself.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 3:20 AM

ALT, why are you defending a policy that involves jailing children? Just answer me that, okay?

IMOHO, this act is an unthinkable atrocity that is NEVER justified or excusable, no matter what the reasoning is.

"Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

Matthew 19:14

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 3:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049013)
ALT, why are you defending a policy that involves jailing children? Just answer me that, okay?

IMOHO, this act is an unthinkable atrocity that is NEVER justified or excusable, no matter what the reasoning is.

"Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

Matthew 19:14

What other alternative is there? Releasing them to foster homes in the country can create situations in which they are preyed upon by pedophiles, keeping them in adult detention facilities is dangerous, especially if they come alone. The best I can think of is holding them in facilities with their parents, so that they do not have to be separated, but as we have seen it is common practice for migrants to buy children to cross over, because they believe they will be released if they come across with kids. There is no good answer other than creating bigger facilities with more staff that can properly care for these kids.

moon July 28th, 2019 3:33 AM

I'm curious where I should read more about this, the detention camps in particular. What are some good sources for finding as impartial yet reasonable information as possible on this?

LDSman July 28th, 2019 3:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adventure (Post 10049016)
I'm curious where I should read more about this, the detention camps in particular. What are some good sources for finding as impartial yet reasonable information as possible on this?

Hard to say. Everyone is spinning this.

Something like 30% of the people tested had zero relation to the children in their care.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/dna-tests-reveal-30-of-suspected-fraudulent-migrant-families-were-unrelated

Maedar July 28th, 2019 4:12 AM

And the other 70% of the suspected cases?

That would mean more than 70,000 detained children belong to innocent families, WHY do you tolerate such a atrocity? WHY do you feel it is EVER justified to detain children? Just ANSWER me, LDS!

WHY is money so important to you that you are willing to support a Nazi who approves hurting thousands of children??

And as for your question, ALT, what we had before Trump manufactured his phony crisis was working just fine. You guys just don't understand, when Trump makes claims of invasion by Mexico of rapists and traffickers, WE DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. Just like we don't believe his phony-baloney claims of voter fraud and Birtherism.

What he is doing is inhuman.

Now answer my question please, WHY do you support this monstrosity who is jailing children?

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 4:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049029)
And the other 70% of the suspected cases?

That would mean more than 70,000 detained children belong to innocent families, WHY do you tolerate such a atrocity? WHY do you feel it is EVER justified to detain children? Just ANSWER me, LDS!

WHY is money so important to you that you are willing to support a Nazi who approves hurting thousands of children??

Those were only of the families tested, no where does it say the children were detained from their families, or were not returned to Mexico to wait. Just that they were tested among those applying for asylum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049029)
And as for your question, ALT, what we had before Trump manufactured his phony crisis was working just fine. You guys just don't understand, when Trump makes claims of invasion by Mexico of rapists and traffickers, WE DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. Just like we don't believe his phony-baloney claims of voter fraud and Birtherism.

What he is doing is inhuman.

I am trying to wrap my head around how Trump manufactured this crisis and how it is phony, could you care to elaborate? The number of people crossing illegally is up to levels not in more than a decade, detention centers are packed, and those working on the border are quoted at saying they are at a "breaking point" .

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47736603

So how is this phony or not a crisis?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049029)
Now answer my question please, WHY do you support this monstrosity who is jailing children?

I don't want to turn this into a Good/Bad Trump thread, I will say I support any policy that can safely and humanly hold those who are seeking asylum so that their claims can be properly vetted, and not released into the country so that they can disappear.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 4:24 AM

Quote:

I am trying to wrap my head around how Trump manufactured this crisis and how it is phony, could you care to elaborate? The number of people crossing illegally is up to levels not in more than a decade, detention centers are packed, and those working on the border are quoted at saying they are at a "breaking point" .
I will give you the exact moment he manufactured this crisis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=iZNBDBRHdwc

And his psychotic sycophants went wild.

Quote:

I don't want to turn this into a Good/Bad Trump thread, I will say I support any policy that can safely and humanly hold those who are seeking asylum so that their claims can be properly vetted, and not released into the country so that they can disappear.
I do not want to hear it. IMOHO, Abusing children is an evil, cowardly act, is NEVER justifiable for ANY reason, and your attempts to justify it (while denying the centers are "concentration camps", which they ARE) make you an accomplice.

LDSman July 28th, 2019 4:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049029)
And the other 70% of the suspected cases?

What about them? Do you support allowing possible child smugglers keeping the children not related to them?

Quote:

That would mean more than 70,000 detained children belong to innocent families,
70,000? Where did you get that number?

Quote:

WHY do you tolerate such a atrocity?
Making people follow the laws of this country is not an "atrocity".

Quote:

WHY do you feel it is EVER justified to detain children? Just ANSWER me, LDS!
They came into the country illegally. They are possibly kidnap victims. Why is it okay to ignore some laws and not others?

Quote:

WHY is money so important to you that you are willing to support a Nazi who approves hurting thousands of children??
What money? Where did money come into this arguement? What Nazi? Where is this "approval of hurting children" coming from?
Quote:

And as for your question, ALT, what we had before Trump manufactured his phony crisis was working just fine.
There are a number of quotes from Dems about border security needing improvement that would disagree. Its not a "phony crisis" when there are tens of thousands of illegal crossings being detained every day. There are so many that the border facilities are being overwhelmed.

Quote:

You guys just don't understand, when Trump makes claims of invasion by Mexico of rapists and traffickers, WE DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. Just like we don't believe his phony-baloney claims of voter fraud and Birtherism.

What he is doing is inhuman.

Now answer my question please, WHY do you support this monstrosity who is jailing children?
Blame the parents for crossing illegally.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 4:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049032)
I will give you the exact moment he manufactured this crisis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=iZNBDBRHdwc

And his psychotic sycophants went wild.

Okay how does that change the facts on the ground that we are experiencing a massive swell of people crossing not seen in a decade, or that the border patrol is saying that they are at a breaking point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049032)
Abusing children is an evil, cowardly act, and your attempts to justify it make you an accomplice.

I agree, it is evil, and we need to either change the laws so that family's can stay together in a facility indefinitely, or provide better facilities to handle the current flood crossing.

moon July 28th, 2019 4:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049029)
And the other 70% of the suspected cases?

That would mean more than 70,000 detained children belong to innocent families, WHY do you tolerate such a atrocity? WHY do you feel it is EVER justified to detain children? Just ANSWER me, LDS!

WHY is money so important to you that you are willing to support a Nazi who approves hurting thousands of children??

And as for your question, ALT, what we had before Trump manufactured his phony crisis was working just fine. You guys just don't understand, when Trump makes claims of invasion by Mexico of rapists and traffickers, WE DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. Just like we don't believe his phony-baloney claims of voter fraud and Birtherism.

What he is doing is inhuman.

Now answer my question please, WHY do you support this monstrosity who is jailing children?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049032)
I will give you the exact moment he manufactured this crisis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=iZNBDBRHdwc

And his psychotic sycophants went wild.



I do not want to hear it. IMOHO, Abusing children is an evil, cowardly act, is NEVER justifiable for ANY reason, and your attempts to justify it (while denying the centers are "concentration camps", which they ARE) make you an accomplice.

Maedar, you need to rethink how you word yourself and what you are actually debating for here. Remember this forum's rules:

Remain civil at all times. Personal attacks during debates are not acceptable.

Discussions should be earnest in nature and not misrepresent views or be a platform for toxicity. In other words, we do not tolerate toxic behavior or debating in "bad faith".



This is a warning. Stay civil, don't make things personal, or you will not be allowed to post further in this thread.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 4:29 AM

I'm trying to remain civil, nut it's hard to do so while replying to someone trying to condone the abuse of children.

IMOHO, some things are universally wrong, and folks who think they can convince me that those things are acceptable, well, it's hard to debate such people.

I'll ask this to anyone here: What if it was YOUR child? Just consider that.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 4:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049041)
I'm trying to remain civil, nut it's hard to do so while replying to someone trying to condone the abuse of children.

IMOHO, some things are universally wrong, and folks who think they can convince me that those things are acceptable, well, it's hard to debate such people.

I'll ask this to anyone here: What if it was YOUR child? Just consider that.

I think we can all agree that there is things that need to be done, that there need to be more facilities to properly hold the kids traveling alone, that laws should be changed so that families can stay together, and that more judges appropriated so that migrant claims can move smoother. These facilities need to be clean, well kept, with staff properly trained to deal with the children and families.

I don't think anyone here is condoning child abuse, and I think everyone realizes that these facilities are overwhelmed and breaking, it's a crisis and the Government needs to react accordingly to stem the flood, provide better facilities, and expedite the process.

moon July 28th, 2019 4:38 AM

How come the US can't let the refugees in and help them find work so they can live in the country and support themselves eventually? Are they too many, or unable to work, or are there other organizational hindrances to that?

(I'm aware this might be a really naive viewpoint, but I think that's sort of how it works in Sweden - I will try to look up more facts though. I'm sure life is still really not easy for people seeking asylum here either, but I think that at least children are welcomed to go to school, or get helped to learn Swedish so they can eventually go to normal school)

Maedar July 28th, 2019 4:39 AM

Quote:

I think we can all agree that there is things that need to be done, that there need to be more facilities to properly hold the kids traveling alone, that laws should be changed so that families can stay together, and that more judges appropriated so that migrant claims can move smoother.
Interesting you should say that. Trump's two shutdowns - which, as you recall, he started over his Wall - resulted in immigration court backlogs becoming even worse. Also, he has, several times, suggested doing away with due process for migrants altogether.

What's your opinion of THAT?

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 4:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adventure (Post 10049052)
How come the US can't let the refugees in and help them find work so they can live in the country and support themselves eventually?

(I'm aware this might be a really naive viewpoint, but I think that's sort of how it works in Sweden - I will try to look up more facts though. I'm sure life is still really not easy for people seeking asylum here either, but I think that at least children are welcomed to go to school, or get helped to learn Swedish so they can eventually go to normal school)

That is a good question, there are a number of reasons, for one there is a safety concern as you have to worry about terrorists and gang members crossing who's only purpose is to commit crime.

There is a money aspect, in that American schools are already hurting, and taking in millions upon millions of more children would force more kids in already packed class rooms, force teachers to deal with a myriad of different languages while teaching, and take away valuable time from the other kids.

There is the jobs aspect, in that any economy can only hold a certain number of people at one time, especially in low paying jobs. Any country that takes in millions upon millions of economic migrants will soon find the labor market for those jobs filled.

Which brings me to the final aspect, social services. To properly care for the people the Government would have to provide trillions in social services in terms of housing, food, medical care, and education, that will take money away from other services and eventually lead to resentfulness among the populous.

The US tries to be welcoming and it tries to take in a large amount of people each year, but allowing a flood through would overwhelm the system, pose security problems, and eventually probably lead to ethno nationalist groups that will seek to drive out the refugees.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar
Interesting you should say that. Trump's two shutdowns - which, as you recall, he started over his Wall - resulted in immigration court backlogs becoming even worse. Also, he has, several times, suggested doing away with due process for migrants altogether.

What's your opinion of THAT?

I do think we need a wall, in that it will funnel the people to ports of entry in which they can properly apply for asylum. To tie it back into the topic, one reason we are facing a crisis is because so many people are not applying at ports of entry but instead trying to sneak across, doing so forces the Government to place these people in facilities instead of having them wait in Mexico.

LDSman July 28th, 2019 4:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adventure (Post 10049052)
How come the US can't let the refugees in and help them find work so they can live in the country and support themselves eventually? Are they too many, or unable to work, or are there other organizational hindrances to that?

(I'm aware this might be a really naive viewpoint, but I think that's sort of how it works in Sweden - I will try to look up more facts though. I'm sure life is still really not easy for people seeking asylum here either, but I think that at least children are welcomed to go to school, or get helped to learn Swedish so they can eventually go to normal school)

All of that is a reason that most countries simply don't allow unlimited immigration/open borders. A lot are unskilled laborers, some are not law-abiding. Drop 10 new people who need help and the system can usually be adjusted to cover them. Drop 10,000 and the system becomes overwhelmed.

Edit: Alt said it better.

Nah July 28th, 2019 4:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049041)
I'm trying to remain civil, nut it's hard to do so while replying to someone trying to condone the abuse of children.

If it's getting that hard to maintain a reasonable level of cool, that's probably a sign that it's time to step out of the conversation for a bit. This is something for everyone to keep in mind btw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adventure (Post 10049016)
I'm curious where I should read more about this, the detention camps in particular. What are some good sources for finding as impartial yet reasonable information as possible on this?

Not entirely sure what is the sort of stuff that you're looking for, but these things may or may not be of use to you or others reading this thread:

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-Sep/CBP%20TEDS%20Policy%20Oct2015.pdf

https://www.ice.gov/detention-management

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Mar/bp-total-monthly-apps-sector-area-fy2018.pdf
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Mar/bp-total-monthly-uacs-sector-fy2010-fy2018.pdf
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Mar/bp-total-monthly-family-units-sector-fy13-fy18.pdf

It's a lot to read (the first one is 31 pages lol), and I've hardly looked at the first two links at all myself, but I figure that this stuff is likely a little better than random-ass news articles....hopefully, anyway.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 4:51 AM

Quote:

I do think we need a wall, in that it will funnel the people to ports of entry in which they can properly apply for asylum. To tie it back into the topic, one reason we are facing a crisis is because so many people are not applying at ports of entry but instead trying to sneak across, doing so forces the Government to place these people in facilities instead of having them wait in Mexico.
Watch this video. It explains fully why the wall is an unfeasible - and possibly impossible - goal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdUIXvwuwto&list=PLDpZdP4i5RSDpW87ZzZlquEpTF7Sz1FST&index=6&t=0s

LDSman July 28th, 2019 4:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049055)

I do think we need a wall, in that it will funnel the people to ports of entry in which they can properly apply for asylum. To tie it back into the topic, one reason we are facing a crisis is because so many people are not applying at ports of entry but instead trying to sneak across, doing so forces the Government to place these people in facilities instead of having them wait in Mexico.

And even Mexico is having problems with the illegal immigrants.

A thought to consider. How many civilizations have fallen to "barbarians"? People flooding into the wealthier countries for a slice of the pie or a better life. The numbers get high enough that the civilization can't keep up and it is eventually destroyed.

moon July 28th, 2019 4:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LDSman (Post 10049062)
And even Mexico is having problems with the illegal immigrants.

A thought to consider. How many civilizations have fallen to "barbarians"? People flooding into the wealthier countries for a slice of the pie or a better life. The numbers get high enough that the civilization can't keep up and it is eventually destroyed.

Okay, that's enough. We're not going to derail this thread by making it sound as if Mexicans fleeing into the US are barbarians. Keep your arguments respectful, or don't debate at all.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 5:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049061)
Watch this video. It explains fully why the wall is an unfeasible - and possibly impossible - goal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdUIXvwuwto&list=PLDpZdP4i5RSDpW87ZzZlquEpTF7Sz1FST&index=6&t=0s

For those wondering here is what the video says. However I really would like to go back to discussing the topic at hand, being the facilities.

9: The wall could become a tourist attraction, which has no relevance here.

8 The wall could go way over budget, fair point, but we are already going over budget just trying to build and maintain new holding facilities.

7: It would only stop half of the illegals. Fair point, and we could get into the numbers, however in terms of health and safety aspect at least those who cross through airports are properly vetted and screened for diseases.

6: The wall causes environmental change: Not really relevant to the discussion, and one could argue all the garbage dumped by people crossing in these habitats does far more damage.

5: The wall makes the smugglers rich: Not relevant to the discussion, but the smugglers are already getting rich, just getting a person to the US Mexico border costs around $4,000.

4: Illegal Aliens Build the Wall: Again not relevant

3: The wall helps the Mexican economy: Good for them?

2: Mexico doesn't pay for the wall: Again not relevant, but there are ways to make Mexico pay for the wall from placing taxes on remittance to using seized drug money.

1: The wall never gets finished: This is just arguing the wall won't get finished in four years and has no relevance to the discussion.

LDSman July 28th, 2019 5:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adventure (Post 10049064)
Okay, that's enough. We're not going to derail this thread by making it sound as if Mexicans fleeing into the US are barbarians. Keep your arguments respectful, or don't debate at all.

Apologies. I wasn't trying to imply that Mexicans are barbarians. Hence the quotation marks. Outsiders would have worked better I guess. I was trying to point out that its possible to overwhelm a society with sheer numbers. The population growth outstrips the jobs, the housing, the food, etc.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 5:09 AM

Quote:

A thought to consider. How many civilizations have fallen to "barbarians"?
Define "barbarians"?

Quote:

People flooding into the wealthier countries for a slice of the pie or a better life.
That's a pretty callous statement, LDS. Ask yourself this:

You live in a place with no electricity, and no running water. The water you have is the same water animals use as a toilet. Your children are uneducated, malnourished, and sick. You make around 10 cents an hour for a job you know you can do in America for $7.50 an hour.

Is a wall - or even a long stretch of desert - going to stop you?

And as for your claim that "they're criminals, they deserve it"? First of all, the crime they commit is trespassing. I was arrested for trespassing 10 years ago. I got a desk appearance ticket (didn't have to pay bail) showed up in court with about 50 other folks who had been given similar citations, signed a no contest form and did 50 hours of community service. It wasn't even added to my record. What is happening to them now seems disproportionate.

Plus, they are children, which means "below age of consent" and not liable for such things. Children below age of consent can't be held legally responsible for what their parents do.

And as for your claims of child trafficking? Again, we do not believe you.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 5:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049075)
And as for your claims of child trafficking? Again, we do not believe you.

"Mexican authorities are warning refugee mothers about men seeking to buy migrant children to improve their chances of asylum at the United States border.

Officials have grown concerned after men from 'Central America or Haiti' were seen approaching mothers - especially those deemed vulnerable - at the Iglesia Evangelica Embajadores de Jesus shelter in Tijuana offering them $350 to purchase a child to cross into the U.S."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7201581/Groups-willing-pay-350-children-cross-U-S-border-family.html



Some migrants in Tijuana are trying to purchase children from vulnerable single mothers in local shelters so they can more easily cross into the United States, according to shelter directors, migrants and Tijuana law enforcement authorities.

Migrants in Tijuana shelters said they are alarmed after reports of single mothers being approached by groups of men who have offered to buy children to improve their chances of safely crossing into the United States.

A decades-old legal document, known as the Flores agreement, says migrant children should only be held briefly in U.S. border custody, which often means they are released, along with the parent or guardian with whom they crossed while they wait for their asylum cases to make their way through clogged immigration courts.

Typically, when migrants are apprehended at the border with their children they are held in custody for a few days before they are released. Single adults who cross the border can face months in detention.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/authorities-investigate-reports-of-migrants-trying-to-buy-children-to-enter-the-u-s/



In villages such as Chanmagua, where years of depressed coffee prices have pushed families to the breaking point, young children and teenagers are seen as boarding passes to the flight for economic survival. Their absence is evident on soccer teams with too few players and coffee farms with thinner staffs at harvest time. Just this year, 100 adults and children have left, including 17 from the town’s only kindergarten class, local officials said.

Within this exodus, a small number of cases have particularly troubled the town. Some parents have given up their children to other adults — sometimes for cash — to help the adult enter the United States, according to town officials, charity workers and residents. These transactions sometimes involve a minor traveling with a relative or godparent; in other cases, they say, the adult has no relation to the child.

Such arrangements are referred to, euphemistically, as “adoptions.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/for-central-americans-children-open-a-path-to-the-us--and-bring-a-discount/2018/11/19/baf3b092-e6ce-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html?utm_term=.1187ec463b61

Maedar July 28th, 2019 5:25 AM

Again, why punish the children for this? Don't your claims make them more the victims of a crime than criminals?

You can quote statistics all you like, it doesn't change the fact that you are trying to defend something that is cruel and inhumane.

Also, you claimed we need the wall, I explained why it's not a feasible goal, I think ALL my points are VERY relevant, since they prove it's an unobtainable fantasy.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 5:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049081)
Again, why punish the children for this? Don't your claims make them more the victims of a crime than criminals?

I am not for punishing the child, I believe they should be held in a proper and clean facility while they go through the immigration process, be subject to a DNA test to see if they are related to the person they are crossing with, and preferably stay with their parents inside the facility if at all possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049081)
You can quote statistics all you like, it doesn't change the fact that you are trying to defend something that is cruel and inhumane.

Can you please tell me what other solutions exist to deal with this crisis?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049081)
Also, you claimed we need the wall, I explained why it's not a feasible goal, I think ALL my points are VERY relevant, since they prove it's an unobtainable fantasy.

I... don't see anywhere in the video provided where a wall would be infeasible. Also just to note, considering the heat, vast stretches, of desert, and inherent danger of wild animals in the area, isn't it hurting the children by not having a wall up that would funnel them to a proper port of entry?

LDSman July 28th, 2019 5:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049075)
Define "barbarians"?

In this case, outsiders, low skilled laborers, people who may not wish to be Americans, just to benefit from the society. May not wish to adopt American culture and instead bring in their own culture. IE, their own justice system, their own leaders. Enclaves that ignore American laws in favor of their own.

Quote:

That's a pretty callous statement, LDS.
Not sure how its callous to mention facts. The illegals immigrants aren't coming to be tourists.

Quote:

Ask yourself this:

You live in a place with no electricity, and no running water. The water you have is the same water animals use as a toilet. Your children are uneducated, malnourished, and sick. You make around 10 cents an hour for a job you know you can do in America for $7.50 an hour.

Is a wall - or even a long stretch of desert - going to stop you?
Probably not. So what? I still assume the risk of being jailed and deported for breaking the laws of the destination country.

Quote:

And as for your claim that "they're criminals, they deserve it"? First of all, the crime they commit is trespassing. I was arrested for trespassing 10 years ago. I got a desk appearance ticket (didn't have to pay bail) showed up in court with about 50 other folks who had been given similar citations, signed a no contest form and did 50 hours of community service. It wasn't even added to my record. What is happening to them now seems disproportionate.
There is a huge difference between trespassing and entering another country illegally with the intent of living and working there. Trespassing and felony B&E or squatting.

And I'm not aware of saying that claim.

Quote:

Plus, they are children, which means "below age of consent" and not liable for such things. Children below age of consent can't be held legally responsible for what their parents do.

And as for your claims of child trafficking? Again, we do not believe you.
The children aren't being held legally responsible. Doesn't mean that they just get turned out onto the streets or given to strangers claiming to be relatives. See Alt's response to not believing me.

Maedar July 28th, 2019 5:31 AM

Quote:

I am not for punishing the child, I believe they should be held in a proper and clean facility while they go through the immigration process, be subject to a DNA test to see if they are related to the person they are crossing with, and preferably stay with their parents inside the facility if at all possible.
So why isn't anyone in the Trump administration willing to pass reform? Why does McConnell continue to block bills to correct this system?

Quote:

The children aren't being held legally responsible.
They are being jailed and held in filthy conditions.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 5:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049086)
So why isn't anyone in the Trump administration willing to pass reform? Why does McConnell continue to block bills to correct this system?

Trump recently signed a 5 billion dollar border bill.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/01/trump-signs-bill-granting-4-6b-in-emergency-funds-for-us-border/

The Trump Administration has also been trying to set up a Safe Third Country relationship with countries south of the US border to stem the flow, he got the Mexican army to provide greater enforcement of their own southern border, and has kept the "Remain in Mexico" deal which helps deter migrants who are only trying to get into America for economic reasons.

There is also a bill in the House that would make DNA testing required for all migrants, with anyone trying to scam the system subject to ten years in prison.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-congressman-introduces-bill-to-test-migrants-dna-at-border-as-officials-warn-of-child-recycling

Maedar July 28th, 2019 5:42 AM

Quote:

In this case, outsiders, low skilled laborers, people who may not wish to be Americans, just to benefit from the society. May not wish to adopt American culture and instead bring in their own culture. IE, their own justice system, their own leaders. Enclaves that ignore American laws in favor of their own.
I do not see why "outsider" means "barbarian". "Guest" might be another term.

Diversity is what has always made America strong, LDS. What does it say on the Statue of Liberty's plaque.

Quote:

sure how its callous to mention facts. The illegals immigrants aren't coming to be tourists.
You claimed they were coming for a "slice of pie". IMOHO, that's like saying "let them eat cake". These people are starving, poverty stricken, and ill.

Quote:

The children aren't being held legally responsible. Doesn't mean that they just get turned out onto the streets or given to strangers claiming to be relatives. See Alt's response to not believing me.
So caging them and treating them like animals is preferable? Why do you condone that?


Quote:

Trump recently signed a 5 billion dollar border bill.
And how did we accomplish THAT?? Compromise. Something Trump has, 95% of the time, refused to do. He has mostly ruled by Executive Order, something he condemned Obama for doing.

I have to go to work now, so I'll end with this: We are not on the same page, ALT. You keep giving me statistics and laws to justify something I find morally and ethically wrong.

Just because an authority figure CAN do something doesn't mean he SHOULD. The terms "unlawful" and "evil" are two very different things. Trump's policies are usually within the laws of the country, but IMOHO, directly oppose the laws of God.

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 5:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049090)
I have to go to work now, so I'll end with this: We are not on the same page, ALT. You keep giving me statistics and laws to justify something I find morally and ethically wrong.

Just because an authority figure CAN do something doesn't mean he SHOULD. The terms "unlawful" and "evil" are two very different things. Trump's policies are usually within the laws of the country, but IMOHO, directly oppose the laws of God.

Okay, for a third time, I ask how would you deal with the crisis then? You have upwards of a million people from all over the world crossing the southern border, you have families that may or may not be related crossing, and the vast majority of them that are being released are disappearing and not showing up for their court date. Can you please explain what would be a better plan for this situation?

I hope you have a good day at work, and I am interested to see what plan you would present to deal with the current crisis.

LDSman July 28th, 2019 6:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maedar (Post 10049090)
I do not see why "outsider" means "barbarian". "Guest" might be another term.

A guest is someone you invite in. Not someone who sneaks in during the night or in through a window.



Quote:

Diversity is what has always made America strong, LDS. What does it say on the Statue of Liberty's plaque.
To a point. We are all Americans. If someone is not willing to be an American, they are not a strength. If the laws in their area are not the laws of Americans, how is that a strength?



Quote:

You claimed they were coming for a "slice of pie". IMOHO, that's like saying "let them eat cake". These people are starving, poverty stricken, and ill.
Historically, that is not the same saying in any way. "Let them eat cake" was supposedly from a queen who had no clue that cake flour was more expensive that bread flour and that poor peasants couldn't afford cake flour when the bread flour ran out. She was oblivious to facts. Wanting a "slice of the pie" is wanting to benefit from the hard work.

Quote:

So caging them and treating them like animals is preferable? Why do you condone that?
They aren't being caged and treated like animals.

gimmepie July 28th, 2019 6:06 AM

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to detain immigrants as long as it's temporary, humane and comfortable and provides them with the chance to develop the skills and knowledge they'll need to make a life for themselves over the border - with the intent to provide a path into the country. The trouble I feel here has a lot more to do with the conditions and the intent than with the detainment itself.

LDSman July 28th, 2019 6:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 10049105)
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to detain immigrants as long as it's temporary, humane and comfortable and provides them with the chance to develop the skills and knowledge they'll need to make a life for themselves over the border - with the intent to provide a path into the country. The trouble I feel here has a lot more to do with the conditions and the intent than with the detainment itself.

Problem is how long would it take to provide those skills and knowledge? Which skills? What knowledge? Are we talking basic English and an overview of the average American lifestyle or a high school/college diploma so the immigrant can have a good job as opposed to a very low level job? How much would that run and how many people would be needed to run it?

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 6:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 10049105)
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to detain immigrants as long as it's temporary, humane and comfortable and provides them with the chance to develop the skills and knowledge they'll need to make a life for themselves over the border - with the intent to provide a path into the country. The trouble I feel here has a lot more to do with the conditions and the intent than with the detainment itself.

May I ask, is there any set number you believe a country should allow each year? 10,000? 100,000? A million? The reason I ask is that you say that detention should be temporary with a path into the country, but does that not create a flood of immigrants into the system, thus causing the problems we spoke about earlier with overflowing schools, a lack of jobs, and a overburdened welfare system?

gimmepie July 28th, 2019 6:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LDSman (Post 10049107)
Problem is how long would it take to provide those skills and knowledge? Which skills? What knowledge? Are we talking basic English and an overview of the average American lifestyle or a high school/college diploma so the immigrant can have a good job as opposed to a very low level job? How much would that run and how many people would be needed to run it?

I'd settle for basic English and any important legal information that was needed with improving facilities as the main goal. I think the idea of at the very least providing children appropriate schooling during detainment in the mean time is a good idea though and something to work towards.

gimmepie July 28th, 2019 7:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049108)
May I ask, is there any set number you believe a country should allow each year? 10,000? 100,000? A million? The reason I ask is that you say that detention should be temporary with a path into the country, but does that not create a flood of immigrants into the system, thus causing the problems we spoke about earlier with overflowing schools, a lack of jobs, and a overburdened welfare system?

I couldn't say for sure on that, but I think having such a policy certainly becomes a lot more plausible in a system where the detention is comfortable and even potentially helpful thanks to the education available.

Edit: Oh shit double post, my bad.

Hands July 28th, 2019 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10045231)
It all depends on how it affects the individual person, the Eric Garner case while a miscarriage of justice won't really be noticed in all the noise outside of those that are actively following it.

The "Concentration Camps", well we can disagree on the use of that word to describe those buildings, but I would say the attack on them and the recent raising of the Mexican flag on their property does more damage than helps. Even the use of the word "Concentration Camps" to describe them probably sends most people into eye rolls.

As for the "Send her back" chants, while wrong, I am interested to see how it plays out, the "Squad" has said some pretty outrageous things, that the GOP has now made a campaign video of, and her sponsoring a BDS vote certainly will not help her in the eyes of the American public.

Anyway to answer your question, Americans are quite resilient when it comes to the outrageous outrage of politics, and usually pretty quick to forget and move on. What may seem shocking and anger educing to you or I will be forgotten by this time next year.



They are unarguably concentration camps. The fact American citizens have ended up in them because they look foreign should speak volumes about what their intended purpose is.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/concentration-camp

EnglishALT July 28th, 2019 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049381)
They are unarguably concentration camps. The fact American citizens have ended up in them because they look foreign should speak volumes about what their intended purpose is.

If you are speaking about Francisco Erwin Galicia, the reason he ended up in custody was because he was traveling in the car with other illegal immigrants, and his own illegal immigrant mother screwed up on his VISA saying he was born in Mexico, leading to ICE to think his documents were fake. It is sad he was detained but it is not like he was picked up because he looked foreign.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/07/francisco-erwin-galicia/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049381)

Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order.

Well lets look at this, they are not members of a national or minority group, they are not being confined for state security, exploitation, or punishment unless you believe being confined for immigration processing is a state security reason, which I would then ask why are they being let out after their case is processed?

Persons are placed in such camps often on the basis of identification with a particular ethnic or political group rather than as individuals and without benefit either of indictment or fair trial.

Again not being placed in on the basis of a particular ethnic or political group, and they are allowed the opportunity to plead their case for asylum in front of a judge.

Concentration camps are to be distinguished from prisons interning persons lawfully convicted of civil crimes and from prisoner-of-war camps in which captured military personnel are held under the laws of war. They are also to be distinguished from refugee camps or detention and relocation centres for the temporary accommodation of large numbers of displaced persons.

The last one, being a detention center for the temporary accommodation of large numbers of displaced persons would most likely fit the descriptions of these camps.

So your link proves they are not concentration camps!

Nah July 29th, 2019 5:15 AM

Tbh the semantics aren’t important. Whatever we call them, the important thing is that under no circumstances are the conditions at the border acceptable, and it’s not good that the president and his administration think that they are doing a good job.

Hands July 29th, 2019 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049385)
If you are speaking about Francisco Erwin Galicia, the reason he ended up in custody was because he was traveling in the car with other illegal immigrants, and his own illegal immigrant mother screwed up on his VISA saying he was born in Mexico, leading to ICE to think his documents were fake. It is sad he was detained but it is not like he was picked up because he looked foreign.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/07/francisco-erwin-galicia/



Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order.

Well lets look at this, they are not members of a national or minority group, they are not being confined for state security, exploitation, or punishment unless you believe being confined for immigration processing is a state security reason, which I would then ask why are they being let out after their case is processed?

Persons are placed in such camps often on the basis of identification with a particular ethnic or political group rather than as individuals and without benefit either of indictment or fair trial.

Again not being placed in on the basis of a particular ethnic or political group, and they are allowed the opportunity to plead their case for asylum in front of a judge.

Concentration camps are to be distinguished from prisons interning persons lawfully convicted of civil crimes and from prisoner-of-war camps in which captured military personnel are held under the laws of war. They are also to be distinguished from refugee camps or detention and relocation centres for the temporary accommodation of large numbers of displaced persons.

The last one, being a detention center for the temporary accommodation of large numbers of displaced persons would most likely fit the descriptions of these camps.

So your link proves they are not concentration camps!


Only they are strictly for minority groups lol. How many white Brits who overstayed their visas are in the camps? How many Canadian kids have gone missing or died in the camps?





It's entirely politically motivated. Trump has ran his entire campaign on the "Mexican Terror" and these camps are a part of it. The Govt has consistently referred to the caravans or migrants themselves as a risk to national security (the wall is entirely based on this) and they are targeting people exclusively based on their ethnic appearance. There's literally no reasonable denying it.




It also doesn't matter what his mother's status was or if she made an admin error, he had an American birth certificate, SSN and his lawyer provided every other document they asked for and he was still held for three weeks in squalid conditions, denied access to a phone call, denied access to sanitary facilities (this would actually be a war crime if it happened to a prisoner of war) and was underfed. The fact you defend this is honestly worrying.



I'm glad you glossed over the conditions though. Those camps are not fit for humans. At all. Kids sleeping on cold concrete, overcrowded cells, masked guards, physical cages. These camps make the British concentration camps of the Boer war look tolerable.

EnglishALT July 29th, 2019 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049773)
Only they are strictly for minority groups lol. How many white Brits who overstayed their visas are in the camps? How many Canadian kids have gone missing or died in the camps?

How many Brits or Canadian kids are crossing the border illegally and applying for asylum?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049773)
It's entirely politically motivated. Trump has ran his entire campaign on the "Mexican Terror" and these camps are a part of it. The Govt has consistently referred to the caravans or migrants themselves as a risk to national security (the wall is entirely based on this) and they are targeting people exclusively based on their ethnic appearance. There's literally no reasonable denying it.

So it's entirely politically motivated, then these camps did not exist before Trump?

https://www.businessinsider.com/migrant-children-in-cages-2014-photos-explained-2018-5

Now letting the caravans in with out properly documenting each person, making sure they do not have a criminal history, making sure they are not carrying diseases is a national security risk. However that is not what is happening here is it? They are putting people in these camps, and then slowly releasing them. So again I ask, if they pose such a national security risk by letting them out at all, why are they going through the process of allowing them to apply for asylum?

As for targeting people based on ethnic appearance, do you mind providing an example, as I already shot one down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049773)
It also doesn't matter what his mother's status was or if she made an admin error, he had an American birth certificate, SSN and his lawyer provided every other document they asked for and he was still held for three weeks in squalid conditions, denied access to a phone call, denied access to sanitary facilities (this would actually be a war crime if it happened to a prisoner of war) and was underfed. The fact you defend this is honestly worrying.

I have not defended the state of the facilities, I have said more money needs to be placed in there, more man power, etc etc. However the fact documents like birth certificates and social security numbers are easily faked in the US, and that his name was bringing up problems in the system, can be understood as to why he was taken into custody. It was not a case of "Oh he looks hispanic, get him" as you made it out to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049773)
I'm glad you glossed over the conditions though. Those camps are not fit for humans. At all. Kids sleeping on cold concrete, overcrowded cells, masked guards, physical cages. These camps make the British concentration camps of the Boer war look tolerable.

They are overcrowded no doubt, there needs to be better living conditions and more money placed into it. That is one thing we both agree on.

Hands July 30th, 2019 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049775)
How many Brits or Canadian kids are crossing the border illegally and applying for asylum?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/08/07/dhs-foreigners-overstayed-visas-2017/924316002/


Canadians are the biggest offenders for overstaying visa and a noted number of French and Brits routinely overstay visas as well. Yet ICE isn't stopping busses of white people to make sure none of those pesky red coats are hiding on them.



Also, you cannot illegally cross a border and apply for asylum. If you are applying for asylum you are following international law and therefore your crossing of the border was legal. You would only be illegally entering the country if you failed to seek asylum and successfully entered the country off the grid.



Quote:

So it's entirely politically motivated, then these camps did not exist before Trump?

That's a logical fallacy. The camps existing before Trump is completely irrelevant. It was wrong then, absolutely, but he has rapidly increased the scope of it.

https://cmsny.org/trumps-executive-orders-immigration-refugees/

https://time.com/4473972/donald-trump-mexico-meeting-insult/

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/trump-ice/565772/

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/07/22/warning-new-show-me-your-papers-era-rights-advocates-vow-fight-unlawful-trump-plan

https://globalnews.ca/news/4284138/separation-children-parents-us-border-permanent/



Of course, not that it matters who started it, the US has always been institutionally racist, whether it was Obama's ICE caging US citizens for years or Trump's ICE "losing" over 3,000 children.

Quote:

Now letting the caravans in with out properly documenting each person, making sure they do not have a criminal history, making sure they are not carrying diseases is a national security risk.
So, we're in agreement it's presented as a national security risk, gotcha.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/us-army-soldiers-migrant-detention-camp-donna-texas-a9023591.html so much so that the US army are now manning some of the camps. An army branch of a far right govt manning camps comprised entirely of minority groups. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think this happened before somewhere a few times. Tricky, it's almost like there's a repeat going on of...well.....geez...British/German/Japanese/French/Spanish/American concentration camps of olde!




Quote:

However that is not what is happening here is it? They are putting people in these camps, and then slowly releasing them.
Some people are literally there for years. There are people in ICE detention who've been there longer than most British POWs were in Japanese camps during the second World War.



Quote:

So again I ask, if they pose such a national security risk by letting them out at all, why are they going through the process of allowing them to apply for asylum?
pesky little thing called International Law.


Quote:

As for targeting people based on ethnic appearance, do you mind providing an example, as I already shot one down.

uh yeah, there were over 300,000 (that's more than Mexicans who attempted to enter the country illegally) white foreigners who overstayed their visas since Trump came into office (and we will see it increase again for 2018) and yet not a single one of them has ended up in the camps and ICE are not out there demanding to see the papers and birth certificates of whites on the street, in busses, at work etc on the off chance they're an illegal brit or canadian.



Quote:

I have not defended the state of the facilities
No, just their right to detain children in squalid conditions almost indefinitely with no due process.


Quote:

I have said more money needs to be placed in there, more man power, etc etc

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-detention-camps-cost


they've already got plenty of money going in and still they're making kids eat frozen meals and refusing to let them wash. They've got the man power, it's walking around with guns.


Quote:

However the fact documents like birth certificates and social security numbers are easily faked in the US, and that his name was bringing up problems in the system, can be understood as to why he was taken into custody.
They can check both of those for legitimacy with ease and simply refused to whilst also denying him his legal rights. So uh, it's not understandable in the slightest and would never have happened to a white person.

Quote:

It was not a case of "Oh he looks hispanic, get him" as you made it out to be.

Yes it was. They aren't stop searching every car of whites they see, they are doing it to every car of "Hispanic looking people" they see.



Quote:

They are overcrowded no doubt, there needs to be better living conditions and more money placed into it. That is one thing we both agree on.
Again, they are already paying the equivalent of roughly $23,000 pcm per kid. How much more money do you need to supply $60 beds and basic sanitary facilities? Also I don't agree with you at all, I think every ICE official should be tried at the Hague and the camps shut down and left empty as a reminder to the world just how despicable the apparent land of the free really is.

EnglishALT July 30th, 2019 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/08/07/dhs-foreigners-overstayed-visas-2017/924316002/


Canadians are the biggest offenders for overstaying visa and a noted number of French and Brits routinely overstay visas as well. Yet ICE isn't stopping busses of white people to make sure none of those pesky red coats are hiding on them.

Except these border camps are not for those overstaying their VISAs, they are for those who have been picked up crossing the border illegally, a rather massive difference. Are you suggesting that if a Hispanic person were to overstay his or her VISA they would be put into a border camp, while a French or British citizen would not? If so where is your proof that is happening?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
Also, you cannot illegally cross a border and apply for asylum. If you are applying for asylum you are following international law and therefore your crossing of the border was legal. You would only be illegally entering the country if you failed to seek asylum and successfully entered the country off the grid.

You can seek asylum by applying for it at a port of entry, in which case the person will stay in Mexico until their case is processed. Entering the US by illegally crossing the border however is still a crime, it does not matter if they are trying to seek asylum or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
That's a logical fallacy. The camps existing before Trump is completely irrelevant. It was wrong then, absolutely, but he has rapidly increased the scope of it.

https://cmsny.org/trumps-executive-orders-immigration-refugees/

https://time.com/4473972/donald-trump-mexico-meeting-insult/

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/trump-ice/565772/

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/07/22/warning-new-show-me-your-papers-era-rights-advocates-vow-fight-unlawful-trump-plan

https://globalnews.ca/news/4284138/separation-children-parents-us-border-permanent/

Of course, not that it matters who started it, the US has always been institutionally racist, whether it was Obama's ICE caging US citizens for years or Trump's ICE "losing" over 3,000 children.

They are completely relevant as your argument is, and I quote: It's entirely politically motivated. Trump has ran his entire campaign on the "Mexican Terror" and these camps are a part of it.

If these camps are part of US policy before Trump became President, to deal with a massive wave of migrants, then how can these camps be politically motivated by Trump?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
So, we're in agreement it's presented as a national security risk, gotcha.

Only if they are not processed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
Some people are literally there for years. There are people in ICE detention who've been there longer than most British POWs were in Japanese camps during the second World War.

Proof please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
pesky little thing called International Law.

So wait are they concentration camps or are they processing camps for asylum cases?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
uh yeah, there were over 30,000 (that's 10,000 more than Mexicans who attempted to enter the country illegally) white foreigners who overstayed their visas in both 2016 and again in 2017 (and we will see it again for 2018) and yet not a single one of them has ended up in the camps and ICE are not out there demanding to see the papers and birth certificates of whites on the street, in busses, at work etc on the off chance they're an illegal brit or canadian.

Again I ask, have you any proof that VISA overstays are being sent to camps meant to process people who illegally cross the border, and not the normal prison system?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
https://www.gq.com/story/trump-detention-camps-cost

they've already got plenty of money going in and still they're making kids eat frozen meals and refusing to let them wash. They've got the man power, it's walking around with guns.

If they have the money then why did Congress just a few weeks ago have to approve billions more?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
They can check both of those for legitimacy with ease and simply refused to whilst also denying him his legal rights. So uh, it's not understandable in the slightest and would never have happened to a white person.

You seem to have this insider knowledge of how quickly a government agent can go through the system to check the credentials of the hundreds of people apprehended each day. You mind providing proof as to where you got this information?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
Yes it was. They aren't stop searching every car of whites they see, they are doing it to every car of "Hispanic looking people" they see.

So, you have proof they are stopping people purely based on race? That seems like a racial profiling lawsuit in the making and not based on any proof what so ever.

Mind you Francisco Erwin Galicia was stopped at a border patrol check point in Falfurrias, Texas, not far from the Mexican border, check points that from personal experience I can tell you, they stop every car, no matter the skin color of the driver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049784)
Again, they are already paying the equivalent of roughly $23,000 pcm per kid. How much more money do you need to supply $60 beds and basic sanitary facilities?

Apparently alot when you consider the cost it takes to build and maintain each of these facilities which are not equipped to handle this many people.

Hands July 30th, 2019 2:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049791)
Except these border camps are not for those overstaying their VISAs, they are for those who have been picked up crossing the border illegally, a rather massive difference. Are you suggesting that if a Hispanic person were to overstay his or her VISA they would be put into a border camp, while a French or British citizen would not? If so where is your proof that is happening?

Yes, they absolutely would be detained awaiting deportation. ICE operates more than just a few border camps. Most people in detention under ICE are not at bordercamps.


Quote:

You can seek asylum by applying for it at a port of entry, in which case the person will stay in Mexico until their case is processed. Entering the US by illegally crossing the border however is still a crime, it does not matter if they are trying to seek asylum or not.
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum

You can apply for asylum after crossing the border. So it does matter. That's how the law works.


Quote:

They are completely relevant as your argument is, and I quote: It's entirely politically motivated. Trump has ran his entire campaign on the "Mexican Terror" and these camps are a part of it.

If these camps are part of US policy before Trump became President, to deal with a massive wave of migrants, then how can these camps be politically motivated by Trump?
Because, as explained to you previously, Trump has increased the scope of both ICE and has ran an entire campaign on demonizing minorities, particularly Mexicans, and creating a culture of fear. For Obama, ICE was an ugly secret. For Trump its a political tool of propaganda.


Quote:

Proof please.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/01/540903038/u-s-citizen-held-by-immigration-for-3-years-denied-compensation-by-appeals-court

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/402725-ice-detained-us-citizen-for-almost-two-years







Quote:

So wait are they concentration camps or are they processing camps for asylum cases?
Concentration camps.



Quote:

Again I ask, have you any proof that VISA overstays are being sent to camps meant to process people who illegally cross the border, and not the normal prison system?
You seem to misunderstand, the conditions in any of ICE's detention centers are poor, not simply the border ones.


Quote:

If they have the money then why did Congress just a few weeks ago have to approve billions more?
Because children are actively dying and the US must be seen to be doing something to address this.



Quote:

You seem to have this insider knowledge of how quickly a government agent can go through the system to check the credentials of the hundreds of people apprehended each day. You mind providing proof as to where you got this information?

https://www.ssa.gov/employer/ssnv.htm



companies can literally do it online it's that easy.


https://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/us/uk-birth-records?kw=birth+records&pgrid=26359860310&ptaid=kwd-15296011&s_kwcid=find+birth+records&gclid=CjwKCAjw1f_pBRAEEiwApp0JKDg7Akwbcq5T76y6ihDk9E5UlR9I-rNexceafv4Znvvi-m19RssUdhoCQ9wQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&o_xid=59287&o_lid=59287&o_sch=Paid+Search+Non+Brand



Hell, regular people can check a birth certificate out. These are things that are commonly recorded.


Quote:

So, you have proof they are stopping people purely based on race? That seems like a racial profiling lawsuit in the making and not based on any proof what so ever.
https://splinternews.com/u-s-man-is-suing-after-ice-holds-him-in-jail-for-3-wee-1793927348


Funny how none of these are ever coming from "John Smith" huh?



Quote:

Mind you Francisco Erwin Galicia was stopped at a border patrol check point in Falfurrias, Texas, not far from the Mexican border, check points that from personal experience I can tell you, they stop every car, no matter the skin color of the driver.
How many white Americans have been detained for three weeks without access to a phone call and had their lawyers ignored when they present legal documentation that clears their client?


I don't think anecdotal evidence is acceptable by community standards as proof, but I can tell you that I have never once had any border agent demand my passport or any other form of ID unless I was at an airport. When we travel for work, it's only ever the engies who aren't white who get stopped and questioned, even though we're all foreign.


Quote:

Apparently alot when you consider the cost it takes to build and maintain each of these facilities which are not equipped to handle this many people.
You'd be surprised how little tents and chickenwire costs. But for context, the average cost to house a single prisoner in the US per year ranges between $23,000 - $60,000 and they have better amnesties than these kids have who cost the taxpayer the equivalent of $276,000 per year per kid. So whatever way you spin it, there is no justification for what is happening and the UN human rights chief agrees. The UN is a legitimate source in your eyes on other topics, particularly the treatment of prisoners in another country, so I hope you treat it with the same weight when applied to the detention of children in the United States



https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/07/1041991

EnglishALT July 30th, 2019 3:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
Yes, they absolutely would be detained awaiting deportation. ICE operates more than just a few border camps. Most people in detention under ICE are not at bordercamps.

Of course, so how can you make the comparison that VISA overstays would be detained at border camps meant to process those who have just entered illegally? Especially when VISA overstays have already been background checked and screened, while those crossing the border have not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum

You can apply for asylum after crossing the border. So it does matter. That's how the law works.

I never said you couldn't, however applying for asylum does not negate the crime of crossing the border illegally. Again if they wish they can apply at a port of entry and wait in Mexico as thousands of others are doing.

https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1911-8-usc-1325-unlawful-entry-failure-depart-fleeing-immigration

That's how the law works.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
Because, as explained to you previously, Trump has increased the scope of both ICE and has ran an entire campaign on demonizing minorities, particularly Mexicans, and creating a culture of fear. For Obama, ICE was an ugly secret. For Trump its a political tool of propaganda.

So Trump is causing the record numbers of migrants to flood the border not seen in over a decade? Is he using magical voodoo powers for this? Mind control perhaps? Or how about we both acknowledge that it is US policy during both the previous and current administration to use camps when there is a flood of migrants illegally crossing, and this has nothing to do with demonizing minorities.

Both of which are miscarriages of justice, and thankfully they are getting money from their ordeal. However it seems neither men were detained in these so camps, so I don't see how it is relevant to the current discussion, unless you are saying that people will be kept in these conditions for years, of which I don't think either of these articles rise to the burden of proof of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
You seem to misunderstand, the conditions in any of ICE's detention centers are poor, not simply the border ones.

Proof please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
Because children are actively dying and the US must be seen to be doing something to address this.

Which ones? Provide some context.

Yes, I am sure the Government uses something like Ancestory.com when trying to go through the bureaucratic paperwork of making sure their IDs are proper. I take it you do not have any proper time frame on how long it takes for a Government official to check this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
https://splinternews.com/u-s-man-is-suing-after-ice-holds-him-in-jail-for-3-wee-1793927348

Funny how none of these are ever coming from "John Smith" huh?

I'll forgo arguing the bias of the link. However again I note you have not provided any proof of actual racial profiling, merely three stories out of the millions of people ICE deals with each year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
How many white Americans have been detained for three weeks without access to a phone call and had their lawyers ignored when they present legal documentation that clears their client?


I don't think anecdotal evidence is acceptable by community standards as proof, but I can tell you that I have never once had any border agent demand my passport or any other form of ID unless I was at an airport. When we travel for work, it's only ever the engies who aren't white who get stopped and questioned, even though we're all foreign.

How many times have you crossed the US/Mexico border?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049821)
You'd be surprised how little tents and chickenwire costs. But for context, the average cost to house a single prisoner in the US per year ranges between $23,000 - $60,000 and they have better amnesties than these kids have who cost the taxpayer the equivalent of $276,000 per year per kid. So whatever way you spin it, there is no justification for what is happening and the UN human rights chief agrees. The UN is a legitimate source in your eyes on other topics, particularly the treatment of prisoners in another country, so I hope you treat it with the same weight when applied to the detention of children in the United States

https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/07/1041991

Chicken wire and tents? Do you realize how hot it gets on the southern border of the United States?

Also note, that a single prisoner is housed in a Jail that has already been constructed, the US, was not ready for such an epic flood of migration, and is now forced with the task of converting facilities as quickly as possible that were not designed to hold people, into holding facilities.

Hands July 30th, 2019 4:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049827)
Of course, so how can you make the comparison that VISA overstays would be detained at border camps meant to process those who have just entered illegally? Especially when VISA overstays have already been background checked and screened, while those crossing the border have not.

Only, if you're from any number of countries then you do not have to face any checks. I can be in the US for 90 days without a proper visa, for instance, because I'm British.


Quote:

I never said you couldn't, however applying for asylum does not negate the crime of crossing the border illegally. Again if they wish they can apply at a port of entry and wait in Mexico as thousands of others are doing.

https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1911-8-usc-1325-unlawful-entry-failure-depart-fleeing-immigration

That's how the law works.

https://www.rescue-uk.org/article/it-legal-cross-us-border-seek-asylum



Quote:

So Trump is causing the record numbers of migrants to flood the border not seen in over a decade? Is he using magical voodoo powers for this? Mind control perhaps? Or how about we both acknowledge that it is US policy during both the previous and current administration to use camps when there is a flood of migrants illegally crossing, and this has nothing to do with demonizing minorities.

Actually, immigration to the US is at a 40 year low.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44319094

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/fact-check-trump-border-crossings-declining-.html

Even illegal crossings are at a relative low

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/fact-check-trump-border-crossings-declining-.html


So the myth of the great border floods is entirely Trump's fault, yes, because he made it up.


The only thing we have seen an increase of is children, because full families are now fleeing violence and poverty and not just young men like years gone by. Overall numbers are down.




Quote:

Both of which are miscarriages of justice, and thankfully they are getting money from their ordeal. However it seems neither men were detained in these so camps, so I don't see how it is relevant to the current discussion, unless you are saying that people will be kept in these conditions for years, of which I don't think either of these articles rise to the burden of proof of that.
Because we are talking, again like I have now highlighted several times, about a wider immigration issue than just the bordercamps, you've literally replied just below and just above to comments I made about ICE detention facilities as a whole. It's also relevant because it highlights that ICE are literally targeting minorities and illegally detaining US citizens.



Quote:

Proof please.
Just for clarification, you replied to my comment about other ICE facilities here, when just above you said we were not talking about those. For clarity's sake I'd like to use this moment to say we are in fact talking about those and I'll assume going forward you are aware of that.

https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/immigrants-rights-and-detention/immigration-detention-conditions

https://www.justia.com/immigration/deportation-removal/detention-by-ice/

ICE raids aren't happening on the border, they're happening in towns and cities. ICE doesn't just arrest kids for crossing the border and the issue of their behavior far exceeds just the kid camps.


Quote:

Which ones? Provide some context.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/16-year-old-unaccompanied-migrant-boy-dies-while-u-s-n1000821

https://www.theroot.com/u-s-government-admits-another-migrant-child-died-under-1834976658

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/migrant-girl-from-guatemala-who-died-in-us-custody-had-infection-autopsy-finds/

Due to the dreadful conditions, illness is running rampant, children are left malnourished and at risk. Children, not criminals, not adults, children.



Quote:

Yes, I am sure the Government uses something like Ancestory.com when trying to go through the bureaucratic paperwork of making sure their IDs are proper. I take it you do not have any proper time frame on how long it takes for a Government official to check this?

The Govt absolutely doesn't use Ancestory.com, but my point is if Joe Average can find a legit birth certificate in 15 minutes it shouldn't take law enforcement three weeks of ignoring said documents being presented to them almost daily. Did you overlook the easy to use govt provided SSN checker?


Quote:

I'll forgo arguing the bias of the link. However again I note you have not provided any proof of actual racial profiling, merely three stories out of the millions of people ICE deals with each year.
source please on ICE dealing with "millions" per year, but here's some more

https://www.gq.com/story/border-patrol-detained-9-year-old-american-girl

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/12/04/born-philadelphia-us-citizen-says-he-was-held-deportation-jamaica-ices-request/?utm_term=.bca1cd1505a9

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/12/opinion/ice-raids.html


You might start to see a pattern with all of these detained people, wrongly or (by law anyway) rightfully. They all share a very common trait. None of them are white.


Quote:

How many times have you crossed the US/Mexico border?
Could be once, could be one hundred times. It isn't relevant to anything we're discussing outside of you trying to defend the illegal detention and denial of rights to a US citizen based on his ethnicity. And that's what it is, because the initial arrest could have been a cock up, sure, but the three weeks of denying him his phone call, basic sanitary rights, ignoring evidence and ghosting his lawyer was nothing short of completely illegal. You know, unlike the young man himself.

Quote:

Chicken wire and tents? Do you realize how hot it gets on the southern border of the United States?
https://nypost.com/2018/06/18/how-children-live-inside-cramped-immigration-detention-centers/

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/jul/08/facts-behind-detention-immigrants/

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/06/07/predicting-even-more-horrifying-conditions-historical-journalist-describes-parallels


I mean, I don't know what else you call the items photographed here.

Quote:

Also note, that a single prisoner is housed in a Jail that has already been constructed, the US, was not ready for such an epic flood of migration, and is now forced with the task of converting facilities as quickly as possible that were not designed to hold people, into holding facilities.
Most of these kids are in facilities that were already constructed, for very short term housing of individuals, not families and not hundreds of children. But we can get an aircraft hanger up in under two weeks for a lot less than the budget ICE now have. It's not an excuse.

EnglishALT July 30th, 2019 6:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
Only, if you're from any number of countries then you do not have to face any checks. I can be in the US for 90 days without a proper visa, for instance, because I'm British.

Yes the US also have a VISA waver program with most first world countries, however that does not mean their passport ( Of which they would have to had get a background check in their home country ) and information is not taken down and identified inside the ESTA system when they arrive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)

No where in the article does it say that crossing the border illegally negate the crime of entering illegally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
Actually, immigration to the US is at a 40 year low.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44319094

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/fact-check-trump-border-crossings-declining-.html

Even illegal crossings are at a relative low

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/fact-check-trump-border-crossings-declining-.html


So the myth of the great border floods is entirely Trump's fault, yes, because he made it up.


The only thing we have seen an increase of is children, because full families are now fleeing violence and poverty and not just young men like years gone by. Overall numbers are down.

It helps to use articles less than a year old, the one current article you have from the BBC says this and I note:

The decline follows a record number of apprehensions between ports of entry in May - the highest in over a decade.

It's impossible to say for certain, but US Border Patrol says it has made 688,375 southwest border apprehensions since October 2018. The previous US fiscal year there were 303,916, according to US Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

The number fell dramatically in President Trump's first year but rose again last year.

The number of migrants apprehended at the border surged in May to the highest level since 2006, with 132,887 detained - including 11,507 unaccompanied children. It was the first time that detentions had exceeded 100,000 since April 2007.


Here are some more current articles.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/february-marked-12-year-high-for-illegal-immigration-76-000-encountered-at-southern-border

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/05/us/border-crossing-increase.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/record-number-undocumented-immigrants-flooded-southern-border-may-n1014186


Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
Just for clarification, you replied to my comment about other ICE facilities here, when just above you said we were not talking about those. For clarity's sake I'd like to use this moment to say we are in fact talking about those and I'll assume going forward you are aware of that.

https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/immigrants-rights-and-detention/immigration-detention-conditions

https://www.justia.com/immigration/deportation-removal/detention-by-ice/

ICE raids aren't happening on the border, they're happening in towns and cities. ICE doesn't just arrest kids for crossing the border and the issue of their behavior far exceeds just the kid camps.

I am well aware that ICE raids are happening all across the US. However, and I may be missing it, I do not see in either of those articles information showing the detention centers away from the border are anywhere comparable.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)

Well lets break this down.

1st: From a quick search, there is still no information as to why the child died, from the original reporting of the Buzzfeed article he was brought in on April 20th to the Brownsville shelter, the next morning he began showing symptoms, and was treated at a hospital, he got worse the next day and eventually died. So far there is no information on what caused his death, and how long he was in ICE custody before arriving at the shelter. Considering the rampant diseases people are showing up with when claiming asylum it is rather possible he was sick before he even came into contact with ICE.

2nd: The girl had congenital heart defects, and died after complications from surgery, I don't see how you can blame ICE for that.

3rd: The father signed a form saying the girl was in good health, although its possible that he had no idea what the form said. That being said she contracted the illness before meeting with border patrol and was rushed to the hospital when her fever was discovered.

None of these seem to be the fault of ICE or Border Patrol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
The Govt absolutely doesn't use Ancestory.com, but my point is if Joe Average can find a legit birth certificate in 15 minutes it shouldn't take law enforcement three weeks of ignoring said documents being presented to them almost daily. Did you overlook the easy to use govt provided SSN checker?

The Government is faced with thousands of people arriving each day, and has to do an exhaustive search to make sure that everything is not fake, it shouldn't take three weeks we agree, but I am not surprised there is a backlog either.

Earlier this year the Border Patrol was on pace to capture over 1 million people, illegally crossing. Combine that with those that are staying in Mexico while requesting asylum, along with those captured in ICE raids inside of the US, and the number easily surpasses 1 million.

https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/1103318241538179072

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
You might start to see a pattern with all of these detained people, wrongly or (by law anyway) rightfully. They all share a very common trait. None of them are white.

Your third article plainly states: Ms. Nuetzi is a cheerful white woman who spent her childhood in Ocala, Fla., and has been an elementary school secretary in Gainesville for 20 years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
Could be once, could be one hundred times. It isn't relevant to anything we're discussing outside of you trying to defend the illegal detention and denial of rights to a US citizen based on his ethnicity. And that's what it is, because the initial arrest could have been a cock up, sure, but the three weeks of denying him his phone call, basic sanitary rights, ignoring evidence and ghosting his lawyer was nothing short of completely illegal. You know, unlike the young man himself.

I agree, but I think we can also agree that with crossings at a ten year high, and the border patrol completely overwhelmed, that a person can be lost a bit in the bureaucracy.

Just to remain clear here, we are talking about massive tent complexes, that stretch the length of football fields if not more, and require equally massive AC, lighting, etc to maintain? Or are you speaking of small little tents similar to the cheap tent city set up in Arizona.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/12/557302259/sheriff-joe-arpaios-infamous-tent-city-jail-closes

One is rather costly to keep up and maintain, he other isn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands (Post 10049842)
Most of these kids are in facilities that were already constructed, for very short term housing of individuals, not families and not hundreds of children. But we can get an aircraft hanger up in under two weeks for a lot less than the budget ICE now have. It's not an excuse.

ICE is apparently trying to get everything and anything up and running to properly care for the kids, including converting old Wal Marts to schools.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/14/us/family-separation-migrant-children-detention.html

http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/072919_phx_migrants/former-phoenix-elementary-school-transformed-into-migrant-shelter/

Roxas August 1st, 2019 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10049036)
Okay how does that change the facts on the ground that we are experiencing a massive swell of people crossing not seen in a decade, or that the border patrol is saying that they are at a breaking point?

I agree, it is evil, and we need to either change the laws so that family's can stay together in a facility indefinitely, or provide better facilities to handle the current flood crossing.

Guess what - people are coming over in "massive swells" because they are refugees.

"So that family's can stay together in a facility indefinitely" Yeah let's just lock up migrant refugee families forever because they're migrant refugees.

EnglishALT August 1st, 2019 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10051081)
Guess what - people are coming over in "massive swells" because they are refugees.

Problem is it depends on what kind of refugees they are, if they are economic refugees, as in they are coming for work, then they do not get asylum status.

Quote:

"So that family's can stay together in a facility indefinitely" Yeah let's just lock up migrant refugee families forever because they're migrant refugees.
What alternative is there? Close to 90 percent are not showing up for their court date.

Taste of Tea August 4th, 2019 11:09 AM

If the refugees/migrants don't want to be held at those facilities (I refuse to call them concentration camps because that's not what they are no matter how the Left tries to spin it), then perhaps they shouldn't approach the US border to begin with. I mean at this point they can't be oblivious to how they'll be treated if they try to cross into the US illegally, so I don't understand why they're putting themselves at risk. I also think it's silly for refugees/migrants to think that the US should be responsible for taking them in, as if the US is the source of all of their problems to begin with.

Roxas August 4th, 2019 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taste of Tea (Post 10052239)
If the refugees/migrants don't want to be held at those facilities (I refuse to call them concentration camps because that's not what they are no matter how the Left tries to spin it), then perhaps they shouldn't approach the US border to begin with. I mean at this point they can't be oblivious to how they'll be treated if they try to cross into the US illegally, so I don't understand why they're putting themselves at risk. I also think it's silly for refugees/migrants to think that the US should be responsible for taking them in, as if the US is the source of all of their problems to begin with.

Okay, then what alternative do refugees have, really?

In other countries, refugees are not held in border patrol facilities.

Her August 4th, 2019 1:55 PM

fwiw Australia does so as well, but they’re not exactly the country to praise on migration issues

EnglishALT August 4th, 2019 3:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10052252)
Okay, then what alternative do refugees have, really?

In other countries, refugees are not held in border patrol facilities.

Almost every country holds refugees in border facilities for security reasons. Japan for example has had a problem with a refugee committing suicide because of the conditions he faced in his facility.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1HK18Z

Taste of Tea August 6th, 2019 9:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10052252)
Okay, then what alternative do refugees have, really?

In the case of refugees from Latin America, I don't understand why they don't just migrate to other Latin American countries that neighbor their country of origin? I mean you'd think that they'd feel more comfortable in countries where Spanish is the most prominent language and the culture is more similar to what they're accustomed to, yet they'd rather travel hundreds of miles north through harsh terrain just to get to the United States where they'll face a harder time getting in... ? I just don't get it.

I also dislike the fact that Mexico just lets migrant caravans waltz right through their country without doing anything about it. They obviously have no intention of providing for the refugees themselves for an extended period of time; they'd just rather let them approach the U.S. border and hand over the problem to the United States.

Roxas August 6th, 2019 1:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10052346)
Almost every country holds refugees in border facilities for security reasons. Japan for example has had a problem with a refugee committing suicide because of the conditions he faced in his facility.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1HK18Z

That doesn't mean having border facilities is a good thing. The fact that anyone is committing suicide out of fear of border facility conditions is dreadful to be honest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taste of Tea (Post 10053382)
In the case of refugees from Latin America, I don't understand why they don't just migrate to other Latin American countries that neighbor their country of origin? I mean you'd think that they'd feel more comfortable in countries where Spanish is the most prominent language and the culture is more similar to what they're accustomed to, yet they'd rather travel hundreds of miles north through harsh terrain just to get to the United States where they'll face a harder time getting in... ? I just don't get it.

I also dislike the fact that Mexico just lets migrant caravans waltz right through their country without doing anything about it. They obviously have no intention of providing for the refugees themselves for an extended period of time; they'd just rather let them approach the U.S. border and hand over the problem to the United States.

Hand the problem over? Who exactly is the problem? Migrants?

Not going to accuse you of anything but this sounds awfully familiar to another historical "problem" group who were eventually, you know, victims of genocide. Because they were labeled a problem, instead of being treated as if they were, I dunno, people in need.

The reason they come to USA instead of another country is simply that the conditions here are better, provided you can eventually work towards citizenship and find a place to live. The other latin american countries they have the "option" of going to clearly aren't that great, otherwise they'd be fleeing there. Perhaps some of them do, but the United States is clearly a popular option because it's the best option, for most. Which is unfortunate, because instead of creating an actual program that helps people attain citizenship and become active members of society, we throw them in the border facility and treat them like criminals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10052319)
fwiw Australia does so as well, but they’re not exactly the country to praise on migration issues

I suppose I should've clarified, most countries with higher standards of living and happiness than the united states don't hold migrants in border camps. Which, admittedly, narrows the list down to a few countries up in the nordic area. It's not a world-encompassing practice, though. Not all third world countries do that either.

Also, I'm basing this off of the conditions of US camps. Can't name too many countries that are on this level of fash just yet, but there are a few that stick out. Australia's colonizers handled its native population and its migrants horribly all throughout history, same with United States, same with etc etc.

It almost seems as if countries infiltrated by colonizers who have run out the natives are generally not good at handling migrants.

EnglishALT August 6th, 2019 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10053515)
That doesn't mean having border facilities is a good thing. The fact that anyone is committing suicide out of fear of border facility conditions is dreadful to be honest.

I will ask you the exact question as I asked Maedar, what is the alternative? A country's duty is to it's own citizenry, not to migrants, how would you handle the security concerns and tracking of migrants if you do not have border facilities?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10053515)
Hand the problem over? Who exactly is the problem? Migrants?

Not going to accuse you of anything but this sounds awfully familiar to another historical "problem" group who were eventually, you know, victims of genocide. Because they were labeled a problem, instead of being treated as if they were, I dunno, people in need.

Just to note, in Germany this week a migrant from Africa ended up pushing an 8 year old boy and his mother in front of a train, the mother survived the boy did not.

https://www.france24.com/en/20190729-boy-8-dies-after-being-pushed-front-german-train

You can find a multitude of stories like this all across Europe and America when it comes to illegal immigration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10053515)
The reason they come to USA instead of another country is simply that the conditions here are better, provided you can eventually work towards citizenship and find a place to live. The other latin american countries they have the "option" of going to clearly aren't that great, otherwise they'd be fleeing there. Perhaps some of them do, but the United States is clearly a popular option because it's the best option, for most. Which is unfortunate, because instead of creating an actual program that helps people attain citizenship and become active members of society, we throw them in the border facility and treat them like criminals.

Sorry but you do not get to pick and choose, if you are fleeing violence you go to the next safest place, you do not get to go to the "best option". The minute you reach a country that does not have the problems you are fleeing, you need to stay or your cries of asylum ring hollow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxas (Post 10053515)
I suppose I should've clarified, most countries with higher standards of living and happiness than the united states don't hold migrants in border camps. Which, admittedly, narrows the list down to a few countries up in the nordic area. It's not a world-encompassing practice, though. Not all third world countries do that either.

Also, I'm basing this off of the conditions of US camps. Can't name too many countries that are on this level of fash just yet, but there are a few that stick out. Australia's colonizers handled its native population and its migrants horribly all throughout history, same with United States, same with etc etc.

It almost seems as if countries infiltrated by colonizers who have run out the natives are generally not good at handling migrants.

Japan and many other first world Asian countries would beg to differ, hell America has laxer standards for migration than Japan does! So is Japan a fascist country?

gimmepie August 7th, 2019 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10053607)
Just to note, in Germany this week a migrant from Africa ended up pushing an 8 year old boy and his mother in front of a train, the mother survived the boy did not.

You can find even more stories about non-immigrants doing that or worse. Don't cherry pick when the vast majority don't commit a single crime beyond the original immigration, especially not violent crime. I've shown you the statistics before, immigrants (illegal or otherwise) are less likely to commit crimes because of the fear of deportation.

Not that I'm against temporary detention, as I explained earlier. I just think this particular argument is extremely disingenuous. If you're anti-immigration, that's on you, but don't use falsities or disingenuous arguments to justify your view.

EnglishALT August 7th, 2019 1:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 10053703)
You can find even more stories about non-immigrants doing that or worse. Don't cherry pick when the vast majority don't commit a single crime beyond the original immigration, especially not violent crime. I've shown you the statistics before, immigrants (illegal or otherwise) are less likely to commit crimes because of the fear of deportation.

Not that I'm against temporary detention, as I explained earlier. I just think this particular argument is extremely disingenuous. If you're anti-immigration, that's on you, butter don't use falsities or disingenuous arguments to justify your view.

If you want we can go into those statistics however it does not address my overall point. Specifically that a government’s duty is to the protection of its citizens above all else. The government must be sure that the people they are letting in won’t harm their citizens or they must refuse to let them in. A citizen committing a crime is on the citizen, an immigrant committing a crime is not only on the immigrant but also brings up the question as to why the government did not see the warning signs when they were let in.

Sothis August 9th, 2019 6:54 PM

Even if you don't like the use of the word concentration camp, you have to admit that the conditions these people are in are appalling. Testimonies from people who were forced into these places say enough, do they not? And I don't think they should be forced in indefinitely, because then it is more of a prison don't you think?
And especially with ICE actually going around to peoples houses to take them away? It's like a dystopian story but it's happening. If someone does not have their proper papers why not just help them get them and let them stay home instead of dragging them away? Especially if they have a job and family.

And the crossings are happening more because of how the economy is, it really isn't anyones fault. Venezuela is in a crisis, for one, and Honduras is the most dangerous country in the Americas IIRC.

EnglishALT August 9th, 2019 7:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055051)
Even if you don't like the use of the word concentration camp, you have to admit that the conditions these people are in are appalling. Testimonies from people who were forced into these places say enough, do they not? And I don't think they should be forced in indefinitely, because then it is more of a prison don't you think?
And especially with ICE actually going around to peoples houses to take them away? It's like a dystopian story but it's happening. If someone does not have their proper papers why not just help them get them and let them stay home instead of dragging them away? Especially if they have a job and family.

And the crossings are happening more because of how the economy is, it really isn't anyones fault. Venezuela is in a crisis, for one, and Honduras is the most dangerous country in the Americas IIRC.

If they committed a crime why should they be allowed to stay at home? What other crimes do we allow a person to just stay at home and not even go to the police station to post bail? If they are here illegally they should be kicked out, that is practically the law in every country on the planet!

Also in the news, a father of five was killed a few days ago by an illegal immigrant who was escaping deportation.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-immigration-advocate-killed-in-crash-with-salvadoran-illegal-immigrant-who-once-sought-sanctuary-in-church-report.amp

Sothis August 9th, 2019 8:16 PM

You missed my point. They should help them become legal like the prison system should be there to help rehabilitate inmates.

EnglishALT August 9th, 2019 9:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055067)
You missed my point. They should help them become legal like the prison system should be there to help rehabilitate inmates.

Doesn’t that just punish those who cannot easily get across the border? Those that want to immigrate here from say China, Africa, Russia, or the Middle East? They cannot cross the border easily they have to wait in line with the rest of the world.

Sothis August 9th, 2019 10:35 PM

Helping people with the immigration process isn't punishing them?? I didn't say only specific people? I have no idea how you're reading what I'm saying.

EnglishALT August 9th, 2019 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055109)
Helping people with the immigration process isn't punishing them?? I didn't say only specific people? I have no idea how you're reading what I'm saying.

If they are here illegally, and your plan is for them to stay here and get legal help to become legal citizens, then you are punishing the people who cannot easily migrate across a desert border to get here. Those illegals get to skip ahead of the line the rest of the world has to wait in, and enjoy all the benefits America provides while waiting for their citizenship, while those in other countries have to wait in their country of origin until they receive a green card or citizenship. In essence you are punishing those that follow the law by allowing those that break the law a path to citizenship and the ability to remain in the country.

Sothis August 9th, 2019 10:47 PM

I'd let others come over too, if you wish to move to and be a good citizen of another country, how come you can't? What's so wrong with people moving between countries? You know most of Europe has lax borders right? "Illegal" shouldn't be a thing, no person is "illegal" if you can fly to a country you want to live in all the power to you as well.
But you seem set in your ways so I won't waste my time further with this, I didn't mention people being able to jump ahead you just assumed it so you could fault my argument and not pay attention to the fact that it is wrong to treat people how these people are being treated.

EnglishALT August 9th, 2019 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055114)
I'd let others come over too, if you wish to move to and be a good citizen of another country, how come you can't? What's so wrong with people moving between countries? You know most of Europe has lax borders right? "Illegal" shouldn't be a thing, no person is "illegal" if you can fly to a country you want to live in all the power to you as well.
But you seem set in your ways so I won't waste my time further with this, I didn't mention people being able to jump ahead you just assumed it so you could fault my argument and not pay attention to the fact that it is wrong to treat people how these people are being treated.

Well before you go then let me ask, if you believe anyone should come then do you think there should be a limit? One million per year? Ten million? Infinite? Even Europe has put a cap on its number even with its lax borders, and if you want we can discuss the dangers that has brought to Europe. However again I ask should a country put a cap on the number of people it let’s in? Or should it just let everyone in and let the country fall apart as people cannot find jobs and have to overburden the welfare system to the point it crumbles?

Sothis August 9th, 2019 11:14 PM

The core issue is why do people wish to immigrate? Well, it's because:
1. Their own country is war torn, why is this so? Many middle eastern countries are only in shambles because of foreign forces going there and tearing shit up just for oil.
2. The country is poor. In my opinion no country should be poor, and they don't HAVE to be, like 100 people use up 50% of the earths resources, isn't that insane? Million and billionaires don't need all that money while countless people suffer.
3. The country is dangerous, this is linked back to poverty, if the worlds resources weren't hoarded by the mega rich and everyone had a fair share and poverty was a thing of the past you'd find people wouldn't be robbing, killing, etc because they'd be perfectly happy.
And the whole "they earned" shit is a thing of the distant past, most mega wealthy people inherited it or had rich parents, and like I said they don't need all that money, they don't need yachts, they don't need gold toilets. The rich live on the backs of the countless they exploit and this immoral and wrong.

EnglishALT August 9th, 2019 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055120)
The core issue is why do people wish to immigrate? Well, it's because:
1. Their own country is war torn, why is this so? Many middle eastern countries are only in shambles because of foreign forces going there and tearing muk up just for oil.
2. The country is poor. In my opinion no country should be poor, and they don't HAVE to be, like 100 people use up 50% of the earths resources, isn't that insane? Million and billionaires don't need all that money while countless people suffer.
3. The country is dangerous, this is linked back to poverty, if the worlds resources weren't hoarded by the mega rich and everyone had a fair share and poverty was a thing of the past you'd find people wouldn't be robbing, killing, etc because they'd be perfectly happy.
And the whole "they earned" muk is a thing of the distant past, most mega wealthy people inherited it or had rich parents, and like I said they don't need all that money, they don't need yachts, they don't need gold toilets. The rich live on the backs of the countless they exploit and this immoral and wrong.

You are deflecting from the question, we can go into how to fix the world’s problems and how much each country should give in aid, however I will again ask what would you put a cap on immigration? Because no matter what there are going to be millions if not billions that will want to move to first world countries, and no country on this planet can absorb that many people.

Nah August 10th, 2019 3:38 AM

It's not really deflecting imo. If you make it so people don't have much reason to immigrate to other countries, a cap is not something worth thinking about, as you'll never have to worry about taking in more people than you can handle.

What is deflection however is the constant mentioning of trivial things like immigration caps and "it's not fair to people who have to cross an ocean!" and inflexible adherence to the law over important things like the poor treatment of other human beings simply coming here to escape the awful conditions of their homelands, with said awful conditions caused in significant part by the wealthy elite of the West.

Sothis August 10th, 2019 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10055122)
You are deflecting from the question, we can go into how to fix the world’s problems and how much each country should give in aid, however I will again ask what would you put a cap on immigration? Because no matter what there are going to be millions if not billions that will want to move to first world countries, and no country on this planet can absorb that many people.

Literally how am I deflecting there shouldn't be third world whatever the fuck countries in the first place which has everything to do with immigration because with a more equal spread of wealth in every country there wouldn't be a need to immigrate. Please connect the dots here you just don't want to admit that I am in the right.

EnglishALT August 10th, 2019 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nah (Post 10055196)
It's not really deflecting imo. If you make it so people don't have much reason to immigrate to other countries, a cap is not something worth thinking about, as you'll never have to worry about taking in more people than you can handle.

We can go into the discussion on how it is impossible to do that, but even if the western countries were to attempt something like that it would still require decades of change, in the meantime there would be millions upon millions who would refuse to wait for their countries to change and want to immigrate immediately.

Quote:

What is deflection however is the constant mentioning of trivial things like immigration caps and "it's not fair to people who have to cross an ocean!" and inflexible adherence to the law over important things like the poor treatment of other human beings simply coming here to escape the awful conditions of their homelands, with said awful conditions caused in significant part by the wealthy elite of the West.
The discussion was not about that, it was about helping illegals obtain citizenship over those who have to wait for citizenship.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yurius (Post 10055484)
Literally how am I deflecting there shouldn't be third world whatever the psyduck countries in the first place which has everything to do with immigration because with a more equal spread of wealth in every country there wouldn't be a need to immigrate. Please connect the dots here you just don't want to admit that I am in the right.

So can you please answer it then, but let’s say we do this magical change, something that would take decades, what should the cap be in the meantime, or should we force people to stay in their countries while said change is happening.

Now to answer what you proposed let’s say we did “spread the wealth” around, there are numerous countries that are ruled by drug lords and criminal organizations, do you plan to use the military to overthrow those drug lords?

In Africa we see numerous countries ruled by dictators and warlords that take western aid and money and use it to prop themselves up with a lavish lifestyle do you plan to use the military to overthrow them?

There are countries that are very resource poor, do you plan to constantly provide those countries aid to support a first world lifestyle?

You blame the west on wars in the Middle East, however some of the greatest tension in the Middle East is Shia vs Sunni, ala Saudi Arabia vs Iran, do you plan to use the military to constantly keep those two apart? The same could be said for Pakistan and India, another flash point that has nothing to do with the west.

Ivysaur August 12th, 2019 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10055554)
The same could be said for Pakistan and India, another flash point that has nothing to do with the west.

Oh boy have you heard of Louis Mountbatten. Because if there is something the West is totally responsible for is the cold war between Pakistan and India, two countries that did not even exist until a random British Earl was dispatched to India with a map and told to draw borders for two countries in a few days, without the slightest clue of how it looked on the ground or whether there even was apetite for partition. Please do read the history of the Partition of India and then tell me again the West has nothing to do with it.

EnglishALT August 12th, 2019 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivysaur (Post 10056648)
Oh boy have you heard of Louis Mountbatten. Because if there is something the West is totally responsible for is the cold war between Pakistan and India, two countries that did not even exist until a random British Earl was dispatched to India with a map and told to draw borders for two countries in a few days, without the slightest clue of how it looked on the ground or whether there even was apetite for partition. Please do read the history of the Partition of India and then tell me again the West has nothing to do with it.

Alright fair enough, although I would say that 71 years later the problems the two nations face have little to do with the west and mostly with their current inability to deal with radical jihadism in their own borders, the debacle over Kashmiri, and increased military support from China.

Ivysaur August 12th, 2019 2:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10056663)
Alright fair enough, although I would say that 71 years later the problems the two nations face have little to do with the west and mostly with their current inability to deal with radical jihadism in their own borders, the debacle over Kashmiri, and increased military support from China.

Except the Kashmir issue was created by Earl Mountbatten himself by drawing a randomly drunken line crossing through a 50-50 territory, Jihadism is exacerbated by Pakistan being created as a Muslim-only state as opposed to the multicultural country India once was -aided by the British "Divide the religions and rule" policy that kept them in power for two centuries- and the Chinese are drawn to, and concerned by, the fact that their two neighbouring countries are in a permanent state of war, with nukes on a hair trigger, over the issue of Kashmir.

So yes, literally everything about the India-Pakistan problem was created by the West, by the United Kingdom to be precise. Everything you see right now is the effects of the decision of a British dude, just amplified by 70 years of anger because of what he did.

EnglishALT August 12th, 2019 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivysaur (Post 10056726)
Except the Kashmir issue was created by Earl Mountbatten himself by drawing a randomly drunken line crossing through a 50-50 territory, Jihadism is exacerbated by Pakistan being created as a Muslim-only state as opposed to the multicultural country India once was -aided by the British "Divide the religions and rule" policy that kept them in power for two centuries- and the Chinese are drawn to, and concerned by, the fact that their two neighbouring countries are in a permanent state of war, with nukes on a hair trigger, over the issue of Kashmir.

So yes, literally everything about the India-Pakistan problem was created by the West, by the United Kingdom to be precise. Everything you see right now is the effects of the decision of a British dude, just amplified by 70 years of anger because of what he did.

You neglect to mention that Pakistan was created because a Muslim minority feared losing to a Hindu majority and was seeking their own country.

https://www.hoover.org/research/islam-and-early-history-pakistan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/jinnah_mohammad_ali.shtml

You also neglect the 1937 elections that saw the Muslims League do poorly and resulted to being largely shut out of the government, fueling discontent and driving the need for a separate country.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mohammed-Ali-Jinnah

Her August 22nd, 2019 10:50 PM

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49425624

How's that 'they're not concentration camps' argument going, for those that still rally against the idea? You still feel comfortable, secure? Enjoying the taste of boot?

EnglishALT August 23rd, 2019 1:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10061557)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49425624

How's that 'they're not concentration camps' argument going, for those that still rally against the idea? You still feel comfortable, secure? Enjoying the taste of boot?

As noted before those being released are not showing up for their hearings, thus holding them ( or making them wait in Mexico if they do not illegally cross the border ) is the only way to make sure they do not disappear into the US, before pleading their case for asylum. How does this change anything by the way in your argument? If anything all it does is discourage the purchasing of children to get through.

Ivysaur August 23rd, 2019 11:36 PM

https://www.vox.com/2019/8/22/20827949/trump-chosen-one-greenland-bizarreness-explained?utm_campaign=vox.social&utm_content=1566605472&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stocks-set-to-head-slightly-higher-as-wall-street-awaits-powells-jackson-hole-speech-2019-08-23

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1164914610836783104

Seriously, this man is mentally unstable. I don't know what kind of illness he suffers from (or maybe he's just blind), but this week he was totally deranged and every three hours he's been doing something that would have sent Republicans into asking for a coup to remove Obama had he done one single of these things. "I hereby order companies to leave China and move production to the US", says the candidate of the party that loves free enterprise and warns against socialists telling companies what to do or nationalising them.

And these things are not even productive for him. He's pushing the US into an economic crash, which is very much what he doesn't need by next year.

Her October 2nd, 2019 4:14 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/dna-testing-immigrants.html
Quote:

The Trump administration is moving to begin collecting DNA samples from hundreds of thousands of people booked into federal immigration custody each year for entry into a national criminal database, an immense expansion of the use of technology to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

Senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security said Wednesday that the Justice Department was developing a federal regulation that would give immigration officers the authority to collect DNA in detention facilities that are holding more than 40,000 people.

The move would constitute a major expansion of the use of a database maintained by the F.B.I., which has been limited mainly to genetic data collected from people who have been arrested, charged or convicted in connection with serious crimes.

Immigrant and privacy advocates said the move raised privacy concerns for an already vulnerable population that could face profiling or discrimination as a result of their personal data being shared among law enforcement authorities. The new rules would allow the government to collect DNA from children, as well as those who seek asylum at legal ports of entry and have not broken the law.

Sign Up for the Morning Briefing
Get what you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox.

SIGN UP
They warned that United States citizens, who are sometimes accidentally booked into immigration custody, could also be forced to hand over their private genetic information.

“That kind of mass collection alters the purpose of DNA collection from one of criminal investigation basically to population surveillance, which is basically contrary to our basic notions of a free, trusting, autonomous society,” said Vera Eidelman, a staff lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.

She said that because genetic material carries strong family connections, the data collection would have implications not only for those in immigration custody but also their family members who might be United States citizens, or have legal residence.

Homeland security officials, in a call with reporters on Wednesday, said the new initiative was permitted under the DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005. Up until now, immigrant detainees have been exempt from the law, they said, because of an agreement between Eric H. Holder Jr. and Janet Napolitano, who served as attorney general and homeland security secretary, respectively, under President Barack Obama.

The officials said the proposed rule was inspired partly by a pilot program conducted this summer along the southwestern border, in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents used rapid DNA sampling technology to identify “fraudulent family units” — adults who were using children disguised as their own to exploit special protections for families with immigrant children.

Editors’ Picks

Me and My Whistle-Blower

Ming, the Bengal Tiger Raised in a Harlem Apartment, Has Died

What Does Having a Boyfriend Have to Do With Sleep?
The new program would differ from the pilot in that it would provide a comprehensive DNA profile of individuals who are tested, as opposed to the more narrow test that was used only to determine parentage. And unlike the testing under the pilot program, the results would be shared with other law enforcement agencies.

The move is part of a wider Trump administration move to criminalize unauthorized border crossings, even in some cases when people have complied with federal immigration laws, such as presenting themselves at legal ports of entry into the United States to seek asylum.

Regarding that group, which is considered protected under federal asylum law, a senior D.H.S. official who spoke with reporters on condition of anonymity, said, “There is a criminal aspect to that population.”

Crossing the border without documents and attempting to elude border authorities is a misdemeanor for first offenders.

After the DNA samples are taken, under the forthcoming regulation, they would be entered into the F.B.I.’s highly regulated national DNA database. Known as CODIS, the Combined DNA Index System is used by state and law enforcement authorities to help identify criminal suspects. It is advertised on the bureau’s website as a “tool for linking violent crimes.”

In supplying the F.B.I. and other law enforcement with the DNA of immigration detainees, federal authorities are jumping into an ethical debate about the use of DNA in criminal investigations. While such sampling has been crucial in securing thousands of prosecutions over the past several decades, it has also generated controversy because of the potential for abuse.

Trump administration officials did not provide a timeline for the rollout of the regulation but said that a working group was meeting weekly to introduce it as soon as possible.
what can even be said at this stage that hasn't been said already

EnglishALT October 2nd, 2019 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her (Post 10074796)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/dna-testing-immigrants.html


what can even be said at this stage that hasn't been said already

You mind explaining what exactly is the problem here?

Kanzler October 3rd, 2019 3:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10074815)
You mind explaining what exactly is the problem here?

It's a highly suspect invasion of privacy. You have to ask yourself how the DNA will be used. You have to ask yourself what means they will have to define a match, as people who are related will have similar DNA, and even people who aren't related might be mistakenly identified. Even putting aside concerns of privacy, you have to ask yourself what the science is capable of. And if there are major holes in the technology, then why bother subject a whole group of people to invasive testing against their consent? If you are okay with that, then that suggests some contempt you might have regarding their dignity.

If you don't care about that, then you must consider that such a policy may violate the Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." I don't know how you feel about authoritarian countries, but it would be very ironic to denounce authoritarian governments worldwide and praise American freedom while supporting such a policy.

EnglishALT October 3rd, 2019 4:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075064)
It's a highly suspect invasion of privacy. You have to ask yourself how the DNA will be used. You have to ask yourself what means they will have to define a match, as people who are related will have similar DNA, and even people who aren't related might be mistakenly identified.

Obviously the first and most obvious reason for this is to determine if those who are claiming to be family, have some definitive proof before they are released into the country with a child who may or may not even be related to them. As you said people who are related will have similar DNA, and thus they can determine if the child they brought along actually belongs to them, or was bought of the street, a problem we have discussed previously in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075064)
Even putting aside concerns of privacy, you have to ask yourself what the science is capable of. And if there are major holes in the technology, then why bother subject a whole group of people to invasive testing against their consent? If you are okay with that, then that suggests some contempt you might have regarding their dignity.

Is it against their consent? If one of the rules to claim asylum is a DNA test then they can either consent to it, or abandon the asylum process. I don't see anywhere in the article where it states they are being held down and forced to take a DNA test.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075064)
If you don't care about that, then you must consider that such a policy may violate the Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." I don't know how you feel about authoritarian countries, but it would be very ironic to denounce authoritarian governments worldwide and praise American freedom while supporting such a policy.

I did consider the fourth amendment concerns, however the key phrase your missing is "unreasonable searches and seizures" having DNA tests to see if a person is related to with who they claim as a dependent, so that they can enter the country hardly constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure, the same goes with a DNA check to see if they are a repeat offender of immigration law, neither sounds like an act of an authoritarian country.

Kanzler October 3rd, 2019 5:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10075079)
Obviously the first and most obvious reason for this is to determine if those who are claiming to be family, have some definitive proof before they are released into the country with a child who may or may not even be related to them. As you said people who are related will have similar DNA, and thus they can determine if the child they brought along actually belongs to them, or was bought of the street, a problem we have discussed previously in this thread.

Is this an issue? In that case you would still want to minimize the extent of this information being used - assuming that you are collecting the DNA, you ought to use the information simply to match the parents with the children and not leave a permanent record that persists beyond the purpose that the information is being obtained for. It doesn't mean you create a database that keeps this private information potentially indefinitely with a loose scope for its use. And besides, what is sufficient kinship? What of distant cousins or adopted children?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10075079)
Is it against their consent? If one of the rules to claim asylum is a DNA test then they can either consent to it, or abandon the asylum process. I don't see anywhere in the article where it states they are being held down and forced to take a DNA test.

Even if you asked for the person's consent, it wouldn't make it right. There must be some kind of risk that you are managing in order to ask for someone to give up their information like that. I don't know what an asylum seeker has done to have them give up their DNA information that an immigrant from a traditional channel has not. You could make the same comparison to an American citizen. Those asylum seekers that become US citizens will always have their DNA information in a database somewhere which means they would never appreciate the privilege to have such information kept private to themselves. I think governments have no business asking for information of this kind from people who have done nothing wrong. What about the asylum seeker requires for you to take their DNA?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10075079)
I did consider the fourth amendment concerns, however the key phrase your missing is "unreasonable searches and seizures" having DNA tests to see if a person is related to with who they claim as a dependent, so that they can enter the country hardly constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure, the same goes with a DNA check to see if they are a repeat offender of immigration law, neither sounds like an act of an authoritarian country.

I don't agree with having DNA testing, but if I did, I would still require that the information only be used for the purpose intended and discarded after. For example, you could take someone's DNA and check it against a criminal database, and once that was cleared the sample and all records of the DNA it should be destroyed. If there is a record remaining it should just be a record that they passed or failed the check.

All of this talk is pointless without discussion of the capabilities and limits of DNA testing and checking, however. It's not a perfect technology, and if you use it on everybody you will inevitably get false positives. And for what purposes would you propose for DNA testing to be used? How long should the information be kept for? My understanding is that it's not very American to take people's information first and ask questions later. Privacy was once upon a time respected in society.

EnglishALT October 3rd, 2019 6:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075098)
Is this an issue? In that case you would still want to minimize the extent of this information being used - assuming that you are collecting the DNA, you ought to use the information simply to match the parents with the children and not leave a permanent record that persists beyond the purpose that the information is being obtained for. It doesn't mean you create a database that keeps this private information potentially indefinitely with a loose scope for its use. And besides, what is sufficient kinship? What of distant cousins or adopted children?

If you want I can dig up the articles in the thread, but yes it is a fairly large issue. The use of a database I believe from reading the article is to have it crosschecked with repeat criminal offenders who are attempting to get back into the country as well.

As for kinship, I believe under the Flores Agreement, its based on immediate family, although I am not sure. As for adopted children, again that gets back to buying children illegally, and would probably require the parent to provide proper paperwork from their home country showing the adoption was legal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075098)
Even if you asked for the person's consent, it wouldn't make it right. There must be some kind of risk that you are managing in order to ask for someone to give up their information like that. I don't know what an asylum seeker has done to have them give up their DNA information that an immigrant from a traditional channel has not. You could make the same comparison to an American citizen. Those asylum seekers that become US citizens will always have their DNA information in a database somewhere which means they would never appreciate the privilege to have such information kept private to themselves. I think governments have no business asking for information of this kind from people who have done nothing wrong. What about the asylum seeker requires for you to take their DNA?

The high recidivism rate of those deported, along with the current trend to buy children seems to show a clear risk in letting people in that have not been properly established as to who they are and who they belong to. Mind you as a asylum seeker their information is going to be in a database, their picture, finger prints, name, all information given that they filled out, information provided by their home, etc etc, is going to be in a database, how is DNA any different?

Also and this is the most important point of all, these people are asking to enter the US, many times from some of the most dangerous countries in the world with very little information about their past history. How should they expect any amount of privacy when the Government is going to do everything possible to establish the identities of these people?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075098)
I don't agree with having DNA testing, but if I did, I would still require that the information only be used for the purpose intended and discarded after. For example, you could take someone's DNA and check it against a criminal database, and once that was cleared the sample and all records of the DNA it should be destroyed. If there is a record remaining it should just be a record that they passed or failed the check.

And lets say they are subsequently refused asylum, and deported, five months later they are caught trying to cross the border again and claim asylum, what is the problem with having a profiling system in place for all of those who attempt to gain asylum or enter the country illegally?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 10075098)
All of this talk is pointless without discussion of the capabilities and limits of DNA testing and checking, however. It's not a perfect technology, and if you use it on everybody you will inevitably get false positives. And for what purposes would you propose for DNA testing to be used? How long should the information be kept for? My understanding is that it's not very American to take people's information first and ask questions later. Privacy was once upon a time respected in society.

I would say keep a national database for as long as the person remains alive, I cannot see the difference between this, and all the other checks we maintain on people who enter the country claiming asylum. How is having a DNA database any different than having a database with a person's picture in it, or fingerprints?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:33 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.