Donny osmond wrote:[Ok so images and videos of children being kept in cages is being beamed around the world, and your answer is to speculate that it is stopping *some* illegal immigrants *some* of whom may or may not be the parents of those children. How many illegals is it stopping and is that pitifully small number really a justification for the actual mental torture being inflicted on those kids? For the record, the fact that some people may not be treating their kids right wouldnt usually count as justification for the fucking american government to also, deliberately, engage in equally abhorrent practise.
No, no, you don't understand the Bluoe team are doing it; and I'm part of the Blue team; and I'mnot a bad person; therefore the Blue team can't possibly be bad people; and therefore they are, by definition doing the right because of any bollox I've made up myself, or Blue PR have invented for my consumption.
Admitting my team have done a bad thing would involve way too much self-reflection, and possibly even an admission that Team Red might have had a point after I specifically disagreed with them. It's so much easier to simply engage in Doublethink and believe that child abuse is not only a good, but a necessary thing. And it's not like the Nazis - as they were trying to remove people, whilst we're just trying to remove people.
Sorry Coco - there IS no defence, this is pure evil at work, and you are still supporting them. You ARE a nazi sympathiser
If adults are crossing illegally is there no option to simply send them home rather than arrest them? What's forcing the US to keep the adults and thus separate them from their children?
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
And this is all before anyone even mentions the rights of the original inhabitants of the American continent.
And Coco, you last post was disgraceful. Even if all that is true, any child you separate should be accommodated in something better than a cage.
Coco wrote:
Didn't really mean get behind "him"... meant hopefully something happens that will unite the majority of people in a positive way.
Are many people getting behind him on the whole wrench-children-from-parents thing?
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Very much so. What most people dont understand is that families that cross at a port of entry and claim asylum are not separated, as the parents have not crossed illegally or put their child/children in danger by doing so. There are at least 25 (i think?) ports of entry along our southern border. If you truly and legitimately want asylum for your family, there is no reason not to cross legally and get it done.
You understand that there are quite a few trafficked children that need protection, too. If it cannot be determined that a child belongs to or with the adults they crossed with, they take the child to a safer facility until it can be determined that the child belongs to the adult, and will be safe with them. Quite a few other factors are at play that get conveniently overlooked by main stream on both sides. Tossing your child in the trunk of a coyotes car to travel across the 118 degree desert with no water or guarantee they will be safe seems pretty dangerous and irresponsible.
It is not as simple as "they are ripping children out of their loving parents arms" Some of the so-called parents arent even related or known to the children...it is a very heartbreaking situation. Would you rather these adults just be allowed to take off with children they cannot prove are theirs? Would that make everyone feel better? Do you think it's safe for a lot of these children???
This narrative really pisses me off because 99% of people do not comprehend what is actually going on down here and cannot wrap their head around the possibility that while yes it is not ideal, and yes some legitimate families get temporarily separated, it is probably in the best interest of the children.
It's a racist tool used by racist lawmakers to further a racist agenda and you fucking know it. I really have no time for yanks that cry foul and rally to the most pig ignorant dumb fuck of a leader in contemporary history that is driven by a white supremacist speech writer. You have the AG quoting scripture to justify the policy, in the 21stcentury FFS, and all the while shit is just made up to colour everyone of colour as a criminal. They are still inventing crime statistics for European nations as evidence of the scary wave of brown cut throats approaching en masse to your little white Utopia. They aren't distinguishing children on the basis of their safety, they are fucking incarcerating them all regardless. No other border on the planet does this and they get far more immigrants than the Southern US border ever will. Fuck EVERYONE that supports this shit, and fuck them hard.
There is so much misinformation out there about the Trump administration's new "zero tolerance" policy that requires criminal prosecution, which then warrants the separating of parents and children at the border. Before responding to a post defending this policy, please do your research...As a professor at a local Cal State, I research and write about these issues, so here, I'll make it easier for you:
Myth: This is not a new policy and was practiced under Obama and Clinton - FALSE. The policy to separate parents and children is new and was instituted on 4/6/2018. It was the brainchild of John Kelly and Stephen Miller to serve as a deterrent for undocumented immigration, approved by Trump, and adopted by Sessions. Prior administrations detained migrant families, but didn’t have a practice of forcibly separating parents from their children unless the adults were deemed unfit. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: This is the only way to deter undocumented immigration - FALSE. Annual trends show that arrests for undocumented entry are at a 46 year low, and undocumented crossings dropped in 2007, with a net loss (more people leaving than arriving). Deportations have increased steadily though (spiking in 1996 and more recently), because several laws that were passed since 1996 have made it legally more difficult to gain legal status for people already here, and thus increased their deportations (I address this later under the myth that it's the Democrats' fault). What we mostly have now are people crossing the border illegally because they've already been hired by a US company, or because they are seeking political asylum. Economic migrants come to this country because our country has kept the demand going. But again, many of these people impacted by Trump's "zero tolerance" policy appear to be political asylum-seekers. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: Most of the people coming across the border are just trying to take advantage of our country by taking our jobs - FALSE. Most of the parents who have been impacted by Trump's "zero tolerance" policy have presented themselves as political asylum-seekers at a U.S. port-of-entry, from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Rather than processing their claims, they have been taken into custody on the spot and had their children ripped from their arms. The ACLU alleges that this practice violates the Asylum Act, and the UN asserts that it violates the UN Treaty on the State of Refugees, one of the few treaties the US has ratified. This is an illegal act on the part of the United States government, not to mention morally and ethically reprehensible. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: We're a country that respects the Rule of Law, and if people break the law, this is what they get - FALSE. We are a country that has an above-ground system of immigration and an underground system. Our government (under both parties) has always been aware that US companies recruit workers in the poorest parts of Mexico for cheap labor, and ICE (and its predecessor INS) has looked the other way because this underground economy benefits our country to the tune of billions of dollars annually. Thus, even though the majority of people crossing the border now are asylum-seekers, those who are economic migrants (migrant workers) likely have been recruited here to do jobs Americans will not do. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: The children have to be separated from their parents because there parents must be arrested and it would be cruel to put children in jail with their parents - FALSE. First, in the case of economic migrants crossing the border illegally, criminal prosecution has not been the legal norm, and families have been kept together at all cost. Also, crossing the border without documentation is a typically a misdemeanor not requiring arrest, but rather a civil proceeding. Additionally, parents who have been detained have historically been detained with their children in ICE "family residential centers," again, for civil processing. The Trump administration's shift in policy is for political purposes only, not legal ones. See p. 18: REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: We have rampant fraud in our asylum process the proof of which is the significant increase we have in the number of people applying for asylum. FALSE. The increase in asylum seekers is a direct result of the increase in civil conflict and violence across the globe. While some people may believe that we shouldn't allow any refugees into our country because "it's not our problem," neither our current asylum law, nor our ideological foundation as a country support such an isolationist approach. There is very little evidence to support Sessions' claim that abuse of our asylum-seeking policies is rampant. Also, what Sessions failed to mention is that the majority of asylum seekers are from China, not South of the border. Here is a very fair and balanced assessment of his statements: REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: The Democrats caused this, "it's their law." FALSE. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats caused this, the Trump administration did (although the Republicans could fix this today, and have refused). I believe what this myth refers to is the passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which were both passed under Clinton in 1996. These laws essentially made unauthorized entry into the US a crime (typically a misdemeanor for first-time offenders), but under both Republicans and Democrats, these cases were handled through civil deportation proceedings, not a criminal proceeding, which did not require separation. And again, even in cases where detainment was required, families were always kept together in family residential centers, unless the parents were deemed unfit (as mentioned above). Thus, Trump's assertion that he hates this policy but has no choice but to separate the parents from their children, because the Democrats "gave us this law" is false and nothing more than propaganda designed to compel negotiation on bad policy. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: The parents and children will be reunited shortly, once the parents' court cases are finalized. FALSE. Criminal court is a vastly different beast than civil court proceedings. Also, the children are being processed as unaccompanied minors ("unaccompanied alien children"), which typically means they are sent into the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS). Under normal circumstances when a child enters the country without his or her parent, ORR attempts to locate a family member within a few weeks, and the child is then released to a family member, or if a family member cannot be located, the child is placed in a residential center (anywhere in the country), or in some cases, foster care. Prior to Trump's new policy, ORR was operating at 95% capacity, and they simply cannot effectively manage the influx of 2000+ children, some as young as 4 months. Also, keep in mind, these are not unaccompanied minor children, they have parents. There is great legal ambiguity on how and even whether the parents will get their children back because we are in uncharted territory right now. According to the ACLU lawsuit (see below), there is currently no easy vehicle for reuniting parents with their children. Additionally, according to a May 2018 report, numerous cases of verbal, physical and sexual abuse were found to have occurred in these residential centers. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
Myth: This policy is legal. LIKELY FALSE. The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on 5/6/18, and a recent court ruling denied the government's motion to dismiss the suit. The judge deciding the case stated that the Trump Administration policy is "brutal, offensive, and fails to comport with traditional notions of fair play and decency." The case is moving forward because it was deemed to have legal merit. REFERENCE PROVIDED IN THE ORIGINAL POST
ETA: I never knew there was a limit on links for one post.
Build a wall, build fences, build whatever it takes to keep these freeloaders out. Only allow people in who have gone through the proper immigration channels, all others keep out. Use the National Guard, use the army with tanks if needed, keep America safe from this invasion.
Europe needs to do the same, fortunately the tide is turning there, Italy is the latest country to vote in a common sense government, who will put their own people first, and keep out the migrant invasion. Hungary, Austria, Poland, Czech Republic, all need to be applauded for their stance on these economic freeloaders. Start filling boats up in europe and send the unwanted invaders back from whence they came.
I see Sting is the latest celebrity to come out and virtue signal his support for the migrants, and criticize those who wish to stop them, let him put his money and property where his mouth is, how many of these migrants will he house and take care of??????
What's racist a about a country who insisted it was built on immigration for as long as white people were coming in to usurp brown people from their land and then cried foul when other brown people came and didn't try to usurp anyone but merely live alongside?
Seems both fair and rationale. And I'm sure too Trump has a plan to pay for an obese aging nation absent of large scale immigration, so it's all good
Whats the warning for? I haven't said anything racist.
So according to your figures a mere 310,000 illegal migrants were apprehended last year, I'm assuming the figure for the ones who actually got through is much bigger than that. Sure its not an invasion on the scale of D-Day, where you had 150,000 land in one day, but its an invasion all the same.
What would you have them do exactly? the same as Europe perhaps, where they just let them in?? and how many should they let in? do you have a figure in mind? These are questions that need to be answered, as for every illegal migrant you have coming in, you have millions more wanting to follow in their footsteps, or do you think that there are only so many who want to come to the West, and the rest are content to stay where they are.
Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador's economic and social problems are Americas too. People will continue to attempt to enter the States, regardless of how draconian and heartless the administration is willing to be, because it gives them hope of a better life. The way to stop mass migration is to solve the problems at the source. How you do that I don't pretend to know, but surely we have the resources to do it if there is the will.
J Dory wrote:Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador's economic and social problems are Americas too. People will continue to attempt to enter the States, regardless of how draconian and heartless the administration is willing to be, because it gives them hope of a better life. The way to stop mass migration is to solve the problems at the source. How you do that I don't pretend to know, but surely we have the resources to do it if there is the will.
Probably not propping up dictatorships that perpetuate and endless cycle of proxy wars would be a good start.
Come on guys... dig a little deeper and dare to read something that may make you uncomfy to read because its facts differ from your beliefs. Pictures floating around showing children in cages, etc etc etc were from 2014. The list goes on. While i agree that children should not be separated from their parents, the sad truth of the matter is that the childrens safety is most important... period. Nothing is more important. Both "sides" have their facts spun according to what helps the narrative du jour. This is completely political. You cannot possibly feel truly confident in your accurate opinions if you have not opened up your mind and pride enough to face the possibility of being uninformed or even wrong. Read something credible that challenges your beliefs. Read it with an open mind, then try not to let your hatred for whichever side you dont agree with cloud your newfound information.
Winning the argument is not the point. Promoting and elevating understanding of differing views is the only way to have a constructive and maybe even productive conversation.
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
Coco wrote: While i agree that children should not be separated from their parents, the sad truth of the matter is that the childrens safety is most important... period.
It's not easy to see how forcing child and parent apart in a manner that sees them unable to confirm where the children are now, and whether they could be reunited in all instances is a move based on child safety.
It is political, and it's shame that it is being spun the way it has.
Listening to Trump trying to make political gains out of manipulating families who have lost a loved one at the hands of undocumented migrants was particularly galling...
How about the families of school shooting massacre victims, and gun related murders in general? It sickening to see him associate murder with migrants, when so much needless violence as a result of gun laws already existed and continues to persist.
Coco wrote: While i agree that children should not be separated from their parents, the sad truth of the matter is that the childrens safety is most important... period.
It's not easy to see how forcing child and parent apart in a manner that sees them unable to confirm where the children are now, and whether they could be reunited in all instances is a move based on child safety.
When a family member or sponsor does not show up for the hearing date, they are then considered unaccounted for. Of course they will be deemed lost or unable to reunite with who ever they crossed with. I have no doubt it is not easy to see past the main stream narrative. If you are truly concerned about what is happening here, please make the effort to understand all variances and conditions, not just the surface stuff that is spoonfed to us all. It really deminishes the severity of the problem.
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
WaspInWales wrote:It is political, and it's shame that it is being spun the way it has.
Listening to Trump trying to make political gains out of manipulating families who have lost a loved one at the hands of undocumented migrants was particularly galling...
How about the families of school shooting massacre victims, and gun related murders in general? It sickening to see him associate murder with migrants, when so much needless violence as a result of gun laws already existed and continues to persist.
Then why watch him if he sickens you so? If you think he is the only one manipulating and politicizing any of it, then i really am wasting time trying to toss some food for thought and snippets showing just one facet of the diamond cut turd that is the reality of our immigration system, our gun laws, and anything else that gets browsed over quickly with your one eyed tunnelvision.
Can any of you take what i write/ think for what it is rather than a platform for a debate? A healthy debate requires a bit of understanding for your opponents stance. None of you possess that kind of vulnerability unfortunately. I know it is hard to understand or even digest but +/- 50% of the population thinks differenly than you. Doesnt make anyone wrong, all thoughts have merit. It just makes it difficult to have healthy and productive dialogue if nobody is willing to put their guard down and try to understand another view or way of looking at something, especially when it is more important to be right rather than offering solutions to be considered.
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
WaspInWales wrote:It is political, and it's shame that it is being spun the way it has.
Listening to Trump trying to make political gains out of manipulating families who have lost a loved one at the hands of undocumented migrants was particularly galling...
How about the families of school shooting massacre victims, and gun related murders in general? It sickening to see him associate murder with migrants, when so much needless violence as a result of gun laws already existed and continues to persist.
Then why watch him if he sickens you so? If you think he is the only one manipulating and politicizing any of it, then i really am wasting time trying to toss some food for thought and snippets showing just one facet of the diamond cut turd that is the reality of our immigration system, our gun laws, and anything else that gets browsed over quickly with your one eyed tunnelvision.
Can any of you take what i write/ think for what it is rather than a platform for a debate? A healthy debate requires a bit of understanding for your opponents stance. None of you possess that kind of vulnerability unfortunately. I know it is hard to understand or even digest but +/- 50% of the population thinks differenly than you. Doesnt make anyone wrong, all thoughts have merit. It just makes it difficult to have healthy and productive dialogue if nobody is willing to put their guard down and try to understand another view or way of looking at something, especially when it is more important to be right rather than offering solutions to be considered.
Well, as POTUS his actions and decisions affect many people on the planet, so I think it's important to take notice when he says and does things. Besides, he doesn't sicken me as such...his appearance and delusions about his intellect give rise to pity and humour though.
Also, I don't for one minute think he is the only one manipulating or politicising any of the topics which he deals with in his unique and eloquent manner. I regularly read his Twitter feed and I'm well aware that GOP and Democrat supporters both go to great lengths to spin and bullshit their way with the facts. I'm also well aware of how the news media spin things to support or attack him. For all his attacks on the 'fake news', I find it seriously disturbing that he uses Fox News and Breitbart not only as sources of 'information' for his Twitter rants, but also the basis of his policies.
Coco wrote: While i agree that children should not be separated from their parents, the sad truth of the matter is that the childrens safety is most important... period.
It's not easy to see how forcing child and parent apart in a manner that sees them unable to confirm where the children are now, and whether they could be reunited in all instances is a move based on child safety.
When a family member or sponsor does not show up for the hearing date, they are then considered unaccounted for. Of course they will be deemed lost or unable to reunite with who ever they crossed with. I have no doubt it is not easy to see past the main stream narrative. If you are truly concerned about what is happening here, please make the effort to understand all variances and conditions, not just the surface stuff that is spoonfed to us all. It really deminishes the severity of the problem.
So, should we believe Ann Coulter's opinion that all the children in the images and videos are child actors and that the President shouldn't fall for it?
Digby wrote:
It's not easy to see how forcing child and parent apart in a manner that sees them unable to confirm where the children are now, and whether they could be reunited in all instances is a move based on child safety.
When a family member or sponsor does not show up for the hearing date, they are then considered unaccounted for. Of course they will be deemed lost or unable to reunite with who ever they crossed with. I have no doubt it is not easy to see past the main stream narrative. If you are truly concerned about what is happening here, please make the effort to understand all variances and conditions, not just the surface stuff that is spoonfed to us all. It really deminishes the severity of the problem.
So, should we believe Ann Coulter's opinion that all the children in the images and videos are child actors and that the President shouldn't fall for it?
I wouldnt but i would not consider her rantings accurate or credible either. That is exactly my point though... open yourself up to understand another facet of the situation, accept that it may have merit and then form your own opinion or delve in a little further. You might surprise yourself. It is really okay to have an opinion that differs from others. That is what opens up healthy dialogue and ideas that lead to mutual understanding. Things tend to get resolved when there is mutual understanding.
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
Coco wrote:Come on guys... dig a little deeper and dare to read something that may make you uncomfy to read because its facts differ from your beliefs. Pictures floating around showing children in cages, etc etc etc were from 2014. The list goes on. While i agree that children should not be separated from their parents, the sad truth of the matter is that the childrens safety is most important... period. Nothing is more important. Both "sides" have their facts spun according to what helps the narrative du jour. This is completely political. You cannot possibly feel truly confident in your accurate opinions if you have not opened up your mind and pride enough to face the possibility of being uninformed or even wrong. Read something credible that challenges your beliefs. Read it with an open mind, then try not to let your hatred for whichever side you dont agree with cloud your newfound information.
Winning the argument is not the point. Promoting and elevating understanding of differing views is the only way to have a constructive and maybe even productive conversation.
The problem, Coco, is that the vast majority of publications who say the images are current have a generally good, or decent, record. The vast majority who say they are from 2014 or are fake are...less trustworthy.
I agree there is a lot of outrage about without knowing what the real case is here. It all boils down to a hell of a lot of your laws being absolutely bat shit crazy. And no-one doing anything about it. In fact, that's the worst thing: Trump saying it's the Dems fault and not pushing for a change. It's happened time and again, and Obama was so frustrated with not being able to pass anything, or so it appeared.
We all know who the real bad guys are in American politics. It's people like Pence, Sessions, McConnell, etc., the old white men who profit DIRECTLY from the bills they pass.
Coco wrote:
When a family member or sponsor does not show up for the hearing date, they are then considered unaccounted for. Of course they will be deemed lost or unable to reunite with who ever they crossed with. I have no doubt it is not easy to see past the main stream narrative. If you are truly concerned about what is happening here, please make the effort to understand all variances and conditions, not just the surface stuff that is spoonfed to us all. It really deminishes the severity of the problem.
So, should we believe Ann Coulter's opinion that all the children in the images and videos are child actors and that the President shouldn't fall for it?
I wouldnt but i would not consider her rantings accurate or credible either. That is exactly my point though... open yourself up to understand another facet of the situation, accept that it may have merit and then form your own opinion or delve in a little further. You might surprise yourself. It is really okay to have an opinion that differs from others. That is what opens up healthy dialogue and ideas that lead to mutual understanding. Things tend to get resolved when there is mutual understanding.
The problem is that there is ZERO merit to the situation. Blaming it all on Trump is wrong, of course, and hides the real problems.
And I believe the real villains are absolutely delighted Trump is POTUS. He deflects all attention from them so well.
From the outside, your political situation needs massive change if it is to work.
Trump has recently been talking about David Lynch praising him. Well, Lynch didn't exactly do that. What he did was say that Trump could end up being extremely good by accident. By shaking things up so that you have a chance to fix all the broken bits. Clinton would not have done that, which is why I thought she was the worst choice the US could have made for President.
Well, 2nd after the Zodiac Killer.
But Trump is not moving towards worthwhile changes, it seems. He's not challenging the status quo as much as he could. This child detention thing is one where he could. If he just did a little research and backed up his soundbites with a little more foundation. Yes, this is not your fault, Donald. Yes, it is not good and the current laws are to blame. Yes, your failure to think about what Sessions was doing allowed it to get worse. So what can you do about it?
