Crafting Immigration Policy in America 2
This is a continuation of the topic Crafting Immigration Policy in America.
This topic was continued by Crafting Immigration Policy in America 3.
Talk Pro and Con
Join LibraryThing to post.
This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1margd
>151 TrippB: (original thread) contd. Some suggest Trump just trying to switch pre-election conversation to one he likes (immigration), but Johns Hopkins prof who wrote a book on topic (Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America https://www.politics-prose.com/book/9781316604724) isn't so sanguine about constitutionality:
Martha S. Jones, JD, PhD @marthasjones_ https://twitter.com/marthasjones_ | 3:16 AM - 30 Oct 2018 from Severn, MD:
1/ I’ll weigh in here to say a few things about this issue. The first is that this issue is not one that has been directly tested or addressed by our courts. And the final interpretation here rests with #SCOTUS.
EXCLUSIVE: President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil. https://www.axios.com/trump-birthright-citizenship-executive-order-0cf4285a-16c6...
2/ The President proposes to interpret that part of the 14th Amendment which excludes persons not subject to US jurisdiction from Birthright Citizenship. His view as I take it is that children born to unauthorized immigrants are excluded from Birthright under this exception.
3/ We have long relied upon the #SCOTUS decision of Wong Kim Ark (1898) for the view that even the children of noncitizens, when born in the US, are citizens by Birthright.
4/ Could #SCOTUS revisit its own precedent in Wong Kim Ark and rule that children of non citizens are not Birthright citizens. It would be a departure from precedent, but it is possible.
5/ More likely #SCOTUS could distinguish from Wong Kim Ark on the facts. Wong’s parent were authorized or we might say legal immigrants. Their presence in the US was authorized. Wong Kim Ark did not directly address the status of children born to unauthorized immigrants.
6/ A narrowly tailored EO that rested on the view that the children of unauthorized immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in citizenship terms) and thus not citizens by virtue of Birthright is an argument that can be made.
7/ I’ll leave it others to parse whether the President can bypass Congress on this and in essence legislate the terms of the 14th Amendment via an EO. My point is that his proposal raises a question that courts will need to resolve.
8/ My view is that this sort of wholesale or categorical exclusion is contrary to the spirit of the 14th Amendment which aimed to expand and open a way for citizenship, especially for those who might otherwise be denied because of racism. The case being former slaves.
9/ We are facing a contest over what categories of persons are excluded from Birthright citizenship. Congress intended that children born in the US to parents who were foreign diplomats or parents who were members of an occupying army would not be Birthright Citizens.
Martha S. Jones, JD, PhD @marthasjones_ https://twitter.com/marthasjones_ | 3:16 AM - 30 Oct 2018 from Severn, MD:
1/ I’ll weigh in here to say a few things about this issue. The first is that this issue is not one that has been directly tested or addressed by our courts. And the final interpretation here rests with #SCOTUS.
EXCLUSIVE: President Trump plans to sign an executive order that would remove the right to citizenship for babies of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on U.S. soil. https://www.axios.com/trump-birthright-citizenship-executive-order-0cf4285a-16c6...
2/ The President proposes to interpret that part of the 14th Amendment which excludes persons not subject to US jurisdiction from Birthright Citizenship. His view as I take it is that children born to unauthorized immigrants are excluded from Birthright under this exception.
3/ We have long relied upon the #SCOTUS decision of Wong Kim Ark (1898) for the view that even the children of noncitizens, when born in the US, are citizens by Birthright.
4/ Could #SCOTUS revisit its own precedent in Wong Kim Ark and rule that children of non citizens are not Birthright citizens. It would be a departure from precedent, but it is possible.
5/ More likely #SCOTUS could distinguish from Wong Kim Ark on the facts. Wong’s parent were authorized or we might say legal immigrants. Their presence in the US was authorized. Wong Kim Ark did not directly address the status of children born to unauthorized immigrants.
6/ A narrowly tailored EO that rested on the view that the children of unauthorized immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in citizenship terms) and thus not citizens by virtue of Birthright is an argument that can be made.
7/ I’ll leave it others to parse whether the President can bypass Congress on this and in essence legislate the terms of the 14th Amendment via an EO. My point is that his proposal raises a question that courts will need to resolve.
8/ My view is that this sort of wholesale or categorical exclusion is contrary to the spirit of the 14th Amendment which aimed to expand and open a way for citizenship, especially for those who might otherwise be denied because of racism. The case being former slaves.
9/ We are facing a contest over what categories of persons are excluded from Birthright citizenship. Congress intended that children born in the US to parents who were foreign diplomats or parents who were members of an occupying army would not be Birthright Citizens.
2lriley
Very exciting times if you are a Klanner, a Nazi or a believer in any other kind of white nationalism. They have a President working for them. What comes after that is purity tests. And some still wonder why they get tagged as racists. Well when you support this yokel you get racist policy.
The idea the the POTUS can change the Constitution by executive order is not only illegal but it would set a very dangerous precedent. Might as well just tear up the Constitution right along with that executive order. It will be just be a worthless piece of paper at that point. These amendments were voted on by congress (a co-equal branch of the govt.) and certified by the Supreme Court (another co-equal branch of the govt.). The executive end of the govt. is now thinking about co-opting the powers of both the congress and the court to itself. Might as well just anoint the fucker as King while they're at it.
It's interesting how the republican party is always at work at disenfranchisement and voter suppression.
The idea the the POTUS can change the Constitution by executive order is not only illegal but it would set a very dangerous precedent. Might as well just tear up the Constitution right along with that executive order. It will be just be a worthless piece of paper at that point. These amendments were voted on by congress (a co-equal branch of the govt.) and certified by the Supreme Court (another co-equal branch of the govt.). The executive end of the govt. is now thinking about co-opting the powers of both the congress and the court to itself. Might as well just anoint the fucker as King while they're at it.
It's interesting how the republican party is always at work at disenfranchisement and voter suppression.
3mamzel
>2 lriley: I think a lot of people might be surprised by the results of the purity test. ;-)
4gilroy
>2 lriley: What's interesting and that many Republicans who support what Pres 45 proposes don't realize, if he can change the 14th amendment with an executive order, what's stopping another president or even 45 himself from changing the 2nd amendment?
52wonderY
Garrett Epps, professor of constitutional law at the University of Baltimore, writes in The Atlantic today:
The Citizenship Clause Means What It Says
The citizenship-denial lobby has focused on the words subject to the jurisdiction. Its members argue that citizens of foreign countries, even if they live in the U.S., are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and thus their children are not covered by the clause. To test this idea, ask yourself: If a foreign citizen rear-ends your car on your drive home today, will you, or the police, allow him to drive away on the grounds that a foreign citizen cannot be arrested, ticketed, or sued?
For those scoring at home, the answer is no.
Foreign citizens are “subject to the jurisdiction” of our police and courts when they are in the U.S., whether as tourists, legal residents, or undocumented immigrants. Only one group is not “subject to the jurisdiction”—accredited foreign diplomats and their families, who can be expelled by the federal government but not arrested or tried.
ps: Epps wrote the book on the 14th Amendment: Democracy Reborn: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Fight for Equal Rights in Post-Civil War America
The Citizenship Clause Means What It Says
The citizenship-denial lobby has focused on the words subject to the jurisdiction. Its members argue that citizens of foreign countries, even if they live in the U.S., are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and thus their children are not covered by the clause. To test this idea, ask yourself: If a foreign citizen rear-ends your car on your drive home today, will you, or the police, allow him to drive away on the grounds that a foreign citizen cannot be arrested, ticketed, or sued?
For those scoring at home, the answer is no.
Foreign citizens are “subject to the jurisdiction” of our police and courts when they are in the U.S., whether as tourists, legal residents, or undocumented immigrants. Only one group is not “subject to the jurisdiction”—accredited foreign diplomats and their families, who can be expelled by the federal government but not arrested or tried.
ps: Epps wrote the book on the 14th Amendment: Democracy Reborn: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Fight for Equal Rights in Post-Civil War America
7John5918
Mexico town devastated by earthquake welcomes thousands from migrant caravan (Guardian)
An impoverished Mexican town nearly flattened by a 2017 earthquake has welcomed thousands of tired and hungry Central American migrants in quiet defiance of Donald Trump’s condemnation of the group...
An impoverished Mexican town nearly flattened by a 2017 earthquake has welcomed thousands of tired and hungry Central American migrants in quiet defiance of Donald Trump’s condemnation of the group...
82wonderY
Some Republicans weigh in on Trump's plan to revoke birthright citizenship.
Trump surprise rattles GOP in final stretch
Trump surprise rattles GOP in final stretch
9margd
George Conway @gtconway3d | 10:10 PM - 31 Oct 2018:
To say that “illegal immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” is just drivel. Were that true, then the government wouldn’t be able to arrest them. Surely that’s not the President’s position. Clearly he has no comprehension of the words he’s using.
To say that “illegal immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” is just drivel. Were that true, then the government wouldn’t be able to arrest them. Surely that’s not the President’s position. Clearly he has no comprehension of the words he’s using.
102wonderY
Trump’s birthright citizenship proposal, explained by a law professor, Aziz Huq
Trump has brought up ending birthright citizenship before. The president’s former Deputy National Security Adviser Michael Anton anticipated and argued for Trump’s proposal in two recent opinion articles, supplying the legal arguments the president’s comments lack.
Anton's articles:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/citizenship-shouldnt-be-a-birthright/201...
https://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpage/birthright-citizenship-a-response-to-my-...
Trump has brought up ending birthright citizenship before. The president’s former Deputy National Security Adviser Michael Anton anticipated and argued for Trump’s proposal in two recent opinion articles, supplying the legal arguments the president’s comments lack.
Anton's articles:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/citizenship-shouldnt-be-a-birthright/201...
https://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpage/birthright-citizenship-a-response-to-my-...
11margd
The caravan “invasion” and America’s epistemic crisis
David Roberts@drvoxdavid@vox.com | Nov 1, 2018
The far right’s xenophobic fantasies now involve the actual US military.
...Up to 15,000 members of the world’s greatest fighting force, sitting in the desert, watching for poor refugees approaching on foot.
The ludicrously named “Operation Faithful Patriot” will last 46 days. Even if it walks 20 miles a day, the caravan will arrive, at the earliest, in 45 days. It’s possible none of the troops will ever see an actual refugee.
In short, the troops currently heading to the border are being used entirely as a stunt to boost turnout for the midterms.
Using the military for a domestic stunt has real consequences. “Committing troops to one operation means fewer forces for another,” write Helene Cooper and Thomas Gibbons-Neff in the New York Times. “Compared with how many troops the United States has stationed in Syria (2,000), in Afghanistan (14,000) and in Iraq (5,000), the number of soldiers sent to Texas, Arizona and California will be a significant slice of all troops deployed worldwide.”
And that’s to say nothing of the more intangible consequences of this stunt, which is yet another blow to the norms of conduct that hold our political life together.
And of course there’s the small but not inconsequential risk, if things go badly wrong, that we could see footage of US troops firing on unarmed refugees before the year is out...
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/1/18041710/migrant-caravan-ameri...
David Roberts@drvoxdavid@vox.com | Nov 1, 2018
The far right’s xenophobic fantasies now involve the actual US military.
...Up to 15,000 members of the world’s greatest fighting force, sitting in the desert, watching for poor refugees approaching on foot.
The ludicrously named “Operation Faithful Patriot” will last 46 days. Even if it walks 20 miles a day, the caravan will arrive, at the earliest, in 45 days. It’s possible none of the troops will ever see an actual refugee.
In short, the troops currently heading to the border are being used entirely as a stunt to boost turnout for the midterms.
Using the military for a domestic stunt has real consequences. “Committing troops to one operation means fewer forces for another,” write Helene Cooper and Thomas Gibbons-Neff in the New York Times. “Compared with how many troops the United States has stationed in Syria (2,000), in Afghanistan (14,000) and in Iraq (5,000), the number of soldiers sent to Texas, Arizona and California will be a significant slice of all troops deployed worldwide.”
And that’s to say nothing of the more intangible consequences of this stunt, which is yet another blow to the norms of conduct that hold our political life together.
And of course there’s the small but not inconsequential risk, if things go badly wrong, that we could see footage of US troops firing on unarmed refugees before the year is out...
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/1/18041710/migrant-caravan-ameri...
12lriley
I'm listening to this crazy speech that the POTUS is giving right now on immigration and the 'Caravan'. He's not even trying to his distaste for these people. It is straight up fear mongering.
13lriley
Rocks and projectiles will be considered the same as firearms. WTF! This guy is out of his fucking mind---though it's not all that dissimilar from Netanyahu's govt. policy towards protesting Palestinians. Maybe that's where he got that idea from.
14gilroy
Change the wig to one more close cropped, give him a box mustache just beneath the nose...
And you're getting close to who he is reincarnated from, I suspect... But I could be wrong.
And you're getting close to who he is reincarnated from, I suspect... But I could be wrong.
15margd
Remember the protests when children were separated from their parents, caged?
I can't imagine a soldier shooting a kid with a slingshot, but there are militias already offering to "help"...
I can't imagine a soldier shooting a kid with a slingshot, but there are militias already offering to "help"...
16mamzel
I work in a high school that is predominately Hispanic. Every year recruiters from all branches of the military set up tables in the central quad and eagerly try to sign up students to fill their quota. Recent news made me think about those troops who will be at the border with the rifles aimed at the people on the other side of the wall. Many of these troops could have once been in their shoes (or barefeet), or their parents were, or friends, or relatives. Will they be able to shoot if and when ordered?
I read somewhere that these recruiters target schools like mine with a lower socioeconomic status since there will be more students that won't be able to afford college and have bleak outlooks for jobs when they graduate. And now they might be asked to aim their weapons at their own.
I read somewhere that these recruiters target schools like mine with a lower socioeconomic status since there will be more students that won't be able to afford college and have bleak outlooks for jobs when they graduate. And now they might be asked to aim their weapons at their own.
17margd
Pentagon rejected request for troops it viewed as emergency law enforcement at border
Ryan Browne and Nicole Gaouette | November 2, 2018
...the Department of Homeland Security asked that the Pentagon provide a reserve force that could be called upon to provide "crowd and traffic control" and safeguard Customs and Border Protection personnel at the border to counter a group of Central American migrants walking to the US border to request asylum.
The Pentagon rejected the request on October 26, according to one of the officials, even as it signed off on providing DHS with air and logistics support, medical personnel and engineers.
The request was turned down because the Department of Defense felt that active duty troops do not have the authority to conduct that type of mission unless they are granted additional authorities by the President...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics/white-house-pentagon-troops-border/index...
_______________________________________________________________________
Trump's words weaponized in Nigeria: 45 protesters killed...
Nigerian army appears to use Trump's words to defend shooting of protesters
Bukola Adebayo | November 2, 2018
...They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back," Trump said. "When they throw rocks like they did at the Mexico military and police, I say consider it a rifle,"
...According to Amnesty International, at least 45 people were killed and 122 people were wounded in the clashes Saturday and Monday...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/africa/nigeria-army-trump-video-intl/index.html
Ryan Browne and Nicole Gaouette | November 2, 2018
...the Department of Homeland Security asked that the Pentagon provide a reserve force that could be called upon to provide "crowd and traffic control" and safeguard Customs and Border Protection personnel at the border to counter a group of Central American migrants walking to the US border to request asylum.
The Pentagon rejected the request on October 26, according to one of the officials, even as it signed off on providing DHS with air and logistics support, medical personnel and engineers.
The request was turned down because the Department of Defense felt that active duty troops do not have the authority to conduct that type of mission unless they are granted additional authorities by the President...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics/white-house-pentagon-troops-border/index...
_______________________________________________________________________
Trump's words weaponized in Nigeria: 45 protesters killed...
Nigerian army appears to use Trump's words to defend shooting of protesters
Bukola Adebayo | November 2, 2018
...They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back," Trump said. "When they throw rocks like they did at the Mexico military and police, I say consider it a rifle,"
...According to Amnesty International, at least 45 people were killed and 122 people were wounded in the clashes Saturday and Monday...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/africa/nigeria-army-trump-video-intl/index.html
18margd
Preparing for migrants with their flipflops, dreams, and sippy cups...
US troops lay down barbed wire along border ahead of caravan
Eileen AJ Connelly | November 3, 2018
As three separate migrant caravans slowly made their way north through Mexico on Saturday, newly arrived US troops worked to lay a barbed-wire fence along the Texas side of the Rio Grande.
...“I saw that beautiful barbed wire going up,” Trump said at a Saturday campaign rally in Montana. “Beautiful sight.”
A Border Patrol spokesman said in an email to The Post the fencing was part of “necessary preparations” for the caravans...
https://nypost.com/2018/11/03/us-troops-lay-down-barbed-wire-along-border-ahead-...
US troops lay down barbed wire along border ahead of caravan
Eileen AJ Connelly | November 3, 2018
As three separate migrant caravans slowly made their way north through Mexico on Saturday, newly arrived US troops worked to lay a barbed-wire fence along the Texas side of the Rio Grande.
...“I saw that beautiful barbed wire going up,” Trump said at a Saturday campaign rally in Montana. “Beautiful sight.”
A Border Patrol spokesman said in an email to The Post the fencing was part of “necessary preparations” for the caravans...
https://nypost.com/2018/11/03/us-troops-lay-down-barbed-wire-along-border-ahead-...
19margd
15 contd. This won't end well...
Armed militia groups head to the border, sparking military concerns
Mary Papenfuss | Nov 5, 2018
...About “200 unregulated armed militia members are currently operating along the southwest border,“ says a planning document for Army commanders leading the 5,200 troops Trump has deployed at the border, according to Newsweek. The groups “operate under the guise of citizen patrols supporting” border officials, the document says, pointing out “reported incidents of unregulated militias stealing National Guard equipment during deployments.”
The U.S. Border Patrol late last month warned landowners in Texas to expect “possible armed civilians” to come onto their property because of the caravan, The Associated Press reported.
Militia groups ― heavily armed organizations that train members in paramilitary techniques ― often are right-wing extremist organizations. The Southern Poverty Law Center identified 689 active anti-government extremist groups in 2017. Of those, 273 were militias...
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/11/05/armed-militia-groups-head-to-the-bor...
Armed militia groups head to the border, sparking military concerns
Mary Papenfuss | Nov 5, 2018
...About “200 unregulated armed militia members are currently operating along the southwest border,“ says a planning document for Army commanders leading the 5,200 troops Trump has deployed at the border, according to Newsweek. The groups “operate under the guise of citizen patrols supporting” border officials, the document says, pointing out “reported incidents of unregulated militias stealing National Guard equipment during deployments.”
The U.S. Border Patrol late last month warned landowners in Texas to expect “possible armed civilians” to come onto their property because of the caravan, The Associated Press reported.
Militia groups ― heavily armed organizations that train members in paramilitary techniques ― often are right-wing extremist organizations. The Southern Poverty Law Center identified 689 active anti-government extremist groups in 2017. Of those, 273 were militias...
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/11/05/armed-militia-groups-head-to-the-bor...
20John5918
Faith leaders call on US to address complicity in causing migrant caravan (National Catholic Reporter)
Trade policy, land reform, non-military aid solutions need examination, faith leaders say
Trade policy, land reform, non-military aid solutions need examination, faith leaders say
212wonderY
Funny, the Evangelicals claim that the other faith groups don't speak up about such topics.
22John5918
>21 2wonderY:
US Catholic bishops have been very outspoken about the whole immigration issue. Episcopalians too, I think
US Catholic bishops have been very outspoken about the whole immigration issue. Episcopalians too, I think
24margd
Appeals court rules against Trump on DACA immigrant policy
sudhin thanawala | Nov 8, 2018
A U.S. appeals court blocked President Donald Trump on Thursday from immediately ending an Obama-era program shielding young immigrants from deportation, saying the administration's decision to phase it out was arbitrary because it was based on a flawed legal theory (DACA exceeded Obama's authority and was illegal).
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously kept a preliminary injunction in place against Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
Lawsuits by California and others challenging the administration's decision will continue in federal court while the injunction stands.
...In Thursday's ruling, 9th Circuit Judge Kim Wardlaw said California and other plaintiffs were likely to succeed with their claim that the decision to end DACA was arbitrary and capricious.
... The administration has been critical of the 9th Circuit and took the unusual step of trying to sidestep it and have the California DACA cases heard directly by the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court in February declined to do so.
Federal judges in New York and Washington also have ruled against Trump on DACA...
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/appeals-court-rules-trump-daca-im...
sudhin thanawala | Nov 8, 2018
A U.S. appeals court blocked President Donald Trump on Thursday from immediately ending an Obama-era program shielding young immigrants from deportation, saying the administration's decision to phase it out was arbitrary because it was based on a flawed legal theory (DACA exceeded Obama's authority and was illegal).
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously kept a preliminary injunction in place against Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
Lawsuits by California and others challenging the administration's decision will continue in federal court while the injunction stands.
...In Thursday's ruling, 9th Circuit Judge Kim Wardlaw said California and other plaintiffs were likely to succeed with their claim that the decision to end DACA was arbitrary and capricious.
... The administration has been critical of the 9th Circuit and took the unusual step of trying to sidestep it and have the California DACA cases heard directly by the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court in February declined to do so.
Federal judges in New York and Washington also have ruled against Trump on DACA...
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/appeals-court-rules-trump-daca-im...
25margd
If Trump Administration was truly trying to improve efficiency (anonymous sr official) rather than trying to limit asylum claims (Trump), they would be sending thousands of bureaucrats and immigration judges to border, not soldiers...
Trump administration moves to restrict asylum seekers at border
11/8/2018
Once plan goes into effect, those at US southern border would only be eligible for asylum if they go to official port.
..."What we are attempting to do is trying to funnel ... asylum claims through the ports of entry where we are better resourced, have better capabilities and better manpower and staffing to actually handle those claims in an expeditious and efficient manner," a senior administration official told reporters in a news briefing on Thursday, on condition of anonymity.
..."US law specifically allows individuals to apply for asylum whether or not they are at a port of entry," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants' Rights Project. "It is illegal to circumvent that by agency or presidential decree."...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/11/trump-administration-moves-restrict-asylu...
Trump administration moves to restrict asylum seekers at border
11/8/2018
Once plan goes into effect, those at US southern border would only be eligible for asylum if they go to official port.
..."What we are attempting to do is trying to funnel ... asylum claims through the ports of entry where we are better resourced, have better capabilities and better manpower and staffing to actually handle those claims in an expeditious and efficient manner," a senior administration official told reporters in a news briefing on Thursday, on condition of anonymity.
..."US law specifically allows individuals to apply for asylum whether or not they are at a port of entry," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants' Rights Project. "It is illegal to circumvent that by agency or presidential decree."...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/11/trump-administration-moves-restrict-asylu...
26margd
Mattis dragged his feet on border duty after denying President his parade--can he survive post-election funk in the White House?
(Hope so--can you imagine a Ronny Jackson or Matthew Whitaker in that position?)
Deployed Inside the United States: The Military Waits for the Migrant Caravan
Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Helene Cooper | Nov. 10, 2018
With little electricity, no combat pay and holidays away from home, the 5,600 American troops on the southwest border are on a mission ordered by a politically determined commander in chief and a Pentagon unable to convince him of its perils.
...Two thousand miles away, at the Pentagon, officials privately derided the deployment as an expensive waste of time and resources, and a morale killer to boot.
Leading up to the midterm vote on Tuesday, the military announced that the border mission would be called Operation Faithful Patriot. But Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Election Day told officials to drop the name, and the Pentagon sent out a terse news release a day later saying the operation was now simply to be known as border support. The term “faithful patriot,” officials said, had political overtones.
...in the last furious days before the midterm elections, photographs of a group of soldiers, clad in full military kit and flak jackets, were presented at Trump rallies and shown in the news media. Mr. Trump himself lauded the stringing up of “beautiful barbed wire” at a rally in Montana.
...Two days after the midterms, on Thursday, a platoon of Army engineers in Hidalgo, Tex., who were stretching bands of concertina wire on the American side of the Rio Grande had ditched the body armor. The decision to wear only their uniforms, canteens, gloves and helmets was simple: It was too hot to wear the armored vests, and the soldiers knew they didn’t need them. And some had already suffered heat exhaustion, just days into their new mission.
...“A wasteful deployment of overstretched Soldiers and Marines would be made much worse if they use force disproportional to the threat they face,” tweeted Martin Dempsey, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “They won’t.”...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/10/us/deployed-inside-the-united-states-the-mili...
(Hope so--can you imagine a Ronny Jackson or Matthew Whitaker in that position?)
Deployed Inside the United States: The Military Waits for the Migrant Caravan
Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Helene Cooper | Nov. 10, 2018
With little electricity, no combat pay and holidays away from home, the 5,600 American troops on the southwest border are on a mission ordered by a politically determined commander in chief and a Pentagon unable to convince him of its perils.
...Two thousand miles away, at the Pentagon, officials privately derided the deployment as an expensive waste of time and resources, and a morale killer to boot.
Leading up to the midterm vote on Tuesday, the military announced that the border mission would be called Operation Faithful Patriot. But Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Election Day told officials to drop the name, and the Pentagon sent out a terse news release a day later saying the operation was now simply to be known as border support. The term “faithful patriot,” officials said, had political overtones.
...in the last furious days before the midterm elections, photographs of a group of soldiers, clad in full military kit and flak jackets, were presented at Trump rallies and shown in the news media. Mr. Trump himself lauded the stringing up of “beautiful barbed wire” at a rally in Montana.
...Two days after the midterms, on Thursday, a platoon of Army engineers in Hidalgo, Tex., who were stretching bands of concertina wire on the American side of the Rio Grande had ditched the body armor. The decision to wear only their uniforms, canteens, gloves and helmets was simple: It was too hot to wear the armored vests, and the soldiers knew they didn’t need them. And some had already suffered heat exhaustion, just days into their new mission.
...“A wasteful deployment of overstretched Soldiers and Marines would be made much worse if they use force disproportional to the threat they face,” tweeted Martin Dempsey, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “They won’t.”...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/10/us/deployed-inside-the-united-states-the-mili...
27margd
'Coz winter is coming, and we need a smile:
First snowfall for Eritrean children new to Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB0GHHVZeAY
Published on Nov 12, 2018
John Ivison (political columnist) @IvisonJ | 5:19 PM - 11 Nov 2018
This is the kind of extreme, radical multiculturalism we've been hearing about. Clearly a grave threat to our way of life. (margd: sarcasm, of course)
First snowfall for Eritrean children new to Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB0GHHVZeAY
Published on Nov 12, 2018
John Ivison (political columnist) @IvisonJ | 5:19 PM - 11 Nov 2018
This is the kind of extreme, radical multiculturalism we've been hearing about. Clearly a grave threat to our way of life. (margd: sarcasm, of course)
28mamzel
>27 margd: : )
292wonderY
The migrant caravan has arrived. Here's what you need to know.
The first wave of the migrant caravan that President Donald Trump has been warning about arrived at the southern border on Tuesday, setting the stage for what Trump views as a potentially dangerous confrontation, but what the migrants view as their chance to apply for asylum.
Riding on nine buses, with a Honduran flag flying out the window of one of them, the group (of about 350) arrived in Tijuana after a month-long journey that saw them traverse multiple countries while enduring oppressive heat, torrential rains and exhausting days-long walks.
The first wave of the migrant caravan that President Donald Trump has been warning about arrived at the southern border on Tuesday, setting the stage for what Trump views as a potentially dangerous confrontation, but what the migrants view as their chance to apply for asylum.
Riding on nine buses, with a Honduran flag flying out the window of one of them, the group (of about 350) arrived in Tijuana after a month-long journey that saw them traverse multiple countries while enduring oppressive heat, torrential rains and exhausting days-long walks.
30margd
Expelling green card holder Gulen, without cause,
to placate Erdogan into easing pressure on Saudis
would be as evil as the Saudis' designs on Khashoggi!
To ease Turkish pressure on Saudis over killing, White House weighs expelling Erdogan foe
Carol E. Lee, Julia Ainsley and Courtney Kube | Nov. 15, 2018 / 11:44 AM EST
WASHINGTON — The White House is looking for ways to remove an enemy of Turkish President Recep Erdogan from the U.S. in order to placate Turkey over the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, according to two senior U.S. officials and two other people briefed on the requests.
Trump administration officials last month asked federal law enforcement agencies to examine legal ways of removing exiled Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen in an attempt to persuade Erdogan to ease pressure on the Saudi government, the four sources said.
The effort includes directives to the Justice Department and FBI that officials reopen Turkey's case for his extradition, as well as a request to the Homeland Security Department for information about his legal status, the four people said.
They said the White House specifically wanted details about Gulen's residency status in the U.S. Gulen has a Green Card, according to two people familiar with the matter. He has been living in Pennsylvania since the late 1990s.
Career officials at the agencies pushed back on the White House requests, the U.S. officials and people briefed on the requests said.
"At first there were eye rolls, but once they realized it was a serious request, the career guys were furious," said a senior U.S. official involved in the process...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/white-house-weighs-booting-er...
__________________________________________________________________________
Remember?
Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, is under investigation for involvement in an alleged plot to kidnap a Turkish dissident cleric living in the US and fly him to an island prison in Turkey in return for $15m...
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/10/michael-flynn-trump-turkish-diss...
to placate Erdogan into easing pressure on Saudis
would be as evil as the Saudis' designs on Khashoggi!
To ease Turkish pressure on Saudis over killing, White House weighs expelling Erdogan foe
Carol E. Lee, Julia Ainsley and Courtney Kube | Nov. 15, 2018 / 11:44 AM EST
WASHINGTON — The White House is looking for ways to remove an enemy of Turkish President Recep Erdogan from the U.S. in order to placate Turkey over the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, according to two senior U.S. officials and two other people briefed on the requests.
Trump administration officials last month asked federal law enforcement agencies to examine legal ways of removing exiled Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen in an attempt to persuade Erdogan to ease pressure on the Saudi government, the four sources said.
The effort includes directives to the Justice Department and FBI that officials reopen Turkey's case for his extradition, as well as a request to the Homeland Security Department for information about his legal status, the four people said.
They said the White House specifically wanted details about Gulen's residency status in the U.S. Gulen has a Green Card, according to two people familiar with the matter. He has been living in Pennsylvania since the late 1990s.
Career officials at the agencies pushed back on the White House requests, the U.S. officials and people briefed on the requests said.
"At first there were eye rolls, but once they realized it was a serious request, the career guys were furious," said a senior U.S. official involved in the process...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/white-house-weighs-booting-er...
__________________________________________________________________________
Remember?
Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, is under investigation for involvement in an alleged plot to kidnap a Turkish dissident cleric living in the US and fly him to an island prison in Turkey in return for $15m...
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/10/michael-flynn-trump-turkish-diss...
31John5918
Trump ready to begin drawdown of troops at US-Mexico border (Guardian)
Critics say troops’ deployment was nothing more than a political stunt
Elections are out of the way, so the political stunt is no longer needed...
Critics say troops’ deployment was nothing more than a political stunt
Elections are out of the way, so the political stunt is no longer needed...
32margd
Fresh from dissing Admiral McRaven, who led the mission on Osama Bin Laden and is now suffering from leukemia, Trump prepares to celebrate Thanksgiving in style, while troops he sent to the border pre-election, remain at the border. Maybe Trump will surprise us and spend his Thanksgiving visiting deployed soldiers as have presidents in the past?
Donald Trump Will Spend Thanksgiving at Mar-a-Lago While He Makes Troops Stay Away From Their Families at the Border
Jessica Kwong | 11/19/18
President Donald Trump is facing criticism for planning to continue his tradition of spending Thanksgiving at his Mar-a-Lago resort while keeping thousands of American troops stationed at the southern border away from their home and families for the holiday.
A Federal Aviation Administration advisory last week listed flight restrictions for this Tuesday through Sunday in relation to Trump’s supposed trip to Palm Beach, where his private club he dubs the “Winter White House” is located.
...The number of active-duty troops reached a high of about 5,800, according to a top Pentagon official last Thursday. The deployment is scheduled through December 15, well past Thanksgiving. ...
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-thanksgiving-mar-lago-troops-1222777
__________________________________________________________________
In blow to Trump’s immigration agenda, federal judge blocks asylum ban for migrants who enter illegally from Mexico
Isaac Stanley-Becker and Maria Sacchetti | November 20, 2018
A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from denying asylum to migrants who illegally cross the southern border into the United States, saying the policy likely violated federal law on asylum eligibility.
Jon S. Tigar of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, in a ruling late Monday, issued a temporary nationwide restraining order preventing enforcement of the policy, which was announced on Nov. 9. His order remains in effect until Dec. 19, at which point the court will consider arguments for a permanent order.
...“Whatever the scope of the President’s authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden,” wrote the judge, nominated to the federal bench in 2012 by former President Barack Obama. He reasoned that the “failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/20/blow-trumps-immigration-agenda-...
Donald Trump Will Spend Thanksgiving at Mar-a-Lago While He Makes Troops Stay Away From Their Families at the Border
Jessica Kwong | 11/19/18
President Donald Trump is facing criticism for planning to continue his tradition of spending Thanksgiving at his Mar-a-Lago resort while keeping thousands of American troops stationed at the southern border away from their home and families for the holiday.
A Federal Aviation Administration advisory last week listed flight restrictions for this Tuesday through Sunday in relation to Trump’s supposed trip to Palm Beach, where his private club he dubs the “Winter White House” is located.
...The number of active-duty troops reached a high of about 5,800, according to a top Pentagon official last Thursday. The deployment is scheduled through December 15, well past Thanksgiving. ...
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-thanksgiving-mar-lago-troops-1222777
__________________________________________________________________
In blow to Trump’s immigration agenda, federal judge blocks asylum ban for migrants who enter illegally from Mexico
Isaac Stanley-Becker and Maria Sacchetti | November 20, 2018
A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from denying asylum to migrants who illegally cross the southern border into the United States, saying the policy likely violated federal law on asylum eligibility.
Jon S. Tigar of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, in a ruling late Monday, issued a temporary nationwide restraining order preventing enforcement of the policy, which was announced on Nov. 9. His order remains in effect until Dec. 19, at which point the court will consider arguments for a permanent order.
...“Whatever the scope of the President’s authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden,” wrote the judge, nominated to the federal bench in 2012 by former President Barack Obama. He reasoned that the “failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/20/blow-trumps-immigration-agenda-...
33John5918
Another example of how we used to do immigration:
Clement Attlee took in Jewish child refugee who fled Nazis (Guardian)
For those across the Pond who might not know who Attlee was: Clement Attlee, the Labour prime minister whose government founded the welfare state, looked after a child refugee who escaped from the Nazis in the months leading up to the second world war, it can be revealed. The then leader of the opposition sponsored a Jewish mother and her two children, giving them the confidence and authorisation to leave Germany in 1939 and move to the UK...
Clement Attlee took in Jewish child refugee who fled Nazis (Guardian)
For those across the Pond who might not know who Attlee was: Clement Attlee, the Labour prime minister whose government founded the welfare state, looked after a child refugee who escaped from the Nazis in the months leading up to the second world war, it can be revealed. The then leader of the opposition sponsored a Jewish mother and her two children, giving them the confidence and authorisation to leave Germany in 1939 and move to the UK...
34margd
>27 margd: contd. Indian girl's first snow (Ontario): builds snow man 'er "snow auntie". :)
..."My friend Daljit Waraich came from India and it was her first winter here in Brampton!" says Jassu Kingra, 19, who first posted photos of the creation to her Instagram page on Friday. "She called me and told me she wanted to build a snowman, and then she asked how to build it and I invited her over to our house."
With the help of her Jassu's two younger sisters Navi, 15 and Bini, 9, the teen girls built what turned out to be a flawless, three-tiered snowman.
"We wanted it to be perfect because we wanted to post it on our social media sites," she explained. "And my friend wanted to show her family in India, so we had to make it perfect and show her family that Canada is the best even during the winter!"
Jassu says that the girls were inspired to "do something different" with their creation. "We always see regular snowmen...we wanted to add a traditional touch to it."
So, at Navi's suggestion, the girls added jewellery and false lashes—perfect to promote their respective beauty and jewellery-focused Instagram business accounts.
https://www.blogto.com/arts/2018/11/brampton-snow-woman-breaks-internet/
..."My friend Daljit Waraich came from India and it was her first winter here in Brampton!" says Jassu Kingra, 19, who first posted photos of the creation to her Instagram page on Friday. "She called me and told me she wanted to build a snowman, and then she asked how to build it and I invited her over to our house."
With the help of her Jassu's two younger sisters Navi, 15 and Bini, 9, the teen girls built what turned out to be a flawless, three-tiered snowman.
"We wanted it to be perfect because we wanted to post it on our social media sites," she explained. "And my friend wanted to show her family in India, so we had to make it perfect and show her family that Canada is the best even during the winter!"
Jassu says that the girls were inspired to "do something different" with their creation. "We always see regular snowmen...we wanted to add a traditional touch to it."
So, at Navi's suggestion, the girls added jewellery and false lashes—perfect to promote their respective beauty and jewellery-focused Instagram business accounts.
https://www.blogto.com/arts/2018/11/brampton-snow-woman-breaks-internet/
38margd
Trans Woman Was Beaten in ICE Custody Before Death, Autopsy Finds
Scott Bixby, Betsy Woodruff | 11.26.18
...Roxsana Hernández Rodriguez, 33, a transgender woman from Honduras, died on May 25, nine days after being transferred to a dedicated unit for transgender women at the Cibola County Correctional Center in New Mexico, which is operated under contract by CoreCivic, the second-largest private prison company in the United States.
“There she developed severe diarrhea and vomiting over the course of several days,” wrote forensic pathologist Kris Sperry, “and finally was emergently hospitalized, then transported to Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where she remained critically ill until her death.”
...cause of death was most likely “severe complications of dehydration superimposed upon HIV infection,” which made her susceptible to the physiologic effects of untreated dehydration.
“According to observations of other detainees who were with Ms. Hernández Rodriguez, the diarrhea and vomiting episodes persisted over multiple days with no medical evaluation or treatment, until she was gravely ill,” Sperry wrote.
Sperry’s autopsy, the second conducted on Hernández Rodriguez’s body following her death, also found evidence of physical abuse, with “deep bruising” on her hands and abdomen, evidence of blunt-force trauma “indicative of blows, and/or kicks, and possible strikes with blunt object.” An accompanying diagram illustrated long, thin bruises along Hernández Rodriguez’s back and sides, as well as extensive hemorrhaging on Hernández Rodriguez’s right and left wrists, which Dr. Sperry found were “typical of handcuff injuries.”
...a month before her death, Hernández Rodriguez said she decided to flee Honduras after she was gang-raped by four members of the MS-13 gang, resulting in her being infected with HIV. “Trans people in my neighborhood are killed and chopped into pieces, then dumped inside potato bags,” Hernández Rodriguez said at the time. “I didn’t want to come to Mexico—I wanted to stay in Honduras but I couldn’t… They kill trans people in Honduras. I’m scared of that.” LGBT people in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras are uniquely susceptible to violence and persecution, as well as during their travels in pursuit of asylum.
...Hernández Rodriguez, known as “Roxy” to her friends, decided to travel more than 2,000 miles with 1,300 other migrants hoping to claim asylum in the United States, making a six-week journey across Mexico organized by Pueblo Sin Fronteras.
After arriving at the U.S. border and asking for asylum at the San Ysidro Port of Entry on the U.S.-Mexico border near San Diego, she was taken into custody on May 9.
After being held for five days, she was transferred to the Cibola facility that houses a dedicated “pod” for transgender women, which ICE says is run by medical and detention staff trained in “best practices for the care of transgender individuals.” Less than three weeks after arriving in the U.S., she was dead.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trans-woman-roxsana-hernandez-rodriguez-beaten-in-...
Scott Bixby, Betsy Woodruff | 11.26.18
...Roxsana Hernández Rodriguez, 33, a transgender woman from Honduras, died on May 25, nine days after being transferred to a dedicated unit for transgender women at the Cibola County Correctional Center in New Mexico, which is operated under contract by CoreCivic, the second-largest private prison company in the United States.
“There she developed severe diarrhea and vomiting over the course of several days,” wrote forensic pathologist Kris Sperry, “and finally was emergently hospitalized, then transported to Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where she remained critically ill until her death.”
...cause of death was most likely “severe complications of dehydration superimposed upon HIV infection,” which made her susceptible to the physiologic effects of untreated dehydration.
“According to observations of other detainees who were with Ms. Hernández Rodriguez, the diarrhea and vomiting episodes persisted over multiple days with no medical evaluation or treatment, until she was gravely ill,” Sperry wrote.
Sperry’s autopsy, the second conducted on Hernández Rodriguez’s body following her death, also found evidence of physical abuse, with “deep bruising” on her hands and abdomen, evidence of blunt-force trauma “indicative of blows, and/or kicks, and possible strikes with blunt object.” An accompanying diagram illustrated long, thin bruises along Hernández Rodriguez’s back and sides, as well as extensive hemorrhaging on Hernández Rodriguez’s right and left wrists, which Dr. Sperry found were “typical of handcuff injuries.”
...a month before her death, Hernández Rodriguez said she decided to flee Honduras after she was gang-raped by four members of the MS-13 gang, resulting in her being infected with HIV. “Trans people in my neighborhood are killed and chopped into pieces, then dumped inside potato bags,” Hernández Rodriguez said at the time. “I didn’t want to come to Mexico—I wanted to stay in Honduras but I couldn’t… They kill trans people in Honduras. I’m scared of that.” LGBT people in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras are uniquely susceptible to violence and persecution, as well as during their travels in pursuit of asylum.
...Hernández Rodriguez, known as “Roxy” to her friends, decided to travel more than 2,000 miles with 1,300 other migrants hoping to claim asylum in the United States, making a six-week journey across Mexico organized by Pueblo Sin Fronteras.
After arriving at the U.S. border and asking for asylum at the San Ysidro Port of Entry on the U.S.-Mexico border near San Diego, she was taken into custody on May 9.
After being held for five days, she was transferred to the Cibola facility that houses a dedicated “pod” for transgender women, which ICE says is run by medical and detention staff trained in “best practices for the care of transgender individuals.” Less than three weeks after arriving in the U.S., she was dead.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trans-woman-roxsana-hernandez-rodriguez-beaten-in-...
392wonderY
A volunteer at the border wrote a searing opinion piece in the Houston Chronicle:
When we hurt migrants, we hurt Americans
What I saw at the border was far worse than I imagined, not only because of what these families experienced, but because of what had happened to the American workers guarding them.
…
The next interview made my stomach churn all over again. All that week Laura and I had worked with a Salvadoran mother who had seen authorities in her town beat someone nearly to death. This time, she told us what she experienced herself. At the hands of Americans.
Shivering and exhausted after crossing the Rio Grande River, the woman and her small daughter encountered U.S. border agents almost immediately. The officials drove them to the Port Isabel detention center in Brownsville — and the hielera. The icebox. A routine, and controversial, part of the border control process, the hielera is an ice-cold cell with concrete floors where newly apprehended migrants are jammed often for days. Forbidden to huddle for warmth, with no protection except Mylar sheets, the women in the hielera begged border control agents for sweaters.
“They laughed,” the mother told us. “A group of them fanned themselves and said, ‘Whew, it’s hot in here! Let’s turn up the air conditioning.’”
From the hielera, officers transferred the woman to the perrera, the dog kennel. Here, in a cell crammed with dozens of other women, trays of disgusting food such as still-frozen bologna were kicked across the cell floor. She told us that once, after a day with no food at all, a guard opened the door at 3 a.m. and hurled in packs of crackers, as if to animals.
…
At late-night dinners all that week, my co-workers described similar stories. One talked to a small boy who said he was told by guards to sign a paper he couldn’t read or have his fingers chopped off. Another interviewed an 8-year-old who watched guards kicking a teenager over and over in the ice box room. Child welfare workers and lawyers have documented thousands of similar reports.
…
What had happened to so many of these working dads and moms, that they could see a girl freezing in a concrete room and laugh? How could these regular Americans tell a boy his fingers would be severed if he disobeyed? The zero-tolerance detention policy was designed with full knowledge of how it would damage children. But its most far-reaching effect may be the way it has distorted American men and women who enforce it.
…
Months later I’m back at home, and whenever I dissolve into sleep I often see something familiar as well: a girl who looks a lot like my daughters, intently coloring a picture. Just as often, I see darkness and feel sick. I have the sensation that I’ve been in a place where something was wrong, something infectious. It was cruelty, spreading from person to person, among ordinary Americans not any different from me.
When we hurt migrants, we hurt Americans
What I saw at the border was far worse than I imagined, not only because of what these families experienced, but because of what had happened to the American workers guarding them.
…
The next interview made my stomach churn all over again. All that week Laura and I had worked with a Salvadoran mother who had seen authorities in her town beat someone nearly to death. This time, she told us what she experienced herself. At the hands of Americans.
Shivering and exhausted after crossing the Rio Grande River, the woman and her small daughter encountered U.S. border agents almost immediately. The officials drove them to the Port Isabel detention center in Brownsville — and the hielera. The icebox. A routine, and controversial, part of the border control process, the hielera is an ice-cold cell with concrete floors where newly apprehended migrants are jammed often for days. Forbidden to huddle for warmth, with no protection except Mylar sheets, the women in the hielera begged border control agents for sweaters.
“They laughed,” the mother told us. “A group of them fanned themselves and said, ‘Whew, it’s hot in here! Let’s turn up the air conditioning.’”
From the hielera, officers transferred the woman to the perrera, the dog kennel. Here, in a cell crammed with dozens of other women, trays of disgusting food such as still-frozen bologna were kicked across the cell floor. She told us that once, after a day with no food at all, a guard opened the door at 3 a.m. and hurled in packs of crackers, as if to animals.
…
At late-night dinners all that week, my co-workers described similar stories. One talked to a small boy who said he was told by guards to sign a paper he couldn’t read or have his fingers chopped off. Another interviewed an 8-year-old who watched guards kicking a teenager over and over in the ice box room. Child welfare workers and lawyers have documented thousands of similar reports.
…
What had happened to so many of these working dads and moms, that they could see a girl freezing in a concrete room and laugh? How could these regular Americans tell a boy his fingers would be severed if he disobeyed? The zero-tolerance detention policy was designed with full knowledge of how it would damage children. But its most far-reaching effect may be the way it has distorted American men and women who enforce it.
…
Months later I’m back at home, and whenever I dissolve into sleep I often see something familiar as well: a girl who looks a lot like my daughters, intently coloring a picture. Just as often, I see darkness and feel sick. I have the sensation that I’ve been in a place where something was wrong, something infectious. It was cruelty, spreading from person to person, among ordinary Americans not any different from me.
40John5918
Six charts on the immigrants who call the US home (BBC)
Today, nearly 14% of the population of the US was born overseas. This is a sharp rise from the historical low of just under 5% in 1970 but roughly the same as between 1870 and 1910...
Most immigrants to the US are in the country legally...
Immigrants are more likely to have a master's degree or doctorate than the children of parents born in the US...
Today, nearly 14% of the population of the US was born overseas. This is a sharp rise from the historical low of just under 5% in 1970 but roughly the same as between 1870 and 1910...
Most immigrants to the US are in the country legally...
Immigrants are more likely to have a master's degree or doctorate than the children of parents born in the US...
42margd
China Hails Progress on U.S. Student Visas While Trump Stays Silent
Bruce Einhorn | December 3, 2018
White House didn’t mention Chinese students in statement
U.S. lawmakers have said China uses students for espionage
Earlier this year, Trump’s administration revealed plans to curtail the ability of some Chinese students to stay in the U.S. -- part of what it deemed a campaign to thwart foreign attempts to steal American intellectual property. During an August dinner with CEOs and senior staffers, Trump claimed that almost every student coming to the U.S. from China “is a spy,” according to Politico.
...A June White House report identified Chinese students as potential threats to national security, saying China accounts for some 25 percent of graduate students in the U.S. specializing in science, technology, engineering or math. Beijing “may seek to manipulate or pressure even unwitting or unwilling Chinese nationals into becoming non-traditional information collectors” to serve its military and strategic ambitions, the report said.
It followed the administration’s May decision to set limits on Chinese visa applications, cutting short the amount of time some Chinese citizens could stay in the U.S. and maintaining the existing policy of five years’ maximum validity for student visas.
...Of more than 1 million international students in the U.S. in the 2017-2018 school year, one-third came from China, according to the Institute of International Education, a New York non-profit organization...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-03/china-hails-progress-on-u-s-s...
Bruce Einhorn | December 3, 2018
White House didn’t mention Chinese students in statement
U.S. lawmakers have said China uses students for espionage
Earlier this year, Trump’s administration revealed plans to curtail the ability of some Chinese students to stay in the U.S. -- part of what it deemed a campaign to thwart foreign attempts to steal American intellectual property. During an August dinner with CEOs and senior staffers, Trump claimed that almost every student coming to the U.S. from China “is a spy,” according to Politico.
...A June White House report identified Chinese students as potential threats to national security, saying China accounts for some 25 percent of graduate students in the U.S. specializing in science, technology, engineering or math. Beijing “may seek to manipulate or pressure even unwitting or unwilling Chinese nationals into becoming non-traditional information collectors” to serve its military and strategic ambitions, the report said.
It followed the administration’s May decision to set limits on Chinese visa applications, cutting short the amount of time some Chinese citizens could stay in the U.S. and maintaining the existing policy of five years’ maximum validity for student visas.
...Of more than 1 million international students in the U.S. in the 2017-2018 school year, one-third came from China, according to the Institute of International Education, a New York non-profit organization...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-03/china-hails-progress-on-u-s-s...
43John5918
Myths about migrants spreading disease 'inform hostile policies' (Guardian)
Report says migrants more likely to contribute than to damage health of host nations
Report says migrants more likely to contribute than to damage health of host nations
45mamzel
I was so sorry to hear that all those servicemen will have to stay there to Jan. 31 which means they'll miss any chance of being with their families for the holidays.
46margd
>45 mamzel: I know... :( At Thanksgiving Trump said don't feel sorry for them, that soldiers are tough guys.
Maybe, but they have families and sometimes children, who will be missing their mommies and daddies--for what?
Support for this particular president must surely be waning in the military.
____________________________________________
Appeals court denies Trump bid to reinstate asylum ban
Chris Mills Rodrigo - 12/07/18
The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday denied the Trump administration's effort to delay a judge's order blocking enforcement of its asylum policy.
...Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California...sided with opponents of President Trump’s policy, granting their request for a temporary restraining order against the policy denying asylum to migrants who enter the U.S. illegally.
...Trump blasted the decision while dismissing Tigar as "an Obama judge" – a remark that drew a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
...The Trump administration appealed Tigar's decision (to 9th Circuit Court) in late November, saying that (district) court’s delay, which lasts for 30 days, undermined the president’s determination that an immediate temporary suspension of entry between ports of entry was necessary to address the ongoing and increasing crisis facing our immigration system.
Friday's decision denies that appeal...
(Decision posted at website)
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/420371-appeals-court-denies-trump-b...
Maybe, but they have families and sometimes children, who will be missing their mommies and daddies--for what?
Support for this particular president must surely be waning in the military.
____________________________________________
Appeals court denies Trump bid to reinstate asylum ban
Chris Mills Rodrigo - 12/07/18
The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday denied the Trump administration's effort to delay a judge's order blocking enforcement of its asylum policy.
...Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California...sided with opponents of President Trump’s policy, granting their request for a temporary restraining order against the policy denying asylum to migrants who enter the U.S. illegally.
...Trump blasted the decision while dismissing Tigar as "an Obama judge" – a remark that drew a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
...The Trump administration appealed Tigar's decision (to 9th Circuit Court) in late November, saying that (district) court’s delay, which lasts for 30 days, undermined the president’s determination that an immediate temporary suspension of entry between ports of entry was necessary to address the ongoing and increasing crisis facing our immigration system.
Friday's decision denies that appeal...
(Decision posted at website)
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/420371-appeals-court-denies-trump-b...
47margd
2 More Immigrants Say They Worked for Trump Despite Lacking Legal Status
Miriam Jordan | Dec. 7, 2018
...Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/trump-undocumented-workers-bedminster-golf...
Miriam Jordan | Dec. 7, 2018
...Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/trump-undocumented-workers-bedminster-golf...
482wonderY
The Trump administration’s next targeted group has California GOP unhappy. Vietnamese migrants have traditionally leaned Republican in Orange County.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/15/trump-vietnam-war-refugees-california-...
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/15/trump-vietnam-war-refugees-california-...
49margd
Driven away from home by climate change
UN World Food Programme | Dec 12, 2018
As the Climate Change Conference (COP 24) is underway in Katowice, Poland, we look at how communities in the Central American Dry Corridor are left with a stark choice: adapt to a changing climate or leave
...the Dry Corridor, a region that spans the length of Central America, from southern Mexico all the way down to Panama.
...Climate change, with more frequent and intense extreme weather events as well as slower-onset effects such as land degradation and pests infestations, is making life even harder for rural communities in the Dry Corridor that were already barely subsisting. Unable to put enough food on the table for their families, many are driven away from their lands...
https://insight.wfp.org/driven-away-from-home-by-climate-change-e37a65871f36
________________________________________________________________
New study examines links between emigration and food insecurity in the Dry Corridor of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras
UN WFP | 23 August 2017
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new inter-agency study released today found a correlation between the prolonged droughts in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras – exacerbated by El Niño phenomenon from 2014 to 2016 — and the increase in irregular migration from these countries to the United States of America...
https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/new-study-examines-links-between-emigratio...
UN World Food Programme | Dec 12, 2018
As the Climate Change Conference (COP 24) is underway in Katowice, Poland, we look at how communities in the Central American Dry Corridor are left with a stark choice: adapt to a changing climate or leave
...the Dry Corridor, a region that spans the length of Central America, from southern Mexico all the way down to Panama.
...Climate change, with more frequent and intense extreme weather events as well as slower-onset effects such as land degradation and pests infestations, is making life even harder for rural communities in the Dry Corridor that were already barely subsisting. Unable to put enough food on the table for their families, many are driven away from their lands...
https://insight.wfp.org/driven-away-from-home-by-climate-change-e37a65871f36
________________________________________________________________
New study examines links between emigration and food insecurity in the Dry Corridor of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras
UN WFP | 23 August 2017
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new inter-agency study released today found a correlation between the prolonged droughts in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras – exacerbated by El Niño phenomenon from 2014 to 2016 — and the increase in irregular migration from these countries to the United States of America...
https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/new-study-examines-links-between-emigratio...
502wonderY
This story in The Washington Post today brought tears to my eyes ~
(stupid, stupid government decisions)
A Haitian asylum seeker had spent two years in U.S. detention until an Ohio couple tried to do something about it
Ansly Damus, a Haitian ethics professor who had come to the California-Mexico border in the fall of 2016 to seek asylum. Rather than enter the country illegally, Damus had followed U.S. protocol by presenting himself to Border Patrol and saying he feared for his life. Then he had been handcuffed and flown to a detention facility with empty beds in Ohio, where he’d spent the past two years waiting for a final resolution in his case.
The government had denied Damus parole because it considered him a flight risk with no meaningful connections in Ohio, but now the courtroom was filled with Ohioans who had come to support him.
…
“Yesterday was the first day Mr. Damus had seen daylight in over two years,” his lawyer told the judge.
…
U.S. District Judge Judith Levy glanced at the briefings and then looked at Damus. She said the Ohioans in the courtroom were evidence that he had “a community that cared about him.” She said the government had offered no proof that he was a danger or a flight risk. She said: “This restriction on Mr. Damus’s liberty is extraordinary.”
…
When they found out he had no way to communicate with his wife because the jail didn’t allow detainees to use email or make international calls, they contacted his wife on Facebook and began relaying messages between them.
…
During his time in jail he had slept on a metal cot in a room with 20 people, where the lights remained on at night for security. Now he traced his hands across the four-post bed and the decorative pillows, familiarizing himself with this latest stop on the long path toward asylum in the United States: not with his family but with a family, not in his home but in a house, not free but no longer detained. He took out his Bible and asked Hart and Benjamin to hold his hands.
(stupid, stupid government decisions)
A Haitian asylum seeker had spent two years in U.S. detention until an Ohio couple tried to do something about it
Ansly Damus, a Haitian ethics professor who had come to the California-Mexico border in the fall of 2016 to seek asylum. Rather than enter the country illegally, Damus had followed U.S. protocol by presenting himself to Border Patrol and saying he feared for his life. Then he had been handcuffed and flown to a detention facility with empty beds in Ohio, where he’d spent the past two years waiting for a final resolution in his case.
The government had denied Damus parole because it considered him a flight risk with no meaningful connections in Ohio, but now the courtroom was filled with Ohioans who had come to support him.
…
“Yesterday was the first day Mr. Damus had seen daylight in over two years,” his lawyer told the judge.
…
U.S. District Judge Judith Levy glanced at the briefings and then looked at Damus. She said the Ohioans in the courtroom were evidence that he had “a community that cared about him.” She said the government had offered no proof that he was a danger or a flight risk. She said: “This restriction on Mr. Damus’s liberty is extraordinary.”
…
When they found out he had no way to communicate with his wife because the jail didn’t allow detainees to use email or make international calls, they contacted his wife on Facebook and began relaying messages between them.
…
During his time in jail he had slept on a metal cot in a room with 20 people, where the lights remained on at night for security. Now he traced his hands across the four-post bed and the decorative pillows, familiarizing himself with this latest stop on the long path toward asylum in the United States: not with his family but with a family, not in his home but in a house, not free but no longer detained. He took out his Bible and asked Hart and Benjamin to hold his hands.
51prosfilaes
>48 2wonderY: There's arguments about immigration, but these are people who are already here, refugees from a war we lost who we agreed not to send back two decades ago. This is just cruel.
532wonderY
Tucker Carlson Dropped by at Least 7 Advertisers in Wake of Immigration Flap
At least seven advertisers have now dropped “Tucker Carlson Tonight” after the Fox News host said in a show last Thursday that immigrants to the United States made the country “poorer” and “dirtier.”
As of Tuesday morning, Pacific Life, Indeed, Bowflex, SmileDirectClub, NerdWallet, Minted and Ancestry.com had all announced plans to suspend advertising on the program.
…
The pressure, however, has only grown with each defection, as liberal pressure groups like Media Matters for America and Sleeping Giants have kept up the pressure on Twitter. Activists like Jordan Uhl and Judd Legum posted real-time updates to their massive followings of companies whose ads appeared on Monday night’s show.
On Monday, Fox News also said it would stand by Carlson and would survive the latest boycott against one of its top-rated hosts. “It is a shame that left-wing advocacy groups, under the guise of being supposed ‘media watchdogs’ weaponize social media against companies in an effort to stifle free speech,” a network rep said
At least seven advertisers have now dropped “Tucker Carlson Tonight” after the Fox News host said in a show last Thursday that immigrants to the United States made the country “poorer” and “dirtier.”
As of Tuesday morning, Pacific Life, Indeed, Bowflex, SmileDirectClub, NerdWallet, Minted and Ancestry.com had all announced plans to suspend advertising on the program.
…
The pressure, however, has only grown with each defection, as liberal pressure groups like Media Matters for America and Sleeping Giants have kept up the pressure on Twitter. Activists like Jordan Uhl and Judd Legum posted real-time updates to their massive followings of companies whose ads appeared on Monday night’s show.
On Monday, Fox News also said it would stand by Carlson and would survive the latest boycott against one of its top-rated hosts. “It is a shame that left-wing advocacy groups, under the guise of being supposed ‘media watchdogs’ weaponize social media against companies in an effort to stifle free speech,” a network rep said
54prosfilaes
>53 2wonderY: immigrants to the United States made the country “poorer” and “dirtier.”
I would avoid putting too much emphasis on "poorer"; that's at least a debatable factual question. Keep the emphasis on "dirtier"; there's really no way to interpret that factually, or any other way than racist.
I would avoid putting too much emphasis on "poorer"; that's at least a debatable factual question. Keep the emphasis on "dirtier"; there's really no way to interpret that factually, or any other way than racist.
55margd
A switch to renewable energy is another action the US could take to ease conditions in the "Dry Corridor".
(It's perverse for climate-denier to block people trying to escape results of his non-action.)
Good for Mexico, on its "Marshall Plan" for Central America. Applause for Trump on hold until we see execution.
U.S., Supporting Mexico’s Plan, Will Invest $5.8 Billion in Central America
Gardiner Harris and Azam Ahmed | Dec. 18, 2018
...Mexico’s new president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, introduced what he called a “Marshall Plan” last week to address the root causes of Central American migration: a $30 billion initiative to invest in the region and welcome migrants into Mexico with visas, health care and employment.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration signaled its support for the plan, saying it was committing $5.8 billion in private and public investments in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Much of that amount, however, was previously committed or contingent on the identification of “commercially viable projects.”
...Although Mr. Obrador’s goal of getting $30 billion in shared commitments to regional development remains far-off, Mexico welcomed the United States’ announcement.
“This appears to us to be a very positive step,” said Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s foreign minister and one of the chief architects of the regional development proposal.
The Obama administration invested heavily in Central America, hoping that economic development, police training and a shared sense of commitment would stem a growing tide of migrants — children in particular — traveling through Mexico to get to the United States.
The programs are widely seen as successful, and American diplomats posted in the region consider them vital.
Mr. Trump has, on occasion, threatened to end all such aid unless migration from the region ends entirely, something few diplomats see as possible.
The Trump administration has also repeatedly sought to cut foreign aid in general, only to see it restored by Congress, and there was little about Tuesday’s announcement that suggested that dynamic would change. Mick Mulvaney, the White House budget director and now the acting White House chief of staff, is particularly skeptical of the value of foreign aid.
“Since President Trump took office, Congress has rejected his misguided effort to slash foreign assistance to Central America,” Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York, who is expected to lead the House Foreign Affairs Committee next year, said on Tuesday.
“So it should come as no surprise,” he added, “that Democrats in Congress are skeptical about the Trump administration’s rhetorical commitment to new funding for Central America and southern Mexico to address the root causes of child migration.”...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/us/politics/united-states-mexico-central-amer...
(It's perverse for climate-denier to block people trying to escape results of his non-action.)
Good for Mexico, on its "Marshall Plan" for Central America. Applause for Trump on hold until we see execution.
U.S., Supporting Mexico’s Plan, Will Invest $5.8 Billion in Central America
Gardiner Harris and Azam Ahmed | Dec. 18, 2018
...Mexico’s new president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, introduced what he called a “Marshall Plan” last week to address the root causes of Central American migration: a $30 billion initiative to invest in the region and welcome migrants into Mexico with visas, health care and employment.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration signaled its support for the plan, saying it was committing $5.8 billion in private and public investments in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Much of that amount, however, was previously committed or contingent on the identification of “commercially viable projects.”
...Although Mr. Obrador’s goal of getting $30 billion in shared commitments to regional development remains far-off, Mexico welcomed the United States’ announcement.
“This appears to us to be a very positive step,” said Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s foreign minister and one of the chief architects of the regional development proposal.
The Obama administration invested heavily in Central America, hoping that economic development, police training and a shared sense of commitment would stem a growing tide of migrants — children in particular — traveling through Mexico to get to the United States.
The programs are widely seen as successful, and American diplomats posted in the region consider them vital.
Mr. Trump has, on occasion, threatened to end all such aid unless migration from the region ends entirely, something few diplomats see as possible.
The Trump administration has also repeatedly sought to cut foreign aid in general, only to see it restored by Congress, and there was little about Tuesday’s announcement that suggested that dynamic would change. Mick Mulvaney, the White House budget director and now the acting White House chief of staff, is particularly skeptical of the value of foreign aid.
“Since President Trump took office, Congress has rejected his misguided effort to slash foreign assistance to Central America,” Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York, who is expected to lead the House Foreign Affairs Committee next year, said on Tuesday.
“So it should come as no surprise,” he added, “that Democrats in Congress are skeptical about the Trump administration’s rhetorical commitment to new funding for Central America and southern Mexico to address the root causes of child migration.”...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/us/politics/united-states-mexico-central-amer...
562wonderY
Judge orders deported asylum seekers to be returned to US, in Trump administration rebuke
A federal judge on Wednesday took the extraordinary step of ordering that asylum seekers who sued after their deportation be returned to the U.S. to have their claims heard anew, ruling against the Trump administration's revised asylum policies.
The ruling is from U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington...
In his sweeping ruling Wednesday against the Trump administration's immigration policies, Sullivan said recent changes violated federal law.
“The Court holds that it has jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs’ challenges to the credible fear policies, that it has the authority to order the injunctive relief, and that, with the exception of two policies, the new credible fear policies are arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of the immigration laws,” Sullivan concluded.
eta another story with a bit more detail
Trump admin can't limit asylum protections for domestic and gang violence victims, judge rules
In a rebuke of the policy established by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Judge Emmet Sullivan agreed with a group of women and children who argued the policy unlawfully imposed a heightened standard in reviewing their claims, concluding that the administration must stop deporting migrants currently in the US "without first providing credible fear determinations consistent with the immigration laws."
A federal judge on Wednesday took the extraordinary step of ordering that asylum seekers who sued after their deportation be returned to the U.S. to have their claims heard anew, ruling against the Trump administration's revised asylum policies.
The ruling is from U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington...
In his sweeping ruling Wednesday against the Trump administration's immigration policies, Sullivan said recent changes violated federal law.
“The Court holds that it has jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs’ challenges to the credible fear policies, that it has the authority to order the injunctive relief, and that, with the exception of two policies, the new credible fear policies are arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of the immigration laws,” Sullivan concluded.
eta another story with a bit more detail
Trump admin can't limit asylum protections for domestic and gang violence victims, judge rules
In a rebuke of the policy established by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Judge Emmet Sullivan agreed with a group of women and children who argued the policy unlawfully imposed a heightened standard in reviewing their claims, concluding that the administration must stop deporting migrants currently in the US "without first providing credible fear determinations consistent with the immigration laws."
57margd
New Jersey AG has obtained evidence of possible crimes at Trump's golf club — and Mueller, FBI are involved in probe
Chris Sommerfeldt | Dec 29, 2018
New Jersey prosecutors have collected evidence that supervisors at President Trump’s Garden State golf club may have committed federal immigration crimes — and the FBI as well as special counsel Robert Mueller have played part in the inquiry...
Anibal Romero, a Newark attorney who represents several undocumented immigrants who used to work at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, said Friday he recently met with investigators from the state attorney general’s office and handed over fraudulent green cards and Social Security numbers that management at the club allegedly procured and gave his clients, Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz...
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-fbi-ag-evidence-crimes-trump-go...
Chris Sommerfeldt | Dec 29, 2018
New Jersey prosecutors have collected evidence that supervisors at President Trump’s Garden State golf club may have committed federal immigration crimes — and the FBI as well as special counsel Robert Mueller have played part in the inquiry...
Anibal Romero, a Newark attorney who represents several undocumented immigrants who used to work at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, said Friday he recently met with investigators from the state attorney general’s office and handed over fraudulent green cards and Social Security numbers that management at the club allegedly procured and gave his clients, Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz...
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-fbi-ag-evidence-crimes-trump-go...
58margd
New Jersey AG has obtained evidence of possible crimes at Trump's golf club — and Mueller, FBI are involved in probe
Chris Sommerfeldt | Dec 29, 2018
New Jersey prosecutors have collected evidence that supervisors at President Trump’s Garden State golf club may have committed federal immigration crimes — and the FBI as well as special counsel Robert Mueller have played part in the inquiry, the Daily News has learned.
Anibal Romero, a Newark attorney who represents several undocumented immigrants who used to work at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, said Friday he recently met with investigators from the state attorney general’s office and handed over fraudulent green cards and Social Security numbers that management at the club allegedly procured and gave his clients, Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz...
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-fbi-ag-evidence-crimes-trump-go...
Chris Sommerfeldt | Dec 29, 2018
New Jersey prosecutors have collected evidence that supervisors at President Trump’s Garden State golf club may have committed federal immigration crimes — and the FBI as well as special counsel Robert Mueller have played part in the inquiry, the Daily News has learned.
Anibal Romero, a Newark attorney who represents several undocumented immigrants who used to work at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, said Friday he recently met with investigators from the state attorney general’s office and handed over fraudulent green cards and Social Security numbers that management at the club allegedly procured and gave his clients, Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz...
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-fbi-ag-evidence-crimes-trump-go...
59John5918
Not the USA, but another example of the positive influence of immigrants - something which should be obvious to anyone in the USA since your current nation was built by immigrants.
Festival to celebrate second world war refugees' influence on British culture (Guardian)
Festival to celebrate second world war refugees' influence on British culture (Guardian)
60John5918
I came across this story today in a document I am editing:
Daniel G. Groody, C.S.C., “Jesus and the Undocumented Immigrant: A Spiritual Geography of A Crucified People,” Theological Studies, 70 (2009) pg. 298
One summer in Arizona, as temperatures reached 120 degrees, a group called the Samaritans sent volunteers to keep watch for any immigrants who might be in need or distress. When a group of 20 immigrants came walking along a dry river bed, a volunteer called out to them from a ledge on a hill and asked, “Is anybody injured?” “Do you need any food?” “Do you have any water?” Suddenly the group of immigrants stopped. Unsure of who was speaking to them, they huddled together and deliberated awhile. Then slowly the leader began walking toward the Samaritan volunteers and said, “We don’t have any more food. And we only have a little bit of water. But if you are in need of it, we will share what we have with you.
Daniel G. Groody, C.S.C., “Jesus and the Undocumented Immigrant: A Spiritual Geography of A Crucified People,” Theological Studies, 70 (2009) pg. 298
61TrippB
That’s a nice…story.
Another very plausible ending is that the group, not fully understanding the inquiries, bashed in the skull of the Samaritan, took everything they could find of value, and continued on their way.
That’s the problem with uncontrolled immigration--or perhaps worse, immigration policy and legislation that’s violated with near-impunity by hordes of illegal aliens sneaking around inadequate border controls—you never know what you're going to get.
In the last week, a twice-deported illegal alien gave assistance to another illegal alien who allegedly mercilessly murdered Corporal Ronil Singh, a police officer, husband, and father. Officer Singh had gone through all the required administrative hurdles to legally immigrate to the U.S. Officer Singh’s accused murderer should have been deported long ago, but California’s sanctuary protections prevented that.
I’m very much in favor of legal immigration, but there’s an undeniable fact that some people prefer to ignore: illegal aliens have raped, robbed, assaulted, or murdered many thousands of innocent Americans. People who have proven themselves to be unworthy should not be allowed into the U.S., and there should be no “sanctuary” cities to protect them.
One assessment reports that illegal immigrants cost the U.S. taxpayers $113 billion per year. Border controls between the U.S. and Mexico have never been adequate. I hope President Trump holds out for the appropriation ($5 billion, or whatever) to build a wall that will help to address this dangerous threat to Americans. I’m also in favor of cutting all federal funding to any city or state that declares themselves to be a sanctuary for illegal (aka criminal) aliens.
Another very plausible ending is that the group, not fully understanding the inquiries, bashed in the skull of the Samaritan, took everything they could find of value, and continued on their way.
That’s the problem with uncontrolled immigration--or perhaps worse, immigration policy and legislation that’s violated with near-impunity by hordes of illegal aliens sneaking around inadequate border controls—you never know what you're going to get.
In the last week, a twice-deported illegal alien gave assistance to another illegal alien who allegedly mercilessly murdered Corporal Ronil Singh, a police officer, husband, and father. Officer Singh had gone through all the required administrative hurdles to legally immigrate to the U.S. Officer Singh’s accused murderer should have been deported long ago, but California’s sanctuary protections prevented that.
I’m very much in favor of legal immigration, but there’s an undeniable fact that some people prefer to ignore: illegal aliens have raped, robbed, assaulted, or murdered many thousands of innocent Americans. People who have proven themselves to be unworthy should not be allowed into the U.S., and there should be no “sanctuary” cities to protect them.
One assessment reports that illegal immigrants cost the U.S. taxpayers $113 billion per year. Border controls between the U.S. and Mexico have never been adequate. I hope President Trump holds out for the appropriation ($5 billion, or whatever) to build a wall that will help to address this dangerous threat to Americans. I’m also in favor of cutting all federal funding to any city or state that declares themselves to be a sanctuary for illegal (aka criminal) aliens.
62prosfilaes
>61 TrippB: Another very plausible ending is that the group, not fully understanding the inquiries, bashed in the skull of the Samaritan, took everything they could find of value, and continued on their way.
Another very plausible ending is that the Samaritan saw that the immigrants had no weapons, shot the adults and is keeping the kids in his basement. We can make up any number of stories.
You don't offer any sources for your numbers. Americans have raped, robbed, assaulted or murdered many thousands of innocent Americans, at a generally higher level than illegal immigrants. The numbers for the cost of illegal immigrants come all over the places; the Cato Institute offers $3.3-$15.6 billion a year.* My understanding is that illegal immigrants are necessary for farming, that farmers can't find Americans will work a full season in the fields.
And the question is how helpful the wall will be at changing anything about immigration. Will it be $22 billion dollars worth?** It won't stop drugs; they come in in trucks and boats, not hand-carried over the wall. How much will it stop immigrants, who already get smuggled through borders in trucks or by tunnels?
* https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2018/06/26/paul-gosar-h...
** https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/apr/28/scott-peters/would-...
*** https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/08/opinions/border-wall-cartels-trump-opinion-dr...
Another very plausible ending is that the Samaritan saw that the immigrants had no weapons, shot the adults and is keeping the kids in his basement. We can make up any number of stories.
You don't offer any sources for your numbers. Americans have raped, robbed, assaulted or murdered many thousands of innocent Americans, at a generally higher level than illegal immigrants. The numbers for the cost of illegal immigrants come all over the places; the Cato Institute offers $3.3-$15.6 billion a year.* My understanding is that illegal immigrants are necessary for farming, that farmers can't find Americans will work a full season in the fields.
And the question is how helpful the wall will be at changing anything about immigration. Will it be $22 billion dollars worth?** It won't stop drugs; they come in in trucks and boats, not hand-carried over the wall. How much will it stop immigrants, who already get smuggled through borders in trucks or by tunnels?
* https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2018/06/26/paul-gosar-h...
** https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/apr/28/scott-peters/would-...
*** https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/08/opinions/border-wall-cartels-trump-opinion-dr...
63TrippB
Nice try. Predictable, but irrelevant.
Illegal aliens have killed, raped, and robbed thousands of Americans. To say they haven't is ridiculous. Show any credible numbers to say they haven't, from any sources. You can't, because they have. Without question.
Yes, Americans have also committed such travesties, but that, let me be very clear here, is not relevant. Illegal aliens are additional--additional--and unnecessary, threats to the population where statistics on crime already exist. Keep the illegal criminals out and they have no opportunity to offend.
Evil, upon evil, does not justify the source.
I just moved back to the U.S. from Europe. Charge me more for vegetables and fruit. I'm used to it, and it would be preferable to subsidizing illegal labor. There weren't so many social negatives in Europe for paying more for farm labor.
A wall will stop many of the trucks currently bringing drugs over the border, and even more of the mules (people) carrying sacks of drugs on their backs. I don't particularly care about the drugs. In terms of quantity, low quality (extremely low quality) Mexican marijuana is a low-level nuisance. The heroin and meth is more of an issue that can be addressed, in part, with an effective wall. Instead of drugs, I'd much prefer to block anchor babies.
Illegal aliens have killed, raped, and robbed thousands of Americans. To say they haven't is ridiculous. Show any credible numbers to say they haven't, from any sources. You can't, because they have. Without question.
Yes, Americans have also committed such travesties, but that, let me be very clear here, is not relevant. Illegal aliens are additional--additional--and unnecessary, threats to the population where statistics on crime already exist. Keep the illegal criminals out and they have no opportunity to offend.
Evil, upon evil, does not justify the source.
I just moved back to the U.S. from Europe. Charge me more for vegetables and fruit. I'm used to it, and it would be preferable to subsidizing illegal labor. There weren't so many social negatives in Europe for paying more for farm labor.
A wall will stop many of the trucks currently bringing drugs over the border, and even more of the mules (people) carrying sacks of drugs on their backs. I don't particularly care about the drugs. In terms of quantity, low quality (extremely low quality) Mexican marijuana is a low-level nuisance. The heroin and meth is more of an issue that can be addressed, in part, with an effective wall. Instead of drugs, I'd much prefer to block anchor babies.
64TrippB
“My understanding is that illegal immigrants are necessary for farming, that farmers can't find Americans will work a full season in the fields.”
A nice argument for welfare reform.
A nice argument for welfare reform.
65TrippB
Regarding my time in Europe, let me share a few realities of immigration in other parts of the world. When I arrived, it was immediately made clear to me that, without their version of a green card, I was unable to find a rental home; I was prevented from opening a bank account; there would be no electricity or cable TV. I was not even able to get a mobile telephone. Illegal immigrants get access to nothing. Nothing.
In the U.S., there are few hurdles. illegal aliens can even get drivers licenses. No other civilized part of the world does such things.
In the U.S., there are few hurdles. illegal aliens can even get drivers licenses. No other civilized part of the world does such things.
66jjwilson61
>63 TrippB: Illegal aliens have killed, raped, and robbed thousands of Americans. To say they haven't is ridiculous. Show any credible numbers to say they haven't, from any sources. You can't, because they have. Without question.
So what? If the level of nefarious dudes in the incoming population is less than the level of nefarious dudes in the native population than the overall level of nefarious dudes in the whole population will decrease. It's simple math.
So what? If the level of nefarious dudes in the incoming population is less than the level of nefarious dudes in the native population than the overall level of nefarious dudes in the whole population will decrease. It's simple math.
67prosfilaes
>63 TrippB: Yes, Americans have also committed such travesties, but that, let me be very clear here, is not relevant. Illegal aliens are additional--additional--and unnecessary, threats to the population where statistics on crime already exist. Keep the illegal criminals out and they have no opportunity to offend.
Why isn't it relevant? Why did we let you back into the country? People like you have robbed, raped and killed thousands. This was a perfect change to stop people returning to the US from offending.
A wall will stop many of the trucks currently bringing drugs over the border
How? They're driving through current entrance points with Border Patrol inspections. You can't build a wall in the ocean, and they're running tunnels under the existing walls.
I'd much prefer to block anchor babies.
Stable societies have certain age demographics. Japan and large parts of the Western world are in trouble with the way they have too many old and retired people and not enough younger people to keep things go. Immigration is keeping America young, and thus permitting us to continue to support our older population.
Why isn't it relevant? Why did we let you back into the country? People like you have robbed, raped and killed thousands. This was a perfect change to stop people returning to the US from offending.
A wall will stop many of the trucks currently bringing drugs over the border
How? They're driving through current entrance points with Border Patrol inspections. You can't build a wall in the ocean, and they're running tunnels under the existing walls.
I'd much prefer to block anchor babies.
Stable societies have certain age demographics. Japan and large parts of the Western world are in trouble with the way they have too many old and retired people and not enough younger people to keep things go. Immigration is keeping America young, and thus permitting us to continue to support our older population.
68jjwilson61
>67 prosfilaes: Why isn't it relevant? Why did we let you back into the country? People like you have robbed, raped and killed thousands. This was a perfect change to stop people returning to the US from offending.
That hints at a better answer than I gave before. That we shouldn't be judging whole classes of people as murderers and rapists because a few of them (or even many of them just to stretch the point) might be.
That hints at a better answer than I gave before. That we shouldn't be judging whole classes of people as murderers and rapists because a few of them (or even many of them just to stretch the point) might be.
69TrippB
“…we shouldn't be judging whole classes of people as murderers and rapists because a few of them (or even many of them just to stretch the point) might be.”
We don’t need to judge them. Too many have already been judged, convicted, sentenced, and deported. And then they come back, with no difficulty at all because it’s too easy to just stroll across the US-Mexican border. Some have done it multiple times. Then some of those repeatedly deported people commit additional horrendous crimes—again.
Why should we allow unlimited immigration of unskilled, uneducated, unvaccinated people—who have no qualms flaunting our laws—into the country anyway? More than a few studies have shown that that illegal aliens disproportionately rely on public services. The U.S. is a land of proven opportunity that good people all over the world want to join right now. Highly educated, peaceful, and eager people are ready to join our society as good neighbors and be immediately productive. Why should criminals (and every illegal alien is a criminal) be allowed to jump to the front of the line?
Immigration benefits our society when properly managed. I’m happy to welcome good people who respect our laws and want to pursue the American Dream.
We don’t need to judge them. Too many have already been judged, convicted, sentenced, and deported. And then they come back, with no difficulty at all because it’s too easy to just stroll across the US-Mexican border. Some have done it multiple times. Then some of those repeatedly deported people commit additional horrendous crimes—again.
Why should we allow unlimited immigration of unskilled, uneducated, unvaccinated people—who have no qualms flaunting our laws—into the country anyway? More than a few studies have shown that that illegal aliens disproportionately rely on public services. The U.S. is a land of proven opportunity that good people all over the world want to join right now. Highly educated, peaceful, and eager people are ready to join our society as good neighbors and be immediately productive. Why should criminals (and every illegal alien is a criminal) be allowed to jump to the front of the line?
Immigration benefits our society when properly managed. I’m happy to welcome good people who respect our laws and want to pursue the American Dream.
70RickHarsch
Why? because rich folk hire them.
71TrippB
I'm ok with that. initiate a temporary guest worker program, and let them cross the border legally to earn fair wages before they return home when they want, without exploiting the generosity of American social programs, and without blocking the path of immigrants who want to be Americans.
72prosfilaes
>69 TrippB: Too many have already been judged, convicted, sentenced, ...
Again, what group is that not true of? Americans returning from overseas are surely not an exception. In fact, there's a notorious group of Americans who go overseas to participate in the child sex trade; why should we let them back in?
More than a few studies...
Proof by handwaving. When you can't find a study, claim there's many studies and go on.
Why should we allow unlimited immigration...
Why should we build a wall across private land and protected nature to hamper a small percentage of immigrants?
of unskilled, uneducated,
Because they do jobs Americans don't want to do. Why should we let a stream of Indian and Chinese programmers take jobs Americans can do at much deflated prices? The argument is a little emotional and personal, but I get real tired of people complaining about letting immigrants in to do jobs Americans don't want to do, but being willing to let immigrants in to undercut me at my job.
unvaccinated people
"But that's nationalistic nonsense. According to World Health Organization estimates, the U.S. has a measles vaccination rate of 92 percent, while Mexico and Nicaragua have 99 percent vaccination rates and Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador each have 93 percent vaccination rates. If anything, those countries should be concerned about Americans coming down to visit." Peter Weber with The Week. And that is how a citation works.
who have no qualms flaunting our laws ... (and every illegal alien is a criminal)
And notice how Napster totally failed in the US, because no American would ever commit criminal copyright infringement. Whoops, when Napster hit it big, everyone was using it and violating 17 U.S.C. § 506(a) at a felony level, and many people I know have continued to pirate Game of Thrones or whatever. But that's copyright infringement, right? It's not like anyone would drink before they were 21, which is a misdemeanor, just like illegal entry to the US. Wait, most Americans did? It's almost like almost everyone is willing to ignore a few laws, with less justification than migrants trying to provide a good life for their family.
Again, what group is that not true of? Americans returning from overseas are surely not an exception. In fact, there's a notorious group of Americans who go overseas to participate in the child sex trade; why should we let them back in?
More than a few studies...
Proof by handwaving. When you can't find a study, claim there's many studies and go on.
Why should we allow unlimited immigration...
Why should we build a wall across private land and protected nature to hamper a small percentage of immigrants?
of unskilled, uneducated,
Because they do jobs Americans don't want to do. Why should we let a stream of Indian and Chinese programmers take jobs Americans can do at much deflated prices? The argument is a little emotional and personal, but I get real tired of people complaining about letting immigrants in to do jobs Americans don't want to do, but being willing to let immigrants in to undercut me at my job.
unvaccinated people
"But that's nationalistic nonsense. According to World Health Organization estimates, the U.S. has a measles vaccination rate of 92 percent, while Mexico and Nicaragua have 99 percent vaccination rates and Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador each have 93 percent vaccination rates. If anything, those countries should be concerned about Americans coming down to visit." Peter Weber with The Week. And that is how a citation works.
who have no qualms flaunting our laws ... (and every illegal alien is a criminal)
And notice how Napster totally failed in the US, because no American would ever commit criminal copyright infringement. Whoops, when Napster hit it big, everyone was using it and violating 17 U.S.C. § 506(a) at a felony level, and many people I know have continued to pirate Game of Thrones or whatever. But that's copyright infringement, right? It's not like anyone would drink before they were 21, which is a misdemeanor, just like illegal entry to the US. Wait, most Americans did? It's almost like almost everyone is willing to ignore a few laws, with less justification than migrants trying to provide a good life for their family.
73TrippB
Napster? That and a few perverts are all you have? That is amusing. I'll take your WHO stats on a few countries comprising many of our illegal aliens, but there are people from all over the world sneaking in through Mexico.
Child sex trade? Agreed. Detain those returning pedophiles. If they’re American citizens, they’re entitled to full due process, and, if deemed guilty, I hope they’re separated from society. Illegal aliens should not be equally entitled. If they’re illegal, it’s easier to just deport them for their immigration violations. Forever. One strike as an immigrant, and that should be all we tolerate.
Here’s one study that says there are 22 million illegal, criminal, aliens are in the U.S. (https://thehill.com/latino/407848-yale-mit-study-22-million-not-11-million-undocumented-immigrants-in-us). No handwaving. This is an informal little chat room, not a scientific or academic publication. You want stats, do your own research.
If illegal immigrants are committing a few IPR violations, they won’t get much attention. Unfortunately, too many immigrants are killing people with DUIs, domestic assaults, robberies, and gang offenses (and I don’t care if that’s being done by just a small percentage).
The U.S. doesn’t need any more human trash. As you’ve pointed out, we’ve generated enough domestically. Why welcome more? I've talked with wonderful people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and other parts of the world who would love to get a work or immigration visa in the US, but it isn't easy for them, and they wouldn't consider demanding entry by sneaking across the border...because they are not criminals.
Again, one strike from an immigrant awaiting citizenship is enough. Deport them, and good riddance.
Child sex trade? Agreed. Detain those returning pedophiles. If they’re American citizens, they’re entitled to full due process, and, if deemed guilty, I hope they’re separated from society. Illegal aliens should not be equally entitled. If they’re illegal, it’s easier to just deport them for their immigration violations. Forever. One strike as an immigrant, and that should be all we tolerate.
Here’s one study that says there are 22 million illegal, criminal, aliens are in the U.S. (https://thehill.com/latino/407848-yale-mit-study-22-million-not-11-million-undocumented-immigrants-in-us). No handwaving. This is an informal little chat room, not a scientific or academic publication. You want stats, do your own research.
If illegal immigrants are committing a few IPR violations, they won’t get much attention. Unfortunately, too many immigrants are killing people with DUIs, domestic assaults, robberies, and gang offenses (and I don’t care if that’s being done by just a small percentage).
The U.S. doesn’t need any more human trash. As you’ve pointed out, we’ve generated enough domestically. Why welcome more? I've talked with wonderful people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and other parts of the world who would love to get a work or immigration visa in the US, but it isn't easy for them, and they wouldn't consider demanding entry by sneaking across the border...because they are not criminals.
Again, one strike from an immigrant awaiting citizenship is enough. Deport them, and good riddance.
74John5918
>69 TrippB: Immigration benefits our society when properly managed. I’m happy to welcome good people who respect our laws and want to pursue the American Dream.
Who can disagree? But the reality is that the USA and most other developed nations do not have a system which is fit for the purpose of welcoming people. They are blocked by bureaucracy, cost, often geographical constraints, by petty rules and restrictions, being made to jump through hoops which are very difficult to meet. Many of those who need and deserve to be allowed in legally are not allowed, and in their desperation they therefore come "illegally".
Why should we allow unlimited immigration of unskilled, uneducated, unvaccinated people—who have no qualms flaunting our laws—into the country anyway?
I recall a poster I saw in the Australian council of churches office a few years ago. It depicted two Aboriginal Australians leaning on their spears watching a British sailing ship coming into the bay. One says to the other, "Look, another boatload of undocumented immigrants. They're probably all criminals, and riddled with disease". The same image could probably be reproduced in the USA showing Native Americans watching one of your boatloads of pilgrims arriving. Incidentally one part of the American myth is how these Native Americans actually welcomed and helped these new immigrants (Thanksgiving), who were hopelessly ignorant and unprepared.
I would put the question the other way round. Why shouldn't we welcome people in need, whether into north America or Europe? As a lot of evidence shows, not only is it the right thing to do morally, but as our own populations fall we need fresh young people to do the work (not only the unskilled agricultural labour) and to pay taxes to keep our nations functioning.
Who can disagree? But the reality is that the USA and most other developed nations do not have a system which is fit for the purpose of welcoming people. They are blocked by bureaucracy, cost, often geographical constraints, by petty rules and restrictions, being made to jump through hoops which are very difficult to meet. Many of those who need and deserve to be allowed in legally are not allowed, and in their desperation they therefore come "illegally".
Why should we allow unlimited immigration of unskilled, uneducated, unvaccinated people—who have no qualms flaunting our laws—into the country anyway?
I recall a poster I saw in the Australian council of churches office a few years ago. It depicted two Aboriginal Australians leaning on their spears watching a British sailing ship coming into the bay. One says to the other, "Look, another boatload of undocumented immigrants. They're probably all criminals, and riddled with disease". The same image could probably be reproduced in the USA showing Native Americans watching one of your boatloads of pilgrims arriving. Incidentally one part of the American myth is how these Native Americans actually welcomed and helped these new immigrants (Thanksgiving), who were hopelessly ignorant and unprepared.
I would put the question the other way round. Why shouldn't we welcome people in need, whether into north America or Europe? As a lot of evidence shows, not only is it the right thing to do morally, but as our own populations fall we need fresh young people to do the work (not only the unskilled agricultural labour) and to pay taxes to keep our nations functioning.
75prosfilaes
>73 TrippB: Napster? That and a few perverts are all you have? That is amusing.
Exactly. You try and use "illegal" to condemn them, but you don't really care about illegalities. There are over 300 million illegal criminal people in the US, but you would never use those words to refer to them. You're not using felony copyright infringement as an excuse to condemn Americans, but you'll use misdemeanor illegal entry to condemn immigrants.
they wouldn't consider demanding entry by sneaking across the border...because they are not criminals.
Really? Because I bet that's not true. I bet they've committed more than one misdemeanor in their life, possibly even casual felonies. They wouldn't sneak across the border because the risk/benefit analysis doesn't justify it. If they were running for their life, or their family's lives, they wouldn't hesitate it.
This is an informal little chat room, not a scientific or academic publication. You want stats, do your own research.
This is not a chat room. This is a forum where you can take your time writing your posts. You don't have to offer cites, but I don't see why I have to trust uncited claims.
Exactly. You try and use "illegal" to condemn them, but you don't really care about illegalities. There are over 300 million illegal criminal people in the US, but you would never use those words to refer to them. You're not using felony copyright infringement as an excuse to condemn Americans, but you'll use misdemeanor illegal entry to condemn immigrants.
they wouldn't consider demanding entry by sneaking across the border...because they are not criminals.
Really? Because I bet that's not true. I bet they've committed more than one misdemeanor in their life, possibly even casual felonies. They wouldn't sneak across the border because the risk/benefit analysis doesn't justify it. If they were running for their life, or their family's lives, they wouldn't hesitate it.
This is an informal little chat room, not a scientific or academic publication. You want stats, do your own research.
This is not a chat room. This is a forum where you can take your time writing your posts. You don't have to offer cites, but I don't see why I have to trust uncited claims.
76John5918
>73 TrippB: pedophiles. If they’re American citizens, they’re entitled to full due process, and, if deemed guilty, I hope they’re separated from society. Illegal aliens should not be equally entitled. If they’re illegal, it’s easier to just deport them for their immigration violations
Thus just passing the paedophilia problem onto someone else. You know the Catholic Church used to do this, just moving paedophile priests somewhere else where they could rape more children. The church was roundly (and rightly) condemned for this practice. You are now suggesting that the US government do the same?
22 million illegal, criminal, aliens are in the U.S.
Those 22 million may be "illegal" and "criminal" in the sense that they have broken an immigration law. They are not criminals in the sense of being rapists, thieves and murderers, which you appear to want to protect US citizens from. The vast majority of them are no threat to anyone.
The U.S. doesn’t need any more human trash
The use of the term "human trash" is very telling. I prefer to refer to people as "human beings".
Thus just passing the paedophilia problem onto someone else. You know the Catholic Church used to do this, just moving paedophile priests somewhere else where they could rape more children. The church was roundly (and rightly) condemned for this practice. You are now suggesting that the US government do the same?
22 million illegal, criminal, aliens are in the U.S.
Those 22 million may be "illegal" and "criminal" in the sense that they have broken an immigration law. They are not criminals in the sense of being rapists, thieves and murderers, which you appear to want to protect US citizens from. The vast majority of them are no threat to anyone.
The U.S. doesn’t need any more human trash
The use of the term "human trash" is very telling. I prefer to refer to people as "human beings".
77margd
The demographic time bomb that could hit America
Catherine Rampell | December 31, 2018
...Japan has learned the opposite lesson of the United States: If you want more babies, find ways to make it easier for working people to have kids — through both more family-friendly workplace policies and a more liberal immigration system. (Immigrants, by the way, tend to have more babies than do native-born Americans.)
And preferably, do all this before the demographic time bomb explodes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-the-us-avoid-japans-demographic-disa...
Catherine Rampell | December 31, 2018
...Japan has learned the opposite lesson of the United States: If you want more babies, find ways to make it easier for working people to have kids — through both more family-friendly workplace policies and a more liberal immigration system. (Immigrants, by the way, tend to have more babies than do native-born Americans.)
And preferably, do all this before the demographic time bomb explodes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-the-us-avoid-japans-demographic-disa...
78TrippB
"…. two Aboriginal Australians leaning on their spears watching a British sailing ship coming into the bay. One says to the other, "Look, another boatload of undocumented immigrants.”
Exactly! History is full of similar lessons on the consequences of allowing unlimited immigration.
The use of the term "human trash" is very telling.
I’ll take that. The cold-blooded murder of Officer Singh is what prompted me to post a comment on this issue. If his alleged murderer is guilty as accused, then human trash is too soft a description. I probably am a little more jaded about people who prey on innocent people. I have no remorse about referring to such humans as trash.
Exactly! History is full of similar lessons on the consequences of allowing unlimited immigration.
The use of the term "human trash" is very telling.
I’ll take that. The cold-blooded murder of Officer Singh is what prompted me to post a comment on this issue. If his alleged murderer is guilty as accused, then human trash is too soft a description. I probably am a little more jaded about people who prey on innocent people. I have no remorse about referring to such humans as trash.
79prosfilaes
>78 TrippB: I’ll take that. The cold-blooded murder of Officer Singh is what prompted me to post a comment on this issue.
So yet another white male murdered someone, but you didn't say anything about white males. A gang member killed someone, but you didn't say anything about gang members. Someone killed an officer when he was pulled over for drunk driving, but you didn't saying anything about alcohol.
So yet another white male murdered someone, but you didn't say anything about white males. A gang member killed someone, but you didn't say anything about gang members. Someone killed an officer when he was pulled over for drunk driving, but you didn't saying anything about alcohol.
80TrippB
”So yet another white male murdered someone….”
I know it’s quite trendy to inject race into issues where race is not a factor (especially when you can use the term white male), but it’s still annoying. Who said anything about white males, and how is that in any way relevant?
This discussion topic is about crafting immigration policy in America, and I commented about an extreme failure of immigration policy. My comment was about an individual who is illegally in the U.S. because of failed and inadequate immigration policy; who should have been deported long ago, but wasn’t, because of local rejection and shameful disregard of existing immigration policy; and, who is charged with murdering an innocent legal resident of the U.S.—a murder that would not have happened if we had effective immigration policy.
Sure, we also need to address gang violence and drunk driving, but this particular thread is about immigration.
I know it’s quite trendy to inject race into issues where race is not a factor (especially when you can use the term white male), but it’s still annoying. Who said anything about white males, and how is that in any way relevant?
This discussion topic is about crafting immigration policy in America, and I commented about an extreme failure of immigration policy. My comment was about an individual who is illegally in the U.S. because of failed and inadequate immigration policy; who should have been deported long ago, but wasn’t, because of local rejection and shameful disregard of existing immigration policy; and, who is charged with murdering an innocent legal resident of the U.S.—a murder that would not have happened if we had effective immigration policy.
Sure, we also need to address gang violence and drunk driving, but this particular thread is about immigration.
81jjwilson61
>80 TrippB: You took a murder and made it about immigration. But what makes that person's immigration status more relevant than some other factor about him, like his race. That's the issue, not that prosfilaes made it about race but that you made it about immigration.
82TrippB
The issue is that this murder, allegedly committed by an illegal alien who was then aided by another illegal alien, would not have happened if effective immigration controls had been in place. The illegal criminal alien's race is not relevant.
83jjwilson61
I agree. His immigration status isn't relevant either.
84TrippB
Wrong. His immigration status is everything. Officer Singh would be holding his baby, next to his wife, tonight, if that illegal alien had not been been allowed, aided, and even encouraged, to disregard our immigration laws with impunity. Aided by people with attitudes like yours.
85John5918
>84 TrippB:
Or maybe he would have committed the murder somewhere else, on the other side of a border? Is the life of a US citizen worth more than the life of a human being in a neighbouring country? Murderers should be stopped and/or arrested, but >83 jjwilson61: is correct - their immigration status is not relevant.
Or maybe he would have committed the murder somewhere else, on the other side of a border? Is the life of a US citizen worth more than the life of a human being in a neighbouring country? Murderers should be stopped and/or arrested, but >83 jjwilson61: is correct - their immigration status is not relevant.
86TrippB
It's not a matter of worth, it's a matter of failed immigration policy, and that makes the murderer's immigration status very relevant.
A nation's immigration policy should primarily exist to protect and benefit the society of the country. That means a high priority objective should be to prevent violent people and criminals from entering; and, when they've managed to come in and prove themselves to be violent or criminal, the policy should have a process to expel them and keep them from ever returning. America's immigration policy may state that objective and policy, but it is not effectively implemented.
With hordes of illegal aliens pouring over the border, we don't know who we're getting. Supporters of open borders often like to point to a nice family with young children who just want a better life, at the same time turning a blind eye to gang members, previously deported thugs, and other undesirables. Then sanctuary cities help to hide those undesirables from federal authorities trying to enforce our immigration laws, and special interest groups who profit from illegal aliens make demands to prevent any action to deter, detect, and expel criminal aliens. Far too often, those undesirables then murder, rape, rob, and otherwise prey on our citizens, and people in Internet chat rooms try their best to subvert reality and make claims that immigration status is not relevant in such crimes.
A nation's immigration policy should primarily exist to protect and benefit the society of the country. That means a high priority objective should be to prevent violent people and criminals from entering; and, when they've managed to come in and prove themselves to be violent or criminal, the policy should have a process to expel them and keep them from ever returning. America's immigration policy may state that objective and policy, but it is not effectively implemented.
With hordes of illegal aliens pouring over the border, we don't know who we're getting. Supporters of open borders often like to point to a nice family with young children who just want a better life, at the same time turning a blind eye to gang members, previously deported thugs, and other undesirables. Then sanctuary cities help to hide those undesirables from federal authorities trying to enforce our immigration laws, and special interest groups who profit from illegal aliens make demands to prevent any action to deter, detect, and expel criminal aliens. Far too often, those undesirables then murder, rape, rob, and otherwise prey on our citizens, and people in Internet chat rooms try their best to subvert reality and make claims that immigration status is not relevant in such crimes.
872wonderY
Even Fox News Has Had Enough of Trump's Anti-Immigrant BS
When Sarah Huckabee Sanders appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, it's likely she was expecting more of the encouraging fawning that pervades the network so much of the time. What she got instead was fact-checking and push back. Wallace initially takes issue with Homeland Security secretary Kristjen Nielsen saying that DHS had stopped 3000 "special interest aliens" from entering the U.S.—Wallace points out that this designation only means that these are people who are from the same countries as other terrorists, not people who are suspected terrorists themselves.
Rather than address that point specifically, or at all, Sanders responds by claiming that 4000 "known or suspected terrorists" come into the U.S. illegally, and since the weakest point of entry is the southern border, we need a border wall. Wallace actually interrupts her here:
"Wait, wait, wait, because I know the statistic, I didn't know if you were gonna use it but I studied up on this. Do you know where those 4000 people come from, where they're captured? Airports. The State Department says there hasn't been any terrorist that they've found coming across the southern border."
It's not quite the fury and emotion of Geraldo Rivera's on-air rant about the demonization of immigrants, and it certainly didn't stop Sanders from repeating herself as though she were saying something new. But when faced with a journalist who's supposed to carry water for her and the president, someone she can't attack as a liberally biased "enemy of the people," Sanders suddenly can't come up with anything off script.
When Sarah Huckabee Sanders appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, it's likely she was expecting more of the encouraging fawning that pervades the network so much of the time. What she got instead was fact-checking and push back. Wallace initially takes issue with Homeland Security secretary Kristjen Nielsen saying that DHS had stopped 3000 "special interest aliens" from entering the U.S.—Wallace points out that this designation only means that these are people who are from the same countries as other terrorists, not people who are suspected terrorists themselves.
Rather than address that point specifically, or at all, Sanders responds by claiming that 4000 "known or suspected terrorists" come into the U.S. illegally, and since the weakest point of entry is the southern border, we need a border wall. Wallace actually interrupts her here:
"Wait, wait, wait, because I know the statistic, I didn't know if you were gonna use it but I studied up on this. Do you know where those 4000 people come from, where they're captured? Airports. The State Department says there hasn't been any terrorist that they've found coming across the southern border."
It's not quite the fury and emotion of Geraldo Rivera's on-air rant about the demonization of immigrants, and it certainly didn't stop Sanders from repeating herself as though she were saying something new. But when faced with a journalist who's supposed to carry water for her and the president, someone she can't attack as a liberally biased "enemy of the people," Sanders suddenly can't come up with anything off script.
88John5918
Venezuela Supreme Court judge Christian Zerpa flees to US (BBC)
Apparently it's much easier to flee to the USA for protection if you are a rich high-profile figure. I'm not saying he shouldn't be welcomed, but cases like his highlight the many who are rejected simply because they are not high-profile.
Apparently it's much easier to flee to the USA for protection if you are a rich high-profile figure. I'm not saying he shouldn't be welcomed, but cases like his highlight the many who are rejected simply because they are not high-profile.
89prosfilaes
>82 TrippB: The issue is that this murder, allegedly committed by an illegal alien who was then aided by another illegal alien, would not have happened if effective immigration controls had been in place.
It wouldn't have happened if effective white male controls had been in place. If we kept white males out of the country, it wouldn't have happened. It wouldn't have happened if we had effective gun control. You can insert anything you want in that spot.
It wouldn't have happened if effective white male controls had been in place. If we kept white males out of the country, it wouldn't have happened. It wouldn't have happened if we had effective gun control. You can insert anything you want in that spot.
90TrippB
>89 prosfilaes: You can insert anything you want in that spot.
You can insert anything you want, and propose all kinds of what ifs. That doesn't change the fact that if you simply subtract illegal aliens from the incident I mentioned, a father, husband, and police officer would still be alive. You want more? I can fill this discussion topic with similar examples of murders, rapes, robberies, DUI homicides, assaults, and more offenses that would not, could not, have happened if we had effectively addressed illegal immigration sooner.
You can insert anything you want, and propose all kinds of what ifs. That doesn't change the fact that if you simply subtract illegal aliens from the incident I mentioned, a father, husband, and police officer would still be alive. You want more? I can fill this discussion topic with similar examples of murders, rapes, robberies, DUI homicides, assaults, and more offenses that would not, could not, have happened if we had effectively addressed illegal immigration sooner.
91prosfilaes
>90 TrippB: And I can fill this discussion topic with way more examples that would not, could not, have happened if we had effectively addressed guns sooner. Or white males.
92TrippB
>91 prosfilaes: Once again, you seem to have difficulty differentiating between supposition and fact. And statistics, for that matter.
One indicator of your bias is that you want to divert the topic to race and gender. The discussion here has been primarily about immigration status, actual violations of existing legislation, and violent crime affecting Americans--not race or gender.
Telling, predictable, and desperate......white males!!!! The last grasp for hopeless attempts to justify a position.
One indicator of your bias is that you want to divert the topic to race and gender. The discussion here has been primarily about immigration status, actual violations of existing legislation, and violent crime affecting Americans--not race or gender.
Telling, predictable, and desperate......white males!!!! The last grasp for hopeless attempts to justify a position.
93jjwilson61
>90 TrippB: That doesn't change the fact that if you simply subtract illegal aliens from the incident I mentioned, a father, husband, and police officer would still be alive.
But you can take any set of murderers and come up with some feature that some of them have in common and say if you subtract that group then some people would be alive. You haven't yet explained why the particular feature of being in the country illegally is relevant.
But you can take any set of murderers and come up with some feature that some of them have in common and say if you subtract that group then some people would be alive. You haven't yet explained why the particular feature of being in the country illegally is relevant.
94prosfilaes
>86 TrippB: it's a matter of failed immigration policy, and that makes the murderer's immigration status very relevant.
That's circular. The murderer's immigration status is only relevant if you consider it a matter of failed immigration policy, and to consider a matter of failed immigration policy, you have to consider the immigration status relevant.
A nation's immigration policy should primarily exist to protect and benefit the society of the country.
It seems the primary concern about "undesirables" is when they're not white; e.g. Trump's complaint about getting too many immigrants from "shithole" countries and too few from Norway. This is backed up by the fact that the majority of illegal immigrants overstay their visa, but all the words are about a wall against Mexico. We could discuss With Folded Hands, but there seems to be a lack of concern about dangerous people and weapons unless they're immigrants that can be accused of being disease carrying.
Where does our society need benefits? I'd say we've failed on being a light on the hill; we make enemies of our neighbors and play patty-cake with dictators. Our society needs to show that we aren't an insular nation, that we love the world and can show them the way. We need reminding that we are brothers and sisters of all humans, and don't have a right to stand superior to them just because of our birth. These are more important than throwing every last cent at a huge wall.
With hordes of illegal aliens pouring over the border, we don't know who we're getting.
Putting my hat as an Oklahoman on, I don't see why I should be more concerned about those crossing the Rio Grande than those crossing the Red River. Texans murder, rape, rob and otherwise prey on Oklahomans, more than immigrants do.
That's circular. The murderer's immigration status is only relevant if you consider it a matter of failed immigration policy, and to consider a matter of failed immigration policy, you have to consider the immigration status relevant.
A nation's immigration policy should primarily exist to protect and benefit the society of the country.
It seems the primary concern about "undesirables" is when they're not white; e.g. Trump's complaint about getting too many immigrants from "shithole" countries and too few from Norway. This is backed up by the fact that the majority of illegal immigrants overstay their visa, but all the words are about a wall against Mexico. We could discuss With Folded Hands, but there seems to be a lack of concern about dangerous people and weapons unless they're immigrants that can be accused of being disease carrying.
Where does our society need benefits? I'd say we've failed on being a light on the hill; we make enemies of our neighbors and play patty-cake with dictators. Our society needs to show that we aren't an insular nation, that we love the world and can show them the way. We need reminding that we are brothers and sisters of all humans, and don't have a right to stand superior to them just because of our birth. These are more important than throwing every last cent at a huge wall.
With hordes of illegal aliens pouring over the border, we don't know who we're getting.
Putting my hat as an Oklahoman on, I don't see why I should be more concerned about those crossing the Rio Grande than those crossing the Red River. Texans murder, rape, rob and otherwise prey on Oklahomans, more than immigrants do.
95TrippB
>93 jjwilson61: You haven't yet explained why the particular feature of being in the country illegally is relevant.">
Let me put this a different way...….Many Americans die of heart disease, so why should we pay any attention to ebola? That's how rationalization of illegal immigration sounds to reasonable people.
>94 prosfilaes: Oklahoma is a perfect example of the danger of uncontrolled immigration. Once a sanctuary for Native Americans, it was absolutely overrun with invaders, and the indigenous (or displaced) people of Oklahoma quickly lost their homeland. The particularly evil Sooners exploited both the indigenous people and the laws of the authorities of the time. Their tactics are very much like the people circumventing legal immigration across the southern border now. If you "own" land in Oklahoma, and you really believe your argument, your only recourse is to give your land back to the people from whom it was stolen.
Thank you both for helping to illustrate the necessity of effective immigration laws.
Let me put this a different way...….Many Americans die of heart disease, so why should we pay any attention to ebola? That's how rationalization of illegal immigration sounds to reasonable people.
>94 prosfilaes: Oklahoma is a perfect example of the danger of uncontrolled immigration. Once a sanctuary for Native Americans, it was absolutely overrun with invaders, and the indigenous (or displaced) people of Oklahoma quickly lost their homeland. The particularly evil Sooners exploited both the indigenous people and the laws of the authorities of the time. Their tactics are very much like the people circumventing legal immigration across the southern border now. If you "own" land in Oklahoma, and you really believe your argument, your only recourse is to give your land back to the people from whom it was stolen.
Thank you both for helping to illustrate the necessity of effective immigration laws.
96margd
CBS News @CBSNews | 7:44 AM - 9 Jan 2019:
Donald Trump Jr. says border wall is like a zoo fence protecting you from animals https://cbsn.ws/2D0FZUZ
James Martin, SJ @JamesMartinSJ | 6:05 PM - 9 Jan 2019:
The dehumanization of a minority group is a classic way of legitimizing the mistreatment of that group. It happened in Nazi Germany (with Jews described as "vermin") and in Rwanda (with Tutsi as "cockroaches"). This kind of language always leads to violence and, eventually, death
_________________________________________
Also, as posted
Donald Trump Jr. says border wall is like a zoo fence protecting you from animals https://cbsn.ws/2D0FZUZ
James Martin, SJ @JamesMartinSJ | 6:05 PM - 9 Jan 2019:
The dehumanization of a minority group is a classic way of legitimizing the mistreatment of that group. It happened in Nazi Germany (with Jews described as "vermin") and in Rwanda (with Tutsi as "cockroaches"). This kind of language always leads to violence and, eventually, death
_________________________________________
Also, as posted
97margd
Catholic pushback on wall:
BS News @CBSNews | 7:44 AM - 9 Jan 2019:
Donald Trump Jr. says border wall is like a zoo fence protecting you from animals
https://cbsn.ws/2D0FZUZ
James Martin, SJ @JamesMartinSJ | 6:05 PM - 9 Jan 2019:
The dehumanization of a minority group is a classic way of legitimizing the mistreatment of that group. It happened in Nazi Germany (with Jews described as "vermin") and in Rwanda (with Tutsi as "cockroaches"). This kind of language always leads to violence and, eventually, death
_____________________________________________________________________________
Reposted from "Trump screws his base" thread:
Texas landowners (including local Catholic diocese) prepare wall fight; Trump to visit border
NOMAAN MERCHANT | Jan 10, 2018
...The federal government has started surveying land along the border in Texas and announced plans to start construction next month. Rather than surrender their land, some property owners are digging in, vowing to reject buyout offers and preparing to fight the administration in court...if, as expected, it moves to seize their land through eminent domain.
...the administration’s plans call for a concrete wall to the height of the existing levee, with 18-foot (5.5 meters) steel posts on top. CBP wants to clear 150 feet (45 meters) in front of any new construction for an “enforcement zone” of access roads, cameras, and lighting.
The government sued the local Roman Catholic diocese late last year to gain access for its surveyors at the site of La Lomita chapel, which opened in 1865 and was an important site for missionaries who traveled the Rio Grande Valley by horseback.
...The diocese said it opposes a border wall because the barrier violates Catholic teachings and the church’s responsibility to protect migrants, as well as the church’s First Amendment right of religious freedom. A legal group from Georgetown University has joined the diocese in its lawsuit....
https://apnews.com/0b3d63c524214bbdbfb58ce8f61589f0
BS News @CBSNews | 7:44 AM - 9 Jan 2019:
Donald Trump Jr. says border wall is like a zoo fence protecting you from animals
https://cbsn.ws/2D0FZUZ
James Martin, SJ @JamesMartinSJ | 6:05 PM - 9 Jan 2019:
The dehumanization of a minority group is a classic way of legitimizing the mistreatment of that group. It happened in Nazi Germany (with Jews described as "vermin") and in Rwanda (with Tutsi as "cockroaches"). This kind of language always leads to violence and, eventually, death
_____________________________________________________________________________
Reposted from "Trump screws his base" thread:
Texas landowners (including local Catholic diocese) prepare wall fight; Trump to visit border
NOMAAN MERCHANT | Jan 10, 2018
...The federal government has started surveying land along the border in Texas and announced plans to start construction next month. Rather than surrender their land, some property owners are digging in, vowing to reject buyout offers and preparing to fight the administration in court...if, as expected, it moves to seize their land through eminent domain.
...the administration’s plans call for a concrete wall to the height of the existing levee, with 18-foot (5.5 meters) steel posts on top. CBP wants to clear 150 feet (45 meters) in front of any new construction for an “enforcement zone” of access roads, cameras, and lighting.
The government sued the local Roman Catholic diocese late last year to gain access for its surveyors at the site of La Lomita chapel, which opened in 1865 and was an important site for missionaries who traveled the Rio Grande Valley by horseback.
...The diocese said it opposes a border wall because the barrier violates Catholic teachings and the church’s responsibility to protect migrants, as well as the church’s First Amendment right of religious freedom. A legal group from Georgetown University has joined the diocese in its lawsuit....
https://apnews.com/0b3d63c524214bbdbfb58ce8f61589f0
99prosfilaes
>95 TrippB: That's how rationalization of illegal immigration sounds to reasonable people.
By which you mean people who agree with you. I'd say using the phrase "reasonable people" in a discussion to exclude the people you're talking to is pretty unreasonable.
Nice dodge. Do I have the right to object to Texans, who are murders and rapists and some of them might be good people, from coming into Oklahoma?
By which you mean people who agree with you. I'd say using the phrase "reasonable people" in a discussion to exclude the people you're talking to is pretty unreasonable.
Nice dodge. Do I have the right to object to Texans, who are murders and rapists and some of them might be good people, from coming into Oklahoma?
100John5918
US fertility rate is below level needed to replace population, study says (CNN)
Overall, the total fertility rate for the United States in 2017 was 1,765.5 per 1,000 women, which was 16% below what is considered the level needed for a population to replace itself: 2,100 births per 1,000 women...
Overall, the total fertility rate for the United States in 2017 was 1,765.5 per 1,000 women, which was 16% below what is considered the level needed for a population to replace itself: 2,100 births per 1,000 women...
101TrippB
>99 prosfilaes: In retrospect, my comments were indeed rather dismissive. I apologize for that.
I do not apologize for the position I hoped to convey. I, and plenty of other people, have grown weary of being told that we must welcome into our neighborhoods violent criminals, drunk drivers, and other undesirables who circumvent quite reasonable immigration laws. Like that loser cousin at the family reunion, we’re stuck with our homegrown criminals, but we certainly have a choice about which immigrants we allow to live, work, and produce new citizens in this fine country. Why take human trash along with all those wonderful families seeking the American Dream?
The statistics regarding illegal aliens and crime are very difficult to compile and assess. I’ve seen the oft-quoted studies that say illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens. I’ve also seen studies that show those immigrant-friendly studies are bogus, and which provide compelling evidence that illegal aliens commit more violent crime than Americans. Even the Cato study, in the fine print, admits that due to a lack of specific statistics, they use Census Bureau data and statistical modeling (guessing) to come up with their figures. Census data is notorious for not capturing accurate illegal immigrant data.
One study which claimed that illegal aliens commit fewer crimes than citizens also reported that legal immigrants commit 87% fewer crimes than U.S. citizens. That’s a great argument in favor of encouraging legal immigration, and effectively blocking illegal aliens. Good immigrants, who don’t sneak across the border in the dark of night, are the ones we want as neighbors.
I do not apologize for the position I hoped to convey. I, and plenty of other people, have grown weary of being told that we must welcome into our neighborhoods violent criminals, drunk drivers, and other undesirables who circumvent quite reasonable immigration laws. Like that loser cousin at the family reunion, we’re stuck with our homegrown criminals, but we certainly have a choice about which immigrants we allow to live, work, and produce new citizens in this fine country. Why take human trash along with all those wonderful families seeking the American Dream?
The statistics regarding illegal aliens and crime are very difficult to compile and assess. I’ve seen the oft-quoted studies that say illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens. I’ve also seen studies that show those immigrant-friendly studies are bogus, and which provide compelling evidence that illegal aliens commit more violent crime than Americans. Even the Cato study, in the fine print, admits that due to a lack of specific statistics, they use Census Bureau data and statistical modeling (guessing) to come up with their figures. Census data is notorious for not capturing accurate illegal immigrant data.
One study which claimed that illegal aliens commit fewer crimes than citizens also reported that legal immigrants commit 87% fewer crimes than U.S. citizens. That’s a great argument in favor of encouraging legal immigration, and effectively blocking illegal aliens. Good immigrants, who don’t sneak across the border in the dark of night, are the ones we want as neighbors.
102TrippB
>100 John5918: US fertility rate is below level needed to replace population, study says (CNN)
So what? That is not justification for open borders. There are millions of smart, educated, peaceful people who would love an opportunity to live in the U.S. Our immigration laws should give them a fast track past MS-13 gang members and other human trash that should be blocked by effective border controls, walls included.
Merit-based immigration is favorable to open borders or visa lotteries. More than half of all immigrants to the U.S. are dependent on government support a year after entering. That’s proof we’re bringing in the wrong people. There’s nothing wrong with giving immigration priority to those who can quickly contribute to our society. I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
So what? That is not justification for open borders. There are millions of smart, educated, peaceful people who would love an opportunity to live in the U.S. Our immigration laws should give them a fast track past MS-13 gang members and other human trash that should be blocked by effective border controls, walls included.
Merit-based immigration is favorable to open borders or visa lotteries. More than half of all immigrants to the U.S. are dependent on government support a year after entering. That’s proof we’re bringing in the wrong people. There’s nothing wrong with giving immigration priority to those who can quickly contribute to our society. I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
103John5918
>102 TrippB: human trash
Do you mean human beings?
I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
If you find yourself living next door to a semi-retired cartel assassin then you should report them to the police and they should be arrested for murder, regardless of whether they are from a homegrown US cartel or any other. Similarly, if you have a research scientist living next door to you then you are probably lucky, regardless of their immigration status. Presumably you would rather have a reasearch scientist living next door to you than a retired US murderer? Murder is murder, regardless of nationality or immigration status.
Do you mean human beings?
I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
If you find yourself living next door to a semi-retired cartel assassin then you should report them to the police and they should be arrested for murder, regardless of whether they are from a homegrown US cartel or any other. Similarly, if you have a research scientist living next door to you then you are probably lucky, regardless of their immigration status. Presumably you would rather have a reasearch scientist living next door to you than a retired US murderer? Murder is murder, regardless of nationality or immigration status.
104margd
U.S. approved thousands of child bride requests, lives ruined
Associated Press | Jan 11, 2019
WASHINGTON — Thousands of requests by men to bring in child and adolescent brides to live in the United States were approved over the past decade, according to government data obtained by The Associated Press. In one case, a 49-year-old man applied for admission for a 15-year-old girl.
The approvals are legal: The Immigration and Nationality Act does not set minimum age requirements. And in weighing petitions for spouses or fiancees, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services goes by whether the marriage is legal in the home country and then whether the marriage would be legal in the state where the petitioner lives.
But the data raises questions about whether the immigration system may be enabling forced marriage and about how U.S. laws may be compounding the problem despite efforts to limit child and forced marriage. Marriage between adults and minors is not uncommon in the United States, and most states allow children to marry with some restrictions.
There were more than 5,000 cases of adults petitioning on behalf of minors and nearly 3,000 examples of minors seeking to bring in older spouses or fiances, according to the data requested by the Senate Homeland Security Committee in 2017 and compiled into a report.
Some victims of forced marriage say the lure of a U.S. passport combined with lax U.S. marriage laws are partly fueling the petitions...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/u-s-approved-thousands-child-bride-...
Associated Press | Jan 11, 2019
WASHINGTON — Thousands of requests by men to bring in child and adolescent brides to live in the United States were approved over the past decade, according to government data obtained by The Associated Press. In one case, a 49-year-old man applied for admission for a 15-year-old girl.
The approvals are legal: The Immigration and Nationality Act does not set minimum age requirements. And in weighing petitions for spouses or fiancees, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services goes by whether the marriage is legal in the home country and then whether the marriage would be legal in the state where the petitioner lives.
But the data raises questions about whether the immigration system may be enabling forced marriage and about how U.S. laws may be compounding the problem despite efforts to limit child and forced marriage. Marriage between adults and minors is not uncommon in the United States, and most states allow children to marry with some restrictions.
There were more than 5,000 cases of adults petitioning on behalf of minors and nearly 3,000 examples of minors seeking to bring in older spouses or fiances, according to the data requested by the Senate Homeland Security Committee in 2017 and compiled into a report.
Some victims of forced marriage say the lure of a U.S. passport combined with lax U.S. marriage laws are partly fueling the petitions...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/u-s-approved-thousands-child-bride-...
1052wonderY
Wonder about the display during Trump's visit to the border?
The showcase prepared by Homeland Security officials for Trump’s visit shows why.
Take the 117 kilos of methamphetamines and 12 kilos of heroin they neatly piled up. Officials at a port of entry discovered them after screening a commercial load with X-ray technology and sniffing dogs. Statistics show stashing illegal cargo in vehicles and driving through ports of entry is the most common way of smuggling in meth and heroin, drugs that are fueling an overdose epidemic in the US.
https://qz.com/1520651/border-patrol-agents-in-texas-showed-trump-why-his-wall-w...
The showcase prepared by Homeland Security officials for Trump’s visit shows why.
Take the 117 kilos of methamphetamines and 12 kilos of heroin they neatly piled up. Officials at a port of entry discovered them after screening a commercial load with X-ray technology and sniffing dogs. Statistics show stashing illegal cargo in vehicles and driving through ports of entry is the most common way of smuggling in meth and heroin, drugs that are fueling an overdose epidemic in the US.
https://qz.com/1520651/border-patrol-agents-in-texas-showed-trump-why-his-wall-w...
106John5918
Trump's right about a crisis at the border – but migrants are the victims (Guardian)
Volunteering on behalf of asylum seekers in Tijuana offered me a firsthand view of the devastation US policies have caused
Volunteering on behalf of asylum seekers in Tijuana offered me a firsthand view of the devastation US policies have caused
107prosfilaes
>102 TrippB: There’s nothing wrong with giving immigration priority to those who can quickly contribute to our society.
I was discouraged from continuing my mathematics education because there were over two hundred people applying for one position at UNLV. The positions we need immigrants to fill are of farm labor, not scholars.
I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
I'm with johnthefireman, in that I want the assassin arrested. But as for my next door neighbor, I would rather have someone who wanted to live a quiet life away from the action and didn't want to bothered by the law, than a research scientist who knows he's all that and feels it's his right to complain whenever he hears anything through the thin walls. These are somewhat stereotypical, but any argument like that is going to be based on stereotypes.
In a purely theoretical sense, it would be better to have complete control over immigration. The problem comes in the implementation. How do you plan on keeping the semi-retired cartel assassin from coming in? He's not going to be sneaking in anywhere a wall would stop. A quick Google search says a US passport comes out between $1K and $4K, and fake ID papers come in at $2,500. A retired assassin is just going to buy a fake identity and walk through an entry point.
A wall is an expensive, destructive and unproductive solution. We have walls along the border where they're practical; what's left is miles and miles of wilderness where a wall is just going to be climbed with a ladder, while stopping any number of vulnerable species
Ronald Reagan on the campaign trail said:
"I still believe the answer to any problem lies with the people. I believe in states' rights. I believe in people doing as much as they can for themselves at the community level and at the private level, and I believe we've distorted the balance of our government today by giving powers that were never intended in the Constitution to that federal establishment."
You say that liberals always bring up race, so let's ignore the dog whistles there. Since when does the federal government have the right to tell sanctuary cities how to use their police power? These cities argue that not turning illegal immigrants into the federal government means that they can more effectively police the illegal immigrants that are going to be part of their town. States' rights mean that that's their decision (or their state's) to make.
I was discouraged from continuing my mathematics education because there were over two hundred people applying for one position at UNLV. The positions we need immigrants to fill are of farm labor, not scholars.
I’d rather have an immigrant research scientist next door than a semi-retired cartel assassin.
I'm with johnthefireman, in that I want the assassin arrested. But as for my next door neighbor, I would rather have someone who wanted to live a quiet life away from the action and didn't want to bothered by the law, than a research scientist who knows he's all that and feels it's his right to complain whenever he hears anything through the thin walls. These are somewhat stereotypical, but any argument like that is going to be based on stereotypes.
In a purely theoretical sense, it would be better to have complete control over immigration. The problem comes in the implementation. How do you plan on keeping the semi-retired cartel assassin from coming in? He's not going to be sneaking in anywhere a wall would stop. A quick Google search says a US passport comes out between $1K and $4K, and fake ID papers come in at $2,500. A retired assassin is just going to buy a fake identity and walk through an entry point.
A wall is an expensive, destructive and unproductive solution. We have walls along the border where they're practical; what's left is miles and miles of wilderness where a wall is just going to be climbed with a ladder, while stopping any number of vulnerable species
Ronald Reagan on the campaign trail said:
"I still believe the answer to any problem lies with the people. I believe in states' rights. I believe in people doing as much as they can for themselves at the community level and at the private level, and I believe we've distorted the balance of our government today by giving powers that were never intended in the Constitution to that federal establishment."
You say that liberals always bring up race, so let's ignore the dog whistles there. Since when does the federal government have the right to tell sanctuary cities how to use their police power? These cities argue that not turning illegal immigrants into the federal government means that they can more effectively police the illegal immigrants that are going to be part of their town. States' rights mean that that's their decision (or their state's) to make.
108proximity1
>80 TrippB: , >81 jjwilson61: , >84 TrippB: , >86 TrippB: >90 TrippB: , >92 TrippB: ,
>90 TrippB: : That doesn't change the fact that if you simply subtract illegal aliens from the incident I mentioned, a father, husband, and police officer would still be alive.
But you can take any set of murderers and come up with some feature that some of them have in common and say if you subtract that group then some people would be alive. You haven't yet explained why the particular feature of being in the country illegally is relevant.
Wow. Just “wow.”
Uhm, actually, yes, he did explain that—clearly, carefully and completely.
That you missed that is all I need to conclude that you—as is so drearily often the case here—are completely out of your depth in this discussion.
>101 TrippB:
"In retrospect, my comments were indeed rather dismissive. I apologize for that."
It's the others who ought to be posting the apologies to you.
Your posts, arguments and explanations have been been entirely clear and compelling. In fact, forensically, you've 'wiped the floor' with these people—even without laboriously trying to state the obvious about their lame objections.
Here, in a nutshell, is your opponents' view stripped of their delusional politically-correct comforts:
"We can't— and, really, we ought not, even supposing we could— effectively deter the entry of illegal aliens into the U.S. just because some of them are certainly going to eventually commit first-degree felonies once inside the U.S."
In other words, preventing the entry of some who are (as we'd see if we had the chance to stop them and carefully examine their personal histories) extremely likely to commit rape, murder, kidnapping and other felonies is simply not a good enough reason to prohibit people who have no legal right to enter the country from entering it illegally. After all, some, most, even, probably won't commit murder.
That isn't just stupidity--it's suicidal stupidity.
1092wonderY
Calexico mayor: “We don’t need a wall; we need a door.” Looking for port of entry funding -
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/us/calexico-border-wall.html
Because stories like this make it clear that drugs go around and under any wall
https://www.ivpressonline.com/news/local/valley-briefs-mexicali-police-officer-c...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/us/calexico-border-wall.html
Because stories like this make it clear that drugs go around and under any wall
https://www.ivpressonline.com/news/local/valley-briefs-mexicali-police-officer-c...
110margd
Kristin Hook @Kristin_Hook | 8:17 AM - 25 Jan 2019:
https://twitter.com/Kristin_Hook
As a furloughed scientist, I thought it worthwhile to use my PhD skills to look at evidence for the president’s claims of a national security crisis & whether his desire for a wall is an adequate justification for a government #shutdown that has cut off pay for 800,000 Americans.
What every American should be asking themselves right now is this: what is the evidence that our border is so unsafe that it constitutes a crisis and the need to #BuildTheWall? Evidence that would be needed to support such a claim are that...
(A) there has been a dramatic increase in people crossing our border over time, (B) there is an increase in crime with an increase in immigration, and immigrants commit more crimes than those within our borders, and/or (C) current strategies for border security are ineffective.
So what do the data show?
There is absolutely no evidence for (A). In fact, the opposite is supported – unauthorized immigration rates actually slowed down between 2010 and 2016, when it fell to its lowest level in decades (1). Overall, the population of unauthorized immigrants shrank by 13%...
between 2007 and 2016 in the U.S. As of January 2015, there were an estimated 10.7 to 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States (1, 2). That’s 3.3% to 3.7% of the total U.S. population, which was 328,337,383 on this very day in 2015.
For perspective, the current unemployment rate for people 16 years of age and over is 3.9% (3), greater than the number of illegal immigrants residing in our country. (Side bar: how is *this* not a national crisis?)
In looking at the data for total apprehensions of illegal aliens across multiple years by our border patrol, these numbers have also declined (4). Because I’m a scientist and love data, I acquired the raw data and made you a graph so you could see the trends for yourself. (margd graph at website shows more than 150,000 apprehansions at border in 2000 v less than 50,000 in 2017)
So to conclude, there is no evidence for (A). What about (B)?
Studies on the subject have found no immigrant-crime link. NONE. This revelation comes from a study that attempted to correlate undocumented immigration and violent crime in all 50 states and DC using multiple data sources at the state level from 1990-2014.
Their robust analyses reveal the opposite relationship: increases in the undocumented immigrant population are generally associated with significantly *lower* rates of violence (5). Other studies reveal that illegal immigrants have *lower* conviction and arrest rates...
relative to native-born Americans in the U.S. In my home state of #Texas alone, a study of 2015 data found that the homicide rate for illegal immigrants was 16% *below* that of native-born Americans; for all criminal convictions,...
illegal and legal immigrants had criminal conviction rates 50% and 66% *below* that of native-born Americans, respectively (6). Together these findings undermine statements that undocumented immigrants are criminals and/or are bringing crime into the United States.
In looking at statistics from the U.S. Border and Customs Protection, two things are clear: an increase in funding (7) & an increase in staffing agents (8) over time is correlated with reduced rates of apprehension of illegal aliens. I made you more figures so you could see this. (margd: see graph at website)
So if you are concerned about keeping these numbers low, these observations suggest continuing to fund this agency and maintaining a steady number of agents on the ground may be an effective way to do so.
An alternative explanation is that there are fewer people crossing our border over time (which is supported by the aforementioned studies above). Regardless, these results do not support (C) and instead suggest that the border security strategies currently in place are effective.
In sum, there is NO EVIDENCE that there is a border crisis that requires building a wall. The number of immigrants coming into the US are decreasing, and they are not causing any upticks in crime. A wall is an unnecessary feature and would be a total waste of taxpayer money.
Sincerely,
Your neighborhood scientist born and raised two hours away from the US Southern Border in Texas who is now on day 59 without pay.
Here are my sources:
(1) “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2015” from the Office of Immigration Statistics, the US Department of Homeland Security
(2) “Facts on U.S. Immigrants, 2016” from the Pew Research Center
(3) “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey” from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US Department of Labor
(4) “U.S. Border Patrol Monthly Apprehensions (FY 2000 – FY 2017)” from the Stats and Summaries page of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(5) Light, Michael T. and T. Y. Miller (2018). Does undocumented immigration increase violent crime? Criminology 56(2): 370-401.
(6) Nowrasteh, A (2018). “Criminal Immigrants in Texas: Illegal Immigrant Conviction and Arrest Rates for Homicide, Sex Crimes, Larceny, and Other Crimes." Immigration Research and Policy Brief No. 4, Cato Institute.
(7) “The Cost of Immigration Enforcement and Border Security” from the American Immigration Council. January 2017.
(8) “U.S. Border Patrol Fiscal Year Staffing Statistics (FY 1992 – FY 2017)” from the Stats and Summaries page of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
https://twitter.com/Kristin_Hook
As a furloughed scientist, I thought it worthwhile to use my PhD skills to look at evidence for the president’s claims of a national security crisis & whether his desire for a wall is an adequate justification for a government #shutdown that has cut off pay for 800,000 Americans.
What every American should be asking themselves right now is this: what is the evidence that our border is so unsafe that it constitutes a crisis and the need to #BuildTheWall? Evidence that would be needed to support such a claim are that...
(A) there has been a dramatic increase in people crossing our border over time, (B) there is an increase in crime with an increase in immigration, and immigrants commit more crimes than those within our borders, and/or (C) current strategies for border security are ineffective.
So what do the data show?
There is absolutely no evidence for (A). In fact, the opposite is supported – unauthorized immigration rates actually slowed down between 2010 and 2016, when it fell to its lowest level in decades (1). Overall, the population of unauthorized immigrants shrank by 13%...
between 2007 and 2016 in the U.S. As of January 2015, there were an estimated 10.7 to 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States (1, 2). That’s 3.3% to 3.7% of the total U.S. population, which was 328,337,383 on this very day in 2015.
For perspective, the current unemployment rate for people 16 years of age and over is 3.9% (3), greater than the number of illegal immigrants residing in our country. (Side bar: how is *this* not a national crisis?)
In looking at the data for total apprehensions of illegal aliens across multiple years by our border patrol, these numbers have also declined (4). Because I’m a scientist and love data, I acquired the raw data and made you a graph so you could see the trends for yourself. (margd graph at website shows more than 150,000 apprehansions at border in 2000 v less than 50,000 in 2017)
So to conclude, there is no evidence for (A). What about (B)?
Studies on the subject have found no immigrant-crime link. NONE. This revelation comes from a study that attempted to correlate undocumented immigration and violent crime in all 50 states and DC using multiple data sources at the state level from 1990-2014.
Their robust analyses reveal the opposite relationship: increases in the undocumented immigrant population are generally associated with significantly *lower* rates of violence (5). Other studies reveal that illegal immigrants have *lower* conviction and arrest rates...
relative to native-born Americans in the U.S. In my home state of #Texas alone, a study of 2015 data found that the homicide rate for illegal immigrants was 16% *below* that of native-born Americans; for all criminal convictions,...
illegal and legal immigrants had criminal conviction rates 50% and 66% *below* that of native-born Americans, respectively (6). Together these findings undermine statements that undocumented immigrants are criminals and/or are bringing crime into the United States.
In looking at statistics from the U.S. Border and Customs Protection, two things are clear: an increase in funding (7) & an increase in staffing agents (8) over time is correlated with reduced rates of apprehension of illegal aliens. I made you more figures so you could see this. (margd: see graph at website)
So if you are concerned about keeping these numbers low, these observations suggest continuing to fund this agency and maintaining a steady number of agents on the ground may be an effective way to do so.
An alternative explanation is that there are fewer people crossing our border over time (which is supported by the aforementioned studies above). Regardless, these results do not support (C) and instead suggest that the border security strategies currently in place are effective.
In sum, there is NO EVIDENCE that there is a border crisis that requires building a wall. The number of immigrants coming into the US are decreasing, and they are not causing any upticks in crime. A wall is an unnecessary feature and would be a total waste of taxpayer money.
Sincerely,
Your neighborhood scientist born and raised two hours away from the US Southern Border in Texas who is now on day 59 without pay.
Here are my sources:
(1) “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2015” from the Office of Immigration Statistics, the US Department of Homeland Security
(2) “Facts on U.S. Immigrants, 2016” from the Pew Research Center
(3) “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey” from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US Department of Labor
(4) “U.S. Border Patrol Monthly Apprehensions (FY 2000 – FY 2017)” from the Stats and Summaries page of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(5) Light, Michael T. and T. Y. Miller (2018). Does undocumented immigration increase violent crime? Criminology 56(2): 370-401.
(6) Nowrasteh, A (2018). “Criminal Immigrants in Texas: Illegal Immigrant Conviction and Arrest Rates for Homicide, Sex Crimes, Larceny, and Other Crimes." Immigration Research and Policy Brief No. 4, Cato Institute.
(7) “The Cost of Immigration Enforcement and Border Security” from the American Immigration Council. January 2017.
(8) “U.S. Border Patrol Fiscal Year Staffing Statistics (FY 1992 – FY 2017)” from the Stats and Summaries page of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
111TrippB
>108 proximity1: I appreciate your recognition of what I consider to be common sense logic that is not biased by ulterior motives or missionary-level turning of a cheek to pure evil and violence. I had abandoned this topic after it was abundantly evident that those defending illegal criminal aliens—and the horrific crimes too many of them commit—really don’t care if good people are spared death or other victimization by effective immigration policy and barriers. I don’t know their real motives for defending lawlessness, but I’m sure they have their reasons (not that I, or any reasonable person, would accept those motives).
>110 margd: I won’t question the research capabilities of a furloughed government scientist, even if her specialty is more suited to analysis of the "sexy sperm" hypothesis (really!) rather than sociological and economic impacts of an influx of uneducated, unskilled, and too-often violently criminal immigrants. After 58 days of research, apparently, she has determined that illegal immigration reduces crime. The good doctor obviously put great effort into this research of her academic position...
Here is about two minutes of research, which reiterates what I've personally known to be happening for decades.
https://www.libertyheadlines.com/illegal-immigrant-kills-two-drunken-wrong-way-c...
BUILD THE WALL! Illegal immigrant who had been deported four times kills and dismembers a man” https://powderedwigsociety.com/rosalio-ramos-ramos/
https://www.libertyheadlines.com/illegal-alien-killing-nfl-linebacker/”> “Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Sentenced to 16 Years for Killing NFL Linebacker”
And, back to my original reason for posting here:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/12/28/young-california-police-of... Young California Police Officer, a Legal Immigrant, Was Killed by an Illegal Alien”
The furloughed scientist you reference places a different value judgement on the atrocities committed by the unacceptable portion of illegal aliens who are human trash. From a statistical perspective, such trash are outliers. That’s fine when you’re researching "sexy sperm," but it’s not acceptable when those outliers threaten innocent Americans. The stakes are just too high.
margd’s posting of dubious analysis based on statistical outliers is somewhat amusing—but not surprising—when her posts on other subjects, such as gun control, are absolutely dependent on statistical outliers. If you rely on statistical outliers in weak attempts to justify imposing gun control on law-abiding citizens, it’s quite hypocritical to claim that some statistics don’t matter when they jeapordize your position on illegal criminal immigration. You can’t have it both ways.
>110 margd: I won’t question the research capabilities of a furloughed government scientist, even if her specialty is more suited to analysis of the "sexy sperm" hypothesis (really!) rather than sociological and economic impacts of an influx of uneducated, unskilled, and too-often violently criminal immigrants. After 58 days of research, apparently, she has determined that illegal immigration reduces crime. The good doctor obviously put great effort into this research of her academic position...
Here is about two minutes of research, which reiterates what I've personally known to be happening for decades.
https://www.libertyheadlines.com/illegal-immigrant-kills-two-drunken-wrong-way-c...
BUILD THE WALL! Illegal immigrant who had been deported four times kills and dismembers a man” https://powderedwigsociety.com/rosalio-ramos-ramos/
https://www.libertyheadlines.com/illegal-alien-killing-nfl-linebacker/”> “Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Sentenced to 16 Years for Killing NFL Linebacker”
And, back to my original reason for posting here:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/12/28/young-california-police-of... Young California Police Officer, a Legal Immigrant, Was Killed by an Illegal Alien”
The furloughed scientist you reference places a different value judgement on the atrocities committed by the unacceptable portion of illegal aliens who are human trash. From a statistical perspective, such trash are outliers. That’s fine when you’re researching "sexy sperm," but it’s not acceptable when those outliers threaten innocent Americans. The stakes are just too high.
margd’s posting of dubious analysis based on statistical outliers is somewhat amusing—but not surprising—when her posts on other subjects, such as gun control, are absolutely dependent on statistical outliers. If you rely on statistical outliers in weak attempts to justify imposing gun control on law-abiding citizens, it’s quite hypocritical to claim that some statistics don’t matter when they jeapordize your position on illegal criminal immigration. You can’t have it both ways.
112TrippB
Margd’s source of southern border immigrant (and that is a wide variety of international cultures) knowledge was sure to state that she grew up just two hours from the US/Mexico border—apparently in an attempt to establish credibility. That prompted me to consider my own experience. I first crossed the southern border decades ago when I was six years old. I still have the knife my father bought for me on that first visit—standing nearly three feet tall at that time, the knife was more like a sword hanging from the stylish 1970 wide white belt that was holding up my groovy purple shorts. I still have that knife, and the leather scabbard bearing the eagle and snake image of Mexico.
Since then, I’ve spent time, and often crossed the border along every state bordering Mexico, at Brownsville/Matomoros, Laredo/Nuevo Laredo (several times), McAllen, El Paso/Juarez, Naco/Naco, Douglas/Agua Prieto, Gringo Pass/Sonoyta (multiple times), San Luis/San Luis Rio Colorado, San Ysidro/Tijuana, and very likely a few other places. I’ve also avoided the border and enjoyed Cozumel, Merida, and several locations within the Yucatan. Despite being shown common illegal crossing points by friends who lived along the border, I never, even once, crossed illegally. It was not difficult to comply with the laws of Mexico, even if they are far more stringent than the immigration laws of the U.S.
I really like Mexico, and nearly all of the people who inhabit it. There was a brief time when I considered retiring there. No more. The violent lawlessness and corruption is just too pervasive. I don’t want that unfettered evil to infect the U.S. Americans in their peaceful little towns who have no idea of the cruelty that is common to the Mexican cartels that are the real rulers of Mexico. The naïve who support open borders need to be protected, in part, because they threaten us all. Bless their little hearts.
113John5918
>111 TrippB: Here is about two minutes of research
Is what you offer really "research" or is it two minutes of random googling for anecdotes? The list of authoritative sources quoted in >110 margd: does seem rather weightier than yours.
Is what you offer really "research" or is it two minutes of random googling for anecdotes? The list of authoritative sources quoted in >110 margd: does seem rather weightier than yours.
114TrippB
Random googling was quite sufficient to counter her ridiculous "research.". Are you prepared to, in person, question the families of any of those unnecessary victims of criminal violations of very reasonable US immigration laws to justify your position on criminal violations of U.S. immigration laws? I hope not, as I doubt that anything you can attempt to say will be enough to convince any reasonable person that blatant violations of very reasonable U.S. immigration laws are enough to justify what has happened to their loved ones.
"Weightier" in terms of a zealot does not resonate with most people.
Again, the U.S. has every right, and a responsibility, to block the immigration of human trash.
"Weightier" in terms of a zealot does not resonate with most people.
Again, the U.S. has every right, and a responsibility, to block the immigration of human trash.
115TrippB
Illegal immigration = more crime. No argument, no debate, no question.
If you subtract offenses committee by illegal aliens--often horrific offenses--from existing crime, there is less crime. Period.
Hiding it behind a long list of qualifiers does not negate the crimes that have been committed.
If you subtract offenses committee by illegal aliens--often horrific offenses--from existing crime, there is less crime. Period.
Hiding it behind a long list of qualifiers does not negate the crimes that have been committed.
116John5918
>114 TrippB:
I don't think any of those sources can be connected with the word "zealot". They look like solid independent sources to me, the sort that one needs to refer to when making policies.
I sympathise with the families of any crime victim, regardless of where the criminal came from. I think good solid research rather than ideological positions helps to produce policies which reduce crime.
>115 TrippB: Illegal immigration = more crime. No argument, no debate, no question.
Evidence? I think your second sentence says it all.
Edited to add:
A percentage of human beings commit murder in any society. How will you know in advance which immigrants are going to commit murder and thus should be excluded from the USA? To refer to an earlier example of yours, even the nice research scientist living next door to you might turn out to be a murderer. So logically your philosophy excludes all immigrants, and indeed also all tourists, all business visitors, foreign investors, in fact every foreigner. After all, one of them might turn out to be a murderer, and if you subtract crimes committed by them, there is less crime. Period (or Full Stop, as we say on this side of the Pond).
I don't think any of those sources can be connected with the word "zealot". They look like solid independent sources to me, the sort that one needs to refer to when making policies.
I sympathise with the families of any crime victim, regardless of where the criminal came from. I think good solid research rather than ideological positions helps to produce policies which reduce crime.
>115 TrippB: Illegal immigration = more crime. No argument, no debate, no question.
Evidence? I think your second sentence says it all.
Edited to add:
A percentage of human beings commit murder in any society. How will you know in advance which immigrants are going to commit murder and thus should be excluded from the USA? To refer to an earlier example of yours, even the nice research scientist living next door to you might turn out to be a murderer. So logically your philosophy excludes all immigrants, and indeed also all tourists, all business visitors, foreign investors, in fact every foreigner. After all, one of them might turn out to be a murderer, and if you subtract crimes committed by them, there is less crime. Period (or Full Stop, as we say on this side of the Pond).
117TrippB
>116 John5918: johnthefireman: Where are you now? Still in Sudan? I truly admire your dedication to making the world a better place, and I hope your efforts are successful.
When your efforts are demonstrably effective, I'll be willing to try your methods within the U.S. Until then, in my experience of traveling throughout the world, I'd prefer to address local problems, such as illegal immigration, locally.
My perspective is focused on the U.S. Having experienced the evils of the realities of humanity, I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats--perhaps until you prove how you can eliminate evil and cruelty in the places where its more prevalent, and show me how it will be effective in the U.S. I'm eager to see success in that area. Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
When your efforts are demonstrably effective, I'll be willing to try your methods within the U.S. Until then, in my experience of traveling throughout the world, I'd prefer to address local problems, such as illegal immigration, locally.
My perspective is focused on the U.S. Having experienced the evils of the realities of humanity, I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats--perhaps until you prove how you can eliminate evil and cruelty in the places where its more prevalent, and show me how it will be effective in the U.S. I'm eager to see success in that area. Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
118margd
Also belongs in shutdown (Pelosi), truthiness, info, mental health, war against women, and Kavanaugh (Blasey Ford) threads?
Trump again mentioned taped-up women at the border. Experts don’t know what he is talking about.
Katie Mettler | January 25, 2019
UPDATE: President Trump on Friday again claimed that human traffickers taped women’s mouths at the border.
“Women are tied up, they’re bound, duct tape put around their faces, around their mouths, in many cases they can’t even breathe,” he said in the Rose Garden while discussing a deal to temporarily end the partial government shutdown. “They’re put in the backs of cars or vans or trucks.”
Experts say Trump’s claims are ‘divorced from reality.’ His comment Friday was at least the second time he has mentioned taped-up women since The Post initially published this story on Jan. 17, bringing the total number of statements on taped-up women to at least 10 times in 22 days...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/17/trumps-stories-taped-up-women...
Trump again mentioned taped-up women at the border. Experts don’t know what he is talking about.
Katie Mettler | January 25, 2019
UPDATE: President Trump on Friday again claimed that human traffickers taped women’s mouths at the border.
“Women are tied up, they’re bound, duct tape put around their faces, around their mouths, in many cases they can’t even breathe,” he said in the Rose Garden while discussing a deal to temporarily end the partial government shutdown. “They’re put in the backs of cars or vans or trucks.”
Experts say Trump’s claims are ‘divorced from reality.’ His comment Friday was at least the second time he has mentioned taped-up women since The Post initially published this story on Jan. 17, bringing the total number of statements on taped-up women to at least 10 times in 22 days...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/17/trumps-stories-taped-up-women...
119prosfilaes
>111 TrippB: good people are spared death or other victimization by effective immigration policy and barriers.
Good people are spared death in the current system; certainly some Mexicans who would have died didn't because their would-be killers moved to the US. The whole refugee problem is good people trying to escape death and other victimization. The only "good people" your solution has a chance of helping is Americans.
it’s not acceptable when those outliers threaten innocent Americans. The stakes are just too high. ... If you rely on statistical outliers in weak attempts to justify imposing gun control on law-abiding citizens,
"those defending gun owners—and the horrific crimes too many of them commit—really don’t care if good people are spared death or other victimization by effective gun control." A young California police officer was killed by a gun wielder, and you don't care.
I suspect you're going to get offended again by the comparison, but I don't know how you thought you'd avoid it. If you really care about good people being spared death or other victimization, why are you making such a fuss about their attackers breaking one certain law? Does that make the dead any more or less dead? How does one or two examples of people murdered by illegal immigrants matter, but thousands dead by guns not?
>112 TrippB: I never, even once, crossed illegally
Bless your heart. You've had no problem travelling the world legally, and somehow think that not breaking a law you never had a reason to break somehow makes you a better person than other people.
Not only that, you entered Mexico. The US can't protect you from would-be illegal immigrants if you're not in the US. If we build the wall, we need to keep the naïve Americans from crossing the wall.
>116 John5918: To refer to an earlier example of yours, even the nice research scientist living next door to you might turn out to be a murderer.
Russia let Hans Reiser, a brilliant computer programmer, move into and work in Russia. He then took a Russian woman back to the US as his wife and murdered her.
>117 TrippB: Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
And when I pointed out your wall would do absolutely nothing to stop any semi-retired assassin, you don't reply, and posted "BUILD THE WALL" again. Creating strong effective borders without damaging trade or tourism is difficult; it's not trivial even if you don't care about those things. The wall does nothing to stop drugs and cartel from crossing the border, and thus is obviously not the best way of spending five billion dollars on the problem.
Good people are spared death in the current system; certainly some Mexicans who would have died didn't because their would-be killers moved to the US. The whole refugee problem is good people trying to escape death and other victimization. The only "good people" your solution has a chance of helping is Americans.
it’s not acceptable when those outliers threaten innocent Americans. The stakes are just too high. ... If you rely on statistical outliers in weak attempts to justify imposing gun control on law-abiding citizens,
"those defending gun owners—and the horrific crimes too many of them commit—really don’t care if good people are spared death or other victimization by effective gun control." A young California police officer was killed by a gun wielder, and you don't care.
I suspect you're going to get offended again by the comparison, but I don't know how you thought you'd avoid it. If you really care about good people being spared death or other victimization, why are you making such a fuss about their attackers breaking one certain law? Does that make the dead any more or less dead? How does one or two examples of people murdered by illegal immigrants matter, but thousands dead by guns not?
>112 TrippB: I never, even once, crossed illegally
Bless your heart. You've had no problem travelling the world legally, and somehow think that not breaking a law you never had a reason to break somehow makes you a better person than other people.
Not only that, you entered Mexico. The US can't protect you from would-be illegal immigrants if you're not in the US. If we build the wall, we need to keep the naïve Americans from crossing the wall.
>116 John5918: To refer to an earlier example of yours, even the nice research scientist living next door to you might turn out to be a murderer.
Russia let Hans Reiser, a brilliant computer programmer, move into and work in Russia. He then took a Russian woman back to the US as his wife and murdered her.
>117 TrippB: Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
And when I pointed out your wall would do absolutely nothing to stop any semi-retired assassin, you don't reply, and posted "BUILD THE WALL" again. Creating strong effective borders without damaging trade or tourism is difficult; it's not trivial even if you don't care about those things. The wall does nothing to stop drugs and cartel from crossing the border, and thus is obviously not the best way of spending five billion dollars on the problem.
120John5918
>117 TrippB:
Thanks for your response. I'm currently in South Sudan.
I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats... I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
Understood. So why do you allow any foreigners in at all? Foreign tourists, foreign businesspeople, foreign investors, foreign diplomats (who have immunity from your laws). Individuals from all of the above can and probably have committed murder. I have a US visa. Apart from the routine question about whether I have any prior criminal convictions, no attempt was made to determine whether or not I am a potential murderer. And even if it was, the visa is valid for ten years, and who can say what will have happened to my mental state in the years before it expires? How do you spot a potential murderer? So keep them/us all out.
Incidentally, the 22 foreigners who committed the greatest act of mass murder on US soil (at least since Native Americans were routinely massacred in centuries past) were in the US legally on valid visas. They were not illegal immigrants; their crime was murder, not illegal immigration.
Thanks for your response. I'm currently in South Sudan.
I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats... I want strong, effective, borders for the US.
Understood. So why do you allow any foreigners in at all? Foreign tourists, foreign businesspeople, foreign investors, foreign diplomats (who have immunity from your laws). Individuals from all of the above can and probably have committed murder. I have a US visa. Apart from the routine question about whether I have any prior criminal convictions, no attempt was made to determine whether or not I am a potential murderer. And even if it was, the visa is valid for ten years, and who can say what will have happened to my mental state in the years before it expires? How do you spot a potential murderer? So keep them/us all out.
Incidentally, the 22 foreigners who committed the greatest act of mass murder on US soil (at least since Native Americans were routinely massacred in centuries past) were in the US legally on valid visas. They were not illegal immigrants; their crime was murder, not illegal immigration.
121margd
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump | 5:44 AM - 27 Jan 2019 :
We are not even into February and the cost of illegal immigration so far this year is $18,959,495,168. Cost Friday was $603,331,392. There are at least 25,772,342 illegal aliens, not the 11,000,000 that have been reported for years, in our Country. So ridiculous! DHS
We are not even into February and the cost of illegal immigration so far this year is $18,959,495,168. Cost Friday was $603,331,392. There are at least 25,772,342 illegal aliens, not the 11,000,000 that have been reported for years, in our Country. So ridiculous! DHS
122John5918
US militia members plead guilty to pipe bomb attack on mosque (Al Jazeera)
The plea agreements say the men targeted the mosque to interfere with the free exercise of religion by Muslims and to let them know they were not welcome in the US... McWhorter and Morris wanted the Muslim community to be fearful and run away...
The plea agreements say the men targeted the mosque to interfere with the free exercise of religion by Muslims and to let them know they were not welcome in the US... McWhorter and Morris wanted the Muslim community to be fearful and run away...
123TrippB
>119 prosfilaes:
Good people are spared death in the current system; certainly some Mexicans who would have died didn't because their would-be killers moved to the US.
And there we’ve hit the primary difference between our views. I have no qualms about saying that I’m affected more when a crime happens close to the people I personally know and care about. It is sad when a crime occurs far away, but a crime in Mexico is not a failure of U.S. laws or law enforcement—it’s Mexico’s failure. It should be addressed by Mexicans. Meanwhile, it’s our responsibility to enforce our laws which are intended to protect our society.
The whole refugee problem is good people trying to escape death and other victimization.
If the “whole refugee problem” were good people, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Bless your heart. You've had no problem travelling the world legally, and somehow think that not breaking a law you never had a reason to break somehow makes you a better person than other people.
The reason I’ve had no problem traveling the world legally is most definitely because I’m viewed to be a better person than some other people. To get into several countries, I had to go through a lengthy visa process to ensure I’m not a criminal or other undesirable. If those countries get a visa application from someone they know is a criminal, they can, and do, deny entry. That is how they protect their society. And if you sneak across their border in the middle of the night, they don’t welcome you in, provide welfare and other assistance, and look away as you illegally register to vote. That’s good immigration policy.
And when I pointed out your wall would do absolutely nothing to stop any semi-retired assassin, you don't reply, and posted "BUILD THE WALL" again.
You have no way of knowing if a wall would stop a cartel thug or not. The cartels have well established networks for human smuggling. Why wouldn’t one of their henchman use those routes to sneak into the U.S.? Have you spent any time along the border, where it’s easy to just walk or wade across? There are areas where people regularly stroll across with a load on their back—heroin, meth, and fentanyl, if we’re lucky, but we don’t know what else they’ve brought into the U.S.
I believe walls have value. So does Nancy Pelosi’s sleazy ilk. If they didn’t, they would not have voted to spend half a billion dollars to build a border wall in Jordan. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/9/inside-the-beltway-democrats-pai... I’ve seen border walls in other countries. I think the biggest and most imposing border walls might be those around Vatican City. I’m also very much in favor of fixing our own problems before we try to solve every issue in the world. That half a billion dollars in U.S. foreign welfare in Jordan would have been a good start on our own wall. From that perspective, I fully agree with President Trump. America first.
Good people are spared death in the current system; certainly some Mexicans who would have died didn't because their would-be killers moved to the US.
And there we’ve hit the primary difference between our views. I have no qualms about saying that I’m affected more when a crime happens close to the people I personally know and care about. It is sad when a crime occurs far away, but a crime in Mexico is not a failure of U.S. laws or law enforcement—it’s Mexico’s failure. It should be addressed by Mexicans. Meanwhile, it’s our responsibility to enforce our laws which are intended to protect our society.
The whole refugee problem is good people trying to escape death and other victimization.
If the “whole refugee problem” were good people, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Bless your heart. You've had no problem travelling the world legally, and somehow think that not breaking a law you never had a reason to break somehow makes you a better person than other people.
The reason I’ve had no problem traveling the world legally is most definitely because I’m viewed to be a better person than some other people. To get into several countries, I had to go through a lengthy visa process to ensure I’m not a criminal or other undesirable. If those countries get a visa application from someone they know is a criminal, they can, and do, deny entry. That is how they protect their society. And if you sneak across their border in the middle of the night, they don’t welcome you in, provide welfare and other assistance, and look away as you illegally register to vote. That’s good immigration policy.
And when I pointed out your wall would do absolutely nothing to stop any semi-retired assassin, you don't reply, and posted "BUILD THE WALL" again.
You have no way of knowing if a wall would stop a cartel thug or not. The cartels have well established networks for human smuggling. Why wouldn’t one of their henchman use those routes to sneak into the U.S.? Have you spent any time along the border, where it’s easy to just walk or wade across? There are areas where people regularly stroll across with a load on their back—heroin, meth, and fentanyl, if we’re lucky, but we don’t know what else they’ve brought into the U.S.
I believe walls have value. So does Nancy Pelosi’s sleazy ilk. If they didn’t, they would not have voted to spend half a billion dollars to build a border wall in Jordan. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/9/inside-the-beltway-democrats-pai... I’ve seen border walls in other countries. I think the biggest and most imposing border walls might be those around Vatican City. I’m also very much in favor of fixing our own problems before we try to solve every issue in the world. That half a billion dollars in U.S. foreign welfare in Jordan would have been a good start on our own wall. From that perspective, I fully agree with President Trump. America first.
124TrippB
>120 John5918:
So why do you allow any foreigners in at all?
Foreigners are great for a society. Good foreigners, anyway. Immigration policy should be focused on attracting good foreigners, and keeping out the human trash.
So why do you allow any foreigners in at all?
Foreigners are great for a society. Good foreigners, anyway. Immigration policy should be focused on attracting good foreigners, and keeping out the human trash.
125John5918
>124 TrippB: Immigration policy should be focused on attracting good foreigners
And how do we really know in advance which ones are going to be "good" and which ones are going to commit a crime in the future? Like your nice foreign research scientist - who knows when he will crack and murder his wife, or turn out to be a closet paedophile not even known to his closest friends and relatives? Or the 22 "good" foreigners who were allowed in to learn to fly commercial aircraft in 2001?
keeping out the human trash
And perhaps this is the basis of our differing views. There is no such thing as human trash, only human beings. Once we start giving such labels to a group of people, we (unintentionally, perhaps) encourage nutters like those mentioned in >122 John5918: to murder them to let them know they are not welcome in the USA.
And how do we really know in advance which ones are going to be "good" and which ones are going to commit a crime in the future? Like your nice foreign research scientist - who knows when he will crack and murder his wife, or turn out to be a closet paedophile not even known to his closest friends and relatives? Or the 22 "good" foreigners who were allowed in to learn to fly commercial aircraft in 2001?
keeping out the human trash
And perhaps this is the basis of our differing views. There is no such thing as human trash, only human beings. Once we start giving such labels to a group of people, we (unintentionally, perhaps) encourage nutters like those mentioned in >122 John5918: to murder them to let them know they are not welcome in the USA.
126prosfilaes
>123 TrippB: And there we’ve hit the primary difference between our views.
Let's be blunt; you accused us of not carrying about "good people", and then suddenly admit that we care about "good people", and you don't care about "good people" who aren't Americans.
To get into several countries, I had to go through a lengthy visa process to ensure I’m not a criminal or other undesirable
It also checks to see that you're an American with enough money to go home and they can trust that you will. That's the big problem with most illegal immigrants, not that they have criminal records but that they want to work here. (People like Donald Trump are happy to hire them, but somehow don't want them to legally be there.)
You have no way of knowing if a wall would stop a cartel thug or not.
You want to spend six billion dollars that you don't know if it will be effective or not? According to the DEA (page 99) for smuggling drugs, "The most common method employed by these TCOs involves transporting illicit drugs through U.S. POEs in passenger vehicles with concealed compartments or commingled with legitimate goods on tractor trailers". Plus the fact that a US passport is $1500, there's no way that any successful cartel member will have any problem finding less arduous routes to the US than through the desert, wall or no wall. Six billion dollars is a lot of money to try and patch a small part of a problem.
I believe walls have value.
So do I. I also believe that cell phones have value, but that doesn't mean we can throw six billion dollars at a really big cell phone to improve border security.
Let's be blunt; you accused us of not carrying about "good people", and then suddenly admit that we care about "good people", and you don't care about "good people" who aren't Americans.
To get into several countries, I had to go through a lengthy visa process to ensure I’m not a criminal or other undesirable
It also checks to see that you're an American with enough money to go home and they can trust that you will. That's the big problem with most illegal immigrants, not that they have criminal records but that they want to work here. (People like Donald Trump are happy to hire them, but somehow don't want them to legally be there.)
You have no way of knowing if a wall would stop a cartel thug or not.
You want to spend six billion dollars that you don't know if it will be effective or not? According to the DEA (page 99) for smuggling drugs, "The most common method employed by these TCOs involves transporting illicit drugs through U.S. POEs in passenger vehicles with concealed compartments or commingled with legitimate goods on tractor trailers". Plus the fact that a US passport is $1500, there's no way that any successful cartel member will have any problem finding less arduous routes to the US than through the desert, wall or no wall. Six billion dollars is a lot of money to try and patch a small part of a problem.
I believe walls have value.
So do I. I also believe that cell phones have value, but that doesn't mean we can throw six billion dollars at a really big cell phone to improve border security.
127TrippB
>125 John5918: And how do we really know in advance which ones are going to be "good" and which ones are going to commit a crime in the future?
Here’s a clue: if someone’s been deported before; if they’re already in a database of known criminals; or, if they’re covered in gang tattoos, they’re probably not good and they’re likely to commit a crime in the future. It isn’t complicated.
There is no such thing as human trash, only human beings.
You’re a much more forgiving man than I, and I’m ok with that. I might be a little more cynical, as I see some people as absolute trash. Human, yes, but not worthy of any positive descriptor.
In addition to the piece of trash that first prompted me to post on this topic, here are just a few examples that are appropriate for
both of the issues you raised:
Undocumented immigrant convicted of rape sentenced to more prison time for illegal reentry
https://katu.com/news/local/undocumented-immigrant-sergio-martinez-mendoza-convi...
Previously deported illegal immigrant, 45, who raped a child after being given a 'free pass' by Philadelphia officials, pleads guilty to reentering the US illegally
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6040513/Previously-deported-illegal-imm...
Man deported six times charged with murder in California bludgeonings
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-murder-california/man-deported-six-times-char...
IMMIGRANT ARRESTED FOR MURDER WAS PREVIOUSLY DEPORTED AT LEAST EIGHT TIMES
https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/05/immigrant-deported-eight-times-murder/
ICE: Man who killed 3 should have been deported before murders
http://amp.fox5ny.com/news/ice-man-who-killed-3-should-have-been-deported-before...
Here’s a clue: if someone’s been deported before; if they’re already in a database of known criminals; or, if they’re covered in gang tattoos, they’re probably not good and they’re likely to commit a crime in the future. It isn’t complicated.
There is no such thing as human trash, only human beings.
You’re a much more forgiving man than I, and I’m ok with that. I might be a little more cynical, as I see some people as absolute trash. Human, yes, but not worthy of any positive descriptor.
In addition to the piece of trash that first prompted me to post on this topic, here are just a few examples that are appropriate for
both of the issues you raised:
Undocumented immigrant convicted of rape sentenced to more prison time for illegal reentry
https://katu.com/news/local/undocumented-immigrant-sergio-martinez-mendoza-convi...
Previously deported illegal immigrant, 45, who raped a child after being given a 'free pass' by Philadelphia officials, pleads guilty to reentering the US illegally
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6040513/Previously-deported-illegal-imm...
Man deported six times charged with murder in California bludgeonings
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-murder-california/man-deported-six-times-char...
IMMIGRANT ARRESTED FOR MURDER WAS PREVIOUSLY DEPORTED AT LEAST EIGHT TIMES
https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/05/immigrant-deported-eight-times-murder/
ICE: Man who killed 3 should have been deported before murders
http://amp.fox5ny.com/news/ice-man-who-killed-3-should-have-been-deported-before...
128TrippB
>126 prosfilaes:
Let's be blunt; you accused us of not carrying about "good people", and then suddenly admit that we care about "good people", and you don't care about "good people" who aren't Americans.
Um….ok. I may not have been clear, so I’ll try to say it again. If an MS-13 piece of human trash murders someone in El Salvador, that is a bad thing—particularly if they’ve murdered good people. I’m fully with you there. If an MS-13 gangbanger murders a “good” resident of the United States, that’s worse, as it also demonstrates a failure of immigration policy. A nation must protect it’s own citizens.
That's the big problem with most illegal immigrants, not that they have criminal records but that they want to work here.
I would welcome a guest worker program, within a revamped and improved immigration policy. However, I would demand a few conditions. No anchor babies. That weakness in our laws should have been fixed under President Reagan, but Congress failed us then, too. And no welfare. If a guest worker can’t make it while they’re a guest in the country, they should go home. There are more than enough people eager to be Americans who can pull their own weight. I know several that I’d be thrilled to vouch for, if given the opportunity. I also want a lifetime ban on anyone who sneaks across our border. One strike, and don’t come back. If an immigrant can’t respect our laws, they should not be welcome.
I also believe that cell phones have value, but that doesn't mean we can throw six billion dollars at a really big cell phone to improve border security.
According to credible studies, if a wall deters just 3% to 4% of illegal immigration, it will pay for itself within 10 years. As I said before, I’ve personally stood in the gaping holes in our current border security. There were many places where I could have crossed the border illegally without any difficulty. I think a wall will deter much more than 4% of the illegal immigrants now pouring across the border. It’s a great investment, and long overdue.
The fiscal argument against a wall is being posed by many liberals and Democrat politicians. In my experience, liberals have little concern about spending federal funds. That is a strong indicator that they’re hiding ulterior motives. Two days ago, it was reported that Texas is purging some 95,000 registered voters who are believed to be ineligible immigrants. Since Democrats do all they can to throw money at illegal, criminal, aliens, it stands to reason that liberals see the value in welcoming all the illegal aliens they can attract to register to vote.
A few interesting information sources:
U.S. spends $116B per year on illegal alien welfare
https://www.oann.com/u-s-spends-116b-per-year-on-illegal-alien-welfare-wall-cost...
Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do
https://www.laconiadailysun.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/most-of-us-don-t-welco...
Center for Immigration Studies
https://cis.org
Examples of Serious Crimes Committed by Illegal Aliens
http://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/examples-serious-crimes-illegal-alie...
Let's be blunt; you accused us of not carrying about "good people", and then suddenly admit that we care about "good people", and you don't care about "good people" who aren't Americans.
Um….ok. I may not have been clear, so I’ll try to say it again. If an MS-13 piece of human trash murders someone in El Salvador, that is a bad thing—particularly if they’ve murdered good people. I’m fully with you there. If an MS-13 gangbanger murders a “good” resident of the United States, that’s worse, as it also demonstrates a failure of immigration policy. A nation must protect it’s own citizens.
That's the big problem with most illegal immigrants, not that they have criminal records but that they want to work here.
I would welcome a guest worker program, within a revamped and improved immigration policy. However, I would demand a few conditions. No anchor babies. That weakness in our laws should have been fixed under President Reagan, but Congress failed us then, too. And no welfare. If a guest worker can’t make it while they’re a guest in the country, they should go home. There are more than enough people eager to be Americans who can pull their own weight. I know several that I’d be thrilled to vouch for, if given the opportunity. I also want a lifetime ban on anyone who sneaks across our border. One strike, and don’t come back. If an immigrant can’t respect our laws, they should not be welcome.
I also believe that cell phones have value, but that doesn't mean we can throw six billion dollars at a really big cell phone to improve border security.
According to credible studies, if a wall deters just 3% to 4% of illegal immigration, it will pay for itself within 10 years. As I said before, I’ve personally stood in the gaping holes in our current border security. There were many places where I could have crossed the border illegally without any difficulty. I think a wall will deter much more than 4% of the illegal immigrants now pouring across the border. It’s a great investment, and long overdue.
The fiscal argument against a wall is being posed by many liberals and Democrat politicians. In my experience, liberals have little concern about spending federal funds. That is a strong indicator that they’re hiding ulterior motives. Two days ago, it was reported that Texas is purging some 95,000 registered voters who are believed to be ineligible immigrants. Since Democrats do all they can to throw money at illegal, criminal, aliens, it stands to reason that liberals see the value in welcoming all the illegal aliens they can attract to register to vote.
A few interesting information sources:
U.S. spends $116B per year on illegal alien welfare
https://www.oann.com/u-s-spends-116b-per-year-on-illegal-alien-welfare-wall-cost...
Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do
https://www.laconiadailysun.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/most-of-us-don-t-welco...
Center for Immigration Studies
https://cis.org
Examples of Serious Crimes Committed by Illegal Aliens
http://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/examples-serious-crimes-illegal-alie...
129prosfilaes
>128 TrippB: A nation must protect it’s own citizens.
Then you need your passport revoked, because we can't protect you if you keep wandering across the border. If you're accurate about Mexico and the dangers of people in Mexico, you must be suicidal.
According to credible studies, if a wall deters just 3% to 4% of illegal immigration, it will pay for itself within 10 years. As I said before, I’ve personally stood in the gaping holes in our current border security. There were many places where I could have crossed the border illegally without any difficulty. I think a wall will deter much more than 4% of the illegal immigrants now pouring across the border.
"Credible studies" in the opinion of someone I disagree with, and the opinion of someone who has absolutely no knowledge on the subject. So convincing.
In my experience, liberals have little concern about spending federal funds.
Have you never seen the deficit graph? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD#0 is one version, but they all seem pretty similar. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_percent_gdp is by percentage of GDP. Between 2003-2007 and 2017-2019, the president and both houses of Congress were Republican. All of them ran large deficits, and the 2017 and 2018 budgets got worse, despite a good economy. Since 1969, the only time we've not run a deficit is when 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001, three of which were under Bill Clinton.
That Republicans are fiscally conservative is a Big Lie, one of those stories that have no basis but are told often enough that people just believe them. Guess what, liberals understand that we need to tax to pay for programs, and cutting unnecessary expenditures means we can pay for more important programs or tax less.
And this is an unconvincing ad hominem argument. Don't say "we care about responsible spending", and then when someone calls you on part of your spending, dodge actually explaining why this six billion dollar expenditure is worth it.
U.S. spends $116B per year on illegal alien welfare
A YouTube video that cites no sources below it.
Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do
A letter to the editor.
What wonderful sources. You've found a bunch of sources that don't hit the reliability of Fox News, which is saying something.
Then you need your passport revoked, because we can't protect you if you keep wandering across the border. If you're accurate about Mexico and the dangers of people in Mexico, you must be suicidal.
According to credible studies, if a wall deters just 3% to 4% of illegal immigration, it will pay for itself within 10 years. As I said before, I’ve personally stood in the gaping holes in our current border security. There were many places where I could have crossed the border illegally without any difficulty. I think a wall will deter much more than 4% of the illegal immigrants now pouring across the border.
"Credible studies" in the opinion of someone I disagree with, and the opinion of someone who has absolutely no knowledge on the subject. So convincing.
In my experience, liberals have little concern about spending federal funds.
Have you never seen the deficit graph? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD#0 is one version, but they all seem pretty similar. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_percent_gdp is by percentage of GDP. Between 2003-2007 and 2017-2019, the president and both houses of Congress were Republican. All of them ran large deficits, and the 2017 and 2018 budgets got worse, despite a good economy. Since 1969, the only time we've not run a deficit is when 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001, three of which were under Bill Clinton.
That Republicans are fiscally conservative is a Big Lie, one of those stories that have no basis but are told often enough that people just believe them. Guess what, liberals understand that we need to tax to pay for programs, and cutting unnecessary expenditures means we can pay for more important programs or tax less.
And this is an unconvincing ad hominem argument. Don't say "we care about responsible spending", and then when someone calls you on part of your spending, dodge actually explaining why this six billion dollar expenditure is worth it.
U.S. spends $116B per year on illegal alien welfare
A YouTube video that cites no sources below it.
Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do
A letter to the editor.
What wonderful sources. You've found a bunch of sources that don't hit the reliability of Fox News, which is saying something.
130John5918
>128 TrippB: Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do
Hm. I think that might take a little unpacking. A letter to the editor of what is presumably a relatively small circulation local newspaper with a link which I can't access ("451: Unavailable due to legal reasons")? For that one letter I suspect you could Google and find many more articles which explain why immigrants are welcome. And what are "special interests"? Churches, for example? Farmers? Employers? Industry? Tax collectors?
Hm. I think that might take a little unpacking. A letter to the editor of what is presumably a relatively small circulation local newspaper with a link which I can't access ("451: Unavailable due to legal reasons")? For that one letter I suspect you could Google and find many more articles which explain why immigrants are welcome. And what are "special interests"? Churches, for example? Farmers? Employers? Industry? Tax collectors?
131TrippB
>129 prosfilaes:
I see you avoided criticism of those sites I referenced which detail just a small portion of the atrocities committed by illegal, criminal, aliens….too many of whom are human trash. The links are still available up there, if anyone but us actually visits this topic.
Then you need your passport revoked, because we can't protect you if you keep wandering across the border. If you're accurate about Mexico and the dangers of people in Mexico, you must be suicidal.
What can I say? I’m a thrill-seeker. I’ve taken many risks. That’s been my choice. Many thousands of victims of violent illegal criminal aliens did not have a choice. These innocent Americans were just going about their normal routines when illegal human trash raped, robbed, assaulted, or killed them. The U.S. failed to protect them because the government allowed human trash to come across the border with impunity, and even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales.
“That Republicans are fiscally conservative is a Big Lie…”
I’m with you on this point. Democrats and Republicans are both irresponsible when it comes to wasting our money. Let’s subtract the fiscal aspect of this debate. Let me ask you a hypothetical question prosfilaes. If an anonymous donor offers to pay every penny necessary to build a wall, would you still oppose the effort to secure the southern border, and, if yes, why? What is your motivation to protect illegal aliens? If you think walls don’t work, why would you be opposed to building one that costs the U.S. nothing?
I see you avoided criticism of those sites I referenced which detail just a small portion of the atrocities committed by illegal, criminal, aliens….too many of whom are human trash. The links are still available up there, if anyone but us actually visits this topic.
Then you need your passport revoked, because we can't protect you if you keep wandering across the border. If you're accurate about Mexico and the dangers of people in Mexico, you must be suicidal.
What can I say? I’m a thrill-seeker. I’ve taken many risks. That’s been my choice. Many thousands of victims of violent illegal criminal aliens did not have a choice. These innocent Americans were just going about their normal routines when illegal human trash raped, robbed, assaulted, or killed them. The U.S. failed to protect them because the government allowed human trash to come across the border with impunity, and even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales.
“That Republicans are fiscally conservative is a Big Lie…”
I’m with you on this point. Democrats and Republicans are both irresponsible when it comes to wasting our money. Let’s subtract the fiscal aspect of this debate. Let me ask you a hypothetical question prosfilaes. If an anonymous donor offers to pay every penny necessary to build a wall, would you still oppose the effort to secure the southern border, and, if yes, why? What is your motivation to protect illegal aliens? If you think walls don’t work, why would you be opposed to building one that costs the U.S. nothing?
132John5918
>128 TrippB:, >130 John5918:
I'm just glancing through a small US Catholic magazine, Maryknoll, the November/December 2018 issue (things reach us rather slowly here). From the Editor:
Building walls and tactics like taking children from their parents' arms are not stopping desperate people. Such methods just diminish us as a nation... Our national debate is focused on the border itself... We're not focusing enough on why.
A "special interest"? Note also the use of the term "desperate people" rather than "human trash".
Incidentally for the Christian ideologues the magazine also features an article reminding us that in the Christian narrative Jesus and his family were undocumented "illegal" refugees fleeing for their lives to a neighbouring country. "The Holy Family becomes history's most famous refugees, not unlike so many who are forced to flee their homes today".
I'm just glancing through a small US Catholic magazine, Maryknoll, the November/December 2018 issue (things reach us rather slowly here). From the Editor:
Building walls and tactics like taking children from their parents' arms are not stopping desperate people. Such methods just diminish us as a nation... Our national debate is focused on the border itself... We're not focusing enough on why.
A "special interest"? Note also the use of the term "desperate people" rather than "human trash".
Incidentally for the Christian ideologues the magazine also features an article reminding us that in the Christian narrative Jesus and his family were undocumented "illegal" refugees fleeing for their lives to a neighbouring country. "The Holy Family becomes history's most famous refugees, not unlike so many who are forced to flee their homes today".
133prosfilaes
>131 TrippB: I see you avoided criticism of those sites I referenced which detail just a small portion
I see you didn't respond to the point that a legal immigrant to Russia, a research scientist, took a Russian wife and murdered her. I could mention the Japanese student who was studying in Paris who killed and ate a French student. Will coming up with more lists of atrocities committed by legal immigrants who didn't have gang tattoos change your mind?
I see also you're ignoring rational argument. You've claimed that one crime would be enough; we've asserted that a group of people can't be judged by the actions of a few of them, especially when statistically they are less law-violating then others. There's no reason to respond to those lists, because they are by definition irrelevant to the argument.
I’m a thrill-seeker. I’ve taken many risks. That’s been my choice.
I always have problems when people are willing to take risks for themselves, but are willing to stomp on other people's decisions. When they choose to accept risks for Americans, they're naive; when you do, you're a thrill-seeker.
Also, I see you support denying the choice of Americans not to be shot, and haven't approached the contradiction. I'm willing to take the risk of accepting their tired, their poor, their huddled masses, but not the risk of being shot by some American with a gun.
the government ... even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales.
It's quite simple; the state and local police are just that, state and local. They're under no more obligation to work with the Feds than a private investigator or an average citizen would, thus it's not obstruction.
If an anonymous donor offers to pay every penny necessary to build a wall, would you still oppose the effort to secure the southern border, and, if yes, why?
Maybe. If you take away the fact that's the plan of someone who says that "Mexicans are rapists" (but bragged about sexual assault himself) and it will cost us billions, it's still a wall that cuts off wildlife from their natural habitats and destroys the natural view. It still won't be effective, and what effectiveness it would have would need patrolling and repair.
I see you didn't respond to the point that a legal immigrant to Russia, a research scientist, took a Russian wife and murdered her. I could mention the Japanese student who was studying in Paris who killed and ate a French student. Will coming up with more lists of atrocities committed by legal immigrants who didn't have gang tattoos change your mind?
I see also you're ignoring rational argument. You've claimed that one crime would be enough; we've asserted that a group of people can't be judged by the actions of a few of them, especially when statistically they are less law-violating then others. There's no reason to respond to those lists, because they are by definition irrelevant to the argument.
I’m a thrill-seeker. I’ve taken many risks. That’s been my choice.
I always have problems when people are willing to take risks for themselves, but are willing to stomp on other people's decisions. When they choose to accept risks for Americans, they're naive; when you do, you're a thrill-seeker.
Also, I see you support denying the choice of Americans not to be shot, and haven't approached the contradiction. I'm willing to take the risk of accepting their tired, their poor, their huddled masses, but not the risk of being shot by some American with a gun.
the government ... even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales.
It's quite simple; the state and local police are just that, state and local. They're under no more obligation to work with the Feds than a private investigator or an average citizen would, thus it's not obstruction.
If an anonymous donor offers to pay every penny necessary to build a wall, would you still oppose the effort to secure the southern border, and, if yes, why?
Maybe. If you take away the fact that's the plan of someone who says that "Mexicans are rapists" (but bragged about sexual assault himself) and it will cost us billions, it's still a wall that cuts off wildlife from their natural habitats and destroys the natural view. It still won't be effective, and what effectiveness it would have would need patrolling and repair.
134jjwilson61
>133 prosfilaes: ...it's still a wall that cuts off wildlife from their natural habitats and destroys the natural view...
Not to mention cutting off farmers and ranchers from their source of water.
Not to mention cutting off farmers and ranchers from their source of water.
135TrippB
>132 John5918:
I'm just glancing through a small US Catholic magazine…”
From what I’ve read here on LT, I have great respect for your dedication to helping people. I appreciate, but also recognize, your perspective. I previously said that the Vatican has some of the most imposing and impervious border security I’ve ever seen. Massive walls, the Swiss Guard, thorough security screening for visitors, and security personnel always on alert throughout the limited areas where we mere common people are allowed to visit.
From the way Vatican security personnel immediately react to anyone who casually dares to snap a mobile phone photo in the Sistine Chapel, I can only imagine how quickly they’d shut down someone who climbs over the massive walls and pops open a tent anywhere near the Holy See. The U.S. southern border would greatly benefit from just a fraction of the border security in place for the Vatican. Along the southern border, the illegal invaders don’t just cross over and pop a tent—many of them also make demands about how their unwelcoming hosts should compensate them for blatantly ignoring very reasonable immigration laws.
For the record, despite having a shiny new camera I was eager to use, I respected the rules and refrained from taking photos where they were prohibited by Papal decree. If only everyone could follow the rules, we would not be having this conversation.
I'm just glancing through a small US Catholic magazine…”
From what I’ve read here on LT, I have great respect for your dedication to helping people. I appreciate, but also recognize, your perspective. I previously said that the Vatican has some of the most imposing and impervious border security I’ve ever seen. Massive walls, the Swiss Guard, thorough security screening for visitors, and security personnel always on alert throughout the limited areas where we mere common people are allowed to visit.
From the way Vatican security personnel immediately react to anyone who casually dares to snap a mobile phone photo in the Sistine Chapel, I can only imagine how quickly they’d shut down someone who climbs over the massive walls and pops open a tent anywhere near the Holy See. The U.S. southern border would greatly benefit from just a fraction of the border security in place for the Vatican. Along the southern border, the illegal invaders don’t just cross over and pop a tent—many of them also make demands about how their unwelcoming hosts should compensate them for blatantly ignoring very reasonable immigration laws.
For the record, despite having a shiny new camera I was eager to use, I respected the rules and refrained from taking photos where they were prohibited by Papal decree. If only everyone could follow the rules, we would not be having this conversation.
136TrippB
>133 prosfilaes:
I see you didn't respond to the point that a legal immigrant to Russia, a research scientist, took a Russian wife and murdered her. I could mention the Japanese student who was studying in Paris who killed and ate a French student. Will coming up with more lists of atrocities committed by legal immigrants who didn't have gang tattoos change your mind?\>
Absolutely not. If there’s no indication that someone is human trash, we should not make an assumption that they are. However, if there’s reasonable suspicion that they are a threat to Americans, they should not be allowed to enter our country.
Let me be clear (I learned the value of that phrase from someone who claimed to support strong border controls), I fully agree that 90-something percent of southern border immigrants are fine people who have contributed positively to our society. I’d even be willing to accept eventual, tightly-controlled, amnesty for those who’ve lived here without violating our laws. However, we allow in far too many pieces of human trash—trash that would be easily identified as trash if we applied even basic screening methods.
I see also you're ignoring rational argument.
I think I understand exactly what you’re feeling in this regard.
Also, I see you support denying the choice of Americans not to be shot, and haven't approached the contradiction.
OK. Huge difference. Enhanced border security will have no effect on law-abiding citizens. They’re already required to cross the border only at points designated by U.S. immigration officers (a border inspection point or other official port of entry). However, most gun control proposals would punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of statistical outliers (see some post above that references outliers), and infringes upon rights that are recognized in the Bill of Rights and which have been commonly accepted throughout the existence of the U.S.. People are endowed by their Creator with the right to protect themselves, and arms are a very useful tool for that purpose. Invading a sovereign country, in violation of immigration laws, never made it into the Bill of Rights, for good reason.
… the state and local police are just that, state and local. They're under no more obligation to work with the Feds than a private investigator or an average citizen would, thus it's not obstruction.
Therefore, if Congress enacts some gun control law, you would support the 43 or so states who might declare themselves exempt from federal law? Here’s an article that provides a useful perspective on the subject of sanctuary cities: Sanctuary Cities? That's a Constitutional 'Hell No'
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sanctuary-cities-thats-constituti...
“It's still a wall that cuts off wildlife from their natural habitats and destroys the natural view.
Natural view? Have you spent any time along the border? There’s not much worth seeing. The manager of a facility adjacent to the border once requested my assistance in gaining approval for a block wall on the southern side of her building to protect her employees from all the gunfire coming from Mexico. Who wants a natural view when you have to risk being shot to see it? And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
When I’ve heard references to “The Wall,” I’ve never interpreted that to be a seamless barrier from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. I just want an effective physical barrier that funnels would-be illegal alien criminals to limited areas that can be more efficiently and effectively patrolled by our Border Patrol.
Refer back a few posts to this: IMMIGRANT ARRESTED FOR MURDER WAS PREVIOUSLY DEPORTED AT LEAST EIGHT TIMES
https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/05/immigrant-deported-eight-times-murder/
The fact that it’s so common for deported human trash to stroll back across the border—multiple times—to further victimize good Americans is unquestionable proof that our border controls are negligently ineffective. We need a wall, and much better immigration laws to protect the United States.
I see you didn't respond to the point that a legal immigrant to Russia, a research scientist, took a Russian wife and murdered her. I could mention the Japanese student who was studying in Paris who killed and ate a French student. Will coming up with more lists of atrocities committed by legal immigrants who didn't have gang tattoos change your mind?\>
Absolutely not. If there’s no indication that someone is human trash, we should not make an assumption that they are. However, if there’s reasonable suspicion that they are a threat to Americans, they should not be allowed to enter our country.
Let me be clear (I learned the value of that phrase from someone who claimed to support strong border controls), I fully agree that 90-something percent of southern border immigrants are fine people who have contributed positively to our society. I’d even be willing to accept eventual, tightly-controlled, amnesty for those who’ve lived here without violating our laws. However, we allow in far too many pieces of human trash—trash that would be easily identified as trash if we applied even basic screening methods.
I see also you're ignoring rational argument.
I think I understand exactly what you’re feeling in this regard.
Also, I see you support denying the choice of Americans not to be shot, and haven't approached the contradiction.
OK. Huge difference. Enhanced border security will have no effect on law-abiding citizens. They’re already required to cross the border only at points designated by U.S. immigration officers (a border inspection point or other official port of entry). However, most gun control proposals would punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of statistical outliers (see some post above that references outliers), and infringes upon rights that are recognized in the Bill of Rights and which have been commonly accepted throughout the existence of the U.S.. People are endowed by their Creator with the right to protect themselves, and arms are a very useful tool for that purpose. Invading a sovereign country, in violation of immigration laws, never made it into the Bill of Rights, for good reason.
… the state and local police are just that, state and local. They're under no more obligation to work with the Feds than a private investigator or an average citizen would, thus it's not obstruction.
Therefore, if Congress enacts some gun control law, you would support the 43 or so states who might declare themselves exempt from federal law? Here’s an article that provides a useful perspective on the subject of sanctuary cities: Sanctuary Cities? That's a Constitutional 'Hell No'
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sanctuary-cities-thats-constituti...
“It's still a wall that cuts off wildlife from their natural habitats and destroys the natural view.
Natural view? Have you spent any time along the border? There’s not much worth seeing. The manager of a facility adjacent to the border once requested my assistance in gaining approval for a block wall on the southern side of her building to protect her employees from all the gunfire coming from Mexico. Who wants a natural view when you have to risk being shot to see it? And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
When I’ve heard references to “The Wall,” I’ve never interpreted that to be a seamless barrier from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. I just want an effective physical barrier that funnels would-be illegal alien criminals to limited areas that can be more efficiently and effectively patrolled by our Border Patrol.
Refer back a few posts to this: IMMIGRANT ARRESTED FOR MURDER WAS PREVIOUSLY DEPORTED AT LEAST EIGHT TIMES
https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/05/immigrant-deported-eight-times-murder/
The fact that it’s so common for deported human trash to stroll back across the border—multiple times—to further victimize good Americans is unquestionable proof that our border controls are negligently ineffective. We need a wall, and much better immigration laws to protect the United States.
137TrippB
On the lighter side, this is an entertaining look at the effectiveness of walls, and the hypocrisy of critics of effective border control.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/29/walls-across-america-celebrity-edition/
https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/29/walls-across-america-celebrity-edition/
138prosfilaes
>135 TrippB: I previously said that the Vatican has some of the most imposing and impervious border security I’ve ever seen.
The Vatican is 108 acres. The White House, including grounds, is 18 acres. Camp David is 200 acres. Comparing the security of the Pope's private lands to the President's private lands are much more apt than comparing the world's tiniest nation to the world's fourth largest.
If only everyone could follow the rules, we would not be having this conversation.
Mexico holds that the wall violates a treaty about the handling of the river area to prevent flooding. I guess that just makes the wall impossible. Plus there's treaties about how you treat refugees that mean that the wall isn't going to change much there; you may consider them illegal invaders, but the treaties and law pursuant to them consider them asylum seekers.
And "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
The Vatican is 108 acres. The White House, including grounds, is 18 acres. Camp David is 200 acres. Comparing the security of the Pope's private lands to the President's private lands are much more apt than comparing the world's tiniest nation to the world's fourth largest.
If only everyone could follow the rules, we would not be having this conversation.
Mexico holds that the wall violates a treaty about the handling of the river area to prevent flooding. I guess that just makes the wall impossible. Plus there's treaties about how you treat refugees that mean that the wall isn't going to change much there; you may consider them illegal invaders, but the treaties and law pursuant to them consider them asylum seekers.
And "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
139TrippB
>138 prosfilaes:
The Vatican is 108 acres. The White House, including grounds, is 18 acres. Camp David is 200 acres. Comparing the security of the Pope's private lands to the President's private lands are much more apt than comparing the world's tiniest nation to the world's fourth largest.
To repeat myself, somewhat, have you visited the world's tiniest nation? It holds riches far beyond its limited acres--none of which have been converted to aid anyone sleeping under bridges or begging in the streets. Give me just one room of those treasures and the auction talent of Christie's, and I could care for U.S. southern border immigrants for years.
Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time. They should not have any say regarding our government until they assimilate. They might be bringing failed political views from their failed countries.
On another purely personal issue, I have travel and work to do. My absence from this discussion for the next week or so does not mean I give up. It's apparent that nothing I say will change your view, but there might be a couple of other people reading this thread. Maybe. Maybe not. It might be just you, John, and me. And that's ok, too.
I do appreciate your views, and I mean that. it helps me to understand the perspective of those people demanding open borders, and your views strengthen my resolve in opposing them.
The Vatican is 108 acres. The White House, including grounds, is 18 acres. Camp David is 200 acres. Comparing the security of the Pope's private lands to the President's private lands are much more apt than comparing the world's tiniest nation to the world's fourth largest.
To repeat myself, somewhat, have you visited the world's tiniest nation? It holds riches far beyond its limited acres--none of which have been converted to aid anyone sleeping under bridges or begging in the streets. Give me just one room of those treasures and the auction talent of Christie's, and I could care for U.S. southern border immigrants for years.
Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time. They should not have any say regarding our government until they assimilate. They might be bringing failed political views from their failed countries.
On another purely personal issue, I have travel and work to do. My absence from this discussion for the next week or so does not mean I give up. It's apparent that nothing I say will change your view, but there might be a couple of other people reading this thread. Maybe. Maybe not. It might be just you, John, and me. And that's ok, too.
I do appreciate your views, and I mean that. it helps me to understand the perspective of those people demanding open borders, and your views strengthen my resolve in opposing them.
140prosfilaes
>136 TrippB: However, if there’s reasonable suspicion that they are a threat to Americans, they should not be allowed to enter our country.
Again, you're basically assuming that the kid from Guatemala who didn't get a chance to finish high school is a threat, but the kid from Japan who did is not. We wouldn't have half this problem if we didn't create huge opportunities, some basically designed to be filled by low-paid immigrant labor, and then tried to exclude all the people who wanted to fill them. You're willing to let research scientists in, but not actually honest workers.
However, most gun control proposals would punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of statistical outliers
In the way that any law change would. And it's amazing how we go from listing single cases to dismissing them as outliers, even when the outliers now go from a handful to 10,000 a year.
If I'm murdered, I don't really give a fuck if my killer was an illegal immigrant or not. Hence I'm suspicious of anyone who's most concerned with killers who are illegal immigrants, instead of keeping Americans from getting murdered.
Invading a sovereign country, in violation of immigration laws, never made it into the Bill of Rights, for good reason.
It made it into the Declaration of Independence.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
That is, they objected to the fact that they couldn't displace the Native Americans from land owned by them. And that the King passed laws against immigration.
Therefore, if Congress enacts some gun control law, you would support the 43 or so states who might declare themselves exempt from federal law?
A sanctuary city does not declare itself exempt from federal law. You might have a point on the article, but I find the claim that the government can't order a city's officers to do something, but it can order a city to let its officers do something if they chose, to be speciously splitting hairs.
Natural view? Have you spent any time along the border? There’s not much worth seeing.
Barbarians may not understand the beauty of nature, but there's many humans who can appreciate it. That would be why we created the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, for example.
And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
Of course. Nevermind what actual biologists say, we'll take your word for it.
>139 TrippB: Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time.
That's asylum from the societies we've helped create; if we're keeping people from voting in our elections, maybe we should start with the people who don't know of the US's long history in meddling with our neighbor's internal affairs? We funded the civil war in Guatemala for thirty years, longer than it's been since it ended in 1996.
Again, you're basically assuming that the kid from Guatemala who didn't get a chance to finish high school is a threat, but the kid from Japan who did is not. We wouldn't have half this problem if we didn't create huge opportunities, some basically designed to be filled by low-paid immigrant labor, and then tried to exclude all the people who wanted to fill them. You're willing to let research scientists in, but not actually honest workers.
However, most gun control proposals would punish law-abiding citizens for the actions of statistical outliers
In the way that any law change would. And it's amazing how we go from listing single cases to dismissing them as outliers, even when the outliers now go from a handful to 10,000 a year.
If I'm murdered, I don't really give a fuck if my killer was an illegal immigrant or not. Hence I'm suspicious of anyone who's most concerned with killers who are illegal immigrants, instead of keeping Americans from getting murdered.
Invading a sovereign country, in violation of immigration laws, never made it into the Bill of Rights, for good reason.
It made it into the Declaration of Independence.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
That is, they objected to the fact that they couldn't displace the Native Americans from land owned by them. And that the King passed laws against immigration.
Therefore, if Congress enacts some gun control law, you would support the 43 or so states who might declare themselves exempt from federal law?
A sanctuary city does not declare itself exempt from federal law. You might have a point on the article, but I find the claim that the government can't order a city's officers to do something, but it can order a city to let its officers do something if they chose, to be speciously splitting hairs.
Natural view? Have you spent any time along the border? There’s not much worth seeing.
Barbarians may not understand the beauty of nature, but there's many humans who can appreciate it. That would be why we created the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, for example.
And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
Of course. Nevermind what actual biologists say, we'll take your word for it.
>139 TrippB: Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time.
That's asylum from the societies we've helped create; if we're keeping people from voting in our elections, maybe we should start with the people who don't know of the US's long history in meddling with our neighbor's internal affairs? We funded the civil war in Guatemala for thirty years, longer than it's been since it ended in 1996.
141John5918
>135 TrippB:
I'm a little surprised that you think the Vatican is relevant to the conversation we were having. In >128 TrippB: you linked to a letter which claimed, "Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do" (the "us" presumably being US citizens, and the "special interests" still unexplained). In >132 John5918: I then directed your attention to a US Catholic magazine to suggest that quite a lot of US citizens do welcome strangers from other countries. I also questioned whether or not the Catholic church in the USA is what you would consider a "special interest". The immigration policies of the Vatican State have little or nothing to do with the opinions of US Catholics.
But as >138 prosfilaes: points out, it's a little disingenuous to compare security in the Vatican State to US immigration policy. I may be misinformed, but certainly I have never had to undergo any immigration formalities to enter the Vatican State. If you are not a member of the EU (as I might not be in 60 days due to the anti-immigration zeal of some of my fellow Britons) you may have to undergo immigration formalities and present a Schengen visa as you enter the sovereign state of Italy, but as far as I know there are no immigration formalities for entering the sovereign state of the Vatican. Security within the Vatican is no more than you would expect in any world-famous religious and historical venue which includes the residence of the Head of State, and is not connected with immigration as far as I can see. As you wander around Rome you may have noticed that there are armed Italian soldiers on the streets. They are not checking people's immigration status, they are acting as a deterrent to "terrorist" activity, whether it be carried out by Italians or foreigners and regardless of their immigration status. As we have seen in so many cases, many "terrorists" are not foreigners, they are citizens who have been radicalised at home, and in the most high profile case of foreigners carrying out a "terrorist" act in the USA, the 22 perpetrators were all in the USA legally on valid visas.
I'm a little surprised that you think the Vatican is relevant to the conversation we were having. In >128 TrippB: you linked to a letter which claimed, "Most of us don't welcome illegal aliens but special interests do" (the "us" presumably being US citizens, and the "special interests" still unexplained). In >132 John5918: I then directed your attention to a US Catholic magazine to suggest that quite a lot of US citizens do welcome strangers from other countries. I also questioned whether or not the Catholic church in the USA is what you would consider a "special interest". The immigration policies of the Vatican State have little or nothing to do with the opinions of US Catholics.
But as >138 prosfilaes: points out, it's a little disingenuous to compare security in the Vatican State to US immigration policy. I may be misinformed, but certainly I have never had to undergo any immigration formalities to enter the Vatican State. If you are not a member of the EU (as I might not be in 60 days due to the anti-immigration zeal of some of my fellow Britons) you may have to undergo immigration formalities and present a Schengen visa as you enter the sovereign state of Italy, but as far as I know there are no immigration formalities for entering the sovereign state of the Vatican. Security within the Vatican is no more than you would expect in any world-famous religious and historical venue which includes the residence of the Head of State, and is not connected with immigration as far as I can see. As you wander around Rome you may have noticed that there are armed Italian soldiers on the streets. They are not checking people's immigration status, they are acting as a deterrent to "terrorist" activity, whether it be carried out by Italians or foreigners and regardless of their immigration status. As we have seen in so many cases, many "terrorists" are not foreigners, they are citizens who have been radicalised at home, and in the most high profile case of foreigners carrying out a "terrorist" act in the USA, the 22 perpetrators were all in the USA legally on valid visas.
142John5918
>136 TrippB: most gun control proposals would punish law-abiding citizens
Where does this narrative come from that gun control proposals would "punish" anybody? Are car drivers "punished" because they are forced to take a driving test, hold a valid driving licence, be above a certain age, pay for insurance, not drive when under the influence of drink or drugs, stick to speed limits, stop at red traffic lights, drive on the right-hand side of the road, etc? These are basic safety measures, recognising the right of others not to be run down by irresponsible drivers.
Where is the "punishment" in being required to have a background check before purchasing a lethal weapon, or having a short waiting period, or any of the other very modest gun control proposals which have been suggested?
See Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) - No Firearms For Anyone | The Thin Blue Line
Where does this narrative come from that gun control proposals would "punish" anybody? Are car drivers "punished" because they are forced to take a driving test, hold a valid driving licence, be above a certain age, pay for insurance, not drive when under the influence of drink or drugs, stick to speed limits, stop at red traffic lights, drive on the right-hand side of the road, etc? These are basic safety measures, recognising the right of others not to be run down by irresponsible drivers.
Where is the "punishment" in being required to have a background check before purchasing a lethal weapon, or having a short waiting period, or any of the other very modest gun control proposals which have been suggested?
See Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) - No Firearms For Anyone | The Thin Blue Line
143John5918
Migrants force-fed at Texas detention centre (BBC)
Six migrants on hunger strike at an immigration detention centre in Texas are being force-fed. Immigration officials are using plastic nasal tubes to feed the men, which family members say are causing severe nosebleeds and vomiting...
Six migrants on hunger strike at an immigration detention centre in Texas are being force-fed. Immigration officials are using plastic nasal tubes to feed the men, which family members say are causing severe nosebleeds and vomiting...
145proximity1
This,
>112 TrippB: "No more. The violent lawlessness and corruption is just too pervasive. I don’t want that unfettered evil to infect the U.S. Americans in their peaceful little towns who have no idea of the cruelty that is common to the Mexican cartels that are the real rulers of Mexico. The naïve who support open borders need to be protected, in part, because they threaten us all. Bless their little hearts."
and these,
>117 TrippB: "When your efforts are demonstrably effective, I'll be willing to try your methods within the U.S. Until then, in my experience of traveling throughout the world, I'd prefer to address local problems, such as illegal immigration, locally."
"My perspective is focused on the U.S. Having experienced the evils of the realities of humanity, I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats--perhaps until you prove how you can eliminate evil and cruelty in the places where its more prevalent, and show me how it will be effective in the U.S. I'm eager to see success in that area. Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US."
>123 TrippB: "And there we’ve hit the primary difference between our views. I have no qualms about saying that I’m affected more when a crime happens close to the people I personally know and care about. It is sad when a crime occurs far away, but a crime in Mexico is not a failure of U.S. laws or law enforcement—it’s Mexico’s failure. It should be addressed by Mexicans. Meanwhile, it’s our responsibility to enforce our laws which are intended to protect our society."
>128 TrippB: "Um….ok. I may not have been clear, so I’ll try to say it again. If an MS-13 piece of human trash murders someone in El Salvador, that is a bad thing—particularly if they’ve murdered good people. I’m fully with you there. If an MS-13 gangbanger murders a “good” resident of the United States, that’s worse, as it also demonstrates a failure of immigration policy. A nation must protect it’s own citizens."
>131 TrippB: "Many thousands of victims of violent illegal criminal aliens did not have a choice. These innocent Americans were just going about their normal routines when illegal human trash raped, robbed, assaulted, or killed them. The U.S. failed to protect them because the government allowed human trash to come across the border with impunity, and even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales."
>137 TrippB:
Brilliant! LOL!
>138 prosfilaes: "Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time. They should not have any say regarding our government until they assimilate. They might be bringing failed political views from their failed countries."
--- state my sentiments to a "T" and-- forgive the apparent lack of modesty in my saying it-- your statement is fucking brilliant in its clarity and cogency.
For others, of course, you've just "outed yourself" as a "despicable racist."
I fear for both the United States' and Britain's future as, in one place, like the other, an amazingly, even suicidally, naive idiocy about the supposedly poor and down-trodden has become the dominant point of view-- and I write that as someone who is homeless and lives on the street. And I'm in this--and all other countries in which I've resided--legally.
My answer to those who flee war-torn or otherwise-failed-states is simple:
Go back where you were--or, if you're still there, stay there and do this:
..."mutually pledge to each other (y)our Lives, (y)our Fortunes, and (y)our sacred Honor" ...
to the recovery--or, if you've never known it there, then, the establishment-- of enlightened civil government as did a cohort of Americans, once upon a time.
>112 TrippB: "No more. The violent lawlessness and corruption is just too pervasive. I don’t want that unfettered evil to infect the U.S. Americans in their peaceful little towns who have no idea of the cruelty that is common to the Mexican cartels that are the real rulers of Mexico. The naïve who support open borders need to be protected, in part, because they threaten us all. Bless their little hearts."
and these,
>117 TrippB: "When your efforts are demonstrably effective, I'll be willing to try your methods within the U.S. Until then, in my experience of traveling throughout the world, I'd prefer to address local problems, such as illegal immigration, locally."
"My perspective is focused on the U.S. Having experienced the evils of the realities of humanity, I can't help but to be devoted to the priority of trying to keep the U.S. safe from outside threats--perhaps until you prove how you can eliminate evil and cruelty in the places where its more prevalent, and show me how it will be effective in the U.S. I'm eager to see success in that area. Until then, I want strong, effective, borders for the US."
>123 TrippB: "And there we’ve hit the primary difference between our views. I have no qualms about saying that I’m affected more when a crime happens close to the people I personally know and care about. It is sad when a crime occurs far away, but a crime in Mexico is not a failure of U.S. laws or law enforcement—it’s Mexico’s failure. It should be addressed by Mexicans. Meanwhile, it’s our responsibility to enforce our laws which are intended to protect our society."
>128 TrippB: "Um….ok. I may not have been clear, so I’ll try to say it again. If an MS-13 piece of human trash murders someone in El Salvador, that is a bad thing—particularly if they’ve murdered good people. I’m fully with you there. If an MS-13 gangbanger murders a “good” resident of the United States, that’s worse, as it also demonstrates a failure of immigration policy. A nation must protect it’s own citizens."
>131 TrippB: "Many thousands of victims of violent illegal criminal aliens did not have a choice. These innocent Americans were just going about their normal routines when illegal human trash raped, robbed, assaulted, or killed them. The U.S. failed to protect them because the government allowed human trash to come across the border with impunity, and even protected many of them in sanctuary (obstruction of justice) locales."
>137 TrippB:
Brilliant! LOL!
>138 prosfilaes: "Asylum seekers....is that asylum from the societies they've helped to create? I sure don't want them voting in our elections for a long, long, time. They should not have any say regarding our government until they assimilate. They might be bringing failed political views from their failed countries."
--- state my sentiments to a "T" and-- forgive the apparent lack of modesty in my saying it-- your statement is fucking brilliant in its clarity and cogency.
For others, of course, you've just "outed yourself" as a "despicable racist."
I fear for both the United States' and Britain's future as, in one place, like the other, an amazingly, even suicidally, naive idiocy about the supposedly poor and down-trodden has become the dominant point of view-- and I write that as someone who is homeless and lives on the street. And I'm in this--and all other countries in which I've resided--legally.
My answer to those who flee war-torn or otherwise-failed-states is simple:
Go back where you were--or, if you're still there, stay there and do this:
..."mutually pledge to each other (y)our Lives, (y)our Fortunes, and (y)our sacred Honor" ...
to the recovery--or, if you've never known it there, then, the establishment-- of enlightened civil government as did a cohort of Americans, once upon a time.
146margd
@ACLU | 7:07 PM - 1 Feb 2019:
BREAKING: Tonight the Trump administration filed documents that don’t dispute the recent report that there may have been thousands more separated kids. They’re arguing it would take too long to figure out where those kids are because they have no tracking system.
This response is a shocking concession that the government can’t easily find thousands of children it ripped from parents, and doesn’t even think it’s worth the time to locate each of them. We will be back in court on February 21.
ETA______________________________________________
Kyle Griffin (MSNBC) @kylegriffin1 | 1:00 PM - 4 Feb 2019:
Inbox: On February 12, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a full committee hearing to conduct oversight of the Trump Admin's family separation policy, "finally holding the Admin accountable for the inhumane and callous policy that separated children from their parents."
BREAKING: Tonight the Trump administration filed documents that don’t dispute the recent report that there may have been thousands more separated kids. They’re arguing it would take too long to figure out where those kids are because they have no tracking system.
This response is a shocking concession that the government can’t easily find thousands of children it ripped from parents, and doesn’t even think it’s worth the time to locate each of them. We will be back in court on February 21.
ETA______________________________________________
Kyle Griffin (MSNBC) @kylegriffin1 | 1:00 PM - 4 Feb 2019:
Inbox: On February 12, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a full committee hearing to conduct oversight of the Trump Admin's family separation policy, "finally holding the Admin accountable for the inhumane and callous policy that separated children from their parents."
147margd
Purge of undocumented workers by the president’s company spreads to at least 5 Trump golf courses
Joshua Partlow and David A. Fahrenthold | February 4, 2019
President Trump’s company has fired at least 18 undocumented workers from five golf courses in New York and New Jersey in the past two months, part of a purge set in motion after a series of reports about the clubs’ employment of workers without legal status...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/purge-of-undocumented-workers-by-the-pre...
Joshua Partlow and David A. Fahrenthold | February 4, 2019
President Trump’s company has fired at least 18 undocumented workers from five golf courses in New York and New Jersey in the past two months, part of a purge set in motion after a series of reports about the clubs’ employment of workers without legal status...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/purge-of-undocumented-workers-by-the-pre...
148TrippB
>140 prosfilaes:
“Again, you're basically assuming that the kid from Guatemala who didn't get a chance to finish high school is a threat, but the kid from Japan who did is not……..You're willing to let research scientists in, but not actually honest workers.
I’m not assuming anything. If you read my posts, I’ve said I want threats to American society to be denied entry, and, if there’s a choice, I’d prefer to allow in immigrants who will immediately begin contributing positively. Origin, race, creed, color, religion, Guatemala, Japan, Lichtenstein—I don’t care. Did you really intend to imply that educated immigrants, such as research scientists, are not honest workers? I also said I would welcome a guest worker program to allow in honest workers of all types, as long as it also prevents them from exploiting our generous welfare programs.
Barbarians may not understand the beauty of nature, but there's many humans who can appreciate it. That would be why we created the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, for example.
I fully agree. I love the rough beauty of most of the border, but, if you’re standing at the border and don’t like the beauty of a barrier to keep out criminals and contraband, simply turn around—Look! Same view of the beauty of nature!
Nevermind what actual biologists say, we'll take your word for it.
Have you read what they say? The authors are intelligent biologists—that may, could, be why they strategically placed mays and coulds in their predictions. Conversely, a wall may, could, create stronger populations of wildlife. When suburbs were rapidly encroaching into the natural ranges of coyotes and other wildlife, many biologists decried the impending doom of species in those areas. Not so many years later, many of those species have adapted very well to live within suburbia. Regardless, I’ll cut to the chase here: I firmly believe effective border controls will save American lives. Border law enforcement and other security experts agree. If sections of a wall dissect the gene pool of the Sonoran pronghorn and negatively effects their long-term viability, so be it. I think if we talk with the parents of any of the innocent victims of previously deported murderous illegal aliens, they’d eagerly wipe out every pronghorn on the planet if it would bring their children back.
Also, as I said before (seems like I keep having to point out what I’ve said before), I’ve never envisioned the wall to be a sea-to-sea seamless barrier. If there are measures we can take to keep out illegal, criminal, aliens and also protect wildlife, I’m all for a modified wall.
A few interesting perspectives regarding the demands of immigrants who have no right to demand anything:
Central American migrant caravan reaches Mexico City, demands buses to U.S.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/caravan-migrants-trump-1.4897562
Italy: 60% of ‘retired’ migrants receive pensions while they didn’t work a single day
https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/12/italy-60-of-retired-migrants-receive-pensions-...
I’m conflicted on this next one, as I know the accused murderer is human trash, but he also apparently did the constituents of AOC’s district a favor. Interesting that she wants to abolish ICE, even though they’ve arrested more than a hundred criminals similar to this murderer in her district just between January 14-18. Maybe it’s because they didn’t prevent the murder of one of her likely supporters.
WATCH: Brutal MS-13 Murder On NYC Subway In Ocasio-Cortez's District Goes Viral. She's Called For The Abolition Of ICE
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43061/watch-brutal-ms-13-murder-nyc-subway-ocasio...
“Again, you're basically assuming that the kid from Guatemala who didn't get a chance to finish high school is a threat, but the kid from Japan who did is not……..You're willing to let research scientists in, but not actually honest workers.
I’m not assuming anything. If you read my posts, I’ve said I want threats to American society to be denied entry, and, if there’s a choice, I’d prefer to allow in immigrants who will immediately begin contributing positively. Origin, race, creed, color, religion, Guatemala, Japan, Lichtenstein—I don’t care. Did you really intend to imply that educated immigrants, such as research scientists, are not honest workers? I also said I would welcome a guest worker program to allow in honest workers of all types, as long as it also prevents them from exploiting our generous welfare programs.
Barbarians may not understand the beauty of nature, but there's many humans who can appreciate it. That would be why we created the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, for example.
I fully agree. I love the rough beauty of most of the border, but, if you’re standing at the border and don’t like the beauty of a barrier to keep out criminals and contraband, simply turn around—Look! Same view of the beauty of nature!
Nevermind what actual biologists say, we'll take your word for it.
Have you read what they say? The authors are intelligent biologists—that may, could, be why they strategically placed mays and coulds in their predictions. Conversely, a wall may, could, create stronger populations of wildlife. When suburbs were rapidly encroaching into the natural ranges of coyotes and other wildlife, many biologists decried the impending doom of species in those areas. Not so many years later, many of those species have adapted very well to live within suburbia. Regardless, I’ll cut to the chase here: I firmly believe effective border controls will save American lives. Border law enforcement and other security experts agree. If sections of a wall dissect the gene pool of the Sonoran pronghorn and negatively effects their long-term viability, so be it. I think if we talk with the parents of any of the innocent victims of previously deported murderous illegal aliens, they’d eagerly wipe out every pronghorn on the planet if it would bring their children back.
Also, as I said before (seems like I keep having to point out what I’ve said before), I’ve never envisioned the wall to be a sea-to-sea seamless barrier. If there are measures we can take to keep out illegal, criminal, aliens and also protect wildlife, I’m all for a modified wall.
A few interesting perspectives regarding the demands of immigrants who have no right to demand anything:
Central American migrant caravan reaches Mexico City, demands buses to U.S.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/caravan-migrants-trump-1.4897562
Italy: 60% of ‘retired’ migrants receive pensions while they didn’t work a single day
https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/12/italy-60-of-retired-migrants-receive-pensions-...
I’m conflicted on this next one, as I know the accused murderer is human trash, but he also apparently did the constituents of AOC’s district a favor. Interesting that she wants to abolish ICE, even though they’ve arrested more than a hundred criminals similar to this murderer in her district just between January 14-18. Maybe it’s because they didn’t prevent the murder of one of her likely supporters.
WATCH: Brutal MS-13 Murder On NYC Subway In Ocasio-Cortez's District Goes Viral. She's Called For The Abolition Of ICE
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43061/watch-brutal-ms-13-murder-nyc-subway-ocasio...
149TrippB
>140 prosfilaes:
That's asylum from the societies we've helped create;
Hindsight regarding foreign policy does show that mistakes have been made, and we have stuck our fingers in places they shouldn’t have gone. Still, I believe the vast majority of our “meddling” was done with the best interests of the U.S. as a priority. When our enemies are all over our neighbors, seeking influence and pursuing their own interests, should we sit on the sidelines and allow them to work their evil unchecked and unbalanced?
If I visit my neighbor and tell him that the massive dead tree on the edge of his property is eventually going to fall, and it will likely hit either his house or mine, is that meddling? Sure, my primary motivation is to protect my own house, but it could also help him. And, if I’m exceptionally generous (like the U.S.), and give him more than enough cash to have the tree professionally removed, but he decides to use that cash to buy blingy new rims for his car, and then that tree falls and destroys his house, am I to blame? Based on much of the condemnation I’ve seen regarding U.S. foreign influence, that seems to be the reasoning of those critical of our “meddling.”
We have not been the only foreign influence in those historically troubled areas, and to discount the damage done by other interests promoting communism and anti-American sentiment is either intentionally deceitful or ignorant. Was the CIA or KGB more influential in Latin America during the Cold War? I don’t know, and don’t really care. I’m focused on today’s threats to the U.S., and migrant caravans seeking to bypass border controls intended to protect Americans are definitely a threat.
That's asylum from the societies we've helped create;
Hindsight regarding foreign policy does show that mistakes have been made, and we have stuck our fingers in places they shouldn’t have gone. Still, I believe the vast majority of our “meddling” was done with the best interests of the U.S. as a priority. When our enemies are all over our neighbors, seeking influence and pursuing their own interests, should we sit on the sidelines and allow them to work their evil unchecked and unbalanced?
If I visit my neighbor and tell him that the massive dead tree on the edge of his property is eventually going to fall, and it will likely hit either his house or mine, is that meddling? Sure, my primary motivation is to protect my own house, but it could also help him. And, if I’m exceptionally generous (like the U.S.), and give him more than enough cash to have the tree professionally removed, but he decides to use that cash to buy blingy new rims for his car, and then that tree falls and destroys his house, am I to blame? Based on much of the condemnation I’ve seen regarding U.S. foreign influence, that seems to be the reasoning of those critical of our “meddling.”
We have not been the only foreign influence in those historically troubled areas, and to discount the damage done by other interests promoting communism and anti-American sentiment is either intentionally deceitful or ignorant. Was the CIA or KGB more influential in Latin America during the Cold War? I don’t know, and don’t really care. I’m focused on today’s threats to the U.S., and migrant caravans seeking to bypass border controls intended to protect Americans are definitely a threat.
150TrippB
>141 John5918: ; >142 John5918:
”… in the most high profile case of foreigners carrying out a "terrorist" act in the USA, the 22 perpetrators were all in the USA legally on valid visas.”
I don't know why you put terrorist in quotes, but that is true. Still, at least they had visas. We can’t predict or detect every piece of human trash, but an approved visa means that at least a few basic checks have been made. The illegal, criminal, invading, aliens sneaking across the U.S. border have not been checked. They’re criminals—every one, and many have been validated to be violent, previously deported once or eight times, and yet they still come back. Multiple times. That (again) is failed immigration policy.
“… but as far as I know there are no immigration formalities for entering the sovereign state of the Vatican. Security within the Vatican is no more than you would expect in any world-famous religious and historical venue which includes the residence of the Head of State, and is not connected with immigration as far as I can see.
You highlight an important point. Security within the Vatican is focused on day-to-day security instead of immigration. That is reasonable, as the Vatican security experts have evaluated likely risks, and taken very reasonable precautions against threats such as terrorism. Immigration is not an issue, as Vatican security forces are quite effectively in place to ensure that no unauthorized people from the outside will be staying within those massive Vatican walls after closing time. If you try to stay past 6:00 pm, I don’t know if the Swiss Guard or regular Vatican security escorts you out, but, one way or another, I don’t think a hopeful immigrant would be welcome. Vatican Law n. CXXXI makes it clear that they’ll never be granted citizenship. They just aren’t worthy. The U.S. could certainly benefit from a few lessons from Vatican border security, as there is no illegal alien problem in the Vatican—it simply would not be tolerated.
Where is the "punishment" in being required to have a background check before purchasing a lethal weapon, or having a short waiting period, or any of the other very modest gun control proposals which have been suggested?
There’s a significant difference between operating a motor vehicle on publicly-funded roadways, and exercising an inalienable right granted by the Creator to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Regarding one point—a background check is already required for anyone purchasing a firearm from a U.S. dealer. Now to the others. If a rejected suitor sends his/her ex very clear indications that the rejected suitor is going to harm them, I highly recommend that the threatened person get a gun—quickly—and learn to use it. A waiting period might be enough time for the reject to kill a victim unable to defend themselves. Even in the very best scenario, there’s probably at least a four minute response time for local law enforcement to arrive to protect them. Police officers will tell you without hesitation that they respond after the incident is reported—they are often unable to arrive before the violence reported has claimed its victims (if you want, I can link multiple news stories which demonstrate this reality). Waiting periods only affect those who follow the law. When you need protection from a predator quickly, waiting periods are deadly for the prey.
The other problem with the “very modest gun control proposals” is that the people behind these gun control proposals have already shown their true intentions. Several gun control groups (who all love to highlight gun violence while soliciting donations, to the point that I think they’d be very disappointed if their proposals were ever actually implemented) have openly described their intended strategy of chip, chip, chipping away at gun rights until none are left. With every success, they have made it clear that they intend to keep chipping away until all guns are banned. That’s one reason why I support the NRA when it actively defends every current gun right, because they (we, as I’m also the NRA) know that gun-grabbers will never be satisfied until none of us have the means to defend ourselves.
The Mr. Bean video you referenced is more accurate than you may have thought. From that perspective, here’s an informative and perhaps enlightening video espousing goals similar to the Brady Campaign:
Burglars/Gun Control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOfEi6Qs--s
Still, this is a topic focused on immigration policy. No need to divert it to inalienable self-defense rights. There are multiple other threads here for that.
”… in the most high profile case of foreigners carrying out a "terrorist" act in the USA, the 22 perpetrators were all in the USA legally on valid visas.”
I don't know why you put terrorist in quotes, but that is true. Still, at least they had visas. We can’t predict or detect every piece of human trash, but an approved visa means that at least a few basic checks have been made. The illegal, criminal, invading, aliens sneaking across the U.S. border have not been checked. They’re criminals—every one, and many have been validated to be violent, previously deported once or eight times, and yet they still come back. Multiple times. That (again) is failed immigration policy.
“… but as far as I know there are no immigration formalities for entering the sovereign state of the Vatican. Security within the Vatican is no more than you would expect in any world-famous religious and historical venue which includes the residence of the Head of State, and is not connected with immigration as far as I can see.
You highlight an important point. Security within the Vatican is focused on day-to-day security instead of immigration. That is reasonable, as the Vatican security experts have evaluated likely risks, and taken very reasonable precautions against threats such as terrorism. Immigration is not an issue, as Vatican security forces are quite effectively in place to ensure that no unauthorized people from the outside will be staying within those massive Vatican walls after closing time. If you try to stay past 6:00 pm, I don’t know if the Swiss Guard or regular Vatican security escorts you out, but, one way or another, I don’t think a hopeful immigrant would be welcome. Vatican Law n. CXXXI makes it clear that they’ll never be granted citizenship. They just aren’t worthy. The U.S. could certainly benefit from a few lessons from Vatican border security, as there is no illegal alien problem in the Vatican—it simply would not be tolerated.
Where is the "punishment" in being required to have a background check before purchasing a lethal weapon, or having a short waiting period, or any of the other very modest gun control proposals which have been suggested?
There’s a significant difference between operating a motor vehicle on publicly-funded roadways, and exercising an inalienable right granted by the Creator to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Regarding one point—a background check is already required for anyone purchasing a firearm from a U.S. dealer. Now to the others. If a rejected suitor sends his/her ex very clear indications that the rejected suitor is going to harm them, I highly recommend that the threatened person get a gun—quickly—and learn to use it. A waiting period might be enough time for the reject to kill a victim unable to defend themselves. Even in the very best scenario, there’s probably at least a four minute response time for local law enforcement to arrive to protect them. Police officers will tell you without hesitation that they respond after the incident is reported—they are often unable to arrive before the violence reported has claimed its victims (if you want, I can link multiple news stories which demonstrate this reality). Waiting periods only affect those who follow the law. When you need protection from a predator quickly, waiting periods are deadly for the prey.
The other problem with the “very modest gun control proposals” is that the people behind these gun control proposals have already shown their true intentions. Several gun control groups (who all love to highlight gun violence while soliciting donations, to the point that I think they’d be very disappointed if their proposals were ever actually implemented) have openly described their intended strategy of chip, chip, chipping away at gun rights until none are left. With every success, they have made it clear that they intend to keep chipping away until all guns are banned. That’s one reason why I support the NRA when it actively defends every current gun right, because they (we, as I’m also the NRA) know that gun-grabbers will never be satisfied until none of us have the means to defend ourselves.
The Mr. Bean video you referenced is more accurate than you may have thought. From that perspective, here’s an informative and perhaps enlightening video espousing goals similar to the Brady Campaign:
Burglars/Gun Control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOfEi6Qs--s
Still, this is a topic focused on immigration policy. No need to divert it to inalienable self-defense rights. There are multiple other threads here for that.
151TrippB
>145 proximity1:
Thank you for the kind words. I really don't care if someone without basis or credibility calls me a despicable racist. For issues within the U.S., I fully admit being biased toward Americans, regardless of race, and I'm not the least bit offended when people of other sovereign nations defend opinions for what happens in their countries. Any country that allows foreigners to invade without restriction or to dictate their policies is not a country....or won't be one for long.
Thank you for the kind words. I really don't care if someone without basis or credibility calls me a despicable racist. For issues within the U.S., I fully admit being biased toward Americans, regardless of race, and I'm not the least bit offended when people of other sovereign nations defend opinions for what happens in their countries. Any country that allows foreigners to invade without restriction or to dictate their policies is not a country....or won't be one for long.
152John5918
>150 TrippB: exercising an inalienable right granted by the Creator
Or perhaps more accurately, a right granted by the Constitution, and even that right is interpreted differently by many experts, albeit not yet by the Supreme Court. I think you're overreaching if you claim that God granted US citizens the right to carry firearms.
people behind these gun control proposals have already shown their true intentions. Several gun control groups (who all love to highlight gun violence while soliciting donations
And the NRA is not equally if not more partisan, showing their true intentions and soliciting donations?
But as you say, off topic. There are gun control threads.
Edited to add: no unauthorized people from the outside will be staying within those massive Vatican walls after closing time
I may be wrong, but as far as I know the Vatican State extends beyond the walls which close off parts of the Vatican. Even at night you can wander into the sovereign territory of the Vatican State without any immigration or security checks, as far as I know.
Or perhaps more accurately, a right granted by the Constitution, and even that right is interpreted differently by many experts, albeit not yet by the Supreme Court. I think you're overreaching if you claim that God granted US citizens the right to carry firearms.
people behind these gun control proposals have already shown their true intentions. Several gun control groups (who all love to highlight gun violence while soliciting donations
And the NRA is not equally if not more partisan, showing their true intentions and soliciting donations?
But as you say, off topic. There are gun control threads.
Edited to add: no unauthorized people from the outside will be staying within those massive Vatican walls after closing time
I may be wrong, but as far as I know the Vatican State extends beyond the walls which close off parts of the Vatican. Even at night you can wander into the sovereign territory of the Vatican State without any immigration or security checks, as far as I know.
153prosfilaes
>148 TrippB: The authors are intelligent biologists—that may, could, be why they strategically placed mays and coulds in their predictions.
>136 TrippB: And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
In other words, you are not an intelligent biologist and aren't speaking with the care that someone educated in the subject would use. That doesn't give your statement more weight.
>148 TrippB: I’ve never envisioned the wall to be a sea-to-sea seamless barrier.
If you want a magic barrier, I'll support it, provided it's actually magic. Otherwise, that's not helping anything. Migrants are heading into the holes in the current barrier, even when they're crossing in Arizonian deserts in extreme heat that keeps even serious hikers out. If there are holes large enough to be interesting, migrants are going to be heading through them. If there aren't holes large enough for migrants to be heading through them, the distinction between that and a seamless barrier isn't interesting for me. The physical holes in our border are large in a physical sense, but most of them are isolated areas that those crossing them have to travel hundreds or thousands of miles to reach.
>149 TrippB: Hindsight regarding foreign policy does show that mistakes have been made, and we have stuck our fingers in places they shouldn’t have gone. Still, I believe the vast majority of our “meddling” was done with the best interests of the U.S. as a priority.
Not with "good people are spared death or other victimization" as a priority, huh?
allow them to work their evil unchecked and unbalanced?
Shouldn't Soviets work with the best interests of the Soviet Union as a priority? You can't deny moral obligation on your part and attribute it to your enemies.
We have not been the only foreign influence in those historically troubled areas, and to discount the damage done by other interests promoting communism and anti-American sentiment is either intentionally deceitful or ignorant.
Given that you're the one who wanted to ignore all foreign influence in the area and blame them in total for their societies, that's not exactly an argument.
>150 TrippB: When you need protection from a predator quickly, waiting periods are deadly for the prey.
In a life-or-death scenario between two people with guns, I'm betting on the person who had a gun and practiced with it and who lacks the moral and psychological limitations on killing someone.
Oh, and if you do shoot the person threatening you, you can spend decades in jail. How about "In the cases of women who claim they feared for their lives when confronted with violent intimate abusers, prosecutors say the Stand Your Ground law shouldn’t apply."? That's a Stand Your Ground law written by the NRA.
>150 TrippB: That’s one reason why I support the NRA when it actively defends every current gun right,
The NRA is silent when gun owners are shot by police for holding guns, as long as those gun owners are black. Philando Castile had a licensed gun, and was shot for carrying it, which the NRA said was okay because he used marijuana. (Which they walked back, but never did they stand behind a man shot for the sole reason of having a legal gun.)
>150 TrippB: Still, this is a topic focused on immigration policy.
For which you seem to think a long list of crimes committed by illegal immigrants matters, but not those committed with guns or even immigrants. Policy is all about costs and benefits, and again, I don't care if I'm killed by an illegal immigrant or not. If you're worried about crime, the wall seems like a lousy tool.
>136 TrippB: And cuts off wildlife? Weak. Any animals along the border can adapt quite easily to staying on either side of a border wall.
In other words, you are not an intelligent biologist and aren't speaking with the care that someone educated in the subject would use. That doesn't give your statement more weight.
>148 TrippB: I’ve never envisioned the wall to be a sea-to-sea seamless barrier.
If you want a magic barrier, I'll support it, provided it's actually magic. Otherwise, that's not helping anything. Migrants are heading into the holes in the current barrier, even when they're crossing in Arizonian deserts in extreme heat that keeps even serious hikers out. If there are holes large enough to be interesting, migrants are going to be heading through them. If there aren't holes large enough for migrants to be heading through them, the distinction between that and a seamless barrier isn't interesting for me. The physical holes in our border are large in a physical sense, but most of them are isolated areas that those crossing them have to travel hundreds or thousands of miles to reach.
>149 TrippB: Hindsight regarding foreign policy does show that mistakes have been made, and we have stuck our fingers in places they shouldn’t have gone. Still, I believe the vast majority of our “meddling” was done with the best interests of the U.S. as a priority.
Not with "good people are spared death or other victimization" as a priority, huh?
allow them to work their evil unchecked and unbalanced?
Shouldn't Soviets work with the best interests of the Soviet Union as a priority? You can't deny moral obligation on your part and attribute it to your enemies.
We have not been the only foreign influence in those historically troubled areas, and to discount the damage done by other interests promoting communism and anti-American sentiment is either intentionally deceitful or ignorant.
Given that you're the one who wanted to ignore all foreign influence in the area and blame them in total for their societies, that's not exactly an argument.
>150 TrippB: When you need protection from a predator quickly, waiting periods are deadly for the prey.
In a life-or-death scenario between two people with guns, I'm betting on the person who had a gun and practiced with it and who lacks the moral and psychological limitations on killing someone.
Oh, and if you do shoot the person threatening you, you can spend decades in jail. How about "In the cases of women who claim they feared for their lives when confronted with violent intimate abusers, prosecutors say the Stand Your Ground law shouldn’t apply."? That's a Stand Your Ground law written by the NRA.
>150 TrippB: That’s one reason why I support the NRA when it actively defends every current gun right,
The NRA is silent when gun owners are shot by police for holding guns, as long as those gun owners are black. Philando Castile had a licensed gun, and was shot for carrying it, which the NRA said was okay because he used marijuana. (Which they walked back, but never did they stand behind a man shot for the sole reason of having a legal gun.)
>150 TrippB: Still, this is a topic focused on immigration policy.
For which you seem to think a long list of crimes committed by illegal immigrants matters, but not those committed with guns or even immigrants. Policy is all about costs and benefits, and again, I don't care if I'm killed by an illegal immigrant or not. If you're worried about crime, the wall seems like a lousy tool.
154proximity1
>151 TrippB:
"I really don't care if someone without basis or credibility calls me a despicable racist."
Just so. Your comment gives me an excuse, though a little strained, and, well, any will do, to post this--which I wanted to do somewhere anyway--
"I really don't care if someone without basis or credibility calls me a despicable racist."
Just so. Your comment gives me an excuse, though a little strained, and, well, any will do, to post this--which I wanted to do somewhere anyway--
I don't give a hoot
About what people have to say
I'm laughing as I'm analyzed
“Lunatics anonymous”
That's where I belong
Sure 'cuz I am one
Til my strength is gone
Yeah this beat goes on.
...
Nothing matters but the weekend,
From a “Tuesday-point-of-view,”
Like a kettle in the kitchen,
I feel the steam begin to brew.
Switchin’ to ‘glide,’
Switchin’ to ‘glide.’
Switchin’ to ‘glide,’
Switchin’ to ‘glide.’
Energy can be directed,
I’m turning it ‘up,’
I’m turning it ‘down’
Even love can be affected,
Harmony’s the sweetest sound.
Switchin’ to ‘glide,’
Switchin’ to ‘glide.’
Switchin’ to ‘glide,’
Switchin’ to ‘glide.’
…
________________
"The Beat Goes On / Switchin' To Glide" by THE KINGS from the 1980 LP "The Kings Are Here"
1552wonderY
New Mexico governor pulls National Guard troops from border
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced the partial withdrawal shortly before Trump's State of the Union address. Her Republican predecessor deployed National Guard troops to the border in April 2018 at Trump's suggestion, and 118 remained there before Tuesday's reversal.
"New Mexico will not take part in the president's charade of border fear-mongering by misusing our diligent National Guard troops," Lujan Grisham said in a statement.
At the same time, the governor said a small contingent — around a dozen guardsmen — will remain in the southwestern corner of the state to assist with humanitarian needs in a remote corridor for cross-border immigration. She also mobilized state police to assist local law enforcement.
...
Lujan Grisham traveled last month to New Mexico's southern edge for briefings from the National Guard and Customs and Border Protection, explaining that she wanted to see the situation for herself.
On Tuesday, she also directed 25 troops from other states — Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Wisconsin — to withdraw from the New Mexico border.
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced the partial withdrawal shortly before Trump's State of the Union address. Her Republican predecessor deployed National Guard troops to the border in April 2018 at Trump's suggestion, and 118 remained there before Tuesday's reversal.
"New Mexico will not take part in the president's charade of border fear-mongering by misusing our diligent National Guard troops," Lujan Grisham said in a statement.
At the same time, the governor said a small contingent — around a dozen guardsmen — will remain in the southwestern corner of the state to assist with humanitarian needs in a remote corridor for cross-border immigration. She also mobilized state police to assist local law enforcement.
...
Lujan Grisham traveled last month to New Mexico's southern edge for briefings from the National Guard and Customs and Border Protection, explaining that she wanted to see the situation for herself.
On Tuesday, she also directed 25 troops from other states — Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Wisconsin — to withdraw from the New Mexico border.
This topic was continued by Crafting Immigration Policy in America 3.
