Egregious Violations at Immigrant Detention Facilities

[Nosmo King]

They are not given the opportunity to come here legally. They are being denied access to our arcane, Byzantine system.

No one has a right to immigrate to the country they want to, when they want to.

If we fixed illegal immigration, we could probably increase legal immigration.

Until then, sorry, not sorry.

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

 

[bripat9643]

What exactly do you mean by "imstigational" vs "aspirational" politics? Providing examples would be helpful.

Instigational politics gins up fear, suspicion and division. "They are bringing murderers, rapists, drug dealers and some, I assume, are good people." Remarks designed to instigate fear without fact, hatred without proof.

Aspirational politics reminds us that we should reach for the best within us to accomplish great things and divine solutions that serve humanity fairly.

OK. Any examples of "aspirational" politics?

Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Wrong. Government is not "ourselves." Government is a gang of men separate and distinct from the government, and that is hostile to the interests of all citizens aside from its chosen interest groups. You are delusional if you believe the voters have any real control, especially after the 2016 election.

Government of, by and for the people. Your cynicism does not make Lincoln wrong.

Lincoln was wrong because Lincoln was wrong. It's ironic that he said that in the Gettysburg address when the he was waging war against that very principle.

 

[gallantwarrior]

No one has a right to immigrate to the country they want to, when they want to.

If we fixed illegal immigration, we could probably increase legal immigration.

Until then, sorry, not sorry.

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

How do people in countries that have no contiguous connection to the mainland of North America apply for asylum in the USA?

Does the Slovakian not have a legal means of claiming asylum in the USA from places like Europe?

I had no idea things were so oppressive in Prague.

But the Slovakian may apply at the American embassy.

Then ship this tidal wave of human detritus back to where they came from, they can damned well apply for asylum at the American embassy in their homelands.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Failing to do the basic, humane thing, the government should do the legal thing. If immigration laws work only to deter immigrants, we can longer be seen as the last beacon of freedom? But immigration laws also work to welcome people.

If they can't flood the facilities with food and medicine, flood them with lawyers and judges. Apply the law to the lawful cases, innocence presumed before guilt.

Send them all to San Francisco or Los Angeles, no questions asked

 

[bripat9643]

No one has a right to immigrate to the country they want to, when they want to.

If we fixed illegal immigration, we could probably increase legal immigration.

Until then, sorry, not sorry.

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

 

[bripat9643]

Failing to do the basic, humane thing, the government should do the legal thing. If immigration laws work only to deter immigrants, we can longer be seen as the last beacon of freedom? But immigration laws also work to welcome people.

If they can't flood the facilities with food and medicine, flood them with lawyers and judges. Apply the law to the lawful cases, innocence presumed before guilt.

Send them all to San Francisco or Los Angeles, no questions asked

Nope. They could still vote Democrat there.

 

[Nosmo King]

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

Understand asylum. Asylum is a benefit offered to refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. If you win asylum, you can stay in the United States and eventually apply to become a permanent legal resident by getting a "green card," known more formally as a United States Permanent Resident card. [1]

• Asylum applications can be “defensive” or “affirmative.” A defensive asylum application is one made when you are in removal proceedings in the U.S., either because you are attempting to enter the country without proper papers or because you broke an immigration law when inside the country and are about to be deported. Affirmative asylum applications are ones you file when not in removal proceedings. [2]

 

[bripat9643]

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

Understand asylum. Asylum is a benefit offered to refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. If you win asylum, you can stay in the United States and eventually apply to become a permanent legal resident by getting a "green card," known more formally as a United States Permanent Resident card. [1]

• Asylum applications can be “defensive” or “affirmative.” A defensive asylum application is one made when you are in removal proceedings in the U.S., either because you are attempting to enter the country without proper papers or because you broke an immigration law when inside the country and are about to be deported. Affirmative asylum applications are ones you file when not in removal proceedings. [2]

Your point?

 

[Darkwind]

No one has a right to immigrate to the country they want to, when they want to.

If we fixed illegal immigration, we could probably increase legal immigration.

Until then, sorry, not sorry.

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

How do people in countries that have no contiguous connection to the mainland of North America apply for asylum in the USA?

Does the Slovakian not have a legal means of claiming asylum in the USA from places like Europe?

I had no idea things were so oppressive in Prague.

But the Slovakian may apply at the American embassy.

And so may EVERYONE else. We have an embassy in every country.

Your question answered.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Less than 2% of asylum seekers are granted asylum. The rest make fraudulent claims. There is no claim on any level that the governments of these countries are oppressing the people. No one is fleeing any natural disaster.

They want money. They want the job that was promised, the home that was promised and protection for their gang affiliation. The people who say they are fleeing violence from MS-13 are members of the Latin Kings gang. The families claiming to be terrorized by the Sinoloa Cartel are in tight with the Felix Cartel. This is why the crime and violence in their home countries will be duplicated right here.

 

[Nosmo King]

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

Understand asylum. Asylum is a benefit offered to refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. If you win asylum, you can stay in the United States and eventually apply to become a permanent legal resident by getting a "green card," known more formally as a United States Permanent Resident card. [1]

• Asylum applications can be “defensive” or “affirmative.” A defensive asylum application is one made when you are in removal proceedings in the U.S., either because you are attempting to enter the country without proper papers or because you broke an immigration law when inside the country and are about to be deported. Affirmative asylum applications are ones you file when not in removal proceedings. [2]

Your point?

You're wrong

 

[Nosmo King]

The xenophobe's shallow victory.

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

How do people in countries that have no contiguous connection to the mainland of North America apply for asylum in the USA?

Does the Slovakian not have a legal means of claiming asylum in the USA from places like Europe?

I had no idea things were so oppressive in Prague.

But the Slovakian may apply at the American embassy.

And so may EVERYONE else. We have an embassy in every country.

Your question answered.

Do you think the authorities in Prague would resist any of their countrymen entering the American embassy? Would the gangsters running Guatemala resist their countrymen?

 

[Darkwind]

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

How do people in countries that have no contiguous connection to the mainland of North America apply for asylum in the USA?

Does the Slovakian not have a legal means of claiming asylum in the USA from places like Europe?

I had no idea things were so oppressive in Prague.

But the Slovakian may apply at the American embassy.

And so may EVERYONE else. We have an embassy in every country.

Your question answered.

Do you think the authorities in Prague would resist any of their countrymen entering the American embassy? Would the gangsters running Guatemala resist their countrymen?

Now you want to move the goal posts.

We're xenophobic if we don't allow them to actually come to our country to seek asylum; I point out to you how people who cannot come to our country actually do seek asylum and don't need to show up here, and now you want to change that metric too.

I don't really care if they have to dodge bullets and rough crowds to apply at an embassy. Care to know why? Never mind, I'll tell you anyway.

It isn't any different than having to dodge rapists, child molesters, murders, and criminals they face when they make the trek north.

They can simply do so in their home of record.

Problem solved. It turns out we aren't actually xenophobic, racist, or any other nasty kind of name you want to hurl. We're just correct.

 

[bripat9643]

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

Understand asylum. Asylum is a benefit offered to refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. If you win asylum, you can stay in the United States and eventually apply to become a permanent legal resident by getting a "green card," known more formally as a United States Permanent Resident card. [1]

• Asylum applications can be “defensive” or “affirmative.” A defensive asylum application is one made when you are in removal proceedings in the U.S., either because you are attempting to enter the country without proper papers or because you broke an immigration law when inside the country and are about to be deported. Affirmative asylum applications are ones you file when not in removal proceedings. [2]

Your point?

You're wrong

Your post certainly didn't prove I was wrong.

 

[Picaro]

Yet another fake news story by the traitors and criminals. We know why they're here, they're just scum criminals, is all, and the Democratic Party is behind the swarms to boot. They're racketeers, not a genuine American political party.

Many of them are obese, and as well or better dressed than a lot of kids around here. They aren't 'oppressed', and they aren't starving, and they aren't here because they want to be Americans. They're here because they're criminals, and will remain criminals.

 

[keepitreal]

This shouldn't be happening. This is the United States of America.

We can and have done much better than this.

This isn't making America great again.

DHS watchdog finds 'egregious violations' at immigrant detention facilities

You’re right, it shouldn’t be happening.
This is SUPPOSED to be a sovereign country

The United States is a sovereign nation.

Sovereignty is a simple idea:
the United States is an independent nation,
governed by the American people, that controls its own affairs.

The American people adopted the Constitution
and created the government.

They elect their representatives and make their own laws.

This is a sovereign nation, not a Motel 6

The duties of our elected officials
is to put our country and her rightful residents FIRST

They need to ask Americans what THEY want
Who the fuck are they to use our tax dollars
to support foreigners and neglect its own citizens

They shouldn’t even be fed as far as im concerned
Thats why they come
Do shit but leech

They’re used to shitholes and going hungry...right
So, they should feel right at home

 

[bripat9643]

How am I a xenophobe if I support legal immigration from pretty much everywhere, as long as we get to dictate the parameters?

I am a lawlessnessaphobe.

By shutting down the entire process of seeking asylum, by denying access to legal recourse, the result is a triumph of xenonphobia.

You mean it's a triumph of common sense. Asylum is an antiquated notion left over from the cold war. There is simply no justification for it in this century.

You don't know a humanitarian crisis when you see one. And your myopia does not make you right.

A humanitarian crisis is not a justification for asylum. In fact, US law does not list it as a reason for granting asylum.

Logic is what makes me right. The problems of other countries does not give their populations carte blanch to emigrate to the United States.

Understand asylum. Asylum is a benefit offered to refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. If you win asylum, you can stay in the United States and eventually apply to become a permanent legal resident by getting a "green card," known more formally as a United States Permanent Resident card. [1]

• Asylum applications can be “defensive” or “affirmative.” A defensive asylum application is one made when you are in removal proceedings in the U.S., either because you are attempting to enter the country without proper papers or because you broke an immigration law when inside the country and are about to be deported. Affirmative asylum applications are ones you file when not in removal proceedings. [2]

Asylum or Refugee Status: Who Is Eligible?

But not everyone qualifies for asylum or refugee status. You must meet some strict requirements, as described in this article. In particular, you must show two things:

• You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country because you have been persecuted there in the past or have a well-founded fear that you will be persecuted if you go back.
• The reason you have been (or will be) persecuted is connected to one of five things: your race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or your political opinion.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Yet another fake news story by the traitors and criminals. We know why they're here, they're just scum criminals, is all, and the Democratic Party is behind the swarms to boot. They're racketeers, not a genuine American political party.

Many of them are obese, and as well or better dressed than a lot of kids around here. They aren't 'oppressed', and they aren't starving, and they aren't here because they want to be Americans. They're here because they're criminals, and will remain criminals.

That and they want to live off the fat of the land, be granted feebies, and fuck the rest of us...

 

[Zorro!]

This shouldn't be happening. This is the United States of America.

We can and have done much better than this.

This isn't making America great again.

DHS watchdog finds 'egregious violations' at immigrant detention facilities

In the debate one idiot moderator tellingly spoke about Obama’s record of deporting ” 3 million Americans.”

Americans?

In that bubble, there were no negatives to mass immigration at all, and no concern for existing American citizens’ interests in not having their wages suppressed through this competition. There was no concession that child separation and “metering” at the border to slow the crush were both innovated by Obama, trying to manage an overwhelmed system. Candidates vied with each other to speak in Spanish. Every single one proposed amnesty for all those currently undocumented in the U.S., except for criminals. Every single one opposes a wall. There was unanimous support for providing undocumented immigrants immediately with free health care. There was no admission that Congress needed to tighten asylum law. There was no concern that the Flores decision had massively incentivized bringing children to game the system, leaving so many vulnerable to untold horrors on a journey no child should ever be forced to make.

Andrew Sullivan: Democratic Candidates Are in a Bubble on Immigration

 

[badger2]

It's pretty stupid to exclude the drug problem in Mexico as it relates to migrations from the violence, especially since 20 tons of cocaine were seized in Philadelphia two days ago. Putin is correct.Teenagers are just as susceptible to homosexuality in Colorado as they are to potent Colorado cannabis. The morbidity comes in at the point where Homo sapiens is forced into a kind of accelerated psychic Jesus giving them little time to enjoy and learn about life outside of the dipshit peer pressure of late capitalism and moral-judgement religion in their descending phases. The last Russian-Chechen war, for example, also caused this premature morbidity in teens, so no form if religion, especially, should escape critique. Hormone- and information-compromised teens in particular should be protected through education from these predatory, coercive, "look-at-me-go," recognition-Jonesing social mechanisms and protection racketism.

Post #159: '....in that bubble, there were no negatives to mass immigration at all, an no concern for existing American citizens' interests in not having their wages suppressed through this competition.'

WayFair employees not only did not have a voice against a government order for beds (the employee's "pride of product" parameter), they did not have any (geographic control [italics]) over their product. This is schizoid capitalist extraction of even pride of products produced, an extreme movement of violence.