• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Government photos show detained migrants pleading for help

This coming from a Trump supporter. :lamo Can't get much more ironic than that. :lamo

you are nothing more than a partisan liberal hack focused on issues that are truly of no interest to you but simply give you fodder to attack Trump. It is sad to see someone so dependent on the President of the United States for personal responsibility issues that they would promote the blatant lies of the left for political gain and the march to socialism. People like you seem incapable of taking care of your own personal responsibility issue so you manufacture other issues to divert from your own personal failures including this thread topic which is nothing more than partisan bull**** promoted by a socialist candidate who continues to show her own hypocrisy regarding the issue of illegal migrants

Ocasio-Cortez defiant in face of criticism for opposing border $$ bill while decrying conditions | Fox News
 
Funny that congress seems to be dead set on NOT providing funds for additional bed space when the problem is so obviously over crowding.

I wonder why that is?

Could it be that

  1. "Party A" has a vested interest in maintaining the position "The crisis is so severe that we cannot cope with it and so we have to adopt draconian measures just in order to prevent it getting worse."; and
  2. "Party B" has a vested interest in maintaining the position "The only reason why there is a crisis at all is that 'Party A' isn't coping with the actual problem."?

That means that neither "Party A" nor "Party B" actually has any incentive to resolve the situation as the existing situation serves the interests of both "Party A" and "Party B".

PLEASE NOTE - At present there is a specific designation (you'll have to guess what those are) applied to each of "Party A" and "Party B", but if the balance of power in the government reverses then so to will that specific designation reverse.
 
Funny that congress seems to be dead set on NOT providing funds for additional bed space when the problem is so obviously over crowding.

I wonder why that is?

What I am wondering is this. Many of the migrants have access to cell phones. AOC is announcing a photo op. Is there any way to trace phone calls?
Why is no one telling migrants that this is what can happen if you come here by the thousands?
Tough bananas if you don't like my questions. Call your representatives and have them work it out.
 
From Associated Press

Government photos show detained migrants pleading for help

HOUSTON (AP) — In one photo, one of 88 men in a cell meant for 41 presses a piece of cardboard against the window, with the word "help." In another, a man lowers his head and clasps his hands as if in prayer. And in a third, a woman wearing a surgical mask presses both of her hands against the glass.

The images were released Tuesday by U.S. government inspectors who visited facilities in South Texas where migrant adults and children who crossed the nearby border with Mexico are processed and detained.

As public outrage grows over the conditions in which thousands of people — some no more than a few months old — are being held by the U.S. government, the report offered new cause for alarm. It quotes one senior government manager as calling the situation "a ticking time bomb."

"Specifically, when detainees observed us, they banged on the cell windows, shouted, pressed notes to the window with their time in custody, and gestured to evidence of their time in custody," the report says. BuzzFeed first reported on a draft version of the report, which blurs most faces in the photos.

COMMENT:-

If you don't like the way that that left-wing, loony, liberal, socialist, pinko, commie, so-called "Associated Press" has distorted the true facts, then you can always read the true facts HERE.

Just take a look at the fantastic conditions that those guests of the US government are being hosted in. Then compare them with the horrendous conditions in Obama's Concentration Camps and you can see what a vast improvement Mr. Trump has made in the living conditions of those illegal immigrants who want to destroy America and American society.

[NOTE - The above comment rates 3 "Apple Crates" on the "Snark Scale".]
Clearly we should just let all of them go...right?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
From Associated Press

Government photos show detained migrants pleading for help

HOUSTON (AP) — In one photo, one of 88 men in a cell meant for 41 presses a piece of cardboard against the window, with the word "help." In another, a man lowers his head and clasps his hands as if in prayer. And in a third, a woman wearing a surgical mask presses both of her hands against the glass.

The images were released Tuesday by U.S. government inspectors who visited facilities in South Texas where migrant adults and children who crossed the nearby border with Mexico are processed and detained.

As public outrage grows over the conditions in which thousands of people — some no more than a few months old — are being held by the U.S. government, the report offered new cause for alarm. It quotes one senior government manager as calling the situation "a ticking time bomb."

"Specifically, when detainees observed us, they banged on the cell windows, shouted, pressed notes to the window with their time in custody, and gestured to evidence of their time in custody," the report says. BuzzFeed first reported on a draft version of the report, which blurs most faces in the photos.

COMMENT:-

If you don't like the way that that left-wing, loony, liberal, socialist, pinko, commie, so-called "Associated Press" has distorted the true facts, then you can always read the true facts HERE.

Just take a look at the fantastic conditions that those guests of the US government are being hosted in. Then compare them with the horrendous conditions in Obama's Concentration Camps and you can see what a vast improvement Mr. Trump has made in the living conditions of those illegal immigrants who want to destroy America and American society.

[NOTE - The above comment rates 3 "Apple Crates" on the "Snark Scale".]

If they don't like it, they can carry their asses back to where they came from.
 
Bed space isn't going to fix the over crowding situation. Trump's policies are the problem.

Yeah, Trump refuses to open the border.
 
Clearly we should just let all of them go...right?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not in the least.

What "clearly" should be done is to provide decent accommodation, food, clothing, and recreational/exercise/educational facilities while the people are detained by the government awaiting the government's processing of their applications. Not only that, but those applications should "clearly" be processed in a reasonably short time span and by people who actually have sufficient knowledge and training to process them expeditiously and according to law.

Unfortunately what should "clearly" be done costs money.
 
If they don't like it, they can carry their asses back to where they came from.

With an attitude like that it's pretty easy to move on to "Well, the REALLY simple solution is to just machine gun them before they get a chance to cross the border (or shoot them where you find them if they do cross the border).".

After all, if those people seeking to escape murderous regimes and/or murderous thugs where they live know that the only thing that will happen to them if they try to escape to "The Land of the Free" is that they will be hunted down and shot like wild dogs, THAT will most certainly discourage them from coming to the United States of America AND will do so MUCH more effectively than if they think that the only really bad thing that would happen to them would be being sent home.

Well?

Wouldn't it?
 
Here's a hint, the problem isn't bed space. It's Trump's policies that are the problem. But go ahead and think rounding up illegals in concentration camps is the solution. Cons like you are what allow dictators to come into power.

So what policy do you suggest? 100,000 people a month are streaming across the border. Give me the Praxas solution.
 
Not in the least.

What "clearly" should be done is to provide decent accommodation, food, clothing, and recreational/exercise/educational facilities while the people are detained by the government awaiting the government's processing of their applications. Not only that, but those applications should "clearly" be processed in a reasonably short time span and by people who actually have sufficient knowledge and training to process them expeditiously and according to law.

Unfortunately what should "clearly" be done costs money.

Well, then I guess the democrats should stop standing in the way of funding that stuff...

But, just let me say TU, you lay out these things, which in many cases can be reasonable, and people on both sides of our isle could agree, but yet you open a thread using a style that misses that message, in favor of trying to be clever, place blame, and use snark...Why is that? Do you think that you can't have a solid conversation without being that way? Or is it that you don't really want to agree with anyone on opposing sides of an argument with you, rather opting for insult, and snark?

This crisis at our border wasn't created overnight, and it isn't going to be solved overnight either. There is NO special room, where additional judges, admin, and support staff are being held back, so I don't know still what you expect to be done today...As for necessities, it would seem that AOC was flat out lying about that stuff, as I suspected, and although things do need to get better, those overwhelmed facilities are doing the best they can, even though the person making **** up about them, voted against additional funding...She's trash, pure and simple....
 
With an attitude like that it's pretty easy to move on to "Well, the REALLY simple solution is to just machine gun them before they get a chance to cross the border (or shoot them where you find them if they do cross the border).".

After all, if those people seeking to escape murderous regimes and/or murderous thugs where they live know that the only thing that will happen to them if they try to escape to "The Land of the Free" is that they will be hunted down and shot like wild dogs, THAT will most certainly discourage them from coming to the United States of America AND will do so MUCH more effectively than if they think that the only really bad thing that would happen to them would be being sent home.

Well?

Wouldn't it?

Why won't Canada take them? We'd be more than happy to put them on buses, and give them an air conditioned ride to your country....Wouldn't that be great? :roll:
 
Well, then I guess the democrats should stop standing in the way of funding that stuff...

But, just let me say TU, you lay out these things, which in many cases can be reasonable, and people on both sides of our isle could agree, but yet you open a thread using a style that misses that message, in favor of trying to be clever, place blame, and use snark...Why is that? Do you think that you can't have a solid conversation without being that way? Or is it that you don't really want to agree with anyone on opposing sides of an argument with you, rather opting for insult, and snark?

This crisis at our border wasn't created overnight, and it isn't going to be solved overnight either. There is NO special room, where additional judges, admin, and support staff are being held back, so I don't know still what you expect to be done today...As for necessities, it would seem that AOC was flat out lying about that stuff, as I suspected, and although things do need to get better, those overwhelmed facilities are doing the best they can, even though the person making **** up about them, voted against additional funding...She's trash, pure and simple....

Considering that the IG's reports on the conditions of the detentions indicate that they are (in some cases) less appropriate than you would expect the conditions under which you would expect a CONFESSED multiple/serial child rapist/murderer to be held under whilst awaiting execution, it isn't actually quite realistic to say that the complaints are simply being made up.

PS - Watch the typography for warnings regarding "snark". Sometimes they are NOT printed in bold-faced, size 7, underlined, red type.
 
Why won't Canada take them? We'd be more than happy to put them on buses, and give them an air conditioned ride to your country....Wouldn't that be great? :roll:

Canada would do exactly what the laws of Canada required be done. They would be allowed to apply (in accordance with international law, treaty law, and domestic law), and their applications would be adjudicated in accordance with Canadian law (as provided for by international law, treaty lae, and domestic law). Unfortunately for you, Canadian law indicates that, since the US is a "Safe First Country", those applications would be rejected (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law) and the people would be returned to the United States of America (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law).

You might not have realized it, but the"Safe First Country Agreement" (which is a part of the law in BOTH Canada and the United States of America) was something that the US government insisted upon - and got.

Now, what the procedure is SUPPOSED TO BE, in the US those people are supposed (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law) to be allowed to apply for refugee/asylee status, then those applications are suppose to be adjudicated pursuant to American law (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law), and, if rejected the people are supposed to be returned to the country from which they entered the United States of America (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law). If someone attempted to "illegally enter" the United States of America from Canada and then to make a claim for refugee/asylee status, then the US would be quite legally correct to reject that claim under the provisions of the SFCA and return the person to Canada.

Why the Canadian government/people should assist the US government in breaching international law, treaty law, and domestic law just because you want to see the US government breach international law, treaty law, and domestic law is totally beyond the comprehension of any rational person.

PS - Canada already accepts more refugees (in ABSOLUTE numbers and not just on a per capita basis) than the US does.
 
Canada would do exactly what the laws of Canada required be done. They would be allowed to apply (in accordance with international law, treaty law, and domestic law), and their applications would be adjudicated in accordance with Canadian law (as provided for by international law, treaty lae, and domestic law). Unfortunately for you, Canadian law indicates that, since the US is a "Safe First Country", those applications would be rejected (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law) and the people would be returned to the United States of America (as provided for by international law, treaty law, and domestic law)..

Actually, that safe first country would be Mexico
 
Actually, that safe first country would be Mexico

If the US has a FSCA with Mexico, then that would be the case for the US - unfortunately for your argument, the US does NOT have a FSCA with Mexico. If Canada has a FSCA with Mexico, then that would be the case for Canada - unfortunately for your argument, Canada does NOT have a FSCA with Mexico.

Additionally, it is slightly difficult for someone to cross the Canada/Mexico border and then apply for refugee/asylee status (you might not have noticed it, but there is no Canada/Mexico border).

PS - If you want to actually take a look at the actual terms of the actual Canada/US SFCA, you will see that it provides for the return (by "Country A") of someone who COULD have applied for refugee/asylee status in "Country B" but who didn't, to "Country B". That means that even if the US government did load up semi-trailer vans with Mexicans and trucked they across the US to Canada, they wouldn't be eligible for entry because of the Canada/US SFCA.

PPS - Anyone who actually thinks that Mexico (outside of the heavily policed tourist trap areas) is a "safe country" will be moved to the head of the waiting list for admission to "The Home". Anyone who thinks that the heavily policed tourist trap areas in Mexico are "safer" than any of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, or even Fredericton will have their names moved up 25 places on the waiting list for admission to "The Home".
 
If the US has a FSCA with Mexico, then that would be the case for the US - unfortunately for your argument, the US does NOT have a FSCA with Mexico. .

Its international law on Migrants even in the absence of any such agreements. Even those migrants who legitimately fled El Salvador, Nicaragua or Honduras because they feared for their safety, went to Mexico and eliminated those threats. They continued to the US for purely economic and other reasons.
 
Its international law on Migrants even in the absence of any such agreements. Even those migrants who legitimately fled El Salvador, Nicaragua or Honduras because they feared for their safety, went to Mexico and eliminated those threats. They continued to the US for purely economic and other reasons.

Actually international law (and the laws of the United States of America) allow anyone "fleeing" persecution (regardless of whether it is "government persecution" or not) to apply for refugee/asylee status in ANY country that they can reach - regardless of how they reach it.

If you think that Mexico is a "safe country" then you might be interested in "Crime > Violent crime Stats: compare key data on Mexico & United States" and "Cartel-Ravaged Mexico Sets a New Record for Murders".

Well, you would, except that they contain data that you simply don't want to hear.
 
Actually international law (and the laws of the United States of America) allow anyone "fleeing" persecution (regardless of whether it is "government persecution" or not) to apply for refugee/asylee status in ANY country that they can reach - regardless of how they reach it..

Which doesnt contradict a thing Ive said.
 
Which doesnt contradict a thing Ive said.

Since your basic position can be stated as


Everyone MUST apply for refugee/asylee status at the VERY FIRST country that they arrive in after leaving their own country and a failure of someone to do that means that they HAVE NO RIGHT to apply for refugee/asylee status at any other country.

and what I said was


"Actually international law (and the laws of the United States of America) allow anyone "fleeing" persecution (regardless of whether it is "government persecution" or not) to apply for refugee/asylee status in ANY country that they can reach - regardless of how they reach it."
(slight emphasis added for the literacy impaired)

it most certainly does "contradict a thing (you've) said".

In fact it completely contradicts 100% of what you've said.
 
Since your basic position can be stated as


Everyone MUST apply for refugee/asylee status at the VERY FIRST country that they arrive in after leaving their own country and a failure of someone to do that means that they HAVE NO RIGHT to apply for refugee/asylee status at any other country.
.

Nope. They can apply anywhere they like.
 
Back
Top Bottom