Silverstorm said: BatoKusanagi said: Once detained they're not allowed to leave even for self-deportation. Plus asylum seekers (whether real or imagined) usually don't expect their options to be wait here or go back to danger. I suppose if a cop detained one, your logic is self-release and go home--Well, I'd certainly be interested in you or anyone else here picking apart the "misinformation" in my post. You can start with elaborating on what exactly is contradictory about being (temporarily) detained but allowed to self-deport (that's leaving, in case that wasn't clear). See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_departure_(United_States) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_entry (necessary reading for those who think that tearing down border fences to enter countries constitutes seeking asylum). It's not my logic, it's the law and, hell, just using common sense you can't expect a country to house every person with a claim to be running from danger. Not sure what you think "asylum seekers" should be expecting. I mean, their own countries are harsher than the US regarding immigration., that should be at least a clue about what's probably going to happen. logopolis said: BatoKusanagi said: OP is from a couple of weeks ago, but even back then this hyperbolic narrative about the border "concentration camps" (a comparison that no sane human being would make) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concentration%20camp - "a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard" It's not a 'comparison'. It's just what the term means. Nice dictionary quote, but let's cut crap, we all know what image the term "concentration camp" is supposed to evoke in people's heads (more so when it comes from people who like to label their political opponents, Nazis). It's not a prison, it's f*cking Auschwitz, to put it as clearly as possible. |
BatoKusanagiJul 17, 2019 2:30 PM
 |
BatoKusanagi said: Voluntary Departure still requires a immigration judge to approve, the part that is still under-employed due to Executive negligence at this point. So even if they did do what you asked, it in no way expedites their going--they're still detained, so can't leave just cause they want to. Not to mention the children; where do they go and how do they leave (if they're too young to walk). Its your logic.Silverstorm said: Once detained they're not allowed to leave even for self-deportation. Plus asylum seekers (whether real or imagined) usually don't expect their options to be wait here or go back to danger. I suppose if a cop detained one, your logic is self-release and go home-- See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_departure_(United_States) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_entry (necessary reading for those who think that tearing down border fences to enter countries constitutes seeking asylum). It's not my logic, it's the law and, hell, just using common sense you can't expect a country to house every person with a claim to be running from danger. Not sure what you think "asylum seekers" should be expecting. I mean, their own countries are harsher than the US regarding immigration., that should be at least a clue about what's probably going to happen. |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
Silverstorm said: You leave a thread and the wing-nuts pop out to spout nothing but mistruths for all to read--tsk tsk.. HarryRambod22 said: Tell that to victims from Cartel fueds or quasi-Corrupt Localities. Bet the tourist town was totesYou know what good for border patrol I feel no sympathy for those criminals. They chose to break the rules they got what they deserve. I've been to Mexico I swear and honestly it's not bad. Wow, thought this stupidity stayed under rocks. They're detained as you explained throughout your post, yet you contradict yourself with a "they can leave" statement--you undercut yourself before anyone has time to pick apart the misinformation part of your post. Are you secretly a meme from 2006' with the "they steal our jobs"? Seriously, what state do you live in that a refugee migrant (and not a economic one) is stealing a job you want? Milking dairy cows, picking fruit or shoveling shit are high on the demand list in the US.. Yes Obama had better numbers, but also Trump made his mess with the implementation of separation and administrative decisions that undermined the immigration courts etc creating--his own crisis (still, you're right the numbers coming wasn't going down currently; longterm still under historical norm) ezikialrage said: So you're mad that the government wants to ensure US citizens (the children of those immigrants) get a minimum standard of nutrition, and provide immunization to all children in America (unless medically excluded) to further protect citizens--twisted logic my man. And you lied to ALEX in the process by mixing the context of such benefits; for shame.Illegals can get WIC. Illegals can get welfare by proxy of any kids they have while here in the US. Illegals can also get foodstamps and welfare if the state workers are not checking and in New York they are not checking for legal status. I don't know if you paid any attention to the democrat primary debates or even watched news clips of the debates but all of them believe illegals should get free healthcare coverage. Some states also offer benefits for illegals So to say illegals aren't getting any welfare and other tax payer aid or that no party is offering free shit to illegals is a lie. SpamuraiSensei said: Yeah, cause a wall to temporarily awe migrants is just as useful as hugging a stuffed-bear in a house invasion. Funny.What's funny about this thread, is months ago the Dem's refused Trumps border control funding. A lot of that would have went to humanitarian aid. Selective memory is quite something eh? You obviously dont understand. Its not that Americans dont want that job, its that illegals are paid under the table and given slave wages. Companies want illegals because they dont care how little they're paid and Americans want minimum wage or higher. Basically since illegals are paid a lot less, they take up the spots Americans want. |
| 毎日, 日本語を勉強する |
BatoKusanagi said: Silverstorm said: Once detained they're not allowed to leave even for self-deportation. Plus asylum seekers (whether real or imagined) usually don't expect their options to be wait here or go back to danger. I suppose if a cop detained one, your logic is self-release and go home-- See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_departure_(United_States) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_entry (necessary reading for those who think that tearing down border fences to enter countries constitutes seeking asylum). It's not my logic, it's the law and, hell, just using common sense you can't expect a country to house every person with a claim to be running from danger. Not sure what you think "asylum seekers" should be expecting. I mean, their own countries are harsher than the US regarding immigration., that should be at least a clue about what's probably going to happen. logopolis said: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concentration%20camp - "a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard" It's not a 'comparison'. It's just what the term means. Nice dictionary quote, but let's cut crap, we all know what image the term "concentration camp" is supposed to evoke in people's heads (more so when it comes from people who like to label their political opponents, Nazis). It's not a prison, it's f*cking Auschwitz, to put it as clearly as possible. It's also ironic that you point out points of entry, because there's been an ongoing controversy about border agents at ports of entry illegally turning away asylum seekers. You could argue that they should try anyway but if they're being illegally turned away from applying at a legal point of entry then that only leaves the option of trying to enter at an illegal point or giving up completely. But it still leaves the blatant issue of what was the current administration doing to counter the illegal acts of the agents at the point of entry (assuming it wasn't an order from the department itself)? Or since it's been blatantly pointed out that the administration has been trying to bypass the current law a number of times in that past why don't you seem to hold them as accountable to the same laws you're trying to justify your case with? |
GamerDLMJul 17, 2019 7:04 PM
ChesCayk said: Obviously. Everyone wants menial work to pay a high wage and not all menial tasks are considered nor measured the same way. But that's not at issue--Americans don't want to work on farms (dying sector with no openings for upper level or room to buy into a company), college education is expected from most employers that pay non-slave wages, and is a market away from other markets (country v city). If you're trying to ensure you are a competitive worker in any market, why go into a field that would make sure you can only stay in one line of work, with no chance for upward progression. Americans don't want to pick the jobs cause there is no money in the jobs, regardless of wage and no substantial way of moving up that ladder. So its incorrect to say Americans want jobs that pay them less than what they are worth cause their society tells them they're worth more and sets them up to be. Why would they go lesser?Silverstorm said: Are you secretly a meme from 2006' with the "they steal our jobs"? Seriously, what state do you live in that a refugee migrant (and not a economic one) is stealing a job you want? Milking dairy cows, picking fruit or shoveling shit are high on the demand list in the US.. You obviously dont understand. Its not that Americans dont want that job, its that illegals are paid under the table and given slave wages. Companies want illegals because they dont care how little they're paid and Americans want minimum wage or higher. Basically since illegals are paid a lot less, they take up the spots Americans want. Just one of many examples https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXUdozfL7iM |
SilverstormJul 17, 2019 7:29 PM
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
Grey-Zone said: You got to be kidding me. "nobody is actually equating the two"? Do you ACTUALLY believe that? BatoKusanagi said: Nice dictionary quote, but let's cut crap, we all know what image the term "concentration camp" is supposed to evoke in people's heads (more so when it comes from people who like to label their political opponents, Nazis). It's not a prison, it's f*cking Auschwitz, to put it as clearly as possible. If I wanted to describe Auschwitz, I'd say 'extermination camp'. But if you feel uncomfortable when people call concentration camps 'concentration camps' because it makes you think of Auschwitz, then maybe you should reconsider your support for concentration camps, instead of whining about how the truth, and the lessons from history about the unspeakable crimes you are supporting, makes you uncomfortable. If you don't like an accurate description of your position, it's a sign to you that your position is wrong. |
logopolisJul 18, 2019 12:00 AM
| @logopolis that doesn't represent reality at all. Look, it's the media and left-leaning politicians who frame it as "nazi-like". Your own, or even my or @BatoKusanagi 's own opinions on how we personally interpret these facilities and their circumstances don't really matter in that regard. |
 |
| Even if those claims are true, there are children being put in concentration camps. Why would anyone's concern be that the proto-fascist monsters responsible might be receiving a few inaccurate criticisms? This is all deflection. |
Silverstorm said: Salvatia said: Asylum isn't illegal at any specific point of entry, and its judicial oversight to process their claims, not executive purview~~nuff saidwhy they trying to cross illegally in first plaec, their own fault. & their own fault for bringing kids into it. processing ppls that usually carry no documentation takes a long while, especially when people enter with kids. need to be sure kids are accompanied by actual parents & not strangers trying to sell them for child labor/sex slavery. also daily beast not repuptable src. could have at least used moer mainstream news outlets repoprting saem thing. two problems w/ them 1. Most of them don't actually qualify for asylum/refugee status. They need to have their lives actually threatened. Also Mexico is right there willing to accept, but they didn't take it. They're economic migrants, like those from africa/middle east crossing multiple safe war-free countries to get to wealthy states like germany & scandinavian countries. 2. Most of them are trying to sneak in illegally, not cross legal points of entry, which is a crime. Some of them are even being held specifically because they're repeat offenders. |
hazarddex said: Eight-Man said: your strawmaning hard.A species, yes, invasive, no, for I am not invading any country. If the street was the border between U.S and Mexico and I was a border guard then yeah. All humans are the same species so they cant be an invasive species while the same species is already living there. Now if a bunch of tiger started populating the area then that would be an invasive species, but still illegal to shoot because most tigers are under endanged species protections. Well they won't because shooting citizens of other countries is how you start wars. And its illegal to shot people who are not actively trying to kill you in most countries. (Again not counting north Korea.) Crosding border =/= murderous intent. Gotta love how @holdyourbreath disappeared from this thread after you used logic on him. Now waiting to see if he keeps up with his "invasive species" poorly thought out BS in other threads |
 |
logopolis said: Even if those claims are true, there are children being put in concentration camps. Why would anyone's concern be that the proto-fascist monsters responsible might be receiving a few inaccurate criticisms? This is all deflection. No, the distinction is very important. The moment you give up on making the correct distinction and settle for broadbrushing generalizations instead, is the moment you are wandering off on a very, very dark path. This is exactly what makes a bigot a bigot. Also the US government is far too decentralized to be called anything even remotetly close to "fascist". I don't see the democratic party being banned yet, nor reporters being murdered en masse. You really keep trivilizing one word after another. It's things like these why most claims of racism and such are no longer being taken seriously by an increasingly high amount of people. They have become mere inflated buzzwords at this point. Finally, this is about deterence. If the process is "smothed out" then even just applying for asylum leads to a temporary increase in life standards, hence people would naturally flock over there. But if the rumors about this transition period being not so comfortable spread around? It naturally filters out those who do it for cheap opportunistic reasons and only leaves those who truly are in need of the asylum no matter how difficult the way to that might be, as well as the more stubborn opportunitsts who at least are willing to go through the harshness, meaning they are more likely to be hard workers than the ones who get scared away easily. It's one of those "hard choices a leader must make even if its not a popular decision". |
|
Grey-Zone said: No, the distinction is very important. The moment you give up on making the correct distinction and settle for broadbrushing generalizations instead, is the moment you are wandering off on a very, very dark path. This is exactly what makes a bigot a bigot. More deflection. Worry about the concentration camps, and the people who have been on a very, very dark path for decades and have got to the point where they're putting children in concentration camps, not the people calling proto-fascists 'Nazis', which you're talking bollocks about anyway. Calling proto-fascists 'Nazis' has been happening since neo-Naziism appeared, and it has not caused anyone in all of these decades to become a bigot. Bigots are people full of hatred. They're people who can see other people being put in concentration camps and not be disgusted. Also the US government is far too decentralized to be called anything even remotetly close to "fascist". I don't see the democratic party being banned yet, nor reporters being murdered en masse. Its policies are almost fascistic. The big difference is that the current administration is able to pursue fascistic policies such as building concentration camps without needing to ban the Democrat party or the like, because there's no real revolutionary pressure requiring counter-revolutionary activity, a bit of voter suppression is enough. Such a situation can change quite quickly. Finally, this is about deterence. You are trying to justify concentration camps. That is sick. The only relevant difference between that border ten years ago and that border today is the levels of sick, evil racism in the president, the government and its supporters. People are dying, people are being kept in standing cells which is one of the world's most effective torture techniques, people are suffering permanent psychological harm, children are being separated from their parents and put in cages, just so a bunch of racists can feel good. |
logopolis said: More deflection. Worry about the concentration camps, and the people who have been on a very, very dark path for decades and have got to the point where they're putting children in concentration camps, not the people calling proto-fascists 'Nazis', which you're talking bollocks about anyway. Calling proto-fascists 'Nazis' has been happening since neo-Naziism appeared, and it has not caused anyone in all of these decades to become a bigot. Bigots are people full of hatred. They're people who can see other people being put in concentration camps and not be disgusted. And more conflation as expected. Now you justify using whatever words you fancy I guess. logopolis said: Its policies are almost fascistic. The big difference is that the current administration is able to pursue fascistic policies such as building concentration camps without needing to ban the Democrat party or the like, because there's no real revolutionary pressure requiring counter-revolutionary activity, a bit of voter suppression is enough. Such a situation can change quite quickly. No they aren't. You are objectively wrong. This isn't even even on the table for consideration. This is the "doom is right around the corner fallacy" where you take a random normal situation and force some absurd interpretation into it that this is the threshold of an apocalypse or dystopia. Or to put it simply it's pure delusion. You have nothing but superficial irrelevant cherrypicked trivilities as your so-called "evidence". If you want to prove me wrong, then list all "fascist" things that are BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT fascist and cannot be interpreted in any other way. Until then your claim is pure delusion. logopolis said: You are trying to justify concentration camps. That is sick. The only relevant difference between that border ten years ago and that border today is the levels of sick, evil racism in the president, the government and its supporters. People are dying, people are being kept in standing cells which is one of the world's most effective torture techniques, people are suffering permanent psychological harm, children are being separated from their parents and put in cages, just so a bunch of racists can feel good. You notice how you "filled in the blanks" with "so a bunch of racists can feel good"? Citation needed. You are so deep in with your head in assumptions that I can't even take you seriously at this point. You are also arguing by implicitly demanding me to prove a negative. It's literally impossible to prove the non-existence of something. YOU are the one who needs to prove that someone is actually acting with racist intent while eliminating ALL alternative explanations. What you do is ignoring the alternative explanations and insist that the "racist angle" is true and needs no proof. |
|
Salvatia said: Silverstorm said: Asylum isn't illegal at any specific point of entry, and its judicial oversight to process their claims, not executive purview~~nuff said two problems w/ them 1. Most of them don't actually qualify for asylum/refugee status. They need to have their lives actually threatened. Also Mexico is right there willing to accept, but they didn't take it. They're economic migrants, like those from africa/middle east crossing multiple safe war-free countries to get to wealthy states like germany & scandinavian countries. 2. Most of them are trying to sneak in illegally, not cross legal points of entry, which is a crime. Some of them are even being held specifically because they're repeat offenders. Come on Salvatia, we can't have facts like these in this discussion. We are talking about fascist concentration camps here! Also, @logopolis , the people held in these camps can leave if they really wanted to do so, (if they are not known criminals), they can retract their asylum claim and choose to be deported and be released from these camps, but they choose to stay because they are holding out that the media will pressure the current administration to grant asylum. |
 |
DiscoDespot said: Borrowing incorrect statements from other user's posts doesn't make them any more true. People charged as criminally crossing (regardless of claim) makes them de facto criminals in holding--you just said that, and agreed that if they're crossing illegally they are then criminal--so how in the same post do you suggest they can leave if they're not criminals, if they're always considered so until court?Salvatia said: two problems w/ them 1. Most of them don't actually qualify for asylum/refugee status. They need to have their lives actually threatened. Also Mexico is right there willing to accept, but they didn't take it. They're economic migrants, like those from africa/middle east crossing multiple safe war-free countries to get to wealthy states like germany & scandinavian countries. 2. Most of them are trying to sneak in illegally, not cross legal points of entry, which is a crime. Some of them are even being held specifically because they're repeat offenders. Come on Salvatia, we can't have facts like these in this discussion. We are talking about fascist concentration camps here! Also, @logopolis , the people held in these camps can leave if they really wanted to do so, (if they are not known criminals), they can retract their asylum claim and choose to be deported and be released from these camps, but they choose to stay because they are holding out that the media will pressure the current administration to grant asylum. more direct to @Salvatia Ok, thank you for sharing why you believe it is wrong but repeating the same content in your post as a reply to me doesn't refute what I said. Judges still have to process the claims, so they have to be somewhere. Most don't have to be in there as they have relatives they can be warded to--and if they don't show for trial they still get deported (As recent Ice "raids" targeting such have demonstrated). And again, illegal point of entry does not mean anything in Asylum law, cause the notion people have to be at particular zones to get help or run from harm is unrealistic. Thank you though for sharing your ideas on how law works. |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
DiscoDespot said: Also, @logopolis , the people held in these camps can leave if they really wanted to do so, (if they are not known criminals), they can retract their asylum claim and choose to be deported and be released from these camps, That lie has already been debunked in this thread. Plus refugees can't just "go back", that's why they're called refugees. @Grey-Zone no, actually I don't have to go and perform some vast, time consuming exercises to produce some result which you'll just ignore anyway. I know how you lot work. But at least keep track of whether I'm calling anything 'evidence', it makes your pretence at reasonableness far easier to see through. |
@holdyourbreath Be careful, if you can't stop pretending it's not pretending anymore. |
|
holdyourbreath said: lol i was arguing something dumb and didn't feel like arguing anymore. It's called "baiting" to get people mad. Not sure if you can even fathom that, though. I hope you can fathom the shamefulness of such activities. |
| You countered your own point. First you critique my post by stating: Silverstorm said: if they're crossing illegally they are then criminal--so how in the same post do you suggest they can leave if they're not criminals, if they're always considered so until court? And then you go on to state Silverstorm said: And again, illegal point of entry does not mean anything in Asylum law, cause the notion people have to be at particular zones to get help or run from harm is unrealistic. Thanks for answering your own question. I am not going to keep debating this topic, it's futile. Other posters have posted the laws regarding what is required to seek asylum, what is being done about the logistical issues regarding the holding camps and other such legalities but everyone on the opposing side simply says 'your wrong, my emotions are right' without refuting anything with facts. Its like talking to a brick wall. Edit: Nobody paid any attention to moozeho1's post that demonstrates that actions are being taken to alleviate the over crowding in these facilities. Its not racism, its logistics that results in crappy conditions. modozeho1 said: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/07/15/dhs-and-doj-issue-third-country-asylum-rule Barr just invoked §1158(a)(2)(a) a multilateral treaty that declares Mexico a safe third country, so now all asylum seekers will be sent legally to Mexico for their hearing. They won't be kept in America anymore, so our detention centers will get exactly what you want: They'll have much, much fewer people in them, since they'll be going to Mexico and be in their detention centers. https://www.straitstimes.com/world/migrants-describe-squalid-mexican-detention-centres . |
RinkanReichJul 18, 2019 8:53 AM
|
DiscoDespot said: No, but nice tactic--try to discount my post by trying to highlight a piece of what I post that initially shows your argument. That way my post seems wrong but only cause it is mirroring your logic to you. In other words, when someone (me) explains your post's frame of reasoning to you, doesn't mean that is admittance of the person believing in that logic.You countered your own point. First you critique my post by stating: The user's post you mentioned was looked at but recent articles suggest its a procedure being sent to the courts due to how it was implemented. https://thehill.com/latino/453377-groups-sue-trump-admin-over-new-asylum-restrictions Bye Disco--see you in another thread. |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
ezikialrage said: --ALEX-- said: https://www.thedailybeast.com/shocking-new-photos-hundreds-of-migrants-crammed-into-border-facility >I’m following MAL rules that you must put the article title as the thread title, but my real opinion is as follows.... Let the world see, that the United States Government is GUILTY of crimes against humanity... I’m glad all the horrible shit that is happening in the border is being brought to light so no one can claim “they didn’t know”. The word “Concentration Camp” is being thrown around...and seeing as 6 KIDS have already died in the hands of U.S border officials...that’s not exactly an incorrect term. Just because someone claims asylum doesn't mean we take their word for it.They need to be verified that they actually do qualify for asylum, that they are who they say they are and that they don't have any dangerous diseases. The idea that the deaths of those kids is somehow the border patrol is laughable. Those kids were already sick when they reached the border. Being dragged thousands of miles from one country to another can have a negative effect on someone who is already sick. The reason for the cramped conditions is because of a shit load of people trying to come into the country all at once and the fact democrats won't approve of funding for better detention facilities. The word concentration camp is being thrown around by open borders retards trying to equate what the jews went through to people being temporarily detained until their asylum claims and identities check out. Why are you trying to be logical. We can't make our Hollywood like drama like that? Stop ruining it man. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!! |
MonadJul 23, 2019 11:12 AM
logopolis said: no, actually I don't have to go and perform some vast, time consuming exercises to produce some result which you'll just ignore anyway. I know how you lot work. But at least keep track of whether I'm calling anything 'evidence', it makes your pretence at reasonableness far easier to see through. You are associating Trump with a system of absolute authority and power, yet can't even cite instances where he either expands or abuses his power in a manner that noticably exceeds that of his predecessors, but instead use superficial comparisons with past nations that have next to nothing to do with why these nations are being seen as dangerous or hated in the first place. You have yet to present anything of substance aside from fancy words like "proto-fascist", which on their own just make your points look like hot air and nothing else. |
|
Grey-Zone said: logopolis said: no, actually I don't have to go and perform some vast, time consuming exercises to produce some result which you'll just ignore anyway. I know how you lot work. But at least keep track of whether I'm calling anything 'evidence', it makes your pretence at reasonableness far easier to see through. You are associating Trump with a system of absolute authority and power, yet can't even cite instances where he either expands or abuses his power in a manner that noticably exceeds that of his predecessors, but instead use superficial comparisons with past nations that have next to nothing to do with why these nations are being seen as dangerous or hated in the first place. You have yet to present anything of substance aside from fancy words like "proto-fascist", which on their own just make your points look like hot air and nothing else. When you have hot air you can only produce hot air. The ones against freedom of speech and expression and basic rights for self defence and in favor of censoring are calling others fascists. The irony in all it's glory. |
| The paradox of the new fascism is that it's arising (to a large extent) as a response to the slow revolution in attitudes which is also making it impossible for it to muster the kind of mass movement that old-style fascism depended upon. Hence its greater fusion during growth phase with legit state power. Trouble is, the slow revolution in attitudes is inextricably wedded to an unprecedently huge loss of faith in the legitimacy of 'democracy' (i.e. neoliberal state power). This loss of faith, in its reactionary mode (hegemonic owing to neoliberalism's effective destruction of the left), provides the seedbed for the growth of the movement aspect of the new fascism as a middle-up rejection of the neoliberal normal. In its progressive mode, the loss of faith is the spur to the top-down state response. They converge. Petty-bourgeois ressentiment meets imperialist state anxiety at loss of legitimacy. That this coalition can form is a function of the fact that the ressentiment focuses on hatred of the same people the state legitimacy depends on oppressing. This isn't an essentially new process. (Which is why it's right to characterise it as fascism.) But it's unfolding differently in the particular, owing to the different specific conditions of this historical moment. |
Monad said: The ones against freedom of speech and expression and basic rights for self defence and in favor of censoring are calling others fascists. Who are you talking about? |
| And guess who made all these so called concentration camps? Obama made them. In fact, he Deported a lot of ppl as well. This shit and all happens when such facilities get overun by groups of immigrants who search for the American dream. |
Kyotosomo said: I wish the Democrats would allow for more funding but they'd rather get to keep the issue and let tens of thousand of people (mostly women and children) suffer so unfortunately nothing will get done. Reminds me of when they tried to block the bill that would have let terminally ill patients use procedures not yet approved here but approved overseas, attempting to prevent thousands (if not tens of thousands) of lives from being saved just because they didn't want to give Trump the win. It's fucking disgusting and politics at it's absolute worst. Literally evil. Can't wait for the Republicans to do the exact same thing when what party is in power switches again. Then for another switch and for the cycle to continue. Welcome to America. And then they blame trump for making these Camps. Ignoring the fact that the Democrats actually build those Facilities and such just to attack Trump. Even though the ones who should be criticized for that are Obama and the Democrats. But they think that admitting that they have done such terrible things makes them look weak, and if you want to win, you have to look strong. And they want to win. Remember, the democrats were behind Slavery and the KKK. |
Bourmegar said: Stop mixing up the argument. The parties are not the same from nearly 200 years ago by self admission and historical archives. Don't try to spin American history in a thread with Americans that know their history. Kyotosomo said: I wish the Democrats would allow for more funding but they'd rather get to keep the issue and let tens of thousand of people (mostly women and children) suffer so unfortunately nothing will get done. Reminds me of when they tried to block the bill that would have let terminally ill patients use procedures not yet approved here but approved overseas, attempting to prevent thousands (if not tens of thousands) of lives from being saved just because they didn't want to give Trump the win. It's fucking disgusting and politics at it's absolute worst. Literally evil. Can't wait for the Republicans to do the exact same thing when what party is in power switches again. Then for another switch and for the cycle to continue. Welcome to America. And then they blame trump for making these Camps. Ignoring the fact that the Democrats actually build those Facilities and such just to attack Trump. Even though the ones who should be criticized for that are Obama and the Democrats. But they think that admitting that they have done such terrible things makes them look weak, and if you want to win, you have to look strong. And they want to win. Remember, the democrats were behind Slavery and the KKK. Obama built the facilities is partly true (some of these are private run), but didn't utilize them the way the current president is. Your comment doesn't make sense "he deported more" and yet standards in the facilities were kept? Make your mind up on how and who you want to blame--doesn't matter cause you'd be wrong. @Kyotosomo Incorrect to suggest that House reps from the Democrat side held off funds to aid people; They have been making humanitarian aid part of the package but Senate Republicans as well as House members only want funding to go to procedural issues. The latter doesn't aim to do what you suggests. How bout make claims not so easily dismissable due to easily being proven incorrect or just look up the situation on less-no biased sources. It makes you seem untrustworthy and emotional, none of which I'm sure you are. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-the-obama-administration-separate-families/ https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-immigration-trump-families-20180621-htmlstory.html |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
Silverstorm said: Bourmegar said: Stop mixing up the argument. The parties are not the same from nearly 200 years ago by self admission and historical archives. Don't try to spin American history in a thread with Americans that know their history. And then they blame trump for making these Camps. Ignoring the fact that the Democrats actually build those Facilities and such just to attack Trump. Even though the ones who should be criticized for that are Obama and the Democrats. But they think that admitting that they have done such terrible things makes them look weak, and if you want to win, you have to look strong. And they want to win. Remember, the democrats were behind Slavery and the KKK. Obama built the facilities is partly true (some of these are private run), but didn't utilize them the way the current president is. Your comment doesn't make sense "he deported more" and yet standards in the facilities were kept? Make your mind up on how and who you want to blame--doesn't matter cause you'd be wrong. @Kyotosomo Incorrect to suggest that House reps from the Democrat side held off funds to aid people; They have been making humanitarian aid part of the package but Senate Republicans as well as House members only want funding to go to procedural issues. The latter doesn't aim to do what you suggests. How bout make claims not so easily dismissable due to easily being proven incorrect or just look up the situation on less-no biased sources. It makes you seem untrustworthy and emotional, none of which I'm sure you are. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-the-obama-administration-separate-families/ https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-immigration-trump-families-20180621-htmlstory.html Yh if I want to blame someone then I would blame everyone involved. One thing that has changed since Obama was that more and more Refugees came to America in bigger numbers after Obama had to make way for Trump. That is one of the contributing factors. But Trump is also to Blame. I mean Trump does seperate Families in order tp intimidate all the others which bdw is: 1. Cruel AF especially for the children And 2. It did not work AT ALL, now the Facilities are so dam full that the quality of life is pretty dam terrible. Trump wanted something but didn't prepare the necessary tools and fascilities well enough (or at all) to do it as properly and Humane as it should be, especially in Situations like mass immigration. And that just let to shit like this, Fascilities being runned poorly and stories like, well this. And a real fix will probably not come because both parties are so busy with going at each others throat instead of trying to fix this.... I mean did he make deals with other countries for safe deportations and stuff? As far as I know, the answer is no...... |
Bourmegar said: Then for the second time this weekend, I say sorry and sit corrected on an assumption I made--I bolded where I was wrong.Silverstorm said: Stop mixing up the argument. The parties are not the same from nearly 200 years ago by self admission and historical archives. Don't try to spin American history in a thread with Americans that know their history. Obama built the facilities is partly true (some of these are private run), but didn't utilize them the way the current president is. Your comment doesn't make sense "he deported more" and yet standards in the facilities were kept? Make your mind up on how and who you want to blame--doesn't matter cause you'd be wrong. @Kyotosomo Incorrect to suggest that House reps from the Democrat side held off funds to aid people; They have been making humanitarian aid part of the package but Senate Republicans as well as House members only want funding to go to procedural issues. The latter doesn't aim to do what you suggests. How bout make claims not so easily dismissable due to easily being proven incorrect or just look up the situation on less-no biased sources. It makes you seem untrustworthy and emotional, none of which I'm sure you are. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-the-obama-administration-separate-families/ https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-immigration-trump-families-20180621-htmlstory.html Yh if I want to blame someone then I would blame everyone involved. One thing that has changed since Obama was that more and more Refugees came to America in bigger numbers after Obama had to make way for Trump. That is one of the contributing factors. But Trump is also to Blame. I mean Trump does seperate Families in order tp intimidate all the others which bdw is: 1. Cruel AF especially for the children And 2. It did not work AT ALL, now the Facilities are so dam full that the quality of life is pretty dam terrible. Trump wanted something but didn't prepare the necessary tools and fascilities well enough (or at all) to do it as properly and Humane as it should be, especially in Situations like mass immigration. And that just let to shit like this, Fascilities being runned poorly and stories like, well this. And a real fix will probably not come because both parties are so busy with going at each others throat instead of trying to fix this.... I mean did he make deals with other countries for safe deportations and stuff? As far as I know, the answer is no...... |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
| Damn, would be a great if the politicians of the United States stopped encouraging illegal immigration so the facilities don't get crammed in with more people. |
Username is subject to change. |
Kyotosomo said: I wish the Democrats would allow for more funding but they'd rather get to keep the issue and let tens of thousand of people (mostly women and children) suffer so unfortunately nothing will get done. Ultra7 said: Damn, would be a great if the politicians of the United States stopped encouraging illegal immigration so the facilities don't get crammed in with more people. I literally don't know what to say to some of the evil on this thread. The only solution to concentration camps is to tear down the concentration camps and free the people in them. |
| They can leave when they want. Nobody is holding them against their will unless they try to break the law by sneaking into the country. Because there are so many people trying to get in at once, where else are we supposed to put them until their claims of asylum are addressed? They need to go to court for that to make sure their claims are just. We aren't going to just let them in and hope that they show up for their court dates for asylum claims. Nobody would ever show up for that. It shows that there is an issue at the border that Democrats don't want to address. |
 |
| I hope those people will be treated properly. |
logopolis said: I literally don't know what to say to some of the evil on this thread. The only solution to concentration camps is to tear down the concentration camps and free the people in them. How is what @Kyotosomo said evil? He's absolutely right. The situation at the border is as worse as it is because the Democrats ignored Trump when he initially brought up the issue and since then it has gotten worse. Not only that, when sane Democrats and Republicans wanted to come together and help fund the detention centers so they wouldn't be as shitty as they are, the far leftest nutters like AOC obstructed aid. It's absolutely appalling how American politicians have managed to turn an issue that could be easily solved into a massive shitshow. Except they're not concentration camps. Stop kidding yourself. |
| Username is subject to change. |
Ultra7 said: You're not even in America. Probably been reading too much far right Canadian satire shit lollogopolis said: I literally don't know what to say to some of the evil on this thread. The only solution to concentration camps is to tear down the concentration camps and free the people in them. How is what @Kyotosomo said evil? He's absolutely right. The situation at the border is as worse as it is because the Democrats ignored Trump when he initially brought up the issue and since then it has gotten worse. Not only that, when sane Democrats and Republicans wanted to come together and help fund the detention centers so they wouldn't be as shitty as they are, the far leftest nutters like AOC obstructed aid.[b] It's absolutely appalling how American politicians have managed to turn an issue that could be easily solved into a massive shitshow. Except they're not concentration camps. Stop kidding yourself. |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
Silverstorm said: I don't read far right publications. Your politicians are just inept morons.You're not even in America. Probably been reading too much far right Canadian satire shit lol |
| Username is subject to change. |
Ultra7 said: Right, so just satirical shit. Gotcha; fortunately currently you'd fit in with them lolSilverstorm said: I don't read far right publications. Your politicians are just inept morons.You're not even in America. Probably been reading too much far right Canadian satire shit lol |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
Tapertrain said: Milennin said: Exactly my point. Okay but why lock these people up? Why is what they’re doing illegal. Because laws exist to keep order in a country. The same reason laws exist to keep people from doing anything else that's dangerous or harmful or causes disorder. Whether or not you agree doesn't matter. If a country deems crossing the border as illegal, then that's just the way it's going to be. Don't like it, then don't try to enter illegally. It's not complicated. These people willingly, fully consciously break the laws of the country they're trying to enter. I can't feel sorry for whatever consequences they suffer as a result of it. |
Milennin said: Because laws exist to keep order in a country. The same reason laws exist to keep people from doing anything else that's dangerous or harmful or causes disorder. Whether or not you agree doesn't matter. If a country deems crossing the border as illegal, then that's just the way it's going to be. Don't like it, then don't try to enter illegally. It's not complicated. These people willingly, fully consciously break the laws of the country they're trying to enter. I can't feel sorry for whatever consequences they suffer as a result of it. The holocaust was legal but that doesn't mean it was morally or logically justified. Can you please explain the logic behind these laws. |
Tapertrain said: The holocaust was legal but that doesn't mean it was morally or logically justified. Can you please explain the logic behind these laws. No idea how this relates or compares to the holocaust in any way whatsoever? People break the law and get locked up for doing so. I've already explained the logic behind these laws. It's to keep order in a country and the punishment is to deter them from doing so again and for others trying to do the same thing.  |
Tapertrain said: Milennin said: Because laws exist to keep order in a country. The same reason laws exist to keep people from doing anything else that's dangerous or harmful or causes disorder. Whether or not you agree doesn't matter. If a country deems crossing the border as illegal, then that's just the way it's going to be. Don't like it, then don't try to enter illegally. It's not complicated. These people willingly, fully consciously break the laws of the country they're trying to enter. I can't feel sorry for whatever consequences they suffer as a result of it. The holocaust was legal but that doesn't mean it was morally or logically justified. Can you please explain the logic behind these laws. These Camps are made so that the ppl who want to cross over can wait there until they can enter the country legally. So they are being locked up in there to make the Legal immigration easiër. The problem is that these camps are being Run extremely poorly. |
Bourmegar said: Tapertrain said: The holocaust was legal but that doesn't mean it was morally or logically justified. Can you please explain the logic behind these laws. These Camps are made so that the ppl who want to cross over can wait there until they can enter the country legally. So they are being locked up in there to make the Legal immigration easiër. The problem is that these camps are being Run extremely poorly. Milennin said: Tapertrain said: The holocaust was legal but that doesn't mean it was morally or logically justified. Can you please explain the logic behind these laws. No idea how this relates or compares to the holocaust in any way whatsoever? People break the law and get locked up for doing so. I've already explained the logic behind these laws. It's to keep order in a country and the punishment is to deter them from doing so again and for others trying to do the same thing. This doesn’t answer my question at all. How the fuck does immigration cause harm to a country? Specifically in what way do these facilities bring order to the country? There needs to be a good reason for things to be illegal. I’m brining up the holocaust because you don’t seem understand that laws can be unjust. You people keep dodging my questions and that’s why I assume that you just hate people have terrible motivations. |
TapertrainJul 25, 2019 9:23 AM
Tapertrain said: This doesn’t answer my question at all. How the fuck does immigration cause harm to a country? Specifically in what way do these facilities bring order to the country? There needs to be a good reason for things to be illegal. I’m brining up the holocaust because you don’t seem understand that laws can be unjust. You people keep dodging my questions and that’s why I assume that you just hate people have terrible motivations. Because you put people that don't speak the language, with limited skill sets, lower average IQ, live an entirely different culture that on top of that get sick or injured during their journey so they require resources from the place they end up in, in a country that's built on a foundation of people putting into the system (taxes) in return for social services. These people need housing, because we're too nice to let them sleep in the desert. Where to get the housing from when literal thousands upon thousands of people suddenly enter your country? Answer me that. These people need education so they learn the language, culture, skills, get to integrate (lol, as if). Where to get the facilities and people with the skills to teach from to provide this to these people, not to mention the costs it would bring? Answer me that. How to accommodate to people with an average IQ so low that they can't normally function in society without constantly requiring services so they don't end up homeless and end up living on the streets? When thousands upon thousands of these people suddenly enter the country, where do you get the resources from to care for these people that can't/won't contribute to society? Answer me that. Oh wait, your answer is to take from the tax payers? Well, what happens when another million of these people enter the country? And then another million? And they keep on coming? How long until tax payer money won't cover the bills anymore? What happens to a country that runs out of money to hand out (not to mention the US is already hugely in debt, lol, yet people pretend to think money just endlessly grows on trees and all is fine). The better question is, how does mass immigration not cause harm to a country? Helping every poor person in the world is an idealistic mindset that has no place in reality. Besides, these people don't need help, since they aren't fleeing from war or anything in the first place. Your argument is invalid regardless. |
Milennin said: Tapertrain said: This doesn’t answer my question at all. How the fuck does immigration cause harm to a country? Specifically in what way do these facilities bring order to the country? There needs to be a good reason for things to be illegal. I’m brining up the holocaust because you don’t seem understand that laws can be unjust. You people keep dodging my questions and that’s why I assume that you just hate people have terrible motivations. Because you put people that don't speak the language, with limited skill sets, lower average IQ, live an entirely different culture that on top of that get sick or injured during their journey so they require resources from the place they end up in, in a country that's built on a foundation of people putting into the system (taxes) in return for social services. These people need housing, because we're too nice to let them sleep in the desert. Where to get the housing from when literal thousands upon thousands of people suddenly enter your country? Answer me that. These people need education so they learn the language, culture, skills, get to integrate (lol, as if). Where to get the facilities and people with the skills to teach from to provide this to these people, not to mention the costs it would bring? Answer me that. How to accommodate to people with an average IQ so low that they can't normally function in society without constantly requiring services so they don't end up homeless and end up living on the streets? When thousands upon thousands of these people suddenly enter the country, where do you get the resources from to care for these people that can't/won't contribute to society? Answer me that. Oh wait, your answer is to take from the tax payers? Well, what happens when another million of these people enter the country? And then another million? And they keep on coming? How long until tax payer money won't cover the bills anymore? What happens to a country that runs out of money to hand out (not to mention the US is already hugely in debt, lol, yet people pretend to think money just endlessly grows on trees and all is fine). The better question is, how does mass immigration not cause harm to a country? Helping every poor person in the world is an idealistic mindset that has no place in reality. Besides, these people don't need help, since they aren't fleeing from war or anything in the first place. Your argument is invalid regardless. I don't think we should have to house them. That's one of the reasons why I'm anti detention center. This study shows that they get jobs and it doesn't negatively effect the economy. https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_vis=1&q=undocumented+immigrants+in+the+united+states+economic+impacts&btnG= The Trump administration ran a study and it found that illegal immigrants contribute to the economy. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/refugees-revenue-cost-report-trump.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/19/16333778/trump-administration-rejects-study-refugees-help-economy |
Milennin said: lower average IQ, That part alone is enough to prove your racism. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |