Burgold

The immigration thread: American Melting Pot or Get off my Lawn

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, twa said:

 

it is standard to require dna testing to be paid by the immigrant when they want to come legally, why should illegal crossers be exempt from paying?

Please post some proof. Nothing I've seen says immigrants have to pay for DNA when they are separated by the government.

 

Edit: since we're on a new page

 

 

Edited by Cooked Crack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kidnapped?

obligations are not extortion.

VERY similar except for that trying to avoid screening and rules thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cooked Crack said:

Please post some proof. Nothing I've seen says immigrants have to pay fo DNA when they are separated by the government.

 

I already have, it is required (and the parent pays) if the documentation of ANY immigrant does not meet the standard required, and has been law for about 15 yrs.

Immigrants are NOT separated, ILLEGAL immigrants are under zero tolerance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, twa said:

 

I already have, it is required (and the parent pays) if the documentation of ANY immigrant does not meet the standard required, and has been law for about 15 yrs.

Immigrants are NOT separated, ILLEGAL immigrants are under zero tolerance

Your original statement made it sound like DNA testing is required for all legal immigrants. That's definitely not standard practice.

 

It's hard to meet the standard required when your documentation is taken from you.

Quote

“When these families come in, Customs and Border Protection takes away the documents from parents and puts them in their file,” Garcia said. “In the cases where they’ve been separated from their children, ORR then says, ‘You’re going to need to provide the documents that CBP took.’”

And when the immigrants can’t, Garcia said, ORR tells parents they must take a DNA test.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, twa said:

kidnapped?

 

Kidnapped.  

 

Forcibly removing one's child, and then demanding that the parent pay (or perform some other act) if they ever want to see their child again.  

 

It's a stretch.  But less of one that your attempts to paint this as a pre-existing procedure by pointing at the procedure for parents wishing to receive entry documents for children who they can't document.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

Does this surprise anyone?  These people are products, and this system is all about making money off them.  No one is going to cover the cost of a dna test.  Even if the government paid extra for it, contractors would still try to get those people to pay for it.  If you think I’m exaggerating, go to an immigrant detention center and ask the people there about how they’re nickel and dimed while detained.  

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

 

It's a stretch. 

 

 

We agree :)

 

Do you have evidence of the providence of documents provided or of the results of the interviews of people ALREADY breaking our laws??

 

Of the 100 with kids under 5 we have about 10% either not biological parents or criminals or 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twa said:

 

it is standard to require dna testing to be paid by the immigrant when they want to come legally, why should illegal crossers be exempt from paying?

Because they’re detained without access to funds, often without legal representation, and because the government should have the burden of proof in all instances where children are taken.

Just now, twa said:

 

We agree :)

 

Do you have evidence of the providence of documents provided or of the results of the interviews of people ALREADY breaking our laws??

 

Of the 100 with kids under 5 we have about 10% either not biological parents or criminals or 

Human trafficking is closer than kidnapping.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Destino said:

Because they’re detained without access to funds, often without legal representation, and because the government should have the burden of proof in all instances where children are taken.

 

If they hadn't entered illegally the situation would be different.

 

Breaking the law does put a crimp on things for poor folk.

 

I'd be fine with detaining them as a family unit ....a certain judge isn't.

 

added

I'll agree the govt should meet the burden of proving they entered illegally BEFORE obeying the court order to place the kids elsewhere while we sort out the mess they caused.

Edited by twa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, twa said:

If they hadn't entered illegally the situation would be different.

One wrong does not justify anything and everything.  If someone hangs a flier where they shouldn’t and our government drops a bomb on the neighborhood, no one would be saying “well if they hadn’t posted that flier illegally...”  In this instance the government is actively harming children because they are not equipped to carry out an immigration strategy they’ve chosen.  What they are doing is worse than what they are seeking to solve.  Hurting children in this manner is worse, significantly, than overstaying a visa.  

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Most of these are not being separated for overstaying visas, nor for hanging flyers.

Separating them from their children is something the court and the legislature need to address......you might note the govt's position remains that they will be separated due to the court ruling AND zero tolerance.

 

Quote

 

Stewart told Sabraw that the government read the two orders together — Sabraw's reunification order and Gee's order keeping the Flores agreement intact — to mean that parents in immigration detention would be given a choice: Either agree to waive their child's right to release under the Flores agreement and stay together in custody, or agree to release their child to ORR, where they'd be placed in licensed, nonsecure facilities or possibly released to an eligible sponsor. However, the government did not read the orders together to give parents any right to themselves be released, Stewart said.

The attorney general had authority to decide who should be held, Stewart said, and Sabraw and Gee's orders did not require the release of parents if the government decided it had lawful authority to hold them. If Sabraw disagreed with the government's position, Stewart said, the government was prepared to pursue an emergency appeal. Fabian previously told Sabraw that families reunited Tuesday would be released from custody, but Stewart's comments signaled that the administration plans to hold reunified families going forward.

American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Lee Gelernt, who represents separated parents in Sabraw's case, said they agreed with the government's interpretation of the two orders. Gelernt said he wished the Flores agreement went farther and did require the release of a parent along with their child, but it did not. The two sides said they would jointly file a request with Sabraw to confirm their interpretation of his order.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/the-governments-struggle-to-reunify-children-with-their?utm_term=.xy13JxdwB#.fuPP2dNAb

 

 

Edited by twa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this is the right thread for this, but the police made an arrest in the case of that 91 year old latino who got beat with a brick.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/11/us/mexican-man-beaten-concrete-block-los-angeles-arrest/index.html

 

I admit, I thought it would be Jim-Bob Jones, ardent Trump supporter.  Something tells me that Laquisha Jones isn't a Trump supporter.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

I guess this is the right thread for this, but the police made an arrest in the case of that 91 year old latino who got beat with a brick.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/11/us/mexican-man-beaten-concrete-block-los-angeles-arrest/index.html

 

I admit, I thought it would be Jim-Bob Jones, ardent Trump supporter.  Something tells me that Laquisha Jones isn't a Trump supporter.

 

ya never know, no word on the trash that were kicking him afterwards yet I guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, twa said:

Most of these are not being separated for overstaying visas, nor for hanging flyers.

 

Illegal status is illegal status.  Is over staying your visa somehow less bad than hoping for a successful asylum claim?  Speaking of which here we have another example squeezing desperate immigrants.  They took his daughter to Chicago, and if he wants her back he come up with $1250.  

 

Quote

Honduran immigrant Christian Granados has been separated from his 5-year-old daughter Cristhy for more than a month after they were detained in El Paso, Texas, attempting to enter the U.S.

 

She was taken to a holding facility in Chicago, while he was released pending an asylum request on June 24.

 

He has been in the midst of one bureaucratic hassle after another in trying to get his daughter back, responding to intermittent requests for identification documents and biographical information from government social workers who are attending to his daughter.

 

Granados sought out a suitable home to help reclaim his child by moving in with relatives in Fort Mill, S.C. — but now fears he won't be able to afford airfare for his girl to be reunited with him. He said authorities requested $1,250 to fly her from Chicago.

https://apnews.com/4cb60fc06ca34160bf7445fdc1f47eed

 

And that’s one of the lucky ones.  The rest of the article details children dragged into court after their parents have already been deported.  Some parents were told that they’d have to accept deportation if they wanted their kids back, which is a seriously dirty way to get someone to abandon their efforts to gain legal status, and then deported them without their kids anyway.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Destino said:

 

Illegal status is illegal status.  Is over staying your visa somehow less bad than hoping for a successful asylum claim?

 

 

 

Overstaying is less bad than jumping the border imo, at least with the former there is some vetting. 

IF I get caught I will claim asylum seems a bit too far to me,especially for those paying to be smuggled in.....they ain't lost and wandering.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Jose had a prior removal order, which may have been the reason Customs and Border Patrol targeted him and his son for separation. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

do these guys not have last names? "Jose...yeah we know that guy", says ICE

 

come on Vice

Edited by Gibbit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.