Immigrant caravan

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sunny said:
Bob, that all sounds very correct and high-minded. But realistically, how? Saying "we should" is meaningless when we are confronted with a big surge of desperate humanity.

It seems to me that the only way to stop the illegal crossing is to make it all legal. If we did that, we would have no national borders; people would just be free to come and go as they please. Maybe some day in the future, that will happen. Not in our lifetimes.

Nothing else would work, not even draconian measures such as killing anyone who tries to enter illegally. People would still find a way to do it.

But from all that I have read, immigration from our southern border has diminished considerably. The life awaiting illegal immigrants is not measurably better than the life they left behind. And economic conditions have improved in Mexico. This whole "caravan" thing is a bugaboo work of fiction, designed to scare up the masses to respond at the polls.
Click to expand...

A week or so back I suggested folks in the US should read about how some of the most permissive of the Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, and others have responded to far too much immigration and how they do slow it down. I suggested Denmark as it has done some pretty much to end immigration efforts.

When folks have their money over a certain level taken to help pay for immigration costs. When actually entered and accepted they can not call in family for at least two years. They must learn the local language, they must not attempt to force their ways on the communities. The Danish eat pork so they will not remove it from school menus to please the immigrants. On and on they do what they can to support their own ways of life and insist the newcomers adapt to the Danish life.

I believe also that the US should look to the ways others handle immigration and follow suite. Don't take my word for these actions. Look they up on the web.

Here is an example.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/denmark-refugees-immigration-law/431520/

We are way to easy on the immigrants that think crossing the border is just dandy so now you can feed me, medicate me, provide housing, and even provide a car for us. We need the wall completed and our border patrol should be allowed to block their entrance at the borders.

They need to use our legal way of starting at a consulate and get invited in.
 

news from Louisiana
BATON ROUGE — Louisiana's Department of Health will begin sending nursing home eviction notices Thursday to more than 30,000 residents who could lose Medicaid under the budget passed by the state House of Representatives.
www.thenewsstar.com/story/news/2018/05/07/nursing-home-eviction-notices-sent-week/585516002/


(I don't know if this'd be considered politics, but hope it's ok to post it because it's kinda important)


In the thread titled news from Louisiana the 30,000 that face eviction notices should form a caravan to go to California to claim amnesty from horrible conditions they face in Louisiana. As they cross state borders they could accept offers of amnesty.
 
Lara said:
Southern CA has the most expensive real estate and rent in the US besides SF and NYC. Do you think these people come over the border with millions of dollars each in their pockets? Where do you think they will live? How will they buy food? What about medical care? Transportation? They don't have any money. They are taken care of by the taxpayers. Some are pregnant and go to the emergency rooms in our hospitals and get free delivery.


My source used (in quotes with youtube link) wasn't talking about citizens. He's talking about 200 illegals who were granted entry w/benefits into the US because they used the word "asylum". They are still illegals until they show up for their court date and begin the legal process at their hearing. But many don't show up for their hearing and go to the LA swap meet for their fake IDs.

The word is out to use the "asylum" card because of the instant free benefits you receive that our legal citizens don't get. Yes there is cheating going on, lots of it. Some of the children are not even their own.

Yes they are seeking the American dream and there are some who are honest and become productive citizens but when they arrive in mass caravans we need to be very careful to vet those from the lawless ones. That's why we need a wall and heightened border security...and take our time, oh, and cooperation from California leaders who aren't following our Constitutional laws. They're ignoring ICE, plus warning and protecting illegals even, etc. Is that fair to the honest law abiding aliens who worked their way toward legal citizenship?
Click to expand...

FIRST, what free benefits that US citizens don't get are you talking about?? If you are talking about food and housing again, the way the asylum seekers would get anything like that is in immigration detention centers or from private charities.

Secondly, they were NOT "admitted with benefits" because they used the word asylum. Their case for asylum must be documented and proved before they are legally admitted as asylees into the United states. Those who passed an initial credibility screening would have been allowed to enter only to await the outcome of their cases. It is my understanding that most, if not all, of them will be held in immigration detention centers until their cases are heard, so you can quit worrying about them running amuck at LA swap meets. Those whose cases fail will be deported.

Thirdly, they DO have the right to seek asylum, whether you think they should or not, and there is nothing sneaky or illegal about seeking asylum. Only a fairly small percentage of those who seek asylum are granted it, as the threshold of proof is fairly high.

Fourth, as to the idea of pregnant women going to hospitals to have their babies, would you prefer they have them in the floor at the border checkpoints?

I do agree that we need secure borders, but if we don't like the law then we must change it, not demonize those who might benefit under it.
 

Butterfly said:
FIRST, what free benefits that US citizens don't get are you talking about?? If you are talking about food and housing again, the way the asylum seekers would get anything like that is in immigration detention centers or from private charities.

Secondly, they were NOT "admitted with benefits" because they used the word asylum. Their case for asylum must be documented and proved before they are legally admitted as asylees into the United states. Those who passed an initial credibility screening would have been allowed to enter only to await the outcome of their cases. It is my understanding that most, if not all, of them will be held in immigration detention centers until their cases are heard, so you can quit worrying about them running amuck at LA swap meets. Those whose cases fail will be deported.

Thirdly, they DO have the right to seek asylum, whether you think they should or not, and there is nothing sneaky or illegal about seeking asylum. Only a fairly small percentage of those who seek asylum are granted it, as the threshold of proof is fairly high.

Fourth, as to the idea of pregnant women going to hospitals to have their babies, would you prefer they have them in the floor at the border checkpoints?

I do agree that we need secure borders, but if we don't like the law then we must change it, not demonize those who might benefit under it.
Click to expand...

The expressed payers of the cost are the federal and state funds and from private charities. So all those benefits come from citizens of the US using money that should be left for real citizens needs.

And that is not counting the thousands that have slipped through and never been caught or the thousands that entered the system but then disappeared. We need to stop all entries at the border and make sure they are identified and become part of our system, no matter the reasons.

There are ways for low income and needy folks to get bedding and food in the US. The US is overflowing with charity and ways for helping the needy. We are far too involved in making it possible for folks to live and eat without jobs.

Many years back it was possible for folks, sometimes called 'tramps', that would knock on the door and offer to work for a meal. Should we go back to this form, likely not. But we do need to slow down our willingness to give to our own and certainly to our neighboring countries with their ideas of threats being enough to open our borders to all.
 
Bob, what would you do if you were confronted with a real family whose mother is clearly starving, a baby screaming for food, a child suffering from cancer? And who have not signed all the necessary legal forms to enter this country? Would you demand to see those forms before providing any help, as one human being to another? If they can't produce the forms, would you slam the door on them, saying, "Then die! And good riddance!" We need the money to help real citizens, not riffraff like you!"

If this sounds like something out of Dickens, it is what you are proposing.
 
Sunny said:
Bob, what would you do if you were confronted with a real family whose mother is clearly starving, a baby screaming for food, a child suffering from cancer? And who have not signed all the necessary legal forms to enter this country? Would you demand to see those forms before providing any help, as one human being to another? If they can't produce the forms, would you slam the door on them, saying, "Then die! And good riddance!" We need the money to help real citizens, not riffraff like you!" If this sounds like something out of Dickens, it is what you are proposing.
Click to expand...
Relax. Bob is not a monster. This is a sensational picture to paint of Bob's post and putting words in his mouth. He's not talking about one starving family. He's talking about "thousands that have slipped through and never been caught or the thousands that entered the system but then disappeared", caravans, MS-13 gangs, etc.

And Bob did not say "Die, good riddance, nor call them riff-raff." He suggested we slow down, be more careful at the borders to handle these mass entries, and figure out a plan that will not make it too easy for them to live high-on-the charity hog so they have no need or interest in getting jobs. It's true that we have a lot of generous charities in America.
 
Sunny your sceanario is an extreme and as written involves only one mother or child. As has been explained each amnesty applicant has their case reviewed. What you describe most certainly would be considered .


But this isn't about the kind of situation you described. It's about setting a precedence of gaining mass entry into America and not accepting the offer of Mexico for amnesty.


Maybe you are not old enough to know about Cuban leader Fidel Castro helping criminals end up in America. I believe other governments world wide would help their citizens seek refuge in America if a significant number claiming amnesty were accepted.


I don't blame Castro for what he did then I blame the people that were trying to be kind but didn't realize that not every leader is honest.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_exile


I'm not answering for Bob just posting my view on this topic.
 
Lara and Knight, I'm not calling anyone a monster. I think Bob is making some misguided glittering generalities.

Those "thousands and thousands" consist of individual human beings, each with his/her particular reason for trying to escape to this country. Obviously, some of those reasons carry more veritas than others. But slamming the door on all of them, separating parents and children who have lived in this country for the child's entire life (and are therefore Americans) is heartless.

Looking at the huddled masses referred to on the Statue of Liberty as selfish people and criminals is unconscionable. There were those who labeled them that way even then. Not to mention the people, led by FDR of all people, who refused refuge to Jews trying to escape the Holocaust because they would "put too big a strain on our social services." It's always easy to smear large groups of people with whatever ugly brush you choose.

But looking at them as individual human beings, many of them with tragic experiences and great suffering, it's not so easy to turn your back on them, is it?
 
Sunny said:
Lara and Knight, I'm not calling anyone a monster. I think Bob is making some misguided glittering generalities.

Those "thousands and thousands" consist of individual human beings, each with his/her particular reason for trying to escape to this country. Obviously, some of those reasons carry more veritas than others. But slamming the door on all of them, separating parents and children who have lived in this country for the child's entire life (and are therefore Americans) is heartless.

Looking at the huddled masses referred to on the Statue of Liberty as selfish people and criminals is unconscionable. There were those who labeled them that way even then. Not to mention the people, led by FDR of all people, who refused refuge to Jews trying to escape the Holocaust because they would "put too big a strain on our social services." It's always easy to smear large groups of people with whatever ugly brush you choose.

But looking at them as individual human beings, many of them with tragic experiences and great suffering, it's not so easy to turn your back on them, is it?
Click to expand...

Call things what you want but remember that not all of the US agree with some of the things you are saying. Not sure what you mean by glittering generalities, so will ignore those types of comments for what they are worth.

Slamming the door on all of them? What are you speaking of with that comment. We are trying to build a better border defense with more Border Patrol and military reinforcement. We hope to strengthen our current wall and build a better one where needed. This does not slam the door on any one wanting to immigrate to the US. It is intended to cut down on crime or drug transportation into the US from the southern border.

I believe that allowing the border patrol to actually stop immigrants from crossing the border is correct as only when the immigrants claim for safety in the US can be confirmed should they get permission. Applying at a US Consulate would be a better way. All those that arrive from Europe, Africa, middle east, Asia, and other areas have been screened before arriving in the US, why not those from south and central America?

I lived in a Arizona city where one of the border patrol units was stationed. They were about 300 strong and worked a large part of the border and nearby areas. The border patrols then could not stop them from crossing the border. a Instead they waited till darkness when many of the immigrants would cross the border and attempt to hike north into Arizona or get rides into other states.

This has always been a poor situation as once over the fence it is easy to hide in the weeds during the day and rest through the heat and then make a good move in the evening while trying to avoid the border patrol. They would come by the train load across Mexico and near the US border they drop off the train and start playing hide and seek with the Border Patrols.

Better to shut off access for some as most do appear to need screening prior to arrival. Those along our southern border are no better than all the others I mentioned earlier in this post.
 
Lara said:
Relax. Bob is not a monster. This is a sensational picture to paint of Bob's post and putting words in his mouth. He's not talking about one starving family. He's talking about "thousands that have slipped through and never been caught or the thousands that entered the system but then disappeared", caravans, MS-13 gangs, etc.

And Bob did not say "Die, good riddance, nor call them riff-raff." He suggested we slow down, be more careful at the borders to handle these mass entries, and figure out a plan that will not make it too easy for them to live high-on-the charity hog so they have no need or interest in getting jobs. It's true that we have a lot of generous charities in America.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And he is correct. We are being overrun and it's way past time to stem the flow. We cannot care for the entire world.

I will add that those of you not living in border states really don't have a clear understanding of the magnitude of this problem.
 
Clearly the anti immigration movement is fueled by the fool we have for president so how it ends up is anyone's guess. The immigration problem is world-wide and bad reactions are and will occur violence not ruled out. When any nation is forced to change its laws to accommodate immigrants it is then a problem. America is a good example of immigration creating problems as witnessed by races preferring not to melt in rather, to live amongst themselves. A good example of this "natural selection" is our prisons when we witness the prison yards where races sit separate from each other by choice. Integration was forced on us in the early civil right movement because the govt. knew clearly it is something that does not come natural if it did there would never have been the need to force it. Genocide with it's long history remains alive and well in different parts of the world.
 
fmdog44 said:
Clearly the anti immigration movement is fueled by the fool we have for president so how it ends up is anyone's guess. The immigration problem is world-wide and bad reactions are and will occur violence not ruled out. When any nation is forced to change its laws to accommodate immigrants it is then a problem. America is a good example of immigration creating problems as witnessed by races preferring not to melt in rather, to live amongst themselves. A good example of this "natural selection" is our prisons when we witness the prison yards where races sit separate from each other by choice. Integration was forced on us in the early civil right movement because the govt. knew clearly it is something that does not come natural if it did there would never have been the need to force it. Genocide with it's long history remains alive and well in different parts of the world.
Click to expand...

How can you make such a statement when it was Obama and before when the border protection was started. We have had border fences and walls for years now, long before Trump showed up. Plenty of folks are upset with the lack of control of our borders and Trump is certainly using those ideas to get changes made.
 
Sunny said:
Trump is using those ideas to appeal to his base voters. Period. He has no consistent policy on any changes, and is as changeable as the wind.
Click to expand...

What Trump is doing is to accomplish his campaign promises. Some pretty good actions have happened for the US today and in the future. I hope he continues to be so good in policy changes and for the economy and employment for the rest of his official duty days. Depending on the coming elections he has 2 plus years or possibly 6 plus years.

Interesting years recently and hope they continue no matter who wins these coming years. We do need to have positive leadership no matter which party thinks they run the government.

I am always against either party thinking they run the government. Nowhere in our Constitution does it say any political party will run the government. If a person wins the election the person is supposed to push for what the folks in his election district are pushing for, not what a political party demands.

After the election campaign ends the parties should be forgotten and let our government run per our Constitution.
 
BobF said:
How can you make such a statement when it was Obama and before when the border protection was started. We have had border fences and walls for years now, long before Trump showed up. Plenty of folks are upset with the lack of control of our borders and Trump is certainly using those ideas to get changes made.
Click to expand...

No argument but Trump is blowing smoke up the peoples rear. Example: Where is the caravan now. Trump's ego thinks he can actually STOP illegal immigration and that will NEVER happen. What next a wall to stop tunnels? What a joke.
 
Our immigration problems are totally different than most other countries. Here we sit, a rich country at the top of a band of land that knows only poverty. We are a magnet for those who hunger. We cannot afford to feed them all, but we can in our planning try to be as humane as possible in our approaches to a resolution to their and our problem.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top