Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[apocalyptic_pleasures]

Outrageous rhetoric, part of Trump's plan to create an enemy of the state and convince people that he alone and his policies are what is going to protect us.
Invaders? Infiltrate, bringing crime and terrorism? Aggressors? Enemy Invaders? Look dude, this isn't a war, these aren't gang rapist drug dealing bomb making terrorists. Almost all of these folks are well intentioned humans trying to better themselves and their families. They do a good service to this country and work hard labor intensive jobs for very little pay. Things that get food to our grocery stores, things that support the entire class structure of our society.
You can google up a few illegal immigrants that have committed crimes, some even egregious and violent. That's expected, there's got to be millions of them. That happens in any population, any ethnicity or race or country of origin. There isn't any increased likelihood that these people cause more crime than your neighbors would.
So cut the overzealous exaggerated evil rhetoric crap. These aren't enemy invaders & aggressors. Theres far more domestic crime and terrorism you should be concerned about. Hell, there's hundreds of things you should be more concerned about. The last thing this country needs is more people getting conned into the presidents classic authoritarian manipulation. It's textbook.

This stuff isn't happening as a result of Trump being President...Trump is president as a result of the failure of past administrations' efforts to fix the country in many areas including Immigration. He's just the first President to actually try and seriously do something about it. However, didn't they find their 'Asylum' when they left the allegedly hostile country and entered Mexico?

How are these really Asylum seekers in the first place??

noun
noun: asylum seeker; plural noun: asylum seekers

1. a person who has left their home country as a political refugee and is seeking asylum in another.
   "only asylum seekers who are granted refugee status are allowed to work in the country"

https://www.colorlines.com/articles/central-american-asylum-seekers-respond-trumps-lies

Many of these would appear to be fully able bodied men proudly waiving the flags of Honduras and Nicaragua ...the hostile countries they are seeking Asylum from. If wanting another country to feel sorry for them and take them in, shouldn't they be waiving that country's flag instead?

Trump isn't the only politician who thinks this way...In 2015, during the Syrian refugee crisis, the majority of states governors stated that their state would not accept the refugees. Trump was merely a wannabe then so had no say-so in the matter then,



https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/world/paris-attacks-syrian-refugees-backlash/index.html

 

[gangstonc]

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/11/trump-foundation-tax-return/

 

[Kory]

That’s after they threw projectiles.

Changing gears: why can’t Manafort tell the truth. He’s getting himself in deeper and deeper.

Look at all the non-violent women and children.

 

[Kory]

That was one really large chunk of rock/concrete one guy threw. Quite deadly. If someone were hurling that at me, I would use any force necessary to protect my life. All I'm saying.

 

[gangstonc]

Look at all the non-violent women and children.

Those people should be teargassed.

 

[gangstonc]

As I said before, just waiting for these people to get here and then tear gassing them is not a long term solution. We need a way to calm house them and determine who is eligible for asylum and who is not. I don’t understand why we have to take a tough guy approach with the military as a first option.

 

[gangstonc]

Did mueller know manafort was lying 10 days ago, and then after he got trump’s answers, decide to spill the beans?

 

[Mike S]

As I said before, just waiting for these people to get here and then tear gassing them is not a long term solution. We need a way to calm house them and determine who is eligible for asylum and who is not. I don’t understand why we have to take a tough guy approach with the military as a first option.

I don't understand why they didn't seek asylum in the country they were supposed to. I don't understand why this is our problem when they spent a month walking through Mexico. I don't understand why the United Nations isn't involved in helping them seek asylum in Mexico. I mean, that's the type of stuff the U.N. is there to handle is it not? I don't understand how they walked through Mexico with no interaction from the cartels(I doubt the cartels were disinterested). I don't understand why the human trafficking issue that is very likely going on in this caravan isn't being addressed. I don't understand why the media and the Democratic party wants to play games with the lives of people of color for political gain/one upsmanship of Trump.

 

[gangstonc]

I don't understand why they didn't seek asylum in the country they were supposed to. I don't understand why this is our problem when they spent a month walking through Mexico. I don't understand why the United Nations isn't involved in helping them seek asylum in Mexico. I mean, that's the type of stuff the U.N. is there to handle is it not? I don't understand how they walked through Mexico with no interaction from the cartels(I doubt the cartels were disinterested). I don't understand why the human trafficking issue that is very likely going on in this caravan isn't being addressed. I don't understand why the media and the Democratic party wants to play games with the lives of people of color for political gain/one upsmanship of Trump.

Trump is the one that publicized the caravan. This type of thing is not exactly rare and has never been handled properly.

What country are the people “supposed” to seek asylum in? I would def seem asylum in the US if I had a choice.

I can’t speak for the UN.

What could the cartels gain from these people?

 

[Kory]

Trump is the one that publicized the caravan. This type of thing is not exactly rare and has never been handled properly.

What country are the people “supposed” to seek asylum in? I would def seem asylum in the US if I had a choice.

I can’t speak for the UN.

What could the cartels gain from these people?

These cartels are evil people.

Mexican drug cartels have identified a lucrative niche of opportunity in the geostrategic position of Mexico as “bridge country” for migration flows towards the U.S., and are now actively exploiting it. These organizations have vigorously seized the human smuggling activities in the southern and northern borders of Mexico, and have transformed them into diverse forms of trafficking and exploitation. Every year thousands of Central Americans fall prey to drug cartels while crossing the southern border of Mexico. The victims are frequently extorted, assaulted, and trafficked for forced labor and sexual exploitation within the country and in the United States. Some of the immigrants are forced to beg for money on the streets, while others are found in this position after being extorted and deprived from their resources to cross the border. In this dramatic scenario, the increase in trafficking of immigrant children who are captured by the cartels for sexual exploitation, forced labor or used as child soldiers in the drug wars in the country becomes particularly worrisome.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ana-...and-human-smuggling-meet-today_b_7588408.html

 

[gangstonc]

These cartels are evil people.



https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ana-...and-human-smuggling-meet-today_b_7588408.html

That is awful. I wonder if they have messed with this caravan.

 

[Mike S]

Trump is the one that publicized the caravan. This type of thing is not exactly rare and has never been handled properly.

What country are the people “supposed” to seek asylum in? I would def seem asylum in the US if I had a choice.

I can’t speak for the UN.

What could the cartels gain from these people?

So?

Mexico

I don't blame you. I don't want to, either.

Well, the cartels are gangs of thugs. Normally, they'd rob the people in the caravan blind of anything they may have of value. They'd likely kill, rape and kidnap in most instances. It is what they do. Human trafficking is a huge commodity for them. Who has paid them off to leave these people alone?

 

[gangstonc]

So?

Mexico

I don't blame you. I don't want to, either.

Well, the cartels are gangs of thugs. Normally, they'd rob the people in the caravan blind of anything they may have of value. They'd likely kill, rape and kidnap in most instances. It is what they do. Human trafficking is a huge commodity for them. Who has paid them off to leave these people alone?

So... you said it was the Democrats and media that brought up the caravan. I say it was trump.

Why are they supposed to use Mexico?

Perhaps the cartels aren’t leaving them alone. Perhaps these people don’t have anything of value. Perhaps the cartels realize there are a ton of media embedded with the caravan and it wouldn’t work out well for them to attack. Perhaps they are trafficking some of the young girls. Perhaps they are happy for the distraction created at the border so they can run more drugs in other places.

 

[KoD]

This stuff isn't happening as a result of Trump being President...Trump is president as a result of the failure of past administrations' efforts to fix the country in many areas including Immigration. He's just the first President to actually try and seriously do something about it. However, didn't they find their 'Asylum' when they left the allegedly hostile country and entered Mexico?

How are these really Asylum seekers in the first place??

noun
noun: asylum seeker; plural noun: asylum seekers

1. a person who has left their home country as a political refugee and is seeking asylum in another.
   "only asylum seekers who are granted refugee status are allowed to work in the country"

View attachment 977

https://www.colorlines.com/articles/central-american-asylum-seekers-respond-trumps-lies

Many of these would appear to be fully able bodied men proudly waiving the flags of Honduras and Nicaragua ...the hostile countries they are seeking Asylum from. If wanting another country to feel sorry for them and take them in, shouldn't they be waiving that country's flag instead?

Trump isn't the only politician who thinks this way...In 2015, during the Syrian refugee crisis, the majority of states governors stated that their state would not accept the refugees. Trump was merely a wannabe then so had no say-so in the matter then,

View attachment 978

https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/world/paris-attacks-syrian-refugees-backlash/index.html

I don't understand how your correlation between these immigrants being patriotic towards their home country and seeking asylum has any bearing on their risk to us. If I were to get involved in some type of gang violence and was at risk, for example, of being tortured or killed because a family member of mine made bad decisions and I wanted to seek asylum in Europe .. I would still be proud have been a citizen of the United States.
Your stats show opinions of governor's, and don't support the underlying premise. Immigrants are bad, bring crime and make things worse for the country. If you have data backing that viewpoint, then I would like to see it.
Meanwhile, here's data showing that immigrants have no impact or in some cases reduce the crime rate where they reside:

1. "The Integration of Immigrants into American Society". National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. doi:10.17226/21746. Americans have long believed that immigrants are more likely than natives to commit crimes and that rising immigration leads to rising crime... This belief is remarkably resilient to the contrary evidence that immigrants are in fact much less likely than natives to commit crimes.
2. ^ a b c d e f Papadopoulos, Georgios (2014-07-02). "Immigration status and property crime: an application of estimators for underreported outcomes". IZA Journal of Migration. 3 (1): 12. doi:10.1186/2193-9039-3-12. ISSN 2193-9039.
3. ^ a b c Bianchi, Milo; Buonanno, Paolo; Pinotti, Paolo (2012-12-01). "Do Immigrants Cause Crime?". Journal of the European Economic Association. 10 (6): 1318–1347. doi:10.1111/j.1542-4774.2012.01085.x. ISSN 1542-4774.
4. ^ a b c d e Nunziata, Luca (2015-03-04). "Immigration and crime: evidence from victimization data". Journal of Population Economics. 28 (3): 697–736. doi:10.1007/s00148-015-0543-2. ISSN 0933-1433.
5. ^ a b c d Bell, Brian; Fasani, Francesco; Machin, Stephen (2012-10-10). "Crime and Immigration: Evidence from Large Immigrant Waves". Review of Economics and Statistics. 95 (4): 1278–1290. doi:10.1162/REST_a_00337. ISSN 0034-6535.
6. ^ a b c Bell, Brian; Machin, Stephen (2013-02-01). "Immigrant Enclaves and Crime". Journal of Regional Science. 53 (1): 118–141. doi:10.1111/jors.12003. ISSN 1467-9787.
7. ^ a b c Wadsworth, Tim (2010-06-01). "Is Immigration Responsible for the Crime Drop? An Assessment of the Influence of Immigration on Changes in Violent Crime Between 1990 and 2000". Social Science Quarterly. 91 (2): 531–553. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00706.x. ISSN 1540-6237.
8. ^ a b Lee, Matthew T.; Martinez Jr., Ramiro (2009). "Immigration reduces crime: an emerging scholarly consensus". Immigration, Crime and Justice. Emerald Group Publishing. pp. 3–16. ISBN 9781848554382.
9. Bell, Brian; Oxford, University of; UK (2014). "Crime and immigration". IZA World of Labor. doi:10.15185/izawol.33.

 

[Arcadia]

So... you said it was the Democrats and media that brought up the caravan. I say it was trump.

Why are they supposed to use Mexico?

Perhaps the cartels aren’t leaving them alone. Perhaps these people don’t have anything of value. Perhaps the cartels realize there are a ton of media embedded with the caravan and it wouldn’t work out well for them to attack. Perhaps they are trafficking some of the young girls. Perhaps they are happy for the distraction created at the border so they can run more drugs in other places.

Why Mexico? Because it is an established principle of international law set out by the United Nations Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees that migrants seek asylum in the first safe country they reach. You don't country shop. You don't storm the border of your 'chosen' or 'preferred' country and you don't make demands and you sure as hell don't hurl rocks at them. Mexico receives and processes thousands of asylum applications every year. And yet, for some reason, this caravan was hell bent on coming here. After they breached Mexico's border. Lest we forget.

 

[gangstonc]

Why Mexico? Because it is an established principle of international law set out by the United Nations Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees that migrants seek asylum in the first safe country they reach. You don't country shop. You don't storm the border of your 'chosen' or 'preferred' country and you don't make demands and you sure as hell don't hurl rocks at them. Mexico receives and processes thousands of asylum applications every year. And yet, for some reason, this caravan was hell bent on coming here. After they breached Mexico's border. Lest we forget.

I can only find where articles claim the opposite of the UN convention and the later protocol (which is what the US falls under). Do you have a link i can follow?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

Is the best I have found, but there isn’t any mention of a first country statute.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/immigration/sd-me-safe-country-20180518-story.html

This seems to be an opinion piece, it also supports the idea that you are not required to seek asylum in the first country you reach.

All that said, if you hurl rocks and storm borders, you can’t come in and deserve whatever you get.

 

[Kory]

Just gonna leave this here. Goes to show you the media will oppose ANYTHING Trump says. Even if they published the same opinion just months prior.

 

[Kory]

Asylum =/= seeking better economic opportunities. That is a completely different process and you're not guaranteed it.

 

[Arcadia]

I can only find where articles claim the opposite of the UN convention and the later protocol (which is what the US falls under). Do you have a link i can follow?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

Is the best I have found, but there isn’t any mention of a first country statute.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/immigration/sd-me-safe-country-20180518-story.html

This seems to be an opinion piece, it also supports the idea that you are not required to seek asylum in the first country you reach.

All that said, if you hurl rocks and storm borders, you can’t come in and deserve whatever you get.

Here's the link: https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/migration/4aa76e039/refugee-protection-mixed-migration-10-point-plan-action-chapter-6-differentiated.html?query=first point of entry

A. First country of asylum​

10. The majority of States deny a person access to asylum on their territory if s/he has already found protection in another country. In principle, this should not pose difficulties, assuming the surrogate protection required by the individual is available and can be accessed. Where the notion has, however, been problematic in practice has been in the judgement required as to whether protection possibilities are both genuinely “available”, i.e. accessible to the individual concerned, and “effective”.

11. Admissibility procedures which provide for an individual assessment of each case are clearly best practice here. It may, for example, be that although an individual previously enjoyed protection in another country, s/he can justifiably claim to have a reason to fear that his/her physical safety and/or freedom are endangered in that country. It may also be that a refugee cannot secure effective protection and the full and durable enjoyment of his/her rights in a first country of asylum, for instance, if s/he is obliged to live without proper legal status. In such cases, refugees may legitimately feel compelled to seek protection elsewhere.

There are many dynamics to a complicated thing such as someone seeking asylum. But media reports and interviews are not painting a picture of asylum cases. They are painting a picture of people coming here for economic opportunity, which is a wholly different matter. Could there be alysum seekers in their midst? Sure. But it's not cruel for the US to direct them to seek asylum where they are - in Mexico. In fact, it's an estasblished rule to do so.

Here is a quote from this document.... An examination of the purpose and content of asylum procedures, put in place by States to identify to whom asylum responsibilities are owed, is on the agenda of the Global Consultations process for several reasons. Firstly, State practice has evolved quite considerably since the Executive Committee last turned its attention to the form these procedures should take, and it is timely to examine recent trends with a view to identifying best practices which might be promoted. Secondly, there has been some debate in recent years about what constitutes “fairness” and “efficiency” in procedures, against the backdrop of mixed migratory movements, smuggling and trafficking of people and a degree of misuse of the asylum process for migration outcomes. States have legitimate concerns as regards procedures that are unwieldy, too costly, not necessarily able to respond effectively to misuse, and result in an unequal distribution of responsibilities. The role played by asylum procedures in the overall management of a broader migratory phenomenon is therefore of relevance to this examination.

But why is it whenever the US does it, it becomes a cruelty? Because every imigration story is a political one and very rarely do we get a genuine story of human rights and struggle. Pictures aren't taken because the media cares. Pictures are taken to cultivate a narrative. You can get upset that Trump brought up the caravan all you want. In this instance, it is the media and the Democrats who have egg on their face. Because, while Trump may have exaggerated the numbers, the media and the Democrats denied it was a problem at all. They truth lies somewhere in the middle. And anyone who wants to be honest about it, will look at the entirety of the situation and admit that.

 

[gangstonc]

Those statements don’t really back up that you have to claim asylum in the first country you reach.

Yes the Democrats were wrong when they said it wasn’t a problem. My point is that our govt hs a history of kicking the can down the road with these things. However, that doesn’t mean Trump’s response is correct.