US Authorities Fire Tear Gas to disperse Migrants

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Have you ever heard the phrase "Desperate people do desperate things?" That's what we are seeing at our border right now. These people have been exposed to unspeakable violence in their home country, they have traveled thousands of miles to escape this violence, they know our country has an obligation to hear their pleas and to accept them if they qualify; yet when they get our border they are finding that there are not enough personnel and assets in place to process their request despite the fact that we knew they were coming for months. They are being told they will have to wait weeks if not months to be admitted into the country. Rumors are swirling that they will never be allowed in.

These people are tired, they are hungry, and they are being met by hostility. They are desperate people. They are naturally going to do whatever they feel is necessary to cross the border and if they can manage to cross the border and get arrested on the US side, their asylum processing can begin almost immediately. To many, that option seems better than sitting outside the border in less than ideal conditions with an uncertainty if their voice will ever be heard or not.

Now you're just making excuses for them. If I were to present you with evidence that they were practicing cannibalism, you would find a way to excuse that, probably on the grounds that they were hungry, and furthermore, that it's America's fault for not feeding them. I don't understand why you even bother arguing about how much crime they are likely to commit, since you call for them to be let in regardless.

Let's just say that first, the President made it clear from the start that they would not be welcome, so there was no reason not to expect this beforehand and second, if you are asking to be someone else's guest, you usually present your best behavior. Instead, in addition to this incident at the border, they've made themselves a terrible nuisance in Tijuana, and many have got themselves in trouble with the Mexican authorities. The way they're acting they're confirming everything the President said about them. It's quite obvious why they're being met with hostility on both sides of the border. By their actions, they have shown why Mexico should not have let them in, and why the US should not let them in.

Just change the word "caravan" in that sentence to Germans, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Mexicans, Muslims, and it sounds like what those against immigration since our country's founding have said in the past. What we are hearing today is no different that what has been said about other people groups. They can't assimilate, they are criminals, they want to change our way of life, their culture isn't compatible with ours, they are not good for the economy, etc... History has clearly shown that those against certain people groups in the past were wrong.

Just change the word "caravan" in that sentence to Germans, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Mexicans, Muslims, and it sounds like what those against immigration since our country's founding have said in the past. What we are hearing today is no different that what has been said about other people groups. They can't assimilate, they are criminals, they want to change our way of life, their culture isn't compatible with ours, they are not good for the economy, etc... History has clearly shown that those against certain people groups in the past were wrong.

The United States has restricted immigration, sometimes severely, a number of times in history when it served national interest. Our current immigration policy wasn't adopted until 1965. This notion that immigration is inherently good is actually a pretty recent one, and pretty silly one if I say so myself.

 

[Reconciliation and Truth]

Well you just showed your ignorance about the Republic and the Constitution of the USA. The Electoral College was put into place by the Founding Fathers because no one state or couple of states in the USA should decide who will be president. Every voter in the nation has a right to have a say. Rhode Island has as much right to determine a president as California.

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.

 

[Gigimo]

The US is a major contributor to the chaos in that part of the world

Who in the US specifically is responsible for the chaos?

 

[JosephZ]

Who in the US specifically is responsible for the chaos?

This website goes into the basics United States Interventions in Central America
but if you want to get to the root causes of the mass immigration from central America of the past three decades or so, you can start by reading transcripts from the Iran-Contra Hearings. While the US has been intervening in the affairs of Central America for more than a century, it was during the Reagan Administration that things really took a turn for the worse.

 

[JosephZ]

If I were to present you with evidence that they were practicing cannibalism, you would find a way to excuse that, probably on the grounds that they were hungry, and furthermore, that it's America's fault for not feeding them.

I'm still waiting on you to provide evidence that the people in this caravan are bad.

I don't understand why you even bother arguing about how much crime they are likely to commit,.

in addition to this incident at the border, they've made themselves a terrible nuisance in Tijuana,

By their actions, they have shown why Mexico should not have let them in, and why the US should not let them in.

The way they're acting they're confirming everything the President said about them.

Who is "they" referring to in these comments? The people who make up the caravan and others seeking asylum in the US?

The president has said they are "rapists," "animals," "criminals," and “not the best people," that will “infest" our country.

Once again, who is "they?" Surely you're not referring to asylum seekers, because the descriptions the president gives doesn't describe the vast majority of people wanting to seek asylum in our country. Sure, there are some bad apples in the bunch who have been arrested or caused mischief, maybe 2, 3 or 4% at most? But they don't represent the vast majority of asylum seekers.

The city of Baltimore has some of the highest crime rates in the US and is considered to be one of the most violent cities in the country. Do you consider Baltimoreons rapist, animals, murderers, criminals and a threat to the American population when only a small percentage of them are responsible for the crime found there? Of course not because far greater than 90% of the people in Baltimore aren't responsible for the crime taking place. It's for that same reason we shouldn't see asylum seekers as being bad people either.

This notion that immigration is inherently good is actually a pretty recent one, and pretty silly one if I say so myself.

Would America be as prosperous as it is today had we kept Germans, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Mexicans, and Muslims out as many have pushed for at different points during the history of our country?

 

[jmldn2]

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.


I replied to exactly what you posted. Yes the Electoral College did get him the presidency and I explained exactly why it did. Just because a state has a million more voters than a smaller state does not give that state the right to decide the leader of the nation.

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.

 

[jmldn2]

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.


I replied to exactly what you posted. Yes the Electoral College did get him the presidency and I explained exactly why it did. Just because a state has a million more voters than a smaller state does not give that state the right to decide the leader of the nation.

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.

 

[jmldn2]

Where did I show ignorance?

You didn't read my post. You start writing as soon as you saw "Electoral College."

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

Then you accuse me of ignorance.

Read posts and reply only to what the person actually wrote.

I replied to exactly what you posted. Yes the Electoral College did get him the presidency and I explained exactly why it did. Just because a state has a million more voters than a smaller state does not give that state the right to decide the leader of the nation.

 

[jmldn2]

Who in the US specifically is responsible for the chaos?

The responsibility lies in the antiquated immigration laws which both sides need to address. But that is not the only responsibility to be held up to the glare of light. This caravan and others like it are organized, supported with $$$ by those who desire to desecrate the borders of this Sovereign nation. The chaos at the border currently is a paid for, subsidized effort to break the laws of the USA.

 

[HannahT]

This website goes into the basics United States Interventions in Central America
but if you want to get to the root causes of the mass immigration from central America of the past three decades or so, you can start by reading transcripts from the Iran-Contra Hearings. While the US has been intervening in the affairs of Central America for more than a century, it was during the Reagan Administration that things really took a turn for the worse.

Well, what I find interesting is a number of central American Countries are NOW all of sudden interested in getting together to fight the issues. They never tried all that hard before. The few at the top didn't much care unless it affected their lives. Something human beings across the world have in common.

On Saturday, Mr. López Obrador, the presidents of Guatemala and Honduras, and the vice president of El Salvador, signed an agreement to develop such a strategy, which Mexican officials have likened to the Marshall Plan, the American-led initiative to rebuild Western Europe after World War II.

The approach would “strengthen social development and combat in an integral manner the causes of the migratory phenomenon,” the Mexican government said in a statement.

They never HAD to deal with it in real terms, and so they never did. It was none of their business that people were traveling across their lands to come into America illegally. They stayed out of it. Now that Mexico is having to deal with the ugly reality in a real way? They are also forcing other countries to do that as well, and so maybe now they will CARE about their own people's suffering. It's about time! Shame on them! That was their job!

I hope that this helps those disadvantaged and blown off by their leaders. No one really wants to leave their homes, and they do miss their homelands. This should come to NO surprise to anyone. Now maybe these leaders will be forced to get their poop together, and do what they were placed in their positions to do.

No one cared for the most part - actions speak louder than words - until they had massive amounts of swatters that they had to deal with in their homeland. Now its their reality, and not someone else's? Hopefully they will take their issues much more seriously, and show some true compassion for their own people. Then maybe the other countries will follow suit. I have to believe they will take closing their borders a bit more seriously as more groups continue to come.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I'm still waiting on you to provide evidence that the people in this caravan are bad.

I'm not arguing that they're bad. I'm arguing that it's not in our interest to let them in. It seems that you think we should let them in whether it's in our interest or not.

Would America be as prosperous as it is today had we kept Germans, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Mexicans, and Muslims out as many have pushed for at different points during the history of our country?

The US did keep such people out at certain stages in it history. That was my point.

 

[JosephZ]

Deleted.

 

[JosephZ]

I'm not arguing that they're bad.

Based on some of your comments it seems that you are.

they have committed crimes and otherwise made themselves a nuisance in Tijuana.

I don't understand why you even bother arguing about how much crime they are likely to commit,

You bring in the Third World, you become the Third World.

The president said they are bad people and you said that you agree with him.

The way they're acting they're confirming everything the President said about them.

I'm arguing that it's not in our interest to let them in. It seems that you think we should let them in whether it's in our interest or not.

It's in our interest to let them in because taking in the world’s most vulnerable people and providing them with safety and opportunity reflects American values and shows the world what we stand for. We also have far more vacant jobs each year than we have asylum seekers arriving at our borders. These vacant jobs are preventing our economy from fully reaching it's potential. Asylum seekers throughout history have shown to be a benefit to our country.

The US did keep such people out at certain stages in it history. That was my point.

Out of the groups of people I mentioned, only the Chinese and the Jews were banned from entering the US. The Chinese because it was believed they were taking American jobs, and the Jews because they were believe to be a threat to national security. History has shown that both of those actions were wrong and the justifications used were based on unwarranted fears. While I didn't mention Iranians, President Carter did ban most Iranian immigration, but even then Iranians were still not barred from seeking asylum in our country.

Those seeking refuge at our southern border today are not a threat to our economy nor are they going to take jobs from Americans. Today we have more Jobs than we have Americans willing to fill them. They are also not a threat to our nation's security nor are they criminals.

There's no legitimate reason to fear these asylum seekers or to turn them away.

My point was that the same arguments we are hearing today have been used by immigration restrictionists since our country's founding and history has shown that the positions these people held were wrong. Take the words of Ben Franklin for example:

“Those [Germans] who come here are generally of the most ignorant Stupid Sort of their own Nation.”

“Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs..." -- Ben Franklin

Sounds familiar doesn't it? Once again, insert Muslims, Hondurans, Mexicans, etc... in the place of Germans and it sounds no different than what many politicians and immigration restrictionist are saying in 2018.

 

[Reconciliation and Truth]

I replied to exactly what you posted. Yes the Electoral College did get him the presidency and I explained exactly why it did. Just because a state has a million more voters than a smaller state does not give that state the right to decide the leader of the nation.

Where did I show ignorance?

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

What was I showing ignorance about by stating 3 facts?

Here is your reply:

"Well you just showed your ignorance about the Republic and the Constitution of the USA. The Electoral College was put into place by the Founding Fathers because no one state or couple of states in the USA should decide who will be president. Every voter in the nation has a right to have a say. Rhode Island has as much right to determine a president as California."

I am offering you a chance to correct a mistake.

 

[jmldn2]

Where did I show ignorance?

Here is what I wrote and this was all I wrote:
"Actually, no, the electoral college elected him. The majority of voting Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.

62,984,828 to 65,853,51"

Those were three simple statements of fact.

What was I showing ignorance about by stating 3 facts?

Here is your reply:

"Well you just showed your ignorance about the Republic and the Constitution of the USA. The Electoral College was put into place by the Founding Fathers because no one state or couple of states in the USA should decide who will be president. Every voter in the nation has a right to have a say. Rhode Island has as much right to determine a president as California."

I am offering you a chance to correct a mistake.

I evidently misinterpreted your post. I took it to mean that you were defending Hillary because that's what quite a few people have done, over the process of our Electoral college vs individual voters. However, I can offer apologies anytime I can see I'm wrong.

 

[Gigimo]

This website goes into the basics United States Interventions in Central America
but if you want to get to the root causes of the mass immigration from central America of the past three decades or so, you can start by reading transcripts from the Iran-Contra Hearings. While the US has been intervening in the affairs of Central America for more than a century, it was during the Reagan Administration that things really took a turn for the worse.

Nice link but all that's in it is generalities it doesn't answer my question, doesn't have names.

 

[Gigimo]

I'm not arguing that they're bad. I'm arguing that it's not in our interest to let them in. It seems that you think we should let them in whether it's in our interest or not.

Not letting them in even though it doesn't really benefit them or us is the popular rhetoric and is frequently used to insinuate that some people who are Christians really aren't, that ploy is getting very tiresome.

 

[JosephZ]

Nice link but all that's in it is generalities it doesn't answer my question, doesn't have names.

I mentioned in my post that the link only goes into the the basics. I did tell you where to start looking and I did provide one of the many culprits. The situation in Central America has been extensively covered in the news for the past 30+ years, so it shouldn't be that difficult to understand what has lead up to what we are seeing today at our southern border.

This website goes into the basics United States Interventions in Central America but if you want to get to the root causes of the mass immigration from central America of the past three decades or so, you can start by reading transcripts from the Iran-Contra Hearings. While the US has been intervening in the affairs of Central America for more than a century, it was during the Reagan Administration that things really took a turn for the worse.

 

[HannahT]

I'm not arguing that they're bad. I'm arguing that it's not in our interest to let them in. It seems that you think we should let them in whether it's in our interest or not.

Not letting them in even though it doesn't really benefit them or us is the popular rhetoric and is frequently used to insinuate that some people who are Christians really aren't, that ploy is getting very tiresome.

Regardless of the benefit or not - or if it matters or not? Most of these individuals have been told to come and ask for asylum, and if you listen to them being interviewed by numerous media outlets? They are coming for jobs, and that doesn't met the asylum definition.

You have to wonder WHOM is telling them it does. These people aren't going to walk thousands of miles KNOWING they can't get asylum on economic conditions. Someone is lying to them, and giving them false hope. That's cruel. It really is. Can both sides AGREE that is is cruel that these people were deceived into thinking they will get into the USA because they want a job? IS agreement on that HUGE issue alone something we can agree on?

I have no doubt some of these people will get asylum due to need and meeting the basic definition - as they should. That is the purpose of asylum. It's the humane thing to do.

Whomever is lying to these people and telling them just claim 'asylum' and you can get in and work? Needs to be held accountable. It's outrageous that these people were deceived into giving up what they had to come all that way to find out it very well could be a great lie. Can you imagine?

No one seems to care about that. They are to busy complaining about the other side wanting them in or not in the country. The media is pushing that 'rhetoric' if you will, and is NOT telling the whole story. It seems the public doesn't have the right know that part. It's to much fun watching people bicker about things that really have nothing to do with the bigger sense of cruel actions here.

I found a Youtube channel with a gentleman - or young man - that is in Tijuana. He is translating what the Mexican media - and social media - is reporting down there. Funny how much different it is on the ground there compared to what our media is claiming is really happening. They are concerned about 3,000 vanishing from the stadium to the new location where the migrants are staying. They want to know what the heck happened to them! They are watching because their version of ICE are going to running the new location, and if they think our personnel are big meanies they are in for a big world of hurt with the Mexican version of ICE. They are being told by the migrants that the new President will help them get jobs in the USA, or he will take care of them. The citizens are then concerned about the strain on their system when they realize isn't going to help getting them in. That they don't have claims of asylum. They are also many stories about them planning on storming the border again, and the mayor of Tijuana is telling his citizens to stay calm...because big things could happen, and they need to show their character that is within them. How he knows this is beyond frustrating, and he wants to find the organizers that started this whole thing.

 

[rjs330]

Regardless of how it's calculated, greater than 99.9% of the people seeking asylum are not deadly killers.

If we take in 1,000,000 asylum seekers, which by the way would take years to reach that number at the current rate they are arriving at our border; based on historical statistics, there would be around 20 killers admitted into the country through the asylum process. That is not a high enough number to justify shutting down the border to all of those seeking refuge in the US.



Have you ever heard the phrase "Desperate people do desperate things?" That's what we are seeing at our border right now. These people have been exposed to unspeakable violence in their home country, they have traveled thousands of miles to escape this violence, they know our country has an obligation to hear their pleas and to accept them if they qualify; yet when they get our border they are finding that there are not enough personnel and assets in place to process their request despite the fact that we knew they were coming for months. They are being told they will have to wait weeks if not months to be admitted into the country. Rumors are swirling that they will never be allowed in.

These people are tired, they are hungry, and they are being met by hostility. They are desperate people. They are naturally going to do whatever they feel is necessary to cross the border and if they can manage to cross the border and get arrested on the US side, their asylum processing can begin almost immediately. To many, that option seems better than sitting outside the border in less than ideal conditions with an uncertainty if their voice will ever be heard or not.



It does mean something because The electoral college doesn't represent the wants, desires, and opinions of individual Americans. Since our current president was elected with the votes of only 26% of eligible voters and most of the people who did cast a vote voted against him, it's quite clear that what he wants for our country is not in line with what the majority of Americans want. Since those who voted for President Trump only represent 26% of the eligible voters in the country, they are the minority.

So when you said "We want to keep them out." and I asked "Who is we?" and you answered with "The American people" and went on to say "We could make our position on the immigration issue more clear than that." The "We" you speak of is not the majority of Americans. It's what you and the minority of the American population wants.



This is clearly nothing more than speculation.



This is not true at all as I pointed out earlier in the thread.








Just change the word "caravan" in that sentence to Germans, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Mexicans, Muslims, and it sounds like what those against immigration since our country's founding have said in the past. What we are hearing today is no different that what has been said about other people groups. They can't assimilate, they are criminals, they want to change our way of life, their culture isn't compatible with ours, they are not good for the economy, etc... History has clearly shown that those against certain people groups in the past were wrong.

You sound like an open borders person.

So exactly how many people should we take in? The world is full of people needing help from deplorable conditions. Should we let them all in? How many of the world's poor needy and desperate should we let in. Everyone that gets to our border? At what point do we as a sovereign nation have legitimate right to say stop?