Mexico calls migrant children separation 'inhumane,' 'racist'

[attrayant]

21 minutes ago, Monomial said:

USA is currently ranked #11.

 

Did you notice that oil-rich Brunei is in that list ranked at #4 with a population of only 300 thousand.  If Washington DC and its 700,000 people were a country, it would be right in that same part of the graph with a per capita GDP of around $73,000.  This is called lying with statistics.

 

Come on, get real.  In the context of this discussion about countries that have available capital and resources to "help their own people".  The claim was made that the US has to choose between helping its own, and helping asylum seekers.  If we make a list of countries that have the wealth and resources to do that, Brunei would be nowhere on that list.  If it were, you'd see a massive flood of immigrants rushing there to take advantage of life in Brunei - a county with porous borders and where it is apparently raining money and there are no poor people.  But they're not; I wonder why?

 

It sounds like you're getting closer to agreeing that the USA is one of the richest countries on the planet.  Excellent improvement.  

[lannarebirth]

12 hours ago, bristolboy said:

First of all, Mexico does have enforcement in place to stop Central Americans from crossing their southern border.  

What percentage of illegal aliens does the American border patrol stop? Given that Mexico is a much poorer country with less resources, and that central americans look like many mexicans, why would you expect them to be able to stop all or even most?

And do you think possible, just maybe, there's an outside chance that Trump's constant trash talking about Mexicans and Mexico might have slightly diminished their zeal to assist ICE?

 

You'd think they'd notice some of those "caravans" made up of 600-1000 people. Apparently it is an annual procession.

[SABloke]

On 6/20/2018 at 8:33 AM, webfact said:

while the leftist front-runner ahead of next month's presidential vote called it "racist."

 

Really? Racist? Look, the policy is terrible, but it's not racist - at best it could be xenophobic. Have words lost all meaning? I find describing "Mexican" as a race, racist. Mexico has a multiracial society . "Mexican" is the demonym for people from the country Mexico. I wonder if Andres Obrador, would classify "American", "Canadian", "South African", and "French" etc. etc. as races?

[bristolboy]

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

You'd think they'd notice some of those "caravans" made up of 600-1000 people. Apparently it is an annual procession.

Because blocking those caravans would draw too much media attention and be  politically unpalatable for any Mexican government.

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Because blocking those caravans would draw too much media attention and be  politically unpalatable for any Mexican government.

 

I see.

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, SABloke said:

Really? Racist? Look, the policy is terrible, but it's not racist - at best it could be xenophobic. Have words lost all meaning? I find describing "Mexican" as a race, racist. Mexico has a multiracial society . "Mexican" is the demonym for people from the country Mexico. I wonder if Andres Obrador, would classify "American", "Canadian", "South African", and "French" etc. etc. as races?

Typical nitpicking argument about the meaning of racism. Anyway, while it's true that there are Mexicans of all shades. the overwhelming majority of Mexican undocumented immigrants are brown skinned. 

Edited June 21, 2018 by bristolboy

[BB1958]

5 minutes ago, SABloke said:

Really? Racist? Look, the policy is terrible, but it's not racist - at best it could be xenophobic. Have words lost all meaning? I find describing "Mexican" as a race, racist. Mexico has a multiracial society . "Mexican" is the demonym for people from the country Mexico. I wonder if Andres Obrador, would classify "American", "Canadian", "South African", and "French" etc. etc. as races?

Hey Bloke, It is nice to see some are intelligent - In OZ, the Islamist's tried to use our "racism" laws - they lost - except for the dumbos - most people are aware that "Muslim" is not a race - Mexicans are NOT a race also - that is even MORE clear. Oh.. don't get me started on "Phobias" !!!

[bristolboy]

Just now, BB1958 said:

Hey Bloke, It is nice to see some are intelligent - In OZ, the Islamist's tried to use our "racism" laws - they lost - except for the dumbos - most people are aware that "Muslim" is not a race - Mexicans are NOT a race also - that is even MORE clear. Oh.. don't get me started on "Phobias" !!!

Would calling it "bigotry" make you feel better?

[SABloke]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Typical nitpicking argument about the meaning of racism. Anyway, while it's true that there are Mexicans of all shades. the overwhelming majority are brown skinned. 

There is no nitpicking - every bad thing in the world isn't racist. Calling everything racist takes away from people on the receiving end of real racism.

 

But sure, let's go with your reasoning: British now means white people, Canadian means white people, South African means black people etc. etc. Doesn't work , does it? 

[BB1958]

2 minutes ago, SABloke said:

There is no nitpicking - every bad thing in the world isn't racist. Calling everything racist takes away from people on the receiving end of real racism.

 

But sure, let's go with your reasoning: British now means white people, Canadian means white people, South African means black people etc. etc. Doesn't work , does it? 

Mate you have heard the argument, "You cannot argue with ........... it takes you down to their level - and they are experts" ... Guess I am guilty too?

 

When presented with a person who has a particular "thing" in their head - such as a view on what race IS.

 

Explaining to those who barely function intellectually, that they insult the science of anthropology, is rather pointless. 

 

Best we both move on mate...

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, SABloke said:

There is no nitpicking - every bad thing in the world isn't racist. Calling everything racist takes away from people on the receiving end of real racism.

 

But sure, let's go with your reasoning: British now means white people, Canadian means white people, South African means black people etc. etc. Doesn't work , does it? 

So you're saying that all the invective Trump is using against Mexicans has nothing to do with the fact they the Mexicans crossing over the border are virtually all brown skinned. And when most Americans think of Mexicans, do you believe that it's an image of tall blond people that comes to mind?

 

And as for the meaning of "racism". As anybody who pays serious attention knows, etymology is not a good way to figure out the meaning of words. Words have what linguists call a "developed sense? The most apt example I can think of is anti-semitism". Are Jews the only semites? By your kind of reasoning, anti-semitism should also mean prejudice against arabs and other ethnic groups speaking semitic languages. Is that the case?

 

The meaning of words changes over time. And citing the original meaning of the root of a word will not necessarily guide one to the meaning of a word.

And of course, there was a time not so long ago that groups we no longer think of as races, were.

[BB1958]

2 minutes ago, SABloke said:

There is no nitpicking - every bad thing in the world isn't racist. Calling everything racist takes away from people on the receiving end of real racism.

 

But sure, let's go with your reasoning: British now means white people, Canadian means white people, South African means black people etc. etc. Doesn't work , does it? 

Mate you have heard the argument, "You cannot argue with ........... it takes you down to their level - and they are experts" ... Guess I am guilty too?

 

When presented with a person who has a particular "thing" in their head - such as a view on what race IS.

 

Explaining to those who barely function intellectually, that they insult the science of anthropology, is rather pointless. 

 

Best we both move on mate... He/she will just try and convince you "Mexicans" are a race and a brown skinned one at that.

[bristolboy]

6 hours ago, BB1958 said:

Mate you have heard the argument, "You cannot argue with ........... it takes you down to their level - and they are experts" ... Guess I am guilty too?

 

When presented with a person who has a particular "thing" in their head - such as a view on what race IS.

 

Explaining to those who barely function intellectually, that they insult the science of anthropology, is rather pointless. 

 

Best we both move on mate... He/she will just try and convince you "Mexicans" are a race and a brown skinned one at that.

You're confused. Racism is a belief system, not a scientific one. Just because it isn't based on scientific fact doesn't mean it doesn't exist anymore than asserting that Chrisianity doesn't exist because it is not based on scientific fact but on a belief that a human being was also God. So yes, it is a common belief that brown skinned people are of a different and inferior race from light skinned ones. And that belief is called racism. 

 

[foxboy]

9 hours ago, BB1958 said:

Sadly we need to remove the emotion from our collective rhetoric. "Solutions" are probably out there. Please watch the video I posted (Post 52).

It's the emotional element that causes all the furore and censure unfortunately. Common sense tells you that any amount of immigration can only scratch the surface of the problem, as your video perfectly illustrates. Poverty and it's associated problems have always existed (even in our own 1st world countries) It's tragic, but a 'natural' consequence of life, as was proffered by Thomas Malthus way back in the 18th century. 

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that by taking a 'realist' view, you are instead labelled a racist, fascist, bigot, xenophobe, etc. 

[mcambl61]

21 hours ago, attrayant said:

They "allow" it?  Are they supposed to be like North Korea and not let people out of the country?  This is a recent problem, but Mexico has been around for more than 200 years.

well lets see if you can follow this. They allow them to cross their southern border. they allow smugglers and accept bribes to transport them 1500 miles to their northern border, then do nothing while they are crossing at points they have in plain sight, again taking bribes to let it pass. is that clear enough for you?  or is it racist to see thye obvious problem here? <deleted>

[mcambl61]

21 hours ago, stevenl said:

If you consider Trump in this quote I agree. He definitely is using the kids as bargaining chips.

if you are dishonest enough, you can blame Trump for a decades old problem that the past governments turned a blind eye to so they can use it for a voting issues and the entire established political class for dong nothing to actually create the legislation to allow CBP to do their jobs properly

[mcambl61]

21 hours ago, attrayant said:

 

Hyperbole to demonstrate the absurdity of the statement I quoted.  Read in context, please.

 

 

They "allow" it?  Are they supposed to be like North Korea and not let people out of the country?  This is a recent problem, but Mexico has been around for more than 200 years.

 

 

I agree; seems Trump will do anything for votes. Even hold kids hostage.

 

 

The media is preventing Trump from telling Kirstjen Nielsen to stop putting children in concentration camps?  How, exactly?

stop being so disingenuous. where was your outrage when it was being done in 2014? your selective outrage tells it all.

 

I suppose you actually think the current loopholes in the legislation and decades of catch and release nonsense is not a slap in the face to all those immigrants that followed the rules. over 95 percent failure to appear for hearings is not a coincidence. but i guess those facts are "racist" 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, mcambl61 said:

stop being so disingenuous. where was your outrage when it was being done in 2014? your selective outrage tells it all.

 

I suppose you actually think the current loopholes in the legislation and decades of catch and release nonsense is not a slap in the face to all those immigrants that followed the rules. over 95 percent failure to appear for hearings is not a coincidence. but i guess those facts are "racist" 

Children were being separated from their parents in 2014?

[mcambl61]

8 hours ago, bumofdabeach said:

There is no 'law to fix. This is a Trump policy recently set of course without any thought to the outcome

Sent from my SM-J250F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

if you had any clue what you were talking about you would obviously know the loopholes that have been exploited for decades. the laws do not allow immediate deportation unless they share a border. that is a fact, even if you do not want to deal with it dude. and it is congress that refuses to fix it

[mcambl61]

On 6/20/2018 at 7:05 PM, foxboy said:

I hear lots of anger and disgust at Trump's policy, but I still haven't heard a workable solution to the problem. 'Catch and release' is no deterrent, they will be back the next day. So how do you deter illegal immigrants from crossing borders? Can anybody tell me.. or do you just let them all in?

you are correct sir, and the lefties will shout racist regardless of what gets fixed. they want free flow and open borders to make their ridiculous sense of moral superiority feel better

[mcambl61]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Children were being separated from their parents in 2014?

yes, if you care to look. and the ACLU applied to stop it, which is why there is a ridiculous 20 day rule that never actually fixed anything, as usual the media has an agenda and facts do not matter, just the constant droning on of the agreed propaganda and agenda

[bristolboy]

28 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

yes, if you care to look. and the ACLU applied to stop it, which is why there is a ridiculous 20 day rule that never actually fixed anything, as usual the media has an agenda and facts do not matter, just the constant droning on of the agreed propaganda and agenda

I cared to look it up. Here's what I found:

No, Donald Trump’s separation of immigrant families was not Barack Obama’s policy

Schlapp said the Trump administration’s policy of separating families is "the same way Barack Obama did it."

Obama’s immigration policy specifically sought to avoid breaking up families. While some children were separated from their parents under Obama, this was relatively rare, and occurred at a far lower rate than under Trump, where the practice flows from a zero tolerance approach to illegal border-crossings.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jun/19/matt-schlapp/no-donald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/

Politifact rated as false the claim that Obama's policy was the same as Trumps.

To find differently I expect you'll have to consult the Macedonian News Network. 

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

where was your outrage when it was being done in 2014? your selective outrage tells it all.

 

This was not happening in 2014.  Your ignorance and deceit tells all.

[mcambl61]

14 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I cared to look it up. Here's what I found:

No, Donald Trump’s separation of immigrant families was not Barack Obama’s policy

Schlapp said the Trump administration’s policy of separating families is "the same way Barack Obama did it."

Obama’s immigration policy specifically sought to avoid breaking up families. While some children were separated from their parents under Obama, this was relatively rare, and occurred at a far lower rate than under Trump, where the practice flows from a zero tolerance approach to illegal border-crossings.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jun/19/matt-schlapp/no-donald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/

Politifact rated as false the claim that Obama's policy was the same as Trumps.

To find differently I expect you'll have to consult the Macedonian News Network. 

Well the large text must make you right.

 

I never said the amount of separations were the same, and why would I care? but it did happen, and of course the socialist in charge did not have any problem letting in millions that never reported back to their hearings.

 

10,000 of the12k arrived unaccompanied. I suppose you think your sense of selective outrage would feel better if we  were to just let them in, give them welfare and think that its ok for millions to abuse the legal process so you can feel better about yourself, of course as long as you are not paying the bill.

 

 

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Well the large text must make you right.

 

I never said the amount of separations were the same, and why would I care? but it did happen, and of course the socialist in charge did not have any problem letting in millions that never reported back to their hearings.

 

10,000 of the12k arrived unaccompanied. I suppose you think your sense of selective outrage would feel better if we  were to just let them in, give them welfare and think that its ok for millions to abuse the legal process so you can feel better about yourself, of course as long as you are not paying the bill.

 

 

More rightwing hysteria:

http://econofact.org/do-undocumented-immigrants-overuse-government-benefits

Overwhelmingly undocumented immigrants come here to work at low paying jobs.

But if Trump really wanted to put a dent in the number of undocumented workers, he could institute e-verify nationwide as he pledged to do during his campaign. Of course, that could result in wealthy people being imprisoned. Can't have that.

[stevenl]

25 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Well the large text must make you right.

 

I never said the amount of separations were the same, and why would I care? but it did happen, and of course the socialist in charge did not have any problem letting in millions that never reported back to their hearings.

 

10,000 of the12k arrived unaccompanied. I suppose you think your sense of selective outrage would feel better if we  were to just let them in, give them welfare and think that its ok for millions to abuse the legal process so you can feel better about yourself, of course as long as you are not paying the bill.

 

 

The USA would be much better of if a socialist had been in charge. But I presume you wanted to throw around an insult.

 

Real facts are really better for discussion than attempted insults, misleading information and made up facts.

Edited June 21, 2018 by stevenl

[bristolboy]

And during the recession there was a big net outflow of undocumented immigrants. When the work dried up, they left. Now that there are more job opportunities they're coming back.

[attrayant]

28 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

So I guess the pictures from 2014 are fake news sunshine.

 

I don't know what "news sunshine" is. Maybe you should step away from the keyboard until tomorrow when you're sober.

 

To reiterate, what happened in 2014 is not like what is happening now.  There is a link in that last sentence so you can learn a bit about what went on four years ago.  You'll see nothing about the president using infants as bargaining chips, or indefinite separations of the very young.

 

[MyFriend You]

On 6/20/2018 at 8:48 AM, darksidedog said:

And you have to say, they have absolutely hit the nail on the head. I really cannot understand how any person can defend the practice. Kids have no say in where their parents take them and to treat them so appallingly is nothing short of disgraceful. The whole civilised world is condemning this. America can no longer claim to be the leader of the free world when it practices such an abomination.

I don't defend the policy, but it is not "Racist"  inhumane, yes, but leave racism where it belongs.  Look at history, Japan, China, North Vietnam, Burma, Malaysia and most of Europe during the wars, they all did the same thing.

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

I don't defend the policy, but it is not "Racist"  inhumane, yes, but leave racism where it belongs.  Look at history, Japan, China, North Vietnam, Burma, Malaysia and most of Europe during the wars, they all did the same thing.

Time for you to read up on this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism. "Therefore, racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial."