Must Read Trump backs down, orders end to family separations at U.S. border

[mtls2005]

1 minute ago, dcutman said:

The Liberal Doctrine laid out so perfectly.

 

You do realize that canthai55 is but one person voicing their thought(s)?

 

I'm not sure s/he is the author of some "Liberal Doctrine", right? And labeling them as such seems, well weak and defensive.

 

I'm sure there are good "Far Right Wing, Redneck Wack Jobs, KKK, Nazi sympathizers" on both sides.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, dcutman said:

The Liberal Doctrine laid out so perfectly.

We hate Trump, we have no policy, we have no platform, we have nothing. We can only label people as racists, Nazis, KKK and red necks that do not agree with us.

Like there’s nothing to hate about demonizing immigrants, forcibly separating immigrant children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

Trump has control over both houses, the laws and policies he and the republicans enact are entirely in their control.

 

Nothing to do with what liberals think of Trump or what you think of liberals.

[metisdead]

A disgustingly offensive post has been removed as well as the replies. 

[bushdoctor]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Like there’s nothing to hate about demonizing immigrants, forcibly separating immigrant children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

Trump has control over both houses, the laws and policies he and the republicans enact are entirely in their control.

 

Nothing to do with what liberals think of Trump or what you think of liberals.

You are welcome to your opinion but you’re just dead wrong about what your saying....you must know that. The kids aren’t being put into concentration camps. That’s a completely false statement. And if republicans control congress and don’t need democratic support to pass a bill, why don’t they just fund the wall? If you knew how Congress works or did about 2 minutes of research you would know why they can’t. 

 

Why do you feel the need to post obviously false statements? It dilutes any real points you might have. 

[bushdoctor]

4 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

 

The caption should have been "Lock her up". And if she wasn't "locked up" that is truly wonderful news, but clearly thousands of other children have been locked up.

That’s what you got out of this false news story? Hmm...ok. 

 

What I get is that you can’t trust news just because you see it printed or hear it on TV. This story exemplifies that. Much of the misinformation in this thread can easily be debunked if anyone really wants to know the truth. 

 

 

[bushdoctor]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not the one defending the forced separation of children from their parents and caging children in concentration camps.

 

You are.

 

And with no defense left you now start throwing accusations of lies.

 

If these are not concentration camps, let the press in to show us what they are.

 

The truth will (despite Trump’s best efforts) out.

 

So your saying the reason you post false statements is because I’m the one defending immigration control?

Well, at least that sounds like an honest answer. 

[dcutman]

Dont feed the concentration camp TROLL!

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, dcutman said:

Dont feed the concentration camp TROLL!

Continue objecting to the truth.

[stevenl]

19 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

That’s what you got out of this false news story? Hmm...ok. 

 

What I get is that you can’t trust news just because you see it printed or hear it on TV. This story exemplifies that. Much of the misinformation in this thread can easily be debunked if anyone really wants to know the truth. 

 

 

There was no false news story, the news is happening as depicted in the story. Also the illustration is indicating what is happening, just with a girl that shouldn't have been on that illustration. But this doesn't change any of the facts.

 

And those facts are amongst others that the person you are saying can do nothing, he is only upholding the law and Congress should implement a new law, has told Congress to do nothing until after the elections.

[Chomper Higgot]

21 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

 

So your saying the reason you post false statements is because I’m the one defending immigration control?

Well, at least that sounds like an honest answer. 

I’m not posting false statements.

 

Nor am I donning a tin foil hat denying news reports from across a wide spread of news media.

 

There’s a reason why the government is refusing news reporter access to Trump’s child concentration camps and it’s not a good reason.

 

But I have faith that ... The truth will (despite Trump’s best efforts) out.

 

Let the press in, open the whole viscous mess to the light of truth.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

There was no false news story, the news is happening as depicted in the story. Also the illustration is indicating what is happening, just with a girl that shouldn't have been on that illustration. But this doesn't change any of the facts.

 

And those facts are amongst others that the person you are saying can do nothing, he is only upholding the law and Congress should implement a new law, has told Congress to do nothing until after the elections.

We can be assured what is happening is far worse than what is being reported, hence the government’s obsession with secrecy and keeping the press out.

[neeray]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

There was no false news story, the news is happening as depicted in the story. Also the illustration is indicating what is happening, just with a girl that shouldn't have been on that illustration. But this doesn't change any of the facts.

 

And those facts are amongst others that the person you are saying can do nothing, he is only upholding the law and Congress should implement a new law, has told Congress to do nothing until after the elections.

 

[bushdoctor]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not posting false statements.

 

Nor am I donning a tin foil hat denying news reports from across a wide spread of news media.

 

There’s a reason why the government is refusing news reporter access to Trump’s child concentration camps and it’s not a good reason.

 

But I have faith that ... The truth will (despite Trump’s best efforts) out.

 

Let the press in, open the whole viscous mess to the light of truth.

You say your not posting takes statemrnts and then immediately post that trump has concentration camps. 

 

Ok friend. It’s hard to take you serious. 

[bushdoctor]

By the way, the “cages” the children are in, (or more accurately chain link enclosures) are only temporary border patrol holding areas until they are transferd to DHS and placed in a facility. 

[bristolboy]

16 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

By the way, the “cages” the children are in, (or more accurately chain link enclosures) are only temporary border patrol holding areas until they are transferd to DHS and placed in a facility. 

More accurately "chain link enclosures"? Not a euphemism?  And prison cells are really "steel rod enclosures"?

[Sheryl]

This has never applied to people who did not enter illegally and were not accused of same. There are clear legal procedures for lawfully requesting asylum but people who followed them still had their children removed.

One of the problems is that the law states people must be physically in the US to file an asylum request. Allowing for this to be done at US Embassies abroad would reduce the number of people in the US undergoing revirws of asylum requests. Of course extra staff would have to be deployed to Embassies to help handle the workload.



Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

[bushdoctor]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

More accurately "chain link enclosures"? Not a euphemism?  And prison cells are really "steel rod enclosures"?

Your missing the  point, yhey are temporary. 

This isn’t where they stay long term. 

 

Look up the the definition of cage. The word is used to conjure images of inhumane treatment. They are not cages. But you already know that. 

[bushdoctor]

13 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

This has neen applied to people who did not enter illegally and were not accused of same. There are clear legal procedures for lawfully requesting asylum but people who followed them still had their children removed.

One of the problems is that the law states people must be physically in the US to file an asylum request. Allowing for this to be done at US Embassies abroad would reduce the number of people in the US undergoing revirws of asylum requests. Of course extra staff would have to be deployed to Embassies to help handle the workload.



Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

If your outside the US you would apply for refugee status. 

 

There’s a a lot of focus on refugees and asylum seekers. Most of the people crossing illegally are neither, they come to work and make money. 

[bristolboy]

32 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

If your outside the US you would apply for refugee status. 

 

There’s a a lot of focus on refugees and asylum seekers. Most of the people crossing illegally are neither, they come to work and make money. 

So a disproportionate number of them aren't coming to the USA to engage in homicide?

[wayned]

57 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

This has neen applied to people who did not enter illegally and were not accused of same. There are clear legal procedures for lawfully requesting asylum but people who followed them still had their children removed.

One of the problems is that the law states people must be physically in the US to file an asylum request. Allowing for this to be done at US Embassies abroad would reduce the number of people in the US undergoing revirws of asylum requests. Of course extra staff would have to be deployed to Embassies to help handle the workload.



Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

The people that have crossed the border and turn themselves into the border patrol are physically in the US and should be able to declare that they are seeking asylum and be taken to an office and be allowed to apply by filling out a I-589 form, one page.  The form is available  and fill-able online, just google I-589 form. You do not have to apply at a port of entry.  It seems that the border patrol/ICE are treating all that cross the border illegally as illegal immigrants and are not allowing them the option of applying for asylum at their offices as the law allows.

 

" If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States. To apply for Asylum, file a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, within one year of your arrival to the United States. There is no fee to apply for asylum. "

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

If your outside the US you would apply for refugee status. 

 

There’s a a lot of focus on refugees and asylum seekers. Most of the people crossing illegally are neither, they come to work and make money. 

Just like your forefathers did.

[Ron19]

Flame/Troll post removed.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, bushdoctor said:

By the way, the “cages” the children are in, (or more accurately chain link enclosures) are only temporary border patrol holding areas until they are transferd to DHS and placed in a facility. 

Your defence of Trump’s forced separation of children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps now rests on semantics.

 

And we haven’t even started talking about the psychological damage this policy is inflicting on Trump’s young (tender aged) victims.

[pedro01]

15 hours ago, Credo said:

What an illogical canard.    They did not rob a bank and if they had they would be separated from the child.   The child would not be separated from them and put in detention.   

 

OK - so we agree that criminals have to be separated from their children.

 

So now we are just arguing about which crimes it applies to.

[oldhippy]

4 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

OK - so we agree that criminals have to be separated from their children.

 

So now we are just arguing about which crimes it applies to.

No.

We are arguing whether it is a crime to expect a decent life, for yourself and for your children.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, oldhippy said:

No.

We are arguing whether it is a crime to expect a decent life, for yourself and for your children.

 

The search for the American Dream now a criminal offence. 

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

OK - so we agree that criminals have to be separated from their children.

 

So now we are just arguing about which crimes it applies to.

You really have a problem distinguishing between victimless crimes and other kinds of crimes?

[pedro01]

2 hours ago, oldhippy said:

No.

We are arguing whether it is a crime to expect a decent life, for yourself and for your children.

 

 

It isn't a crime - you can apply to live in the US just as you can live in other countries.

 

You just can't enter illegally. That IS a crime.

 

So - having dreams and expectations are not crimes - just entering illegally is.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

17 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

It isn't a crime - you can apply to live in the US just as you can live in other countries.

 

You just can't enter illegally. That IS a crime.

 

So - having dreams and expectations are not crimes - just entering illegally is.

 

 

Works well unless you’re p1ss poor and have nothing to offer but your labour.

 

The American Dream open to all but for the p1ss poor with nothing to offer but their labour. (Let’s forget the millions like them who passed through Ellis Island).

[Scott]

A few posts and replies removed.   I think we can drop the references to concentration camps; it's inflammatory and not relevant to the topic.