Did you ever imagine America could be degraded, defiled & dismantled so easily & so quickly, by so few?
Curtis Stigers!
Still, when you're right you're right.
Did you ever imagine America could be degraded, defiled & dismantled so easily & so quickly, by so few?
The family detention centers the Obama administration has been operating in Texas and Pennsylvania have been an expedient way to handle the soaring numbers of Central Americans, many of them young children, who have arrived at the Southern border since 2014. They give a sense that Homeland Security has the border situation under control, and they supposedly send a message to other would-be refugees not to come.
But these privately run, unlicensed lockups are no place for children. Or mothers. Their existence belies President Obama’s oft-professed concern for the humane treatment of people fleeing crime and violence in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.
And the centers stand on dubious legal ground. Last year, a district judge ruled that the administration was violating a 1997 court-ordered settlement, called the Flores agreement, that governs the treatment of underage migrants who seek asylum or enter the country illegally. The judge said the children were being held for too long, and ordered the administration to release them as quickly as possible to the care of relatives or other guardians as their cases move through the immigration courts.
The administration appealed, saying that the agreement applied only to children who had crossed the border alone, not those who were accompanied by parents or other adult relatives. On July 6, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disagreed, upholding the district ruling that Flores covers all children, accompanied or not. But it said the administration could still detain their parents.
Which leaves things pretty much where they were — unsettled, unsatisfactory, unfit for a country that aspires (or once did, anyway) to be an example to the world in its welcome for desperate refugees. The administration hasn’t said whether it will appeal, but it’s hard to imagine that it will use the appeals court ruling to break up families — sending children to foster care, maybe, while continuing to hold their mothers behind bars. On a separate issue not addressed by the Ninth Circuit ruling, plaintiffs have accused the administration of subjecting children to miserable conditions at Border Patrol stations.
If the Obama administration took its principles to heart, it would be closing its family prisons and abandoning its emphasis on border crackdowns in favor of greater efforts to connect Central Americans with pro bono lawyers and to provide family- and community-based alternatives to detention. Much money and effort have been spent to deter and detain them, to speed them through court, to hunt down those who are later found to be deportable.
It would be far better to to score a humanitarian victory by reuniting children and families, especially since data show that Central Americans with asylum claims are far more likely to show up in court — and win their cases — when they have lawyers.
Legislation introduced this month in Congress seeks to attack the problem at its root, with funds for combating human trafficking and resettling refugees within Central America and Mexico. But Congress is unlikely to pass it, which leaves the crisis in the president’s hands. Donald Trump and his Republican Party minions have taken the immigration debate to sickening lows, with disgraceful animus toward Mexicans and Muslims. Mr. Obama has forcefully denounced such nativism. But he can add strength to his words by ensuring greater protection for those who arrived, defenseless, at the Southern border.
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
LeBaron wrote:So, let’s see if we have this straight then, Jimbo:
In the face of a cynical, willful attack on the very humanity of thousands of young families, who are some of the most defenseless, impoverished people in the world, perpetrated on the whim of one of the most powerful people in the world, you choose (and are apparently happy) to take the well-trod oath of authoritarian propagandists who would defend the needless and heedless action.
Therefore:
1. This is all a big game to you
2. You don’t really give a shit about other humans
LeBaron wrote:Also, and of arguably more relevance to you, by your rules of logic, citing a NYT editorial chastising Obama for his immigration policies kinda sorta (totally, actually) defeats your “point” that liberals showed insufficient outrage when Obama did vaguely similar things.
Jimbo wrote: Who are these "authoritarian propagandists?"
Jimbo wrote:On the other hand, you are in a much better position to help. Maybe you can join the pro bono lawyers who are helping, lawyers who apparently have great success when they can get asylum seekers before a judge.
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.
Jimbo wrote:Not a game but I do like arguing.
Snarfyguy wrote:The Obama administration separated immigrant children from accompanying adults in two types of cases: (1) if the child was in danger or (2) if the accompanying adult was being prosecuted.
The Trump administration did not alter these guidelines. What did change, however, is that the Trump administration — unlike Obama's — is enforcing the law passed by Congress which makes it a crime to cross the border illegally.
http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/ ... mmigrationJimbo wrote: Who are these "authoritarian propagandists?"
Stephen Miller and Kirstjen Nielsen, to name a couple. Not sure why the question needed to be asked.Jimbo wrote:On the other hand, you are in a much better position to help. Maybe you can join the pro bono lawyers who are helping, lawyers who apparently have great success when they can get asylum seekers before a judge.
This is a rhetorical fallacy I'm not sure I've seen before: "If you actually felt that way, you'd be doing something about it."
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/demo ... ecb466509dLast night Rachel Maddow finally took a break from her relentless warmongering toward Russia, Syria and North Korea to have a pretend cry about the plight of immigrant children on her hit MSNBC show. It was arguably the climax of a loud nationwide outcry against a federal policy of separating parents from their children when they are arrested for illegally crossing the border from Mexico into the United States, and the following day President Trump signed an executive order suspending that policy while congress comes up with some less draconian legislation...
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.
Snarfyguy wrote:Miller and Nielsen are pretty high profile figures these days - that's why I wasn't sure why you were asking.
Snarfyguy wrote:The Obama administration separated immigrant children from accompanying adults in two types of cases: (1) if the child was in danger or (2) if the accompanying adult was being prosecuted.
The Trump administration did not alter these guidelines. What did change, however, is that the Trump administration — unlike Obama's — is enforcing the law passed by Congress which makes it a crime to cross the border illegally.
http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/ ... mmigration
Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Snarfyguy wrote:The Obama administration separated immigrant children from accompanying adults in two types of cases: (1) if the child was in danger or (2) if the accompanying adult was being prosecuted.
The Trump administration did not alter these guidelines. What did change, however, is that the Trump administration — unlike Obama's — is enforcing the law passed by Congress which makes it a crime to cross the border illegally.
http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/ ... mmigration
For the logic impaired...now every adult is under prosecution - so every child is subject to possible separation.
Jimbo wrote:Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Snarfyguy wrote:The Obama administration separated immigrant children from accompanying adults in two types of cases: (1) if the child was in danger or (2) if the accompanying adult was being prosecuted.
The Trump administration did not alter these guidelines. What did change, however, is that the Trump administration — unlike Obama's — is enforcing the law passed by Congress which makes it a crime to cross the border illegally.
http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/ ... mmigration
For the logic impaired...now every adult is under prosecution - so every child is subject to possible separation.
Not anymore, Einstein. Trump rescinded the separation rule...Trump is only adding on to what Obama and his predecessors wrought..
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year
toomanyhatz wrote:Jimbo wrote:Davey the Fat Boy wrote:
For the logic impaired...now every adult is under prosecution - so every child is subject to possible separation.
Not anymore, Einstein. Trump rescinded the separation rule...Trump is only adding on to what Obama and his predecessors wrought..
Not so fast, Socrates. He rescinded that one part of the order - after saying he couldn't - but did absolutely nothing for the children already separated, and still maintained that asylum seekers must still be considered criminals - he's just detaining families together. It's not some magnanimous gesture on his part. It basically improves the "optics" without making any meaningful change to the part of the policy that he (no, not Obama - not on any level) instituted. Here's a 'common sense' rundown from Rolling Stone (an opinion piece, yes, but a lot more backed up by facts than anything the administration has offered up):
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/n ... er-w521783
Trump and his administration have absolutely no idea what they’re doing.
Matt 'interesting' Wilson wrote:So I went from looking at the "I'm a Man" riff, to showing how the rave up was popular for awhile.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.
Copehead wrote:a right wing cretin like Berger....bleating about racism
Jimbo wrote:[ the Obama admin policy was nearly as heartless.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year