Drawings by immigrant children

[_honorentheos]

Markk, all I'm asking is that you provide some backup for your positions that isn't just restating your belief or anecdotes you've heard. This -

"A well coached immigrant, or a immigrant that actually needs asylum, can get into the US very easily based on our current laws"

- is a statement that can be fact checked and defended. So. You know. p-hack if you must but try and make this more of a discussion with evidence. Support your views.

Start here ...

Markk Wrote...."A well coached immigrant, or a immigrant that actually needs asylum, can get into the US very easily based on our current laws"

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refu ... lum/asylum

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. ... ted-states

Those links are about processes not about what is happening. Your claim included multiple parts such as 1) immigrants being coached, 2) it being easy to get in if coached, and 3) it being easy to get in if an immigrant meets the conditions of the asylum laws or, In other words, actually needing asylum. I didn't see any information in the links that backed up any of your claims. Are you saying those links are being used to coach immigrants? That they show how easy it is to get in the US? What exactly do you think those links say?

Now, your anecdote helps explain why I am not hopeful you'll answer that question or find the evidence that actually supports your claim.

Here's your anecdote:

My nephew, who is a border patrol agent, told me there are two things that are critical for a immigrant seeking asylum...basically that they have "suffered" or have a "fear" of persecution or a present danger to their lives... as both of these links confirm.

His job was processing the first step...he asks basic questions, and starts the process. The best day he had, he said he processes 8 people. After he starts the paper work the person goes through numerous steps, and interviews. If, in the end, it is "thought" that there is ample grounds for asylum...then they are granted a future hearing for final judgment, and due to the mass influx, released on a promise they will appear.

You shared that before. You also mentioned last time he quoted there being 10's of thousands of people showing up seeking asylum. Supposing your in law processes 8 a day, and by that he means his best day meant 8 people made it through the first step in the process to go onto further vetting. I am guessing you can figure out it would take more than a few hundred overworked CBP employees to turn that into something that supports your claim.

Now maybe you can go back and answer some of my questions .

This is why I called you a dumbass, Markk. Let's look at your questions.

Your first, and oft repeated question to me and others has been a version of if we think the answer is just to open the border. I assume you believe everyone who doesn't vote Republican is demanding this so it's a waving red flag in front of your face. Otherwise, I'd expect you'd have read this post and known what I think:

viewtopic.php?p=1187280#p1187280

Short answer, provided in the above which was immediately after your question about open borders, was: Our best immediate options at the border include increasing funding to facilitate due process and manage facilities better. Funding seems to be the perpetual issue across administrations.

Next post to me, you claimed:

You avoided the conclusion that detention centers are safer than the desert...yet you choose to follow the current narrative that the detention centers are bad, when given the influx of people our Border Patrol is doing a great job with what they have.

Are detention centers safer than deserts? Are they safer with Coyotes, than with Border patrol agents?

This was after I had pointed out this:

It's odd you imagine Trump's policies would discourage attempts to cross through deserts rather than at customs to claim asylum and that this has no effect on the decision making/risk taking that results in choosing to make a dangerous crossing through the desert.

You said I was avoiding the issue of whether or not detention centers were safer than the desert AFTER I had pointed out one of the issues with Trump's policies is that they encourage desert crossings because they discourage requesting asylum. Also, I pointed out that the Trump administration is prosecuting people for trying to help prevent immigrant deaths by leaving water in the desert. Here's a case that's been making it's way thorugh the courts here in Arizona recently: https://reason.com/2019/03/08/volunteer ... g-food-an/

You'll notice how my source directly supports my claim, too. Trying to help you better understand how links are supposed to work in discussions. That's not p-hacking, by the way. That's supporting a claim. It's kinda considered essential to good faith discussion. You should try it. (hint, hint)

The next time you posted after I had stated the above, you go with this:

Bull, you failed to look at the bigger picture due to your political ideology. We have a huge problem at the border.

Clearly, you either aren't reading what I post or you aren't processing what I'm saying. I don't know what else to tell you other than it is what makes you a dumbass. That, and reasserting that this is the logical binary position for the discussion:

The only alternative is the open the borders up, and have a free for all, or our politicians actually get together and work together. We are the greatest nation to ever exist, we can solve this if we get together.

You mean, like, actually funding legitimate needs at the border such as supplies and staffing up? damned Jesus, man.

Oh, you probably didn't realize that whatever conservative talk radio source you prefer was referencing exactly this thing when it was probably bashing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a couple weeks back. Otherwise, you might reassess the claim Pelosi is sitting this out and not doing anything. She fought with the extreme left in the House to get a House bill passed, accepted the push to vote on a Senate-passed bill that got money heading that way when push came to shove, and went public with her frustration with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others for resisting getting things done in the name of demanding unconditional acceptance of their terms. Say what you will about her methods, the results or strategy, but Pelosi has been anything but sitting on her heels on this.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/ ... ge-1382038

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/us/p ... ation.html

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4518 ... for-voting

So yeah, I think you don't read what other people say and rely on anecdotes to support your views. Go back and look at how often in your posts you tell people if they only saw what you saw they'd change their opinions. We can be talking about basketball, politics, or the price of a ticket to see the surviving members of The Mamas and The Papas. It's inevitable with you. Check above for how blatantly you ignore what others have said to push your own myopia onto an issue.

You're a dumbass.

[_Jersey Girl]

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand, though. We don't throw children in concentration camps to experience psychological torture when their parents are jailed. And if we did, we should stop that immediately. There is absolutely nothing about immigration law that requires us to throw migrants, especially minors, in internment camps. And not all of these children have parents who did anything criminally wrong under our already harsh treatment of immigrants. Seeking asylum is not a crime per se. You might want to make it one, but it isn't yet.

Now that I'm done losing my cool here, I'll get back on the horse and respond to this.

Let's talk a bit about when a parent goes to 'the big timeout' which is what one of my former students called it.

Children of incarcerated parents have the ability in some cases to remain with the other parent or at least with family members, or they're taken into the foster care system which is a crap show any more however, they do have rights under the law even though adults abuse those laws. Depending on their economic status they'd have access to Medicaid, etc. I believe they have the right to visit their incarcerated parent or I may have that mixed up with prisoner rights.

Children in our country who are placed in childcare facilities also have rights under the law. Rights which must be complied with by any licensed program. According to recent reports, detained migrant youth are caring for toddlers in border facilities. What the hell.

Like honor noted earlier in the thread, in the case of migrant children currently held in US custody (a system which is operating beyond max capacity) not only can CBP not meet the needs of children they cannot even accept donations on behalf of the children due to our screwy laws in order to take up the slack for what the gov't cannot currently do on it's own. No diapers, no soap, toothbrushes, clothing, jammies, or equipment from secular and church charities. I can't even ship down a ton of class size art supplies for them at this point which I could have it there in 3 days if only it were permitted.

[_Markk]

LOL... I showed you from the horses mouth the process, and I think even you can figure out that if coached...if one can say the right things, they can get through the process.

Then after you say you now better about people coming through the desert because you live in Arizona, you accuse me of using anecdotes.

I already conceded I am a dumbass, and that you are a pawn and whore for your pimp, the left wing diatribe. You are not a very happy person are you?

I’m on my phone, I’ll comment more when I can read through the links you provided.

[_honorentheos]

Again with anecdotes. Can you provide data showing that it's easy for asylum seekers to get in the US, where they are getting this so called coaching, and how prevelent it is? Or just say you've connected the dots to come to a conclusion that doesn't need anything like evidence or data? At this point I'd be impressed if you were able to translate your nephew in law's story into a reasonable sounding guess.

by the way, I hear anyone can show up at Los Angeles building services and have a building permited and built in no time at all with the proper coaching. It's so easy, homelessness is bound to be abolished in LA any day now so many building should be going up. Want proof? Right from the horses mouth.

https://www.ladbs.org/services/core-ser ... eck-permit

[_Markk]

Again with anecdotes. Can you provide data showing that it's easy for asylum seekers to get in the US, where they are getting this so called coaching, and how prevelent it is? Or just say you've connected the dots to come to a conclusion that doesn't need anything like evidence or data? At this point I'd be impressed if you were able to translate your nephew in law's story into a reasonable sounding guess.

by the way, I hear anyone can show up at Los Angeles building services and have a building permited and built in no time at all with the proper coaching. It's so easy, homelessness is bound to be abolished in LA any day now so many building should be going up. Want proof? Right from the horses mouth.

https://www.ladbs.org/services/core-ser ... eck-permit

LOL...are you that stubborn, or maybe a better word is...so indoctrinated that you can't admit you were ignorant on the process?

I gave you the web site that shows the two things in which one must be "proven"; actual or the threat of prosecution (Credible fear).

If you are incapable of understanding that immigration right groups, attorneys, and other "coaches" can, and do convey this to prospective immigrants, not to mention word of mouth... it only proves my point of your indoctrinated state of mind.

You like to P-Hack....search "Immigrant coaching"...there are even y-tube videos on coaching, and this is in English, I can only imagine if one did a search in Spanish. Here's my "anecdote" of the day, I'll have one of my friends, who is a 1st generation Mexican immigrant's son, who is conservative, google it in Spanish for me...I am sure there are many here that can do so as well...I can speak a little, but that is about it.

One of the first youtube hits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdV51cbCLjY

I know you get it, it is just a pride thing at this point that you deny how "coaching" works in the process.

I just found this...

Initial Contact With Customs and Border Protection Officers

When a Custom and Border Protection (CBP) officer detains a noncitizen for not having the required immigration documents or for attempting to commit fraud to enter the U.S., CBP will ask whether the person has a fear of returning to his or her home country. A person who says “no” will be removed from the United States. If the person expresses a fear of persecution or torture, CBP officers will set up a credible fear interview with an asylum officer.

This is exactly what my nephew explained to me, and what his "job" is when he is sent down here.

You can read on through the coaching part by this firm.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia ... rview.html

[_ajax18]

Your game here is so transparent. You want to portray rejection of the most draconian approaches to immigration possible as equivalent to an immigration free-for-all. It is not at all difficult to imagine you in the future arguing that failure to support executing migrants at the border as wanting "open borders." To the extent you win victories through seizing power, you want to portray any rejection of the government's status quo as ignoring the law while refusing to address whether the law is appropriate. Because you are so eager to do this, you end up using this approach on things that aren't even legally binding.

Parents are separated from their children all the time. Children inevitably suffer consequences for their parents criminal behavior for a plethora of crimes. The only reason this is considered a "concentration camp" is because you don't agree with our immigration law and you see enforcing the border as being equivalent to being heartless. Why do you not see people ignoring beggars and locking their doors as heartless as well? Perhaps you only believe in private property on a personal level but not a national level? I don't know. But then again if a minority juvenile were robbing my house I doubt you'd side with the homeowner or any kind of police response on that either so it's hard to say.

[_honorentheos]

Markk, so you can't support your claim. Got it.

[_Themis]

Parents are separated from their children all the time.

Not forcibly.

Children inevitably suffer consequences for their parents criminal behavior for a plethora of crimes.

For some crimes, but not all, and children are then put in other homes. With asylum seekers though they are not breaking the law. While there are issues, Trump strategy here is to make things worse so they can make it look like it's a crisis to attempt to build up support while distracting you as they pick your pocket. Your children and grand children will end up owing a lot of money because of people like Trump while at the same time stealing their hard earned money.

[_honorentheos]

Markk, maybe you can find something that supports your claim here:

https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/539/

Or maybe not. But feel free to try. I'd be interested in seeing you attempt to ground a claim with supported evidence rather than something you heard from a friend or just came to conclude based on some anecdote you heard.

[_ajax18]

Not forcibly.

So you wouldn't define a parent being put in jail as forcible separation from his children? A father can be forcibly separated from his children in a divorce regardless of whether he is at fault or not.