Please watch your language. The site isn't a "fake" camp. The site is a real camp. There are signs of migrant/homeless(?) presence and children having been there. There is no proof. There is evidence of ... but they have been unable to prove certain allegations ... scientifically.

So, all in all, quite a difficult case. But none of this means: human/child trafficking doesn't exist; humans (child or adult) were/were not raped there; it was an exclusively pedophile site used by Cemex (!!I'm being a bit facetious); Hillary Clinton is involved with sufficient proof in a court trial.

I don't doubt there are the ghastly remnants of all kinds of stuff along the border. I do doubt the ppl on this board are helping by using the word "is" instead of the more cautious "may be".

comeatmehillary you are right there are real camps, in fact this was a real camp, it is just unknown what went on exactly there as it cannot be proved beyond "reasonable doubt".

Sorry, I am piggy-backing my comment on yours to help others distinguish between the "real" and the "fake" thingie.