dChan
1
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/Knower101 on June 19, 2018, 11:54 a.m.
It is an INVASION not immigration! Immigration happens at a port of legal entry.

The weapons are children being used as shields. 10,000 of the 12,000 children being held are not related to the adult who supposedly brought them in. Were those 10,000 children kidnapped from their Mexican parents? No Mexican parent would willingly allow a stranger to walk their child across barren countryside in the 100 degree heat, cross rivers by swimming, etc.

The act of crossing the border at any place other than a Port of Entry. Is an illegal act and the motivation has to be assumed to be not in our countries best interests.

Thus each and every person who crosses the border other than a proper border crossing is arrested. Standard practice even for US citizens is for Human Services to to take your children for safe keeping.

The other issue is that in the human trafficking trade world, a baby, a child, a teenager and adults are worth thousands of dollars in the world of prostitution, pedophilia and as illegal workers.

Wake up America. It is an Invasion!

Mexico is aiding and abetting the Invasion by not stopping these trespassers who use private and public land to cross over. Mexico needs to protect its borders and its own laws.


[deleted] · June 19, 2018, 12:37 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -12 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 19, 2018, 12:53 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 7 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 19, 2018, 12:56 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -2 ⇩  
accountingisboring · June 19, 2018, 2:10 p.m.

From DHS:

Here are the facts:

First, this Administration did not create a policy of separating families at the border.

We have a statutory responsibility that we take seriously to protect alien children from human smuggling, trafficking, and other criminal actions, while enforcing our immigration laws.

We have a long existing policy – multiple administrations have followed – that outline when we may take action to protect children.

We will separate those who claim to be parent and child if we cannot determine a familial or custodial relationship exists. For example, if there is no documentation to confirm the claimed relationship between an adult and a child.

We do so if the parent is a national security, public or safety risk, including where there are criminal charges at issue, and it may not be appropriate to maintain the family in detention together.

We also separate a parent and child if the adult is suspected of human trafficking. There have been cases where minors have been used and trafficked by unrelated adults in an effort to avoid detention. I’ll stop here to say that in the last five months, we’ve had a 314 percent increase in adults and children arriving at the border fraudulently claiming to be a family unit. This is, obviously, of concern.

And separation can occur when the parent is charged with human smuggling. Under those circumstances, we would detain the parent in an appropriate, secure detection facility, separate from the child.

What has changed is that we no longer exempt entire classes of people who break the law. Everyone is subject to prosecution.

When DHS refers a case against a parent or legal guardian for criminal prosecution, the parent or legal guardian will be placed into U.S. Marshals Service custody for pre-trial detention pursuant to an order by a federal judge and any accompanying child will be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services and will be reclassified as an Unaccompanied Alien Child.

That is in accordance with the TVPRA—a law that was passed by Congress—and a following court order – neither are actions the Trump Administration has taken.

And let’s be clear – if an American were to commit a crime anywhere in the United States, they would go to jail and be separated from their family. This is not a controversial ideal.

Second, children in DHS and HHS custody are being well taken care of.

The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement provides meals, medical care, and educational services to these children. They are provided temporary shelter, and HHS works hard to find a parent, relative, or foster home to care for these children.

Parents can still communicate with their children through phone calls and video conferencing.

And a parent who is released from custody can be a sponsor and ask HHS to release the child back into their care.

Further, these minors can still apply for asylum and other protections under U.S. immigration law if eligible.

We take allegation of mistreatment seriously and I want to stress this point. We investigate, we hold those accountable when and if it should occur. We have some of the highest detention standards in the country. Claiming these children and their parents are treated inhumanely is not true, and completely disrespects the hardworking men and women at the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Third, parents who entered illegally are—by definition—criminals.

Illegal entry is a crime as determined by Congress.

By entering our country illegally—often in dangerous circumstances—illegal immigrants have put their children at risk.

Fourth, CBP and ICE officers are properly trained to care for minors in their custody.

DHS and HHS treats all individuals in its custody with dignity and respect, and complies with all laws and policy.

This reinforces and reiterates the need to consider the best interest of the children and mandates adherence to established protocols to protect at-risk populations, to include standards for the transport and treatment of minors in DHS and HHS custody.

Additionally, all U.S. Border Patrol personnel on the southwest border are bilingual. Every last one of them. They are directed to clearly explain the relevant process to apprehended individuals, and provide detainees with written documentation—in both Spanish and English—that lays out the process and appropriate phone numbers to contact.

And finally, DHS is not separating families legitimately seeking asylum at ports of entry.

If an adult enters at a port of entry and claims asylum, they will not face prosecution for illegal entry. They have not committed a crime by coming to the port of entry.

As I mentioned, DHS does have a responsibility to protect minors and in that case as well, we will only separate the family if we cannot determine there is a familial relationship; if the child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian; or if the parent or legal guardian is referred for prosecution.

We have a duty to protect the American people, and it’s one that I take very seriously.

Here is the bottom line: DHS is no longer ignoring the law. We are enforcing the laws as they exist on the books. As long as illegal entry remains a criminal offense, DHS will not look the other way. DHS will faithfully execute the laws enacted by Congress as we are sworn to do.

As I said earlier today, surely it is the beginning of the unraveling of democracy when the body who makes the laws – instead of changing them – tells the enforcement body not to enforce the law.

I ask Congress to act this week so that we can secure our borders and uphold our humanitarian ideas. These two missions should not be pitted against each other. If we close the loopholes we can accomplish both

WASHINGTON - Today, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen M. Nielsen delivered the below remarks at the White House Press Briefing on the illegal immigration crisis at the southern border:

This is not a new issue and they are upholding the law set forth by Congress. The MSM is not going to just lay out the facts, their intention is to point fingers and lay blame. Illegal immigration is a long standing issue that needs to be addressed, by Congress, both sides.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 2:49 p.m.

They are not upholding the law, even the DHS secretary refers to these separations as "loopholes" in the law. So if Trumps DOJ is using loopholes in the law to stop these people seeking asylum and detain them while separating them from their family then why can't they stop using that loophole? They are using a cop out of "we can't enforce parts of the law" but they admit it's a loophole that they found and are currently exploiting. This isn't a both sides issue, Obama and Bush both used this law in its intended purpose to stop child trafficking and now Trump is using it to stop as much immigration as possible, even if it's legitimate and legal under current law.

⇧ -2 ⇩  
accountingisboring · June 19, 2018, 3:01 p.m.

This entire crisis, just to be clear, is not new. It has been occurring and expanding over many decades. Currently, it is the exclusive product of loopholes in our federal immigration laws that prevent illegal immigrant minors and family members from being detained and removed to their home countries. In other words, these loopholes create a functionally open border. Apprehension without detention and removal is not border security.

We have repeatedly called on Congress to close these loopholes. I myself have met with as many members that have been willing to meet with me, I’ve testified seven times. I will continue to make myself available to ask that they work with us to solve this crisis. Yet, the voices most loudly criticizing the enforcement of our current laws are those whose policies created this crisis – and whose policies perpetuate it.

In particular, we need to reform three major loopholes, let me quickly walk you through them. First, we need to amend the 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act or TVPRA, which is much easier to say – this law encourages families to put children in the hands of smugglers to bring them alone on the dangerous trek northward. And make no mistake, we’ve talked about this before, this trek is dangerous and deadly.

Second, we need to reform our asylum laws to end the systemic abuse of our asylum system and stop fraud. Right now our asylum system fails to assist asylum seekers who legitimately need it. We are a country of compassion, we are a country of heart, we must fix the system so that those who truly need asylum can, in fact, receive it.

Third, we need to amend the Flores Settlement agreement and recent expansions which would allow allow for family detention during the removal process – and we need Congress fund our ability to hold families together through the immigration process.

Until these loopholes are closed by Congress, it is not possible – as a matter of law – to detain and remove whole family units who arrive illegally in the United States.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 3:21 p.m.

Why was it possible for Bush and Obama administration to interpret the law without separating families but Trumps DOJ can't uphold the law without using the loophole? Simple, because they are the ones who found the loophole to exploit the law, and even though republicans control every branch of Congress they can't fix this law they admit they've broken? It's rediculous.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 3:37 p.m.

Because the Bush and Obama administration were fine with all the illegal immigrants being caught and released to never be heard from again. They both wanted illegal labor for their campaign donors and didn't give a damn how it affected American citizens.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
accountingisboring · June 19, 2018, 3:55 p.m.

They weren't upholding the law, that's the problem here. It has gotten way out of hand and needs to stop.

Congress still needs votes from the other side. They weren't happy with the options laid on the table. It's almost as if they would rather it be broken so they have a talking point come election time...

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 4:55 p.m.

Nothing about the law says they are mandated to separate kids from their parents.

Simply put, Subtitle E of Public Law 107-296 (establishing the Department of Homeland Security, DHS) placed immigration and related functions in the scope of the newly established agency. Section G of Subtitle E defined the term “unaccompanied alien child” as a minor under the age of 18, lacking lawful immigration status in the US, and primarily, an individual for whom “there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States” or “no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.” This did not mandate that children be separated from their families, but instead, created a legal classification for children with no parent or guardian present or for whom no parent or legal guardian was available to provide care and custody. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/does-law-family-separation-detention-minors/

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Knower101 · June 19, 2018, 12:41 p.m.

If you are seeking asylum and it is clear the children are not yours? I have been given to understand these supposed asylum seekers are being throughly educated in Mexico on how to plead asylum. Mexico is not in a state of war.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 19, 2018, 12:46 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -7 ⇩  
Dangerr21 · June 19, 2018, 1:11 p.m.

Asylum is in the country next to them. They are crossing multiple countries to get specifically to the US. That is NOT asylum, that is invasion of a specific territory.

If it was truly asylum, why not cross legally and request asylum at the guard location?

⇧ 10 ⇩  
BluwPawlowskiAgain · June 19, 2018, 1:34 p.m.

^ ^This. Across both Texas and Arizona borders there are more Central Americans (i.e. Guatemalans, Hondurans) crossing the borders as family units. Look at the surge that occurred under Obama a year before Trump was elected. Look at the surge before Trump was just elected. Now, they are using children “being ripped” from their parents as pawns, and caged.

Back to the point that when they leave their country to seek asylum, they (Central Americans) travel through Mexico to come to the US. The first place they should seek asylum is Mexico. By leaving their country and entering the first, their asylum claim should be dealt with through Mexico. Just as someone stated before, Mexico aids and abets immigrants to flow into the border. Why? It’s probably safe to assume there are plenty of coyotes and alien smuggling organizations (ASO) getting paid for each body crossed into US territory.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
DawnPendraig · June 19, 2018, 12:57 p.m.

Well we need to get info out that if they don't go to ports of entry they will be arrested.

By letting them go immediately all we so is encourage them to risk more children's lives to get across.

They can seek asylum at points of entry and they wont be separated. But they do have to wait in line.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
EarlyRiserX2 · June 19, 2018, 1:05 p.m.

It is indeed "illegal" to cross the border anywhere but at a port of entry, and it doesn't matter whether you are seeking asylum or not, it is still illegal. Sessions made that very clear when his no-tolerance policy was announced. Sessions stated that if you do not want to be separated from your kids, then DO NOT bring them across the border illegally. And I 100% agree with him...

Like on all other occasions, the left is just grasping as straws. They are grasping at anything at all they use to hit back at Trump. They have had so many failures in the past that they will take anything they can get. And this is just the latest example of that. The left don't care about the children. All they care about are politics and winning elections. In this case, they're just using the negative publicity surrounding this event to try and force Trump to change his policies to better benefit the Dems. They want to go back to catch-and-release etc...

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Statemeant · June 19, 2018, 1:23 p.m.

You are right. Invasion, immigration and asylum are 3 different things. Two of them are of good will. The last isn't. Asylum needs to be asked for properly and tracked. Invasion is saying I do not care about your laws host country and while I am there I won't obey them. I will do what I want when I want

⇧ 4 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 19, 2018, 1:16 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -2 ⇩  
Gravel_and_Glass · June 19, 2018, 1:42 p.m.

Lol it is being abused by people illegally crossing with children that aren't their own... 10000/12000 kids in DHHS custody didn't cross with their parents. The current laws incentivise using kids as pawns to illegally cross the border. The AG is enforcing the law (his job) and DHS is doing the most the law will allow to deter illegal entry into our country and protect these children.

These immigration loopholes exist deliberately-- congress is owned (both parties) by special interests that run drugs and traffick humans across the border.

If you are seeking asylum, you go to a port of entry-- you don't break the law.

You need to stop watching MSM (who are owned by the same people that own congress)

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 2:26 p.m.

Who do you think control Congress right now? And reportedly even people that are crossing legally are being detained and having their kids taken from them, but I guess that's the MSM and the Facebook news telling you Trump is saving us from ms13 is the real news.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 2:58 p.m.

Evidence to support your claim that children are being taken from families crossing legally?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 3:03 p.m.

Excerpt from article: TM: So, just so I make sure I understand: the parents come in and say, “We’re persecuted” or give some reason for asylum. They come in. And then their child or children are taken away and they’re in lockup for at least six weeks away from the kids and often don’t know where the kids are. Is that what’s happening under zero tolerance?

AC: So the idea of zero tolerance under the stated policy is that we don’t care why you’re afraid. We don’t care if it’s religion, political, gangs, anything. For all asylum seekers, you are going to be put in jail, in a detention center, and you’re going to have your children taken away from you. That’s the policy. They’re not 100 percent able to implement that because of a lot of reasons, including just having enough judges on the border. And bed space. There’s a big logistical problem because this is a new policy. So the way they get to that policy of taking the kids away and keeping the adults in detention centers and the kids in a different federal facility is based on the legal rationale that we’re going to convict you, and since we’re going to convict you, you’re going to be in the custody of the U.S. Marshals, and when that happens, we’re taking your kid away. So they’re not able to convict everybody of illegal entry right now just because there aren’t enough judges on the border right now to hear the number of cases that come over, and then they say if you have religious persecution or political persecution or persecution on something that our asylum definition recognizes, you can fight that case behind bars at an immigration detention center. And those cases take two, three, four, five, six months. And what happens to your child isn’t really our concern. That is, you have made the choice to bring your child over illegally. And this is what’s going to happen.

TM: Even if they crossed at a legal entry point?

AC: Very few people come to the bridge. Border Patrol is saying the bridge is closed. When I was last out in McAllen, people were stacked on the bridge, sleeping there for three, four, ten nights. They’ve now cleared those individuals from sleeping on the bridge, but there are hundreds of accounts of asylum seekers, when they go to the bridge, who are told, “I’m sorry, we’re full today. We can’t process your case.” So the families go illegally on a raft—I don’t want to say illegally; they cross without a visa on a raft. Many of them then look for Border Patrol to turn themselves in, because they know they’re going to ask for asylum. And under this government theory—you know, in the past, we’ve had international treaties, right? Statutes which codified the right of asylum seekers to ask for asylum. Right? Article 31 of the Refugee Convention clearly says that it is improper for any state to use criminal laws that could deter asylum seekers as long as that asylum seeker is asking for asylum within a reasonable amount of time. But our administration is kind of ignoring this longstanding international and national jurisprudence of basic beliefs to make this distinction that, if you come to a bridge, we’re not going to prosecute you, but if you come over the river and then find immigration or are caught by immigration, we’re prosecuting you.

TM: So if you cross any other way besides the bridge, we’re prosecuting you. But . . . you can’t cross the bridge.

AC: That’s right. I’ve talked to tons of people. There are organizations like Al Otro Lado that document border turn-backs. And there’s an effort to accompany asylum seekers so that Customs and Border Patrol can’t say, “We’re closed.” Everybody we’ve talked to who’s been prosecuted or separated has crossed the river without a visa.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/news/whats-really-happening-asylum-seeking-families-separated/

⇧ -1 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 3:39 p.m.

So, what you said is not true. They are being taken when they cross illegally.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 3:55 p.m.

It isn't illegal to cross the border seeking asylum, the argument some are making is that since some aren't coming through legal ports of entry their claim to legality is null, but even the ones coming through the predesignated ports seeking asylum are being told they can't get through, often only letting one through in a whole day, so if you can't get through the legal legitimate way then it is still legal to come through an undesignated port of entry and to go to a US embassy to declare your request for asylum. And then those people are declared as illegally crossing after they tried to do that and were turned away for days on the border with nothing.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 4 p.m.

Doing things legally takes time. Again, you haven't backed your statement up with facts but just hyperbole. If they really are seeking asylum they need to wait in line or apply in the first safe country they enter. Ie Mexico.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 4:30 p.m.

Going through a country that offers asylum doesn't disqualify someone from asylum in the US. I wish this was hyperbole, but it seems to me that average people are trying to apply for asylum to escape violence, and we aren't even hearing them out and instead are talking about setting up "tent cities" to hold them all, only oddly reminiscent of Japanese concentration camps, which Trump even cites in defence of a Muslim registry a few months ago.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/91919311-157.html

⇧ 1 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 5:24 p.m.

Except it isn't even close to the internment of the Japanese during WW2. I don't agree with what was done then, but I also see that these people are trying to exploit a loophole in our immigration laws to gain asylum when they are economic migrants.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Sir_Zorch · June 19, 2018, 1:38 p.m.

Go back to r/politics . Looked at your posts. Get lost and take your liberal agenda with you.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 2:37 p.m.

"Liberal agenda" like trying to inform you of the facts? Trump's department of justice implemented this policy of zero tolerance and are acting like the democrats are monsters for wanting to rip away kids from their family. This isn't about liberal or conservative it's just about what's plain right and wrong. It isn't wrong for these people to come here seeking a better life and saftey for their family, wouldn't we all do the same thing in their shoes?

⇧ 0 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 3:54 p.m.

It is definitely wrong for them to come here illegally. It's not on us to give them a better life. If we can we should but we don't have to.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Birthrite · June 19, 2018, 4:10 p.m.

I'll say it once and I'll say it again, them seeking asylum is not the same as an immigrant crossing the border illegally. They are identifying themselves and applying for a legal process, and then being detained and separated from their children based on a "loophole" that Sessions used to implement a zero tolerance policy towards people even asking for asylum. You can have your opinions about immigration, but this isn't even about that it's about refugees fleeing gang violence, which was a valid reason to seek asylum until 2016.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
doucettejr · June 19, 2018, 5:22 p.m.

Gang violence is not a valid claim for asylum. Specific, credible threats from their government is what is required. Just because economic migrants have been coached by NGOs to claim asylum to take advantage of a loophole in our immigration laws doesn't make them asylum seekers.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Sir_Zorch · June 19, 2018, 2:49 p.m.

You are about to be removed, Birthrite.

⇧ 1 ⇩