Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Jade Helm Conspiracy Non-TerroristsFollow

#227 Jun 13 2018 at 7:33 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,689 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Accountability is hard, let's go shopping!
It's okay as long as everyone else is accountable for my actions.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#228 Jun 13 2018 at 6:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,345 posts
Quote:
These are not children that were taken from their parents. These are children that showed up unaccompanied at the border and were placed in homes.


Most of them were defined as unaccompanied because their parents were arrested upon entry, sometimes because they were also applying for asylum.

It's not like roving herds of kids just show up at the border, although that is the narrative being pedaled currently.

Also, so very nice that the current plan is to house these kids in tent camps. That's not super creepy at all.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#229 Jun 13 2018 at 8:46 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,296 posts
So the 7500 unaccompanied minors are really just 7500 kids who were already separated from their parents in the last year. And the previous border crisis with all these kids and DACA misinformation causing problems in 2012+...

Then what exactly is Trump's "We will separate children" changing or making new, if they already separated them?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#230 Jun 13 2018 at 9:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,345 posts
The biggest difference now, today, is the Trump Administration's 100% prosecution policy, which necessitates separation (because the parents are being arrested in every case, and apparently incarcerated while awaiting adjudication).

And, of course, the statements by Kelly and Trump that the separation is specifically punitive, even against asylum seekers.

Before you argue that asylum seekers are breaking the law, that's how it has always worked. You enter the country, you turn yourself in, and you request asylum. If you are granted asylum, then by definition no crime has occurred. If you are not, then you are charged and deported.

With hundreds of kids being separated from their parents in the past few weeks, and the loose follow-up with regards to where those kids are at any given time, I'm not sure the kids could be reunited with their parents in the event of deportation. They could conceivably never see their parents again. They could theoretically be deported without an adult.

With existing resources stretched past the limit with the flood of children under the current policy, government agencies have apparently decided that detention centers are the way to go. The first tent city is being planned at Fort Bliss, between El Paso and Abilene (TX). It's scrub desert. I imagine it's hellish in the summer.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#231 Jun 13 2018 at 9:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I don't think Samira's previous statement (re: unaccompanied minors) was accurate.

The US has an established program of taking unaccompanied minors at the border and putting them in sponsor families. This is where the 20% "We dunno" rate came from. If you look it up, you'll see photos of shelters from the Obama era and probably earlier doing the same thing. While you certainly couldn't defend it as a stellar example of effectiveness, you could at least argue that placing unaccompanied minors with sponsor families is better than keeping them permanently in a detainment facility. However, if you were a minor and with your parents who were detained, you remained with your family through the process.

Trump has implemented a new policy of separating children from their parents and moving them in with the unaccompanied children where they will be entering the same program. There is no real reason for this besides "haha, fuck you illegals" but it means that significantly more children will be in the 20% "Eh, we made a phone call so we're done" group. Quite possibly, it could grow larger -- many unaccompanied minors were sent north with the expectation that Auntie Maria or whoever would take possession of them in the US. But there's no reason to assume that a child who was with their family just has more family in the US to act as a sponsor. These children would be more likely to wind up with strangers. That's why the "Once they're in the sponsor family, they're not our problem any more" statement is troubling and why intentionally flooding the program with more children purely as a "deterrent" to their families is damn near monstrous.

Edited, Jun 13th 2018 10:38pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#232 Jun 14 2018 at 6:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Children entering Trump's new immigrant children camps are greeted with murals of Trump's face and the phrase Arbeit Mach--- no wait... "Sometimes by losing a battle you find a new way to win the war".

So buck up, kiddos!

There's actually murals of various presidents, most with inspiring immigration quotes, but it's still pretty creepy

Edited, Jun 14th 2018 7:59am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#233 Jun 14 2018 at 8:08 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,689 posts
The quote should be "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#234 Jun 14 2018 at 8:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Missing sponsor family children aside, life in the detention shelter ain't no great shakes either.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#235 Jun 14 2018 at 8:50 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,296 posts
2 hours per day of outside time? A couple hours less and they'll be ready to be real American kids.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#236 Jun 14 2018 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,689 posts
Clearly they're using the same WalMarts that Obama stole during the Jade Helm exercises to use their underground tunnels to smuggle the girls out and deliver them to PizzaHut Basement Sex Dungeons all across the country.

Edited, Jun 14th 2018 11:09am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#237 Jun 14 2018 at 5:40 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The US has an established program of taking unaccompanied minors at the border and putting them in sponsor families. This is where the 20% "We dunno" rate came from. If you look it up, you'll see photos of shelters from the Obama era and probably earlier doing the same thing. While you certainly couldn't defend it as a stellar example of effectiveness, you could at least argue that placing unaccompanied minors with sponsor families is better than keeping them permanently in a detainment facility.


So what Trump is doing is better than what Obama was doing? Just checking to see if I read that right.

Quote:
However, if you were a minor and with your parents who were detained, you remained with your family through the process.


At the risk of repeating a point that was already made, then where were all those unaccompanied minors coming from during the Obama administration? You kinda can't have it both ways. Either there were/are a largish number of minors actually showing up at the border with no adult family members (as you claimed earlier) or there are not. If there were not, then Obama was separating them, just as you're arguing Trump is. If there were, then your earlier point about this not happening very often is wrong (at least to some degree).

Which again, puts us in the "we don't really have enough specifics from the article to make a good decision about this" followed by "this sure seems like a lot of fact manipulation to create fear rather than actually informing the public about something".

Quote:
Trump has implemented a new policy of separating children from their parents and moving them in with the unaccompanied children where they will be entering the same program.


I'm not sure what you mean here. So he's separating the children from the parents (apparently in some way that Obama wasn't, or maybe was, depending on <something>. But then he's "moving them (them referring to the parents?) in with the unaccompanied children where they'll be entering the same program (so they're "together" for the entire immigration hearing process and for whatever happens next?)". Um...How is that "worse". If the complain is about separating families, your statement seems to indicate that Trump is keeping them together as much as possible and at least as much (if not more) than occurred under the Obama administration.

Quote:
There is no real reason for this besides "haha, fuck you illegals" but it means that significantly more children will be in the 20% "Eh, we made a phone call so we're done" group.


I'm not following you there. So separating them is bad. But putting them back together is somehow "more bad"? Now I'm not even sure what that 20% represents. Is that the number that aren't answering the phone because we lost track of them and their parents, you know, since they're in this together now. Were you actually trying to argue that Trumps policy is bad because by putting them back together it increases the risk that the entire family will just disappear in the US? Or something else?


Quote:
Quite possibly, it could grow larger -- many unaccompanied minors were sent north with the expectation that Auntie Maria or whoever would take possession of them in the US. But there's no reason to assume that a child who was with their family just has more family in the US to act as a sponsor. These children would be more likely to wind up with strangers. That's why the "Once they're in the sponsor family, they're not our problem any more" statement is troubling and why intentionally flooding the program with more children purely as a "deterrent" to their families is damn near monstrous.


Again though, I'm seeing a lot of spin, and a lot of "OMG! We should be upset" and "Trump is BAD!" in this whole thing, but not really seeing the facts that support that. Is the rate of children "missing" higher or lower now than it was during Obama's administration? Is the rate of children separated or kept together (or rejoined later) higher or lower? What exactly are we crying about? From what I've seen it looks a lot like media folks suddenly "discovering" a problem about our immigration process with regards to children and parents that they've decided is a huge thing we all need to care about A LOT!, but which seems to have existed previously and they decided to ignore it then. I guess? Dunno. I can't tell from the data being provided.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#238 Jun 14 2018 at 5:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
So what Trump is doing is better than what Obama was doing? Just checking to see if I read that right.

No. I have literally no idea where you got that from. I stopped reading your post here because if you're this stupid this early there didn't seem to be any reason to go deeper.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#239 Jun 14 2018 at 5:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
So what Trump is doing is better than what Obama was doing? Just checking to see if I read that right.

No. I have literally no idea where you got that from. I stopped reading your post here because if you're this stupid this early there didn't seem to be any reason to go deeper.


Um. Because the complaint raised earlier was that 20% of the kids put into sponsor homes went missing? So if that's what Obama was doing, but now Trump is doing something else, then....? I'm just replying to what you are saying, but what you are saying is all over the map.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#240 Jun 14 2018 at 6:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Are you seriously this stupid?

Scenario A: Unaccompanied children are put into shelters and then eventually moved into sponsored homes while their case is sorted. Children arriving with families stay with their families.

Scenario B: ALL children are put into shelters and eventually moved into sponsor homes while their case is sorted. Children arriving with their families are removed from their families and put into the same shelters as those who arrived unaccompanied.

It's not complicated. It probably can't be explained any simpler without the use of puppets or crayon drawings. Yet you manage to have trouble with it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#241 Jun 14 2018 at 6:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,345 posts
So it turns out the detention centers are a cash cow for military contractors. Like Erik Prince's company, for example.

You may remember him. He's Betsy DeVos' brother in law. He's shady af. But I'm sure it's all cool.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#242 Jun 14 2018 at 6:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'd read earlier that they are run by a nonprofit (Southern Keys or something). Is there a Prince link somewhere?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#243 Jun 14 2018 at 7:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,345 posts
No, just read "defense contractor" and my mind went there.

There are a few sources, but this is the headline I saw. Looks like MVM is bidding, not Prince's outfit. Whatever they're called this month.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#244 Jun 14 2018 at 7:35 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,384 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Are you seriously this stupid?


No. I'm pointing out a flaw in the conversation and looking for clarification

Quote:
Scenario A: Unaccompanied children are put into shelters and then eventually moved into sponsored homes while their case is sorted. Children arriving with families stay with their families.


Is this the scenario under the Obama administration? Then, where did all the "unaccompanied minors" that was such a huge issue during the Obama administration come from? Samira seemed certain that the only way people became unaccompanied was by being separated from their parents after arriving:

Samira wrote:
Most of them were defined as unaccompanied because their parents were arrested upon entry, sometimes because they were also applying for asylum.

It's not like roving herds of kids just show up at the border, although that is the narrative being pedaled currently.


So there were roving herd of kids showing up at the border when Obama was president, but not under Trump?

What I'm getting at is that the story seems to be changing back and forth depending on what specific part of the issue is being discussed. Can we just agree that children involved in illegal immigration is a difficult issue and no one really has a great solution? Except, you know, if we could actually prevent folks from entering the country illegally in the first place. That might just "solve" it (except for those actually seeking asylum, and I'm not sure what percentage that actually makes up).

Quote:
Scenario B: ALL children are put into shelters and eventually moved into sponsor homes while their case is sorted. Children arriving with their families are removed from their families and put into the same shelters as those who arrived unaccompanied.


Presumably the change under Trump, right? Ok. Is this "worse". Now we're doubling back to the question I asked earlier. Do we actually know that the number of those "missing" is higher or lower between the two scenarios? I have not yet seen any evidence either way.

Quote:
It's not complicated. It probably can't be explained any simpler without the use of puppets or crayon drawings. Yet you manage to have trouble with it.


I don't have any trouble with it. I'm merely pointing out that all of the stuff you keep talking about doesn't actually support the original claim that this is somehow "worse" with regards to the percentage of minors who go missing. We've somehow meandered from the issue of whether a sponsored home has family members in it, or not, to whether they had family members with them prior to being separated and then placed in a home. But the later issue doesn't tell us anything at all.

For all we know, the odds of going "missing" increases if there's a family member involved in the sponsored home, and the same likelihood of going "missing" would occur regardless of whether we initially separated them from the family members they arrived with prior to placing them there, or not. There's simply not enough data presented to us to make that determination. Hence, we can't say if that rate is higher or lower in this case.

What's the alternative? We keep the kids in a detention center with their parents during the entire process? Is that "better"? Do we find a relative in the US to take them? Does that increase the odd of them "going missing"? Is that "better" or "worse". My point is that it's a bad situation no matter what.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#245 Jun 14 2018 at 8:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,345 posts
Kids can be categorized as "unaccompanied" if they're accompanied by an adult who is not their parent or legal guardian.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#246 Jun 14 2018 at 9:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I don't have any trouble with it.

You just spent a thousand keystrokes proving otherwise.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#247 Jun 14 2018 at 11:14 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,628 posts
Apparently they keep filling up child detention centers and want to use prisons. Because, in addition to the actual unaccompanied minors, removing children from the families they came with makes them unaccompanied.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#248 Jun 15 2018 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,689 posts
Debalic wrote:
Apparently they keep filling up child detention centers and want to use prisons.
They're all criminals anyway.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#249 Jun 15 2018 at 11:43 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,628 posts
Sorry, not prisons, military bases.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#250 Jun 15 2018 at 12:22 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,689 posts
Debalic wrote:
Sorry, not prisons, military bases.
They're all criminals anyway.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#251 Jun 21 2018 at 1:50 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,615 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Sorry, not prisons, military bases.
They're all criminals anyway.
The kids or the people in the military?


*ba-dum-tissssss*
____________________________
Smash wrote:
My next mixed metaphor will include chocolate cake.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 69 All times are in CST
Turin, Anonymous Guests (68)