Moderated Trump announces new concentration camps

There are best practices on how to deal with Migrants - heck there are plenty of Trans-governmental agencies that have decades of experience and expertise. The US could just ask the IOM to handle the cases, as they already do when it comes to camps outside of the US, such as in the Middle East, where people seek asylum to the US.

The problem has a solution, but it is 100% clear that Republicans and Trump would rather the crisis intensifies.
 
Travis said:
And remember how anyone (such as myself) was "crazy" to predict Trump would do something exactly like what he is currently doing?
Click to expand...

The obvious solution is to mercy kill the refugees so they aren't forced to face the horrors of living in a country ruled by Trump, which we have established is a fate worst then death.
 
Last edited:
As a spokesman for the ACLU was say on TV last night (on Chris Hayes?), Trump has defunded the group processing the asylum claims and put the money into the policing side. The court appearance rate was 97% under Obama when the asylum seekers were released. Now, they're piling up and piling up, and something's gotta give.
 
cmikes said:
What? Doing exactly what President Obama did doing the smaller immigration crisis in 2014? ICE ran out of room at that time, also.
Click to expand...

Exactly what Obama did? Really?

https://www.sfchronicle.com/nation/article/Judges-differ-with-Trump-administration-on-14016372.php

The Trump administration’s defense of conditions at its shelters for immigrant minors — it argues it is not legally required to provide all of them with such items as soap, toothbrushes and sleeping accommodations — drew an incredulous response from federal appeals court judges Tuesday at a hearing in San Francisco.
Click to expand...
 
cmikes said:
What? Doing exactly what President Obama did doing the smaller immigration crisis in 2014? ICE ran out of room at that time, also.
Click to expand...


I don't remember Obama ordering people into camps without trial and no prospects of ever appearing in any court while not allowing anyone, not even the Red Cross, to visit inside the camps to check on the condition of the prisoners while also arguing in court that children do not deserve soap, toothbrushes, or sleeping accommodations while also throwing people into ice boxes to torture them, and at least one prisoner dying from other acts of torture.


I don't remember any of that happening under Obama.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
The obvious solution is to mercy kill the refugees so they aren't forced to face the horrors of living in a country ruled by Trump, which we have established is a fate worst then death.
Click to expand...
There is an argument to be made for that.
 
Travis said:
I don't remember Obama ordering people into camps without trial and no prospects of ever appearing in any court while not allowing anyone, not even the Red Cross, to visit inside the camps to check on the condition of the prisoners while also arguing in court that children do not deserve soap, toothbrushes, or sleeping accommodations while also throwing people into ice boxes to torture them, and at least one prisoner dying from other acts of torture.


I don't remember any of that happening under Obama.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, do you remember anything negative regarding immigration under Obama? Deportation numbers? Tear gas? Cages? Or is all this news to you?

Chris B.
 
Travis said:
So, looks like we are full speed ahead with creating concentration camps. Trump just announced a new policy of capturing and then not releasing immigrants. Just keep collecting them. Sooner or later the right will find convenient quarries where they can be killed.
Click to expand...

Almost forgot, you've left out an important qualifier in your OP. You should have used the word "illegal" in front of immigrants. As immigrants are not detained or captured etc. With the selective omission, you've incorrectly substituted someone who is not breaking the law for someone that is.

Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Out of curiosity, do you remember anything negative regarding immigration under Obama? Deportation numbers? Tear gas? Cages? Or is all this news to you?

Chris B.
Click to expand...

Your point being that Trump cannot do better or even as good as Obama, flawed though his migration process might have been at times?
 
A regular reminder that immigration control =/= production line murder and extermination through overwork. After all, Eisenhower pursued worse policies with Operation Wetback, but Americans by and large ignored that.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Almost forgot, you've left out an important qualifier in your OP. You should have used the word "illegal" in front of immigrants. As immigrants are not detained or captured etc. With the selective omission, you've incorrectly substituted someone who is not breaking the law for someone that is.

Chris B.
Click to expand...

Petitioning for sanctuary is not illegal.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Why would obeying the law with regard to those seeking refugee status be unacceptable?
Click to expand...
Isn't obeying the law exactly what the administration is doing?

See:
8 USC 1225(b)(1)(B)(ii) said:
If the officer determines at the time of the interview that an alien has a credible fear of persecution (within the meaning of clause (v)), the alien shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum.
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

How are they in violation of the law?
 
Upchurch said:
Petitioning for sanctuary is not illegal.
Click to expand...
Crossing at a place other than a designated port of entry (as thousands of "asylum seekers" are doing), however, is a criminal act.

Regardless, US law mandates that asylum seekers found to have a credible fear of persecution be placed in mandatory detention, as provided by 8 USC 1225(b)(1)(B)(ii).
 
Delphic Oracle said:
If you need me to cite where the right to due process comes from, then you don't belong in this conversation.
Click to expand...
If you can't come up with something better than "maybe Constitution!" then you are the one who is out of place here. The allegation is that the administration is not following the law. The provision I cited (that's the part in the quote box with the reference to the US Code) provides for (and requires) exactly what the administration is doing. If you've got something that says otherwise (besides your armchair lawyering), you probably should use that instead of spontaneous non-contextual references to due process.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
If you can't come up with something better than "maybe Constitution!" then you are the one who is out of place here. The allegation is that the administration is not following the law. The provision I cited (that's the part in the quote box with the reference to the US Code) provides for (and requires) exactly what the administration is doing. If you've got something that says otherwise (besides your armchair lawyering), you probably should use that instead of spontaneous non-contextual references to due process.
Click to expand...

Giving one example of a law that has not been broken doesn't prove the administration is following the law.

TITLE 42, CHAPTER 21 has various requirements for care of detained persons that are being violated in too many clauses and instances to cite.

I suggest for simplicity, typing "migrant detention conditions" into a search engine.

As for the particularities of the law: if the law says what we're doing is okay, then I say "**** the law."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom