It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Advertised In JANUARY For ‘Escorts’ To ‘Resettle’ 65k Illegal ‘Children’

page: 5
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

So what your saying is Congress is just as much at fault as Obama? Well that is how I look at this piece of information
Maybe if they read the bills they were passing through then they could find these loopholes?
Why doesn't Obama have a new bill on his desk very day asking him to repeal these laws that have been there for the past decade?




posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Stormdancer777

So what your saying is Congress is just as much at fault as Obama? Well that is how I look at this piece of information
Maybe if they read the bills they were passing through then they could find these loopholes?
Why doesn't Obama have a new bill on his desk very day asking him to repeal these laws that have been there for the past decade?


Because it is probably much more complicated then any of us can imagine, be afraid, be very afraid,



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

It's not complicated, get the people out of dc that won't stop having pissing contest and we can get some stuff done.
Immigrants are going to come over, let's stop fighting over what should be done abs actually do something. Let them get citizenship easier so they can get screwed over just like the rest of us.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80




So what your saying is Congress is just as much at fault as Obama?


Well yeah.

Presidents come and go.

Congressman are 'forever'.

And most of those shills on capitol hill have been there during these:

The Seven Amnesties Passed by Congress





Why doesn't Obama have a new bill on his desk very day asking him to repeal these laws that have been there for the past decade?


Because the Democratic majority in the Senate is snip blocking the house of rep.
edit on 8-7-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

So then can we get 12 post a week about how little Congress is doing?
Until obama is vetoing every damn bill that gets to him let's point the finger at the other people not enforcing the same very laws.
They are the ones that allowed the loopholes that are in place right now. Not obama



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

...... is that why John refused to vote on the reform bill that came up?



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

So then can we get 12 post a week about how little Congress is doing?
Until obama is vetoing every damn bill that gets to him let's point the finger at the other people not enforcing the same very laws.
They are the ones that allowed the loopholes that are in place right now. Not obama


Congress can do only so much.

From there it's up to the potus as part of his job description to 'faithfully execute' those laws.

As the constitution says.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

But they are not doing anything.....
You want the borders militarized, Congress needs to do that.
You want the loopholes that are getting exploited gone, Congress needs to do that.
You want reform, Congress needs to do that.
If we stay status quo, nothing will change



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Obama is too weak. Then Obama is all powerful. I call BS...the Obama administration did not ferry 65000 children through a bunch of countries. What would be the point, the potential that those 65000 children will one day become American citizens and vote Democrat, even if such absurdity were true that's only a drop in the bucket in potential votes 20+ years down the line.


The only reason I see plausible is some one wanted to know how Americans would react to 65000 child refugees. Some with compassion and others despite being devout Christians see these children as some sort of threat.

America is a largely Christian nation, so then do the Christian thing. Jesus said: heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us and always pray in private. He didn't say anything about borders and nations.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Stu Harris, VP of AFGE Union for Border Patrol was interviewed by Info Wars and he explains how Obama's new catch & release policy is what is drawing-in illegals suddenly...begins at 5:40 into this report:



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Please tell that to the Executive Orders he has pushed through to selectively enforce laws.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 11:50 PM
link   
The DC rats are trying to incite a civil war in the US so they can declare martial law. They've been at it since OweBama took office and likely before that.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I found an article that has a brief clip of a border patrol union representative talking about how there aren't any plans to restrict the people coming across. The guys name is Ron Zermeno. I'm still not able to start new threads--and this is related material, so I'll try linking the video here. I'll also keep looking for any other information of this type, but I'm busy packing because I'm moving. I'm sure you all will be able to find information just as easily.





posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Ga reply to: OpinionatedB

Good link, I have not looked into Central America issues before. Looks like a despicable corporate takeover, aided by the USA. The changes in wages when it was privatized is shocking, down by almost half.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: kkrattiger

Here is my thinking, they are taking teenage boys, 15-17 years old mainly. They want a complete corporate takeover of a country, so they need people on the inside who would promote this as being good.

Get them here, try to teach them business and show them what a country looks like that is privatized in the hopes they will go back and run these businesses and promote the ideology amongst their own people.

It's one thought anyway....



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96>>> So they pre planned and organized a wave of illegals , and not just illegals but the most pathetic and vulnerable illegals they could find... children. This was done to shame the American people into opening the borders and have them demand immigration reform. Only... it didn't happen that way. The American people have suffered too much for too long have essentially turned their backs on the government and now refuse to acknowledge their authority. Some of this is based on just how inept the government has proven to be, some of It is based on the governments antagonistic stance towards its own people. Yes, the feds and the puppet masters just don't understand the people. Only this is going to lead to even more heavy handed attempts to force their will upon us.
I see the dolt in chief has gone to Texas, hoorah.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 09:07 AM
link   
People elected a Muslim Communist and are surprised that he is destroying the country? The surprise to me is the number of people in collusion with him.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: kkrattiger

May have something to do with this?

labornotes.org...


You know, I'm a little bit torn about that link. On the one hand, there is a little bit of truth in it, but on the other, there is glaringly obvious "spin", to put it charitably, of a variety long used by a certain set of people whom I've never gotten along with very well. It's evident in turns of phrase such as "a bill that would auction off everything", "brutal civil war against a popular liberation movement that threatened U.S. business interests", and "show your solidarity".

Yeah, that war WAS brutal, but the FMLN was anything BUT "popular". You know people personally whose opinion of the FMLN you can ask, people who lived it. "J" can tell you how the FMLN guerrillas treated villagers. She can tell you about children just out playing running across the bodies of villagers executed by the FMLN for not towing the party line. Back during that war, There was a lot of propaganda flowing, as well - which is pretty much the norm for any war, when "hearts and minds" are at stake, and fact is played with pretty fast and loose. For example, there was a big deal about "government death squads". Never mentioned as "death squads", always as "government death squads". Now to be sure, such did exist, but they weren't limited to the government, nor even predominantly government. There was brutality on all sides, and damned few heroes - certainly not the heroic "labor unions" as presented in the article at the link.

"Show your solidarity"? Gimme a break! Those guys really ought to change up their catch phrases more often so as not to be so easily spotted!

Now, this "public-private partnership" business IS troubling. There should be no such critter. "Public" is a euphemism for "government", and NO government should be in bed with private business - that is, after all, the very definition of fascism. Carried to the other extreme, no government should be in possession of all of the private industry, either - that is, after all, the very definition of "socialism". There needs to be a balance, or everyone suffers.

There are some things that are the purview of government, and some that are not. A national army, or execution of foreign policy IS... but electricity is NOT, which is what the article was bitching about mostly, when it wasn't throwing out collectivist catch phrases.

The article was obviously written by the likes of the FMLN, collectivists to the core who are willing to execute out of hand any one who would rather opt out of their collective, and who have apparently beaten their swords into ink pens for the moment.

In a subsequent post, you advanced the theory that young men, 15-17, are overrepresented in the influx, for the purposes of business education to be exported back home. I have a counter-theory.

Military recruiters focus on young men, 17-18 and fresh out of high school with little knowledge of the world and life, specifically because they are still impressionable and malleable. They can be molded into the sort of person the military needs. Thinking about it, Obama has that "national service force stronger than the military" that he's go to put together with reliable folk behind the sights. Who's more reliable in that context than someone with little or no family here? Someone who Obama "graciously" allows into the country in spite of their illegal entry, and sees to their every need to keep them here? Someone who has a vested interest in getting the rest of their family here to The Land of the Big PX? Who do you suppose that sort of person would be most loyal to? Now add in the whole 15-17 "young, impressionable, and malleable" factor...

I personally don't think it's about business at all.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
More proof of this militant tyrant's plan to destroy our country. And at this point, it is not only Obama and the senate to blame...it is the supporting left among us. They have become the enemy too!


ok...all you right-wingers on this thread, what would you do? shoot them?....c'mon I want REAL, PRACTICAL, DOABLE, Answers...not some pie-in-the-sky, vague, philosophy.


Yes.

Too dead to stink.

Is that concrete enough?

Illegal is illegal. If you want to come to my house, come through the front door and I'll hand you a beer. Sneak in through the back door, and and a cold brew is not what you'll be getting AT ALL...



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Love the RW continuing to push the meme it's an "Obama surge." Did you know this surge of children at the border has been happening since 2008?

The root of the surge is one of Bush's last legislative acts;

Immigrant Surge Rooted in Law to Curb Child Trafficking


WASHINGTON — It was one of the final pieces of legislation signed into law by President George W. Bush, a measure that passed without controversy, along with a pension bill and another one calling for national parks to be commemorated on quarters.

...

Now the legislation, enacted quietly during the transition to the Obama administration, is at the root of the potentially calamitous flow of unaccompanied minors to the nation’s southern border.


Obama has been dealing with the fallout from that law. This "surge" has been going on for six years, so yes, the government has been advertising for escorts to deal with all the unaccompanied children. What would you expect?




top topics



 
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join