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.

 

HHS Will ‘Muzzle the Media’ During Tour of Immigrant Child Housing

page: 2
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I read a that there's a Much Better Way and Cheaper way to send the illegals back.
Of-Course it'll cost the Democrat's a lot of Voters but in the Long Run, It's What's Best For America.


The $250 a day figure compares with the $667 one-way cost of an airline ticket from McAllen, Texas, to Guatemala City, Guatemala, according to both Orbitz and Priceline. The combined airfare for 29,358 passengers would be $19.6 million. That is one-half of 1 percent of President Obama’s overall $3.8 billion request. Volume discounts and government rates would yield even lower fares. But even without discounts, sending everyone home right away saves taxpayers 99.5 percent!
It’s also closer to fly them from McAllen to Guatemala City than to Murietta, California. Only 1,297 miles compared to 1,549 miles. And no protesters.

Of-Course, I think we should De-Lice them Cure their Scabies before we but them on the planes with actually Paying Customer's that care about their own Health.

Next, I was asking myself, what about all the Red Tape of send these illegals Back and the article answered that to.
I have to agree, Obama does only enforce the Laws he wants to Obey and Ignores the rest!


But what about the red-tape processing that Obama says gets in ther way? We know the president skirts inconvenient laws when he wants to do so. And although there is some red tape for the minors, there is no federal law that requires officials to drag their feet on deporting the thousands of adults newly arrived from Central America. And no red tape on the accompanied minors. All of them can be placed on planes pronto, arriving home far more quickly than it took them to journey to Texas. And arriving there more quickly than flying to California.
Regarding the unaccompanied juveniles, officials such as Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson don’t seem to have read the law. Johnson told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the top priority is “doing right by the children.” Actually, the law states the top priority is to repatriate those children to their country of origin.

Link, It;s Cheaper

We all know Obama and his Minions Ignore the Laws of Our Land That They Believe Do Not Apply To them At The Time Or For Their Current Agenda.
Of-Course, WE as Law Abiding American Citizens HAVE To Comply Or Face Prison.
The media will Obey
the One They Love and Respect.

We'll have to wait for the Hated and Despised Foxnews.

edit on 9-7-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Question for you all: Will you be so quick to clamor for a 100% secure border if something were to cause you to want OUT?

My DPRK comment was originally meant as an off-hand joke about media censorship.

Yet, I hear that "they could teach us about border security." They have the exact opposite border situation as we do, as well as the advantage of being a very small island nation, in comparison to the sprawling landmass of the US/Mexico border.

Ever hear of anyone trying to illegally immigrate IN to North Korea? Doubtful.

That's the magic of a border -- it lets everyone believe that what happens on the other side will never, ever be their problem. In reality, you can't build a wall big enough to make that true.
edit on 792014 by CloudsTasteMetallic because: typo



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

I'm not going anywhere. If whatever happens is that bad it's just my time to go. If I can fight it I will. Can't live forever. That's why I feel these people should be in their own country raising hell if it's not good enough for them there.

ETA...as far as I'm concerned we can put drones with pepper spray bombs on the border and offer some deterence. If I break the law that's one of the lighter penalties that can be dished out to me. Just for simple noncompliance with a command. Crossing an international border illegally has to be more egregious than not movin when some cop tells you to. I'm all for helping people but the system is becoming biased towards americans themselves.
edit on 9-7-2014 by rustyclutch because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

LOL

Obama shoes now !!!

Well that explains where the tax dollars went.




posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What I am trying to figure out ?

Is if those shoes were made in an American illegal sweat shops.

Or shipped there from slave labor in China.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: neo96

LOL

Obama shoes now !!!

Well that explains where the tax dollars went.



Yeah them obama shoes ftw. Talk about indoctrination.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: xuenchen

What I am trying to figure out ?

Is if those shoes were made in an American illegal sweat shops.

Or shipped there from slave labor in China.


I would bet the shoes are from Mexico.

And I bet they were "issued" somewhere close to the border.

Just look at the good condition.

[ researching china shoe imports/exports ]




posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Rather good shape for a few thousand mile journey.

Surviving 'death' trains and what not.

So I am going to agree.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: xuenchen

What I am trying to figure out ?

Is if those shoes were made in an American illegal sweat shops.

Or shipped there from slave labor in China.


I would bet the shoes are from Mexico.

And I bet they were "issued" somewhere close to the border.

Just look at the good condition.

[ researching china shoe imports/exports ]



Adding some shoe info...

Footwear Central America



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Maybe, Just Maybe this So Called CNN ( Clinton News Network ) Journalist needs to be Toned Down, Her Rant was Stupid if Not Completely Just Plain Ridiculous.
There are No Wars Being Fought between two Nations or Counties or even a Revolution in the South American Counties these Children Claim to be from.
Between 1846 and 1848, the United States and Mexico, went to war, Right, What Nation, Country or Revolution are they Fighting today? Not from a worn torn Country like she says. Not Refugees.
I think Honduras had a War of Independence that was fought from 1991 to 1995. It's 2014, so now we have Refugees?

Unless she's counting the 90 minute war Honduras and El Salvador had in 1969 over a Football game ( Soccer ).

How about the Children from El Salvador are they Refugees like she's saying?
Their Civil War was from about 1980 to 1992, but actually, if I remember right from my time down there it wasn't until 1997, But still, it's 2014 and we're just now getting Refugee Children.
Sorry, Living in Poverty and Running from it, does not make you a Refugee.

Now for the reason for my Rant about this Ignorant reporter.



On CNN’s Legal View today, host Ashleigh Banfield went into a full rant today over people protesting the buses of illegal immigrants arriving in California over the last week.

Obama, You Want To Muzzle A Reporter,,,,, Here's One Of Your Faithful Followers, That Needs To Be Muzzled!!!


Banfield was speaking with the spokesperson for a group offering pro bono legal services to the hundreds of children from Central America seeking to enter the United States. After wrapping the interview, Banfield has words for people who are protesting how the government is handling the situation.

Link



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

She was in a war zone? Last I heard CNN likes to use green screens and background shots of war zones. Surely they arent saying the cartels constitutes a war. By sheer definition all cartels use murder extortion and other means to conduct business. That includes oil cartels, gas cartels, pharmaceutical cartels, gold and diamond cartels, MEDIA cartels etc etc....basically all the major corporations. The media has more blood on its hands in the modern age than any of the cartels. Through their deceptive powers people are butchered daily all over the world and people go largely unaware because of the propaganda. Anyone who believes in karma, god, or any type of balance in the universe knows the pendulum is going to swing the other way for us at some point....and the further we keep pushing it, the further it's going to backlash on us. By we I mean they, but we as well because we have to deal with the consequences even tho we dont make the decisions.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: rustyclutch

rusty, is the envelope in the top right hand corner all white if your using Gray screen,,, check your mail box.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Legal services for illegals eh?

That is the new LAWYER bailout.

Never letting a good crisis go to waste.

Make lawyers richer!!!!!!!!

Immigration lawyer enrichment act.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   
I am reviving this thread, due to the continuing muzzling of the U.S. media by Team Obama and their "enforcement thugs":

www.boston.com...

CONNECTICUT NEWSPAPER OBJECTS TO ORDER TO NOT PUBLISH A CHILD-CUSTODY STORY
"Judge Frazzini on Monday prohibited the Hartford-based weekly newspaper from running a story based on a court document that previously was publicly available in the case before it was transferred to juvenile court earlier this month.

"The case involves the father of three children trying to get them removed from the custody of the state Department of Children and Families. The attorney for the children’s mother requested the injunction, the Law Tribune reported.

"Klau and other media lawyers called the judge’s order an extraordinary case of prior restraint, or preventing a story’s publication. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that most cases of prior restraint are unconstitutional, with national security being the exception."

(They are obviously not protecting the children. One/both of the parents pulled some strings. What are they hiding?)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join