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.

 

Was the ‘Law to Separate Families’ Passed in 1997 or ‘by Democrats’?

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
We always argue, like it's one way or the other, never considering other options. We don't need to separate families.

We can have compassion and still stop families from crossing the border.

How hard would that be? If we catch a family crossing the border...we round them up and we "detain' them until we can return them. All the while keeping them together. It's really not that hard. LOL

What's the real issue? Cost? Cheaper to keep everyone together. Logistics? Easier to keep them together. Processing? We just gave our military a trillion dollars...let's send some money and hire some contractors to process. More agents? I've said this all along...we don't need a wall, we need to fix what we already have and hire a few more agents and give them the resources they are requesting. Not what we think they need.

Why the secrecy too...when our own elected officials aren't even allowed in these "Camps". Seems shady.


This is the way it was done. Then they took Obama to court and they ruled children could not be detained with the parents. They shut down family detention centers. So as of now law does not allow the US to detain children with the parents. They have left only 2 options either they release anyone with children and hope they return for their court date. Or they detain the parents while placing the children into foster care or make arrangements to return them to the family.

So the bottom line is you have two choices let everyone in no matter what they have done without any idea who they are. Or hold them while they seek entry.

www.npr.org...
edit on 6/19/18 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

is this the case of assylum seekers or illegals in general? I see the need to vet assylum seekers but I think they should be housed with their children until they are fully vetted or deported. In the case of illegal aliens I feel they should be immediately deported along w their children. I feel we do need tighter border security but I also feel we should work with countries to eradicate the crime and poverty that is chasing so many of them away.



posted on Jun, 19 2018 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: dragonridr

is this the case of assylum seekers or illegals in general? I see the need to vet assylum seekers but I think they should be housed with their children until they are fully vetted or deported. In the case of illegal aliens I feel they should be immediately deported along w their children. I feel we do need tighter border security but I also feel we should work with countries to eradicate the crime and poverty that is chasing so many of them away.


Asylum seekers cannot legally be detained they have broken no laws. So going through port of entry they register them and give them daye to return for court hearing. 5hay can ask to be held if they have no where to go but its not considered detainment because they do not get arrested. And yes the children can stay if they ask.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Who links snopes on a conspiracy website? I think you might be in the wrong place. lol



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 03:09 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

That seems to contradict what I've been hearing. I would like to know the truth behind these claims. www.msnbc.com...



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
www.snopes.com...



There is no federal law mandating children and parents be separated at the border; a policy resulting in that outcome was enacted in May 2018.


Pretty clear to most that something new has taken place.

The difference is now every crossing is considered a crime.

You're right, every ILLEGAL crossing is a crime.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Turkenstein

there were exceptions written into the law that allowed for asylum seekers to cross and since all the ports of entry were denying entry for asylum they were forced to cross in other areas.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: amazing
We always argue, like it's one way or the other, never considering other options. We don't need to separate families.

We can have compassion and still stop families from crossing the border.

How hard would that be? If we catch a family crossing the border...we round them up and we "detain' them until we can return them. All the while keeping them together. It's really not that hard. LOL

What's the real issue? Cost? Cheaper to keep everyone together. Logistics? Easier to keep them together. Processing? We just gave our military a trillion dollars...let's send some money and hire some contractors to process. More agents? I've said this all along...we don't need a wall, we need to fix what we already have and hire a few more agents and give them the resources they are requesting. Not what we think they need.

Why the secrecy too...when our own elected officials aren't even allowed in these "Camps". Seems shady.


This is the way it was done. Then they took Obama to court and they ruled children could not be detained with the parents. They shut down family detention centers. So as of now law does not allow the US to detain children with the parents. They have left only 2 options either they release anyone with children and hope they return for their court date. Or they detain the parents while placing the children into foster care or make arrangements to return them to the family.

So the bottom line is you have two choices let everyone in no matter what they have done without any idea who they are. Or hold them while they seek entry.

www.npr.org...


We can hold them wihout seperating them. Easy to do.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: howtonhawky
The difference is now every crossing is considered a crime.


Is there some part of "illegal immigration" which confuses you, dude? Seriously now, I just can't imagine why every illegal crossing of the US border would be "considered a crime." It's baffling to me. Why in the world would every violation of US border law be treated as a criminal act?


Because they're all calling them "asylum seekers" now.

While there may be a select few that qualify for asylum, the rules and laws surrounding it are pretty clear.

But, Dims being Dims, they just see it and run off at the mouth with it.

I think they should try to cross into Canada or Mexico illegally, with children that do not belong to them, and see how that goes. Something tells me they're not going to be logging on to ATS for a while.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: amazing
We always argue, like it's one way or the other, never considering other options. We don't need to separate families.

We can have compassion and still stop families from crossing the border.

How hard would that be? If we catch a family crossing the border...we round them up and we "detain' them until we can return them. All the while keeping them together. It's really not that hard. LOL

What's the real issue? Cost? Cheaper to keep everyone together. Logistics? Easier to keep them together. Processing? We just gave our military a trillion dollars...let's send some money and hire some contractors to process. More agents? I've said this all along...we don't need a wall, we need to fix what we already have and hire a few more agents and give them the resources they are requesting. Not what we think they need.

Why the secrecy too...when our own elected officials aren't even allowed in these "Camps". Seems shady.


This is the way it was done. Then they took Obama to court and they ruled children could not be detained with the parents. They shut down family detention centers. So as of now law does not allow the US to detain children with the parents. They have left only 2 options either they release anyone with children and hope they return for their court date. Or they detain the parents while placing the children into foster care or make arrangements to return them to the family.

So the bottom line is you have two choices let everyone in no matter what they have done without any idea who they are. Or hold them while they seek entry.

www.npr.org...


We can hold them wihout seperating them. Easy to do.


Actually, it's not that "easy to do."

Many of these kids, especially the older ones, do not belong to the adults who they're crossing the border with. Even some of the younger ones are sent up with people they know are making the trip or other family members.

So BP agents should just keep children, even if the people they are with aren't their parents, with those adults? So that someone can come out and say the USA sent their children off with a monster/human trafficker, etc.?

How would you handle the situation? Do you think you can do better? Remember, we're talking about thousands of people, who likely do not speak English and if they're from certain parts of Central America, don't speak Spanish, either.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think the issue many are having is that illegally crossing the border is a misdemeanor (even when seeking legal asylum).

I don't know anyone who has ever been locked up and had their children taken away from them for committing a misdemeanor in the U.S., and traumatizing children because their parents commit a misdemeanor isn't the norm here.

If Trump wants to make illegal crossings a felony, then it would be somewhat understandable and he'd probably have more people on his side, but ripping apart families over misdemeanors is setting a precedent that should make any rational American highly concerned.
edit on 6/20/18 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: dragonridr

is this the case of assylum seekers or illegals in general? I see the need to vet assylum seekers but I think they should be housed with their children until they are fully vetted or deported. In the case of illegal aliens I feel they should be immediately deported along w their children. I feel we do need tighter border security but I also feel we should work with countries to eradicate the crime and poverty that is chasing so many of them away.


You don't see how, if calling yourself an asylum seeker will grant you a free pass, that will incentivize illegal immigrants to falsely call themselves asylum seekers?

Even true asylum seekers, there must be a cap. Calling yourself an asylum seeker does not mean our borders open wide open.



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think the issue many are having is that illegally crossing the border is a misdemeanor (even when seeking legal asylum).

I don't know anyone who has ever been locked up and had their children taken away from them for committing a misdemeanor in the U.S., and traumatizing children because their parents commit a misdemeanor isn't the norm here.

If Trump wants to make illegal crossings a felony, then it would be somewhat understandable and he'd probably have more people on his side, but ripping apart families over misdemeanors is setting a precedent that should make any rational American highly concerned.


His executive order reuniting families is being challenged as illegal as it goes against existing laws.



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Actually it was considered a crime for along time decades even it's just past administrations were scared of the Latin American lobby so they let illegal immigrants get away with crossing Willy nilly . They tied the hands of the border patrol so bad that when fired upon a couple of border patrol officers defended themselves they ended up in jail. Everyone wants to harp about people crossing our border illegally but get caught crossing the border illegally into Canada, or China or Saudi Arabia and see what happens?



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: lovebeck

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: amazing
We always argue, like it's one way or the other, never considering other options. We don't need to separate families.

We can have compassion and still stop families from crossing the border.

How hard would that be? If we catch a family crossing the border...we round them up and we "detain' them until we can return them. All the while keeping them together. It's really not that hard. LOL

What's the real issue? Cost? Cheaper to keep everyone together. Logistics? Easier to keep them together. Processing? We just gave our military a trillion dollars...let's send some money and hire some contractors to process. More agents? I've said this all along...we don't need a wall, we need to fix what we already have and hire a few more agents and give them the resources they are requesting. Not what we think they need.

Why the secrecy too...when our own elected officials aren't even allowed in these "Camps". Seems shady.


This is the way it was done. Then they took Obama to court and they ruled children could not be detained with the parents. They shut down family detention centers. So as of now law does not allow the US to detain children with the parents. They have left only 2 options either they release anyone with children and hope they return for their court date. Or they detain the parents while placing the children into foster care or make arrangements to return them to the family.

So the bottom line is you have two choices let everyone in no matter what they have done without any idea who they are. Or hold them while they seek entry.

www.npr.org...


We can hold them wihout seperating them. Easy to do.


Actually, it's not that "easy to do."

Many of these kids, especially the older ones, do not belong to the adults who they're crossing the border with. Even some of the younger ones are sent up with people they know are making the trip or other family members.

So BP agents should just keep children, even if the people they are with aren't their parents, with those adults? So that someone can come out and say the USA sent their children off with a monster/human trafficker, etc.?

How would you handle the situation? Do you think you can do better? Remember, we're talking about thousands of people, who likely do not speak English and if they're from certain parts of Central America, don't speak Spanish, either.



It's common sense. If something seems fishy then seperate, but when it's a clear family as in a lot of these cases or the child is crying for there mom, right there. It's just common sense. We have to stop with our mentallity of all or nothing or only one or the other. Real life isn't like that.



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   
So if I am not mistaken they are to immediately begin dna testing.
Of the 12,000 of this batch there are over 10,000 that are unaccompanied minors.
Of the rest dna will settle it, correct?

But what now about all those that are proven NOT to be a family member but represented that they were?
Is this why so many extra prosecutors are being sent down there?
Are they all going to be charged with human trafficking as a result of dna tests?



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   

An Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) is any person who has not attained 18 years of age who entered the United States unaccompanied by and not destined to: (a) a parent, (b) a close non-parental adult relative who is willing and able to care for said minor, or (c) an adult with a clear and court-verifiable claim to custody of the minor; and who has no parent(s) in the United States.[26] These minors are eligible for entry into the URM program. Trafficking victims who have been certified by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Department of Homeland Security, and/or the United States Department of State are also eligible for benefits and services under this program to the same extent as refugees.
a reply to: bulwarkz

lol

dumb dumb dumb

there is nothing stating a family has to have dna likeness...

All this is NWO gov chip implementation tech

do you know how to find out if someone is raping a child?

you take the child to the side and ask them

you do not kidnapp them and keep them indefinitely simply cause someone could rape them

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 21-6-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Xenogears

I never advocated for open borders, I suggested we work with countries in question to end corruption and crime so that their people aren't fleeing en masse.

I advocate for a combination of solutions including stricter enforcement of the Border, legally accepting more immigrants, working with other countries to eradicate crime, poverty and corruption and immediately deporting those who do not pass the vetting process.



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears
His executive order reuniting families is being challenged as illegal as it goes against existing laws.


Correct.

As with most things Trump has done in office his EO was spur-of-the-moment, and lacked forethought and planning.

Unfortunately, the way it's worded it can be interpreted as allowing indefinite detainment and there is a Dubbya era law that restricts child detainment to 20 days. Thus, the EO and existing law appear to be in conflict, and the EO will be legally challenged on that basis.

Since he refuses the notion of hiring more immigration judges to ease the backlog of cases pending, he's really shooting himself in the foot with notions of indefinite detainment.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: Xenogears
His executive order reuniting families is being challenged as illegal as it goes against existing laws.


Correct.

As with most things Trump has done in office his EO was spur-of-the-moment, and lacked forethought and planning.

Unfortunately, the way it's worded it can be interpreted as allowing indefinite detainment and there is a Dubbya era law that restricts child detainment to 20 days. Thus, the EO and existing law appear to be in conflict, and the EO will be legally challenged on that basis.

Since he refuses the notion of hiring more immigration judges to ease the backlog of cases pending, he's really shooting himself in the foot with notions of indefinite detainment.



They cannot be just held for a short while and set loose ala canada and its open borders.

They have to be held indefinitely or at least until deportation becomes possible. And the wall should be there to disuade them from attempting said journey.




top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join