Peter Fonda Calls for People to Target the Children of ICE agents

Actions have consequences.


I know I've been lectured repeatedly for years on this topic by leftists who say that "Speech has consequences".


Actions have consequences. You violate the law, you violate national sovereignty, you have consequences for those actions.

It really is that simple.

a reply to: notsure1

Obama was not doing this exact thing.

And no matter how many times you suggest that he was, it will not change the facts. The facts ARE that this SPECIFIC situation IS new, that children off ALL migrants were NOT being removed from their arms at the border, that there WERE exemptions under Obama, and that there are not now, which is new as of April of this year, as a result of what Jeff Sessions instructed the Southern Border force to do about new arrivals. It is now impossible to claim legitimate asylum at the border, leave alone after entry, by any method, without getting your kids taken away.

That is all on THIS administration, and no one else. You don't have to believe it for it to be true, but if you don't its your perception that is at fault.

a reply to: DBCowboy

So people showing up at ports of entry as asylum seekers are criminals?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Since when in the leftist world are you Innocent till proven guilty ?

Seems the media and Clinton supporters already have deemed plenty of people guilty with not even a drop of due process

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: UnBreakable

Once again, how does that justification apply to Ms L v. ICE? She was an asylum seeker from Congo with no criminal record and she was separated from her six year old daughter. How is that justified?

She’s been reunited with her daughter. Out of tens of thousands of illegals trying to get in from South American countries, you pick an example of an asylum seeker from the Congo who’s case has been adjudicated and favorably been resolved? Ok.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Even if there is a waiting period, why do we suddenly need to separate families? Keeping families together in facilities seemed to work fine before. The problem is thanks to Sessions' zero tolerance policy even asylum seekers are being treated as criminals.

Nope. If you do the tiniest bit of research, you’ll find the vast majority of those “families” kept together prior to actually enforcing the law on the books would fail to show for their hearings, never to be heard from again (unless picked up elsewhere, where they were illegally residing, and deported for violating immigration law).

a reply to: MetalThunder

Were you literally born yesterday?

In a nutshell..............

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
And as fast as they can be called out for using children as Human Shields they switch gears to using children as Human Targets.

Exactly. This cannot be said too loud or too often. These self-serving tirades might make them feel oh-so-virtuous and superior, but the truth is that they are exploiting these kids as political footballs and if anyone really gave a rats patootie, they'd be far more concerned with what these kids fled and what they endured on the trip north.

They would be even more concerned with how many of these kids -- the MAJORITY -- are not with their parents, and the very real probability that many of these kids are being trafficked for labor and/or sexual purposes by the Coyotes who brought them here.

In the big picture, the detention settings are a cake walk compared to what these kids have already gone through -- and what they left behind. And, I hope and pray, these detention centers are protecting at least some of these kids from further abuse.

ETA: Of course I don't like what's going on and of course I want better for these kids... and I know damn well we have the resources to do better, just not the collective political will. And that's the real problem. If the critters had done their jobs in good conscience, this wouldn't be an issue, and we wouldn't be here now arguing about it.

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

If even one of thier children is harmed I say we prosecute this A-Hole for the crime.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: notsure1

Obama was not doing this exact thing.

And no matter how many times you suggest that he was, it will not change the facts. The facts ARE that this SPECIFIC situation IS new, that children off ALL migrants were NOT being removed from their arms at the border, that there WERE exemptions under Obama, and that there are not now, which is new as of April of this year, as a result of what Jeff Sessions instructed the Southern Border force to do about new arrivals. It is now impossible to claim legitimate asylum at the border, leave alone after entry, by any method, without getting your kids taken away.

That is all on THIS administration, and no one else. You don't have to believe it for it to be true, but if you don't its your perception that is at fault.

Which is why it’s been explained to asylum seekers, ad nauseam, to request asylum before blindly showing up at an overcrowded and backlogged port of entry. And then there’s the small matter of their ability to request asylum in all the countries they’ve travelled through to get to the US, land of free stuff for all.

a reply to: UnBreakable

She was only reunited with her daughter after the lawsuit was filed. Up until that time she maintained her parentage of the child but no DNA tests were ever performed.

What about the case of Ms. C? She was charged with a misdemeanor for illegal entry in to the country but was ultimately granted asylum. She still hasn't been reunited with her child.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: notsure1

That is all on THIS administration, and no one else.

I believe you when you say this, but I don't believe for 1 split second that it has any basis in reality.

**TRIGGER WARNING**

Also, the Don disagrees with you, and he holds the conch..........

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: WarPig1939


and, no this wasn't the policy before trump... which is quite evident when you look at just how big a disaster it's becoming.

Really? just because it's being highlighted by people trying to hide their crimes in the static that's being reported on doesn't mean that it's a new thing. Go look at the homeless issue in the US (for example) it's always been there, but why has it exploded in resent years?

Before everyone says that it's not the same issue, hold your horse and look at the playbook. The homeless crisis has been an issue for years, but with the introduction of sanctuary cities you got an increase of illegal immigrates going into these cities seeking unauthorized asylum. Those cities started to offer more and more free services to those homeless asylum seekers, which bled to non asylum seeking homeless getting free services too. Now you have a generation of people that live homeless just because they don't have to do anything and receive free stuff by those cities, and in return those cities are becoming crime ridden places.


This migrant issue is the exact same thing. You had a mass number of people learning that if you drag a kid along with you when you come into the US, you were getting front of the line privileges, the kids can be sold off after gaining entry, and you got your temporary citizenship. Give free services, deal with people exploiting those services, and then offer more service that end up over whelming the system. Ignore the crisis until you need a distraction, then offer report upon report about how bad it is that the situation is taking place. In reality these same people that are complaining about the issue are also the same people that could have ended the loophole years ago, but didn't since it wasn't politically advantageous for them to do so at the time.


I think we should look at why is this coming to light now, rather than shaming those in the light. How about we poke in the dark and see what those who were hiding this in the dark before now are now hiding in the dark. Peter Fonda, is a has been sell out since the days of "Easy Rider", and now that more sex cults are being exposed in Hollywood he pops up to talk about encouraging major crimes? What's he hiding, what's the purpose for doing this, who's he protecting by deflection? I'm not trying to strawman this topic, but scarecrows aren't used to chase birds away for nothing. I'm thinking that in this case there maybe a scarecrow in the field of truth, rather then a strawman on the road.

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

Why are you even paying attention to this guy?

Ignore him.

It would seem the left is actively pushing for Martial Law. There is not nearly enough law enforcement to protect all ICE Agent children 24/7, so it won’t be hard to justify it. And now that they’ve started doxxing ICE agents, you can bet the other Federal agencies aren’t far behind. Who would have ever imagined the left would become the very definition of fascists...especially while claiming to be anti that?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: UnBreakable

Once again, how does that justification apply to Ms L v. ICE? She was an asylum seeker from Congo with no criminal record and she was separated from her six year old daughter. How is that justified?

Hmmm, the events happened in November 2017 with Ms. L, which blows the whole April 2018 Trump-Sessions change in policy narrative out of the water, doesn’t it?

As I said in my first post, propaganda by confirmation bias is the story being sold.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DBCowboy

So people showing up at ports of entry as asylum seekers are criminals?

I could call myself a unicorn, it doesn't make me one.


there is a verification process involved.

Its on now, if you don't do twitter, you're missing out.......

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DBCowboy

So people showing up at ports of entry as asylum seekers are criminals?

Believe or not, some, not all, are. Surprisingly some people try to take their chances and hope that US immigration doesn’t discover their criminal history. OMG, dishonest immigrants? Say it ain’t so.