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.

 

Mexico deporting nearly 500 migrants after California border blitz

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us

You've got it all wrong. US is making tons of money from these people. Best thing ever.

I saw a show about this on CSPAN. I know this guy was an expert. He was from some think tank and he had a title and a real expensive looking suit. Also, he also had a graph, a big one projected on the wall.

So don't tell me there’s not a rational explanation.




posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: roadgravel

In response to the reports, Schatz initially tweeted: "Tear gas across the border against unarmed families is a new low." Approximately 45 minutes later, Schatz tweeted: "Who gave the order? Did it implement or contravene policy?" He then tweeted "WHO GAVE THE ORDER?" in all caps.

Schatz then asked: "Why tear gas? Is this consistent with the Conventions on Chemical Weapons?"

In an exchange with opinion writer Stephen Miller, Schatz admitted that "I went ahead and deleted the one about chemical weapons because I just don’t know enough about what happened."


LOL (caps required)



I dont think tear gas was used i think the media report is wrong. I was wondering where is the videos of people eyes burning and water being poured over them. Those videos dont exist which makes me wonder why the media is perpetuating a lie,

Here is a video showing them breaching the fence you can tell Border agents used a smoke grenade and was not tear gas.



How do you know the difference between Smoke and Gas?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Where do you get that the "vast majority" of these people are not asylum seekers?

Just asking....



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

invasion hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

The phrase was "legitimate asylum seekers." They are not legitimate because they already turned down asylum from Mexico.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I was under the impression that Asylum seekers should apply in the first country deemed safe, meaning any country which signed up to the 1951 Refugee Convention...which Mexico was/is a part of. But this article refutes that assumption.

www.refugeecouncil.org.uk...


Did I miss something here?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Sillyolme

The phrase was "legitimate asylum seekers." They are not legitimate because they already turned down asylum from Mexico.

TheRedneck


I understand beggars can't be choosers. Also, I do not want to just open the boarders and allow everyone in.

I do wonder though why the U.S.? Why are we this magical asylum nation? Because our dollar is worth more? Because of the possible handouts?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

I checked your link... yes, it does indicate the opposite of what I believe to be true.

I think I have seen the restriction about the first safe country in a UN document somewhere, but I don't have time to look for it right now... if someone else could pick up my slack, I would appreciate it.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: headorheart

I'd say yes. We have a higher standard of living than most other countries and we have more social programs (in the Americas anyway). Other countries are growing economically though, and with luck that discrepancy will be overcome soon.

I want to see Mexico as prosperous as the US... Honduras, Guatemala, Columbia, Equador, Brazil... all of them as prosperous as the US. I just don't want to see us brought down to their level. I want them raised to our level.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Can you imagine 10,000" "refugees" trying to crash through Russia's border?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Mark08

Operation Barbarossa comes to mind. Didn't work out well in the end. It gets cold up there.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Can't we just call up Merkel and have her come get these people?

How about Trudeau? Didn't he say he wanted them?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: toms54

HAHA, I was just reading this. I wonder why it's not getting any press??????? Hmmmmm. Peeps taking taxis over the border! LOL

www.bloomberg.com...



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

Best thing I've read all week.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Breakthestreak

The vast majority of these people coming to the United States that I have encountered are coming here to work.

Many of them have families that they have to send money back to.


Which literally means they are NOT refugees or asylum seekers.
edit on 26 11 2018 by Breakthestreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Where do you get that the "vast majority" of these people are not asylum seekers?

Just asking....


Because they were ALL offered to apply for asylum status and the VAST MAJORITY of them did not.

You know this too.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Here is the best I can find, it is EU-centric but does apply to the US as well. It looks like although the "first country you come to" thing is not true, BUT said country(US) can legally send said refugee back to the 3rd party country(Mexico), until the refugees claim can be made.

I find this counterintuitive but there ya go.
www.theguardian.com...



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Have you ever seen people get gassed? There's coughing, spitting, vomiting, they're eyes are burning... can't say I saw even a hint of that.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

It seems to me take once they are in Mexico, they are safe whether they apply there or not. Then they can prove they are not safe in Mexico either if they want to try the US.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: headorheart
Because of the possible handouts?


We have a winner.

I have one question. If these people were truly refugees, why not take Mexico up on their offer and then petition to enter the US legally?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join