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.

 

The Flores Agreement is Going Bye-Bye Democrats Furious

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Oh I get what you are saying. Guests are invited... yeah Merkel took care of that years ago




posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 01:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: Gothmog

Oh I get what you are saying. Guests are invited... yeah Merkel took care of that years ago

Almost
Asylum seekers apply for asylum in the US.
Then they enter , if approved
In no way is anyone not legally in the US considered a "guest"
Merkel has no authority in the US.


Denying Ignorance
Why ?
Some outsiders need to be informed.

edit on 8/24/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 06:54 AM
link   
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454




Keeping families locked for years isn't the answer.


They don't have to be locked up for years, if they go the legal route.. Quite simple really.


Neither is the fact that they are fleeing violence.

And as far as fleeing violence, well, violence is everywhere you go. They have to prove they are being persecuted on racial, religious, or political lines.


So, all the past presidents that employed "catch and release" policy were committing amnesty. Got it.


Pretty much. Its a dumb policy that kicks the can down the road.

edit on 24-8-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-8-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




They don't have to be locked up for years, if they go the legal route.. Quite simple really.


That is what the Trump administration is proposing.



And as far as fleeing violence, well, violence is everywhere you go. They have to prove they are being persecuted on racial, religious, or political lines.


Prove it to who? Whether or not an individual case will be adjudicated in favor of the family claiming asylum is beside the point of whether or not they should be kept locked up in detention for years.



Pretty much. Its a dumb policy that kicks the can down the road.


So, locking up families for years in detention facilities is the answer?



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454




They don't have to be locked up for years, if they go the legal route.. Quite simple really.


That is what the Trump administration is proposing.



And as far as fleeing violence, well, violence is everywhere you go. They have to prove they are being persecuted on racial, religious, or political lines.


Prove it to who? Whether or not an individual case will be adjudicated in favor of the family claiming asylum is beside the point of whether or not they should be kept locked up in detention for years.



Pretty much. Its a dumb policy that kicks the can down the road.


So, locking up families for years in detention facilities is the answer?


you are being deliberately obtuse. If you enter the country LEGALLY, you aren't locked up, you may not get in, but you aren't jailed. Now, if you enter ILLEGALLY, you will be jailed, and if you play the "i'm seeking asylum" card, you will get a hearing and might be granted asylum. If you know your claim is bogus, then the determent of being jailed for a while, might make you second guess your choices.

There is a right way, and an illegal way of coming in. Doing it the right way, is how this nation was founded. The very people who founded this nation, helped make the rules that govern us even today.



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude



The very people who founded this nation, helped make the rules that govern us even today.


Yea, those people are dead and soon to be long forgotten and dismissed as racist white supremecists.

Soon to be replaced by..............THE SQUAD!

Viva Zapata!



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude




you are being deliberately obtuse.


Look, this thread is about the Trump Administration's proposal to abandon the Flores Agreement, and to detain families indefinitely. It's not about illegal entry, it's not about whether or not the family will or will not win their asylum case. It's about locking up families indefinitely.

I don't think that's a good idea.



There is a right way, and an illegal way of coming in. Doing it the right way, is how this nation was founded.


No it isn't.



The very people who founded this nation, helped make the rules that govern us even today.


No they didn't.
edit on 24-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454




They don't have to be locked up for years, if they go the legal route.. Quite simple really.


That is what the Trump administration is proposing.



And as far as fleeing violence, well, violence is everywhere you go. They have to prove they are being persecuted on racial, religious, or political lines.


Prove it to who? Whether or not an individual case will be adjudicated in favor of the family claiming asylum is beside the point of whether or not they should be kept locked up in detention for years.



Pretty much. Its a dumb policy that kicks the can down the road.


So, locking up families for years in detention facilities is the answer?



Reread everything, but more slowly this time.



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: network dude




you are being deliberately obtuse.


Look, this thread is about the Trump Administration's proposal to abandon the Flores Agreement, and to detain families indefinitely. It's not about illegal entry, it's not about whether or not the family will or will not win their asylum case. It's about locking up families indefinitely.

I don't think that's a good idea.



There is a right way, and an illegal way of coming in. Doing it the right way, is how this nation was founded.


No it isn't.



The very people who founded this nation, helped make the rules that govern us even today.


No they didn't.


The proposal is a deterrent.

In no uncertain terms, should you proceed with this course of action, these are the consequences. Alternatively, over there is a perfectly fine legal port of entry...


Also,


It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours.” “But why is this desirable? Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of.” - James Madison


And many more examples, should you bother to look. Yes, this country was founded on the idea, among others, of legal immigration and citizenship.
edit on 24-8-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




The proposal is a deterrent.


That's always been their justification. It's the justification for all his cruelty and inhumanity.



Alternatively, over there is a perfectly fine legal port of entry...


And then the Trump administration (illegally) sends them right back to Mexico to wait for their court date.

Then, the Trump administration still denies them "entry" and forces them back, to wait in Mexico for adjudication in the US.

edit on 24-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

So, you think that the border patrol guards are the ones that should decide if an asylum claim is worthy or not, not the courts, not a judge?

The Trump administration is proposing keeping families applying for asylum to stay locked up until their case goes to court. How the family entered the country has nothing to do with their detention.



posted on Aug, 24 2019 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

DOJ Announces Changes to Immigration Courts To Expedite Huge Backlogs 😃

The Department of Justice announced Friday new changes to the Executive Office of Immigration Review that will likely address our broken immigration system and the massive court backlogs, which Trump Administration officials say is the product of loopholes in the law that lead to bogus claims and strain on the nations courts.

The EOIR, which was established to adjudicate “immigration cases by fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly interpreting and administering the Nation’s immigration laws,” will be restructured in 60 days to address the crisis. The pressure of nearly 1,000,000 pending cases in immigration courts as of Fiscal Year 2019 is one of the reasons for the change.

This new rule gives more power to the agency’s leadership, effectively the agency would have the power to decide on the cases, some which have been in the backlogged system for years.
🤣🤣💫💫🤣🤣



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha





That's always been their justification. It's the justification for all his cruelty and inhumanity.


Obama was more cruel. He put kids in cages after separating them from their parents. Where were your crocodile tears then?



And then the Trump administration (illegally) sends them right back to Mexico to wait for their court date. Then, the Trump administration still denies them "entry" and forces them back, to wait in Mexico for adjudication in the US.


As oppose to being locked up.. You're very special, you realize?
edit on 25-8-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 07:42 AM
link   
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454


So, you think that the border patrol guards are the ones that should decide if an asylum claim is worthy or not, not the courts, not a judge?


That's a leap.


The Trump administration is proposing keeping families applying for asylum to stay locked up until their case goes to court. How the family entered the country has nothing to do with their detention.




It has everything to do with it. Crossing the border illegally is a crime. Its a crime in countless countries around the world. Tell me, how did people immigrate previously, without being locked up? Notice I said immigrate. Because most of these people are simply migrating. The crime and violence in their country of origin is no more special than anywhere else. Its not a valid reason for refugee or asylum status. There is not currently a state of open and declared armed hostile conflict between Honduras and some other State/Nation, displacing residents.

And to claim asylum, the onus is on the seeker to show they are being persecuted for political, religious, or racial reasons. Not because they want a better life in a more economically favorable nation. For that, everyone has an immigration process.

And most importantly, while we're dealing with erroneous asylum claims, people that really need it are having to wait.



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




Obama was more cruel. He put kids in cages after separating them from their parents. Where were your crocodile tears then?


The Obama administration did not have a policy of separating families for illegal entry. The Obama administration had a policy of "catch and release", that Trump brutally criticized during his campaign. When Trump took office, one of the first things he did was repeal Obama's policy and instate "no tolerance", which resulted in family separation.

What Obama's administration did have to deal with was 10s of thousands of unaccompanied minors. He did detain them in "cages", and tried to keep them in detention too.

But the Obama administration got slapped down hard in federal court, because of the Flores Settlement.



As oppose to being locked up.. You're very special, you realize?


As opposed to being "caught and released". Yes.

But, the Trump administration is sending those who cross legally, at border check points, back to Mexico. Sometimes this leaves these people in the same danger from which they were fleeing. Mexico is not technically a "safe country". This is Trump cleverly trying to get around US immigration and asylum laws, that require the administration to treat these people humanely and with civility.



Crossing the border illegally is a crime.


That's not what this issue is about, though. This issue is about the Trump administration tossing out the Flores Agreement, in order to keep children, together with their parent or guardian, in indefinite detention, while they await adjudication.

So, the Trump administration is still proposing to detain children, in violation of the Flores Settlement, but they would be with their parents. This is the issue.

I've expressed my opinion, in this thread, that I, personally, would rather see these families allowed to stay together, but be able to put their children in school, or day care, the parents given work permits and allowed to work, prove their self reliance and integration, and maybe, they'll also be able to pay a lawyer for represent them during their adjudication.

You are free to disagree with my opinion.



And most importantly, while we're dealing with erroneous asylum claims, people that really need it are having to wait.


So, who do you propose would decide? ICE and the guards at border patrol check points, or the courts?


edit on 25-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar




posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Obama's administration did have to deal with was 10s of thousands of unaccompanied minors because he announced that all unaccompanied minors would get automatic amnesty, he caused them all to come with that. Then he put them in cages, and none of you gave a # about it then.



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: funbobby

Are you talking about DACA? DACA didn't have anything to do with the throngs of unaccompanied minors that the Obama administration had to deal with. They don't/won't quality for DACA.



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha




The Obama administration did not have a policy of separating families for illegal entry. The Obama administration had a policy of "catch and release", that Trump brutally criticized during his campaign. When Trump took office, one of the first things he did was repeal Obama's policy and instate "no tolerance", which resulted in family separation.

What Obama's administration did have to deal with was 10s of thousands of unaccompanied minors. He did detain them in "cages", and tried to keep them in detention too.

But the Obama administration got slapped down hard in federal court, because of the Flores Settlement.


The Obama administration has already done what is being done currently. Yes, they even separated families. Jeh Johnson admits this. They detained families together, and apart.



As opposed to being "caught and released". Yes. But, the Trump administration is sending those who cross legally, at border check points, back to Mexico. Sometimes this leaves these people in the same danger from which they were fleeing. Mexico is not technically a "safe country". This is Trump cleverly trying to get around US immigration and asylum laws, that require the administration to treat these people humanely and with civility.


I can't find your source for you, on that claim about legal crossers being sent back.

A study conducted found that 30% of women experienced sexual violence, and 70% of all migrants experience violence, along the way to the border. Sounds more dangerous to make the journey than what they were fleeing.
And according to the rhetoric of the left, and the world when it issues travel advisories, neither is America a "safe country".




That's not what this issue is about, though. This issue is about the Trump administration tossing out the Flores Agreement, in order to keep children, together with their parent or guardian, in indefinite detention, while they await adjudication. So, the Trump administration is still proposing to detain children, in violation of the Flores Settlement, but they would be with their parents. This is the issue. I've expressed my opinion, in this thread, that I, personally, would rather see these families allowed to stay together, but be able to put their children in school, or day care, the parents given work permits and allowed to work, prove their self reliance and integration, and maybe, they'll also be able to pay a lawyer for represent them during their adjudication.


Yeah we know, you want to hand out defacto amnesty because of a system designed for it. Which is what the Flores agreement is all about. By design, keep the system so backlogged that of course no one is gonna see a courtroom within 20 days. And of course they won't return for their day in court either. We get it. And for what? Good feels? At what point do you say "sorry, no more" in order to actually fix the immigration issue? Because it has not been fixed. And at this rate, never will be.



So, who do you propose would decide? ICE and the guards at border patrol check points, or the courts?


The asylum process begins at a legal port of entry. So someone already is.
edit on 25-8-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2019 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454




The Obama administration has already done what is being done currently. Yes, they even separated families. Jeh Johnson admits this. They detained families together, and apart.


They did. But rarely, and not as a matter of a no tolerance policy. Generally, the Obama administration's policy was "catch and release". But, Obama isn't the issue here. This is about the Flores Settlement and the indefinite detainment of children under Trump's administration.



The asylum process begins at a legal port of entry. So someone already is.


It's not up to ICE or Border Patrol to determine whose asylum claim is valid and whose is not. That is for a court o decide.

Also, the following policy has not changed under Trump, even with his "no tolerance" policy. He is still required to give asylum claimants safe refuse while their cases are pending.


To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States. You may apply for asylum status regardless of how you arrived in the United States or your current immigration status.
You must apply for asylum within one year of the date of their last arrival in the United States




And according to the rhetoric of the left, and the world when it issues travel advisories, neither is America a "safe country".


HAHA, very funny. Now, for the truth.


Right now, the U.S. has such an agreement, known as a "safe third country," only with Canada. Under a recent agreement with Mexico, Central American countries were considering a regional compact on the issue, but nothing has been decided. Guatemalan officials were expected in Washington on Monday, but apparently a meeting between Trump and Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales was canceled amid a court challenge in Guatemala over whether the country could agree to a safe third with the U.S.


www.10tv.com...


edit on 25-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join