America's Child Abduction Policy

Captain Obvious

The U.S. has started enforcing a policy to remove children from the families of illegal immigrants. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has cited a passage from the Bible as his inspiration for this. A stated goal of the policy is to deter mothers from attempting to enter the country.


Stephen Colbert give a rundown of it here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4KaLkYxMZ8

The only defence people have offered for such a cruel policy is "The parents shouldn't have brought them". The story gets even worse when you start to hear the individual accounts. Staff being told they can offer no comfort to the children in detention, only basic needs. Parents being tricked into handing over their child only to never see them again, children going missing from the system, lawyers trying to represent 5 year olds they know nothing about.



To me, this sounds like something from a third world dictatorship.

Blaas4life

This sounds very like what the aussies done with the abbos



All their doing here is storing up trouble for 10-15 years down the road when the inevitable child abuse stories emerge.....impossible to believe someone is so callous to approve taking people's kids based on immigration status

RandomName2

Captain Obvious wrote: »

The U.S. has started enforcing a policy to remove children from the families of illegal immigrants. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has cited a passage from the Bible as his inspiration for this. A stated goal of the policy is to deter mothers from attempting to enter the country.

Reciting religious verse to defend a policy is rarely a good sign. This is stupid, cruel and expensive. If you're letting the family in, you let the family in. If you don't, you don't. This solves nothing, but makes more problems. If the prime motivation is to act as a deterrent, it will only do so to good stable families, and it will, of course, be irrelevant to the issue of unaccompanied minors.

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Staff being told they can offer no comfort to the children in detention, only basic needs. Parents being tricked into handing over their child only to never see them again, children going missing from the system, lawyers trying to represent 5 year olds they know nothing about.

I can't shake the feeling that that's a microcosm of what's wrong with the public service, and in particular, law enforcement in America.

suicide_circus

Wonder if it will reduce number of illegal immigrants? Cause if it does it will be touted as a win

EdgeCase

It's clearly designed to be cruel to create a "hostile environment".

The US has really gone off the deep end when it comes to jingoism, overzealous law enforcement and so on.

As a society, if it doesn't snap out of it soon, it's looking like it might start to have really serious problems. To me, it's looking more and more like an authoritarian state.

Hande hoche!

The need a deterrence, perhaps a wall....

Sonics2k

I can't wait for all the Trump supporters to come in and try to defend this as a good move.

Graces7

Keeping young children separated from their families in the kind of conditions they are suffering is a crime and a sin.

https://www.rte.ie/news/us/2018/0617/971123-us-migrant-children/

Sheer manipulative uncaring, ignorant inhumanity.. and words there are none. Tears there are.

Child abuse is horrific. Utterly reprehensible.

EdgeCase

The public servants who are carrying out these policies should realise that they have no defence in "I was only following orders."
They aren't in the army and some of this stuff could potentially be classified as crimes against humanity.

Sometimes you have to question and be prepared to say no.

20Cent

It's an inhuman policy.



https://www.thedailybeast.com/bible-quoting-jeff-sessions-makes-little-children-suffer

Marco Antonio Muñoz who was separated from his wife and three-year-old son while attempting to apply for asylum at the Rio Grande border. When the frenzied father learned that his family would be separated and his child was torn from his arms, he became “disruptive and combative” and was removed to another facility where he hung himself.

Captain Obvious

EdgeCase wrote: »

The public servants who are carrying out these policies should realise that they have no defence in "I was only following orders."
They aren't in the army and some of this stuff could potentially be classified as crimes against humanity.

Sometimes you have to question and be prepared to say no.

ICE is not going to come out of this in one piece I think.

Captain Obvious

Audio recorded from one of the internment camps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzbiWJ2er2Y

topper75

Sonics2k wrote: »

I can't wait for all the Trump supporters to come in and try to defend this as a good move.

I'm not a Trump supporter and this is not a good move.

It is however a necessary move.

A country must manage its borders. It if doesn't - there is no country, by definition.

Can we remove the word abduction from the title (I'm pretty sure it is the kids' parents who are bringing them into another country)?

optogirl

topper75 wrote: »

I'm not a Trump supporter and this is not a good move.

It is however a necessary move.

A country must manage its borders. It if doesn't - there is no country, by definition.

Can we remove the word abduction from the title (I'm pretty sure it is the kids' parents who are bringing them into another country)?

How is inflicting trauma on children a necessary move? It is absolutely unnecessary - hence the global disgust.

wexie

topper75 wrote: »

Can we remove the word abduction from the title (I'm pretty sure it is the kids' parents who are bringing them into another country)?

Seems to me that the word abduction is perfectly appropriate here.

abduction
noun: abduction; plural noun: abductions

1.the action of forcibly taking someone away against their will.
"they organized the abduction of Mr Cordes on his way to the airport"
(in legal use) the illegal removal of a child from its parents or guardians.
"the man is also accused of the attempted abduction of another youngster"

There is absolutely no reason or justification for this policy.
Give me one good reason why the children couldn't be deported along with their families?

the only justification I've seen so far (if you can call it that) is that it would be illegal to incarcerate the children as they've committed no crimes....

Yet that is exactly what is being done...

Penn

topper75 wrote: »

I'm not a Trump supporter and this is not a good move.

It is however a necessary move.

A country must manage its borders. It if doesn't - there is no country, by definition.

Can we remove the word abduction from the title (I'm pretty sure it is the kids' parents who are bringing them into another country)?

Managing borders is necessary.

The means by which they're currently doing so is not necessary. It is barbaric and disgusting.

sabat

Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua etc...
If you voted for Ronald Reagan 40 years ago (or even Eisenhower 70 years ago) you voted for this today. All those rigged elections, death squads, tinpot juntas headed by murderous strongmen and corporo-fascist thefts of land and state assets destroyed these societies before they even had a chance. These families have every moral right to enter the US to try to reclaim some of what was stolen from them by the CIA.

sabat

sabat wrote: »

These families have every moral right to enter the US to try to reclaim some of what was stolen from them by the CIA.

Utter BS. They have no right to do any such thing. They have the right to apply for legal and authorised migration.

What the US is doing here with the kids to wrong, stupid, and frankly, another step towards destroying any moral ground for them... but can we leave out the emotional BS?

The US has the right to manage its borders, and to decide who gains entry. They also have the right to eject those who haven't become legal citizens. I don't agree with what they're doing with these children, but at the same time, the above attitude is simply retarded.

tigger123

Greatest country in the world!

steddyeddy

A lot of people in America and elsewhere are defending this as a necessary step to punish those breaking the law. They say that the parents made the choice to break the law and should be punished. The problem with that is that the child who made no such decision is being punished by being separated from their parents. It's the definition of cruel and unusual punishment. Punish he child because of the actions of the parents is acceptable to some it seems.

Mr. Incognito

This is utterly shocking.

1. There is no need to separate parents from children. It is more of the same victimization and inhumanity. Describing them as immigrants or illegals or migrants. They are HUMAN BEINGS and CHILDREN. Dehumanising people goes on all the time. They are called "collateral damage" in war.

2. America was founded by immigrants, and migrants. And fought for those freedoms. It was populated by peoples fleeing religious persecution and is founded on an ideal that all men are created equal and it is the land of opportunity.

3. It is not necessary. The US Can absorb these peoples. It is a tactic. A deliberate policy to act as a deterrent to stop other people coming to America. It wont work.

4. The sickening thing is the denial of responsibility. Saying- Its the law/ the democrats/ the parents fault etc. It is not. It is a deliberate, conscious, ugly stain on the US that will never be erased.

5. This segmentation of society has happened before. Every authocrat and dictactor needs to split society to allow their rise to power. Make no mistake, that is the Trump end game. He has decimated the institutions of power in the US and destroyed any functioning government and the Republicans and the recent wave of lunatic tea party fanatics have made it possible as they are terrified of lising their cosy position as the top of the white power pyramid.

I can only think of JFK

FK Inauguration Speech 20 January 1961

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

and the propoganda of the Nazi Regime

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

marklazarcovic

Why is it you can break the law, knowing you are doing it, involving your children, and expecting no consequences because you dragged your kids into it?

The deterrent of just sending them back wasn't working,now it prosecution time, blame the parents,blame the country who is causing it's citizens to flee en masse, stop blaming countries who are trying to prevent mass illegal immigration,on a global scale.

Mr. Incognito

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

This is utterly shocking.

1. There is no need to separate parents from children. It is more of the same victimization and inhumanity. Describing them as immigrants or illegals or migrants. They are HUMAN BEINGS and CHILDREN. Dehumanising people goes on all the time. They are called "collateral damage" in war.

Completely agree.

2. America was founded by immigrants, and migrants. And fought for those freedoms. It was populated by peoples fleeing religious persecution and is founded on an ideal that all men are created equal and it is the land of opportunity.

Countries change. Is the US always to be an immigrant nation simply because it's past history depended on them for growth?

3. It is not necessary. The US Can absorb these peoples. It is a tactic. A deliberate policy to act as a deterrent to stop other people coming to America. It wont work.

Absorb them how? There is no welfare state system. Those people on the lower end of the wealth spectrum have little to no benefits, and there are already massive inequalities for the people already there. Homelessness and poverty is common in many parts of the US... and the country isn't doing wonderfully economically.

So. How does the US absorb these people? (without just adding them to the lowest levels)

4. The sickening thing is the denial of responsibility. Saying- Its the law/ the democrats/ the parents fault etc. It is not. It is a deliberate, conscious, ugly stain on the US that will never be erased.

It'll be ignored just as hundreds of other bad decisions have been ignored over the last three decades. US administrations have consistently ignored the needs of the general population focusing on the needs of the wealthy. But sure, people outside of the US will not forget...

5. This segmentation of society has happened before. Every authocrat and dictactor needs to split society to allow their rise to power. Make no mistake, that is the Trump end game. He has decimated the institutions of power in the US and destroyed any functioning government and the Republicans and the recent wave of lunatic tea party fanatics have made it possible as they are terrified of lising their cosy position as the top of the white power pyramid.

Bush started the process after Sept 11, and the introduction of all his security laws. Obama continued most of this by dividing support at all levels and introducing his own "key" officials to positions to project his vision. I'm not defending Trump. The man is a destructive muppet. But to lay all of the responsibility on his shoulders is naive. Bush, Obama, Trump. They all screwed with the fabric of the country and are all equally responsible.

The US has not had a reasonable President since Clinton, and he was only reasonable. They've gone far downhill since then.

brevity

I've a feeling they are trying to incite a new 9/11.

RocketRaccoon

Can someone explain why Obama isn't getting any grief for this? All of this has been going on for a lot longer than Trump has been in power.

I am by no means a Trump supporter or fan or whatever but something needs to be done to prevent the insane amount of illegal immigrants getting into the US and if this prevents people attempting to gain access it will have been a success.

yourdeadwright

Aren't the immigrants breaking the law ?
In every country in the world if you break the law you are sent to prison and taken out of your children's life's,

Why is this different ? genuine question , as I haven't read the in's and outs ,

Nermal

The US is not bordering any warzones, nor are there flights to there from warzones.

Anyone requesting asylum as the US border has transited through a safe country and is shopping around for the most advantageous country to claim asylum in. Their claim should be rejected immediately at the border.

The same goes for Ireland, of course.

end of the road

topper75 wrote: »

I'm not a Trump supporter and this is not a good move.

It is however a necessary move.

A country must manage its borders. It if doesn't - there is no country, by definition.

Can we remove the word abduction from the title (I'm pretty sure it is the kids' parents who are bringing them into another country)?

effectively abducting children is not a necessary move nor is it managing borders. abduction is what this policy is, the parents are only bringing them in but the state is taking the children.

Captain Obvious

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Can someone explain why Obama isn't getting any grief for this?

Because he isn't the president anymore.

end of the road

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Why is it you can break the law, knowing you are doing it, involving your children, and expecting no consequences because you dragged your kids into it?

you can't. it's irrelevant to this however.

marklazarcovic wrote: »

The deterrent of just sending them back wasn't working,now it prosecution time, blame the parents,blame the country who is causing it's citizens to flee en masse, stop blaming countries who are trying to prevent mass illegal immigration,on a global scale.

except they don't seem to be prosecuting them, rather just taking the children. prosecutions for this cost money anyway and is not going to work as a deterrent. so it's throwing money away. the same as this theft policy. there is no deterrent to illegal immigration and there never will be. if a country is engaging in theft/abduction of children as part of "controling borders" then that country is fully to blame for it.

Captain Obvious

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Aren't the immigrants breaking the law ?
In every country in the world if you break the law you are sent to prison and taken out of your children's life's,

Why is this different ? genuine question , as I haven't read the in's and outs ,

No, in every country you are not sent to prison for breaking the law. If you are convicted of a serious crime you can be. But in other cases you sometimes get a caution, sometimes a fine, sometimes a suspended sentence. In addition, you get the right to a trial to decide your guilt and, in most cases, are granted bail until that trial.


Even if you ignore all that, you have to look at the treatment of the children. Generally they will be placed in the care of a relative. In the rare cases where children cannot be placed with a relative, they are generally put into foster homes, not internment camps as is the case in the US.



Even in cases where a child has to be housed in some sort of group setting, they are cared for. You down ban physical contact between siblings. You don't leave older unrelated kids to change nappies. You don't take breast feeding children from their mother. You make arrangements to lessen the trauma on the child because they are innocent. They are not even legally capable of committing a crime.


What's happening in the US is the deliberate mental torture and physical neglect of children, we're talking as young as toddlers here, in order to send a message to latinos that they are not welcome in the US.

Rory28

Nermal wrote: »

The US is not bordering any warzones, nor are there flights to there from warzones.

Anyone requesting asylum as the US border has transited through a safe country and is shopping around for the most advantageous country to claim asylum in. Their claim should be rejected immediately at the border.

The same goes for Ireland, of course.

Are you insane? Mexico is far more dangerous than any warzone. The country is more or less run by narco terrorists. They are legitimate asylum seekers.

Here is a list of politicians who tried to fix the problems in Mexico.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_politicians_killed_in_the_Mexican_Drug_War

Sonics2k

I personally can't really stand George Takei, but he does raise an extremely valid point here.

http://time.com/5316734/george-takei-internment-camp-family-separation/

Nermal

Rory28 wrote: »

Are you insane? Mexico is far more dangerous than any warzone. The country is more or less run by narco terrorists. They are legitimate asylum seekers.

Here is a list of politicians who tried to fix the problems in Mexico.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_politicians_killed_in_the_Mexican_Drug_War

Mexico is not more dangerous than any warzone. There are parts of Mexico which are dangerous, just as there are parts of the US that are dangerous. If you're in danger in Mexico, move to one of the safe parts of Mexico.

Or are you proposing that all of the 127.5M people in Mexico can turn up at the US border and say 'I'm afraid of drug dealers' and be entitled to US citizenship?

yourdeadwright

Captain Obvious wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Aren't the immigrants breaking the law ?
In every country in the world if you break the law you are sent to prison and taken out of your children's life's,

Why is this different ? genuine question , as I haven't read the in's and outs ,

No, in every country you are not sent to prison for breaking the law. If you are convicted of a serious crime you can be. But in other cases you sometimes get a caution, sometimes a fine, sometimes a suspended sentence. In addition, you get the right to a trial to decide your guilt and, in most cases, are granted bail until that trial.


Even if you ignore all that, you have to look at the treatment of the children. Generally they will be placed in the care of a relative. In the rare cases where children cannot be placed with a relative, they are generally put into foster homes, not internment camps as is the case in the US.



Even in cases where a child has to be housed in some sort of group setting, they are cared for. You down ban physical contact between siblings. You don't leave older unrelated kids to change nappies. You don't take breast feeding children from their mother. You make arrangements to lessen the trauma on the child because they are innocent. They are not even legally capable of committing a crime.


What's happening in the US is the deliberate mental torture and physical neglect of children, we're talking as young as toddlers here, in order to send a message to latinos that they are not welcome in the US.

Why would the US spend money on having trails for people who are not American citizens, Don't be daft
Last I looked at a map there is no warzone boarding the States so why seek asylum there from what ? 
I can't see why people automatically think they should take burden ,
This is a very very very harsh but eventually something like this was going to happen , Any country has a right to defend there boarders and it seem like the US was going to have to go to extreme measure to stop the steady stream which was happing,
Not saying it is right but there was always going to be a tipping point ,

wexie

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Why would the US spend money on having trails for people who are not American citizens, Don't be daft

really?

What do you think would happen to you if you commit a crime on US soil? Do you actually think they'd go 'oh...he's not one of ours, we'll just let it go this time and turf him out'?

They have trials for people who aren't US citizens all the time....I'll guarantee you anything there are non US citizens on trial in the US right this very minute (actually it's probably a bit early over there still).

The idea they wouldn't have trials for people that aren't citizens is utterly moronic.

(aside from the whole issue of whether or not these refugees should be going on trial of course)

wexie

Varik wrote: »

What do you think happens here in Ireland if both parents were arrested.

I'm not too sure but I'd venture a guess it doesn't involve cages....

yourdeadwright

wexie wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Why would the US spend money on having trails for people who are not American citizens, Don't be daft

really?

What do you think would happen to you if you commit a crime on US soil? Do you actually think they'd go 'oh...he's not one of ours, we'll just let it go this time and turf him out'?

They have trials for people who aren't US citizens all the time....I'll guarantee you anything there are non US citizens on trial in the US right this very minute (actually it's probably a bit early over there still).

The idea they wouldn't have trials for people that aren't citizens is utterly moronic.

(aside from the whole issue of whether or not these refugees should be going on trial of course)

But we are talking about having trails for people they catch crossing the boarder illegally,  Why would they have a trail ? Makes no sense at all ,

Moghead

sabat wrote: »

Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua etc...
If you voted for Ronald Reagan 40 years ago (or even Eisenhower 70 years ago) you voted for this today. All those rigged elections, death squads, tinpot juntas headed by murderous strongmen and corporo-fascist thefts of land and state assets destroyed these societies before they even had a chance. These families have every moral right to enter the US to try to reclaim some of what was stolen from them by the CIA.

This.

The way the US governments and businesses have conducted themselves in Latin America for the past 100 years is an absolute disgrace. So much suffering and death inflicted on the peoples there.

wexie

yourdeadwright wrote: »

But we are talking about having trails for people they catch crossing the boarder illegally,  Why would they have a trail ? Makes no sense at all ,

well.....I have to agree with that although perhaps from a somewhat different point of view.

But...apparently it's now a crime to cross the border illegally and from what I understand they are looking to actually have trials. (I may be wrong in this, the whole process seems to be somewhat vague).

Personally I don't understand why they wouldn't just repatriate/deport these people back from whence they came (if appropriate). It probably wouldn't cost anymore and would save them a lot of negative publicity.

While I'd imagine there may well be genuine asylum cases among them in reality I suspect a lot of them are indeed economic refugees.

Either way the policy of separating the kids from the parents is utterly barbaric and completely inexcusable.

yourdeadwright

wexie wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

But we are talking about having trails for people they catch crossing the boarder illegally,  Why would they have a trail ? Makes no sense at all ,

well.....I have to agree with that although perhaps from a somewhat different point of view.

But...apparently it's now a crime to cross the border illegally and from what I understand they are looking to actually have trials. (I may be wrong in this, the whole process seems to be somewhat vague).

Personally I don't understand why they wouldn't just repatriate/deport these people back from whence they came (if appropriate). It probably wouldn't cost anymore and would save them a lot of negative publicity.

While I'd imagine there may well be genuine asylum cases among them in reality I suspect a lot of them are indeed economic refugees.

Either way the policy of separating the kids from the parents is utterly barbaric and completely inexcusable.

I agree with everything you said but the sheer numbers and the flow is literally none stop, The amount of repeat offenders they catch is crazy, 
There was always going to be a tipping point where a drastic measure was taken by the US,
Again I'm not saying it is right at all but this has been coming for a while ,

RocketRaccoon

These people are not welcome in the USA. Why are they being afforded anything? Not welcome, please turn around and leave. These people know they aren't welcome, they know they will be illegal in the country, they know the repercussions for their actions. They are to blame for this, not any us politician.

wexie

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I agree with everything you said but the sheer numbers and the flow is literally none stop, The amount of repeat offenders they catch is crazy, 
There was always going to be a tipping point where a drastic measure was taken by the US,
Again I'm not saying it is right at all but this has been coming for a while ,

Perhaps....what I find the most baffling about this whole situation is that they couldn't come up with a solution that didn't involve separating kids from their parents. (Not to mention the conditions those kids are being kept in).

I'd be amazed if, within the next couple of weeks, we're not going to see organisations like the ACLU take cases against the US government causing huge headaches etc. etc. And the cases won't be based on not letting refugees/asylum seekers into the country but based on how the children are being treated.

I'm not at all surprised that they've come up with a barbaric and cruel solution.

I'm surprised they've come up with a dumb solution.

Captain Obvious

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Why would the US spend money on having trails for people who are not American citizens,

Articles 5 and 7 of the Declaration of Human Rights.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Don't be daft Last I looked at a map there is no warzone boarding the States so why seek asylum there from what ?

War is not the only reason for seeking asylum.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I can't see why people automatically think they should take burden ,
This is a very very very harsh but eventually something like this was going to happen ,

No it wasn't. They took on the burden themselves. Continuing with the previous policy would have been a lesser burden. They did this to send a message.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Any country has a right to defend there boarders and it seem like the US was going to have to go to extreme measure to stop the steady stream which was happing,

Nobody said they couldn't defend their borders or take people into custody. The separation of families and disgraceful treatment of children was no necessary. It is deliberate cruelty.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not saying it is right but there was always going to be a tipping point ,

Seems you're trying very hard to say it's right. And I think it will be a tipping point, perhaps not how Trumptards hope though.

Varik wrote: »

What do you think happens here in Ireland if both parents were arrested, they're left to wonder the streets.

Given to a relative or put in an emergency foster home.

Varik wrote: »

You only get a trail if you plead innocent during your arraignment, if you plead guilty you go straight to sentencing as with most of the world. Those pleading guilty are getting sentenced to time served.

You are given the chance of bail if you plead innocent. You are also entitled to free legal representation. There really is no comparison to the Irish system in any way.

topper75

optogirl wrote: »

How is inflicting trauma on children a necessary move? It is absolutely unnecessary - hence the global disgust.

It is necessary because any fool like me can take a kid with me (doesn't have to be mine - frequent cases) and use that as my tool to stay in the U.S.

wexie

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

These people are not welcome in the USA. Why are they being afforded anything? Not welcome, please turn around and leave. These people know they aren't welcome, they know they will be illegal in the country, they know the repercussions for their actions. They are to blame for this, not any us politician.

All of which is true, I won't argue with any of it.

But just to put it in perspective : most of these people will know all of this, they probably know that if they did make it into the US they could end up living the rest of their lives looking over their shoulder for ICE, have no benefits, work ****ty jobs, own no property etc. etc. They also know they are risking their lives (and their children's lives) trying to get there in the first place.

And yet they still come...

Now I'm not saying I agree with them, or that they should be let into the country. (which, let's face it, makes no difference to me whatsoever).

But I can't imagine being in a situation so so dire that I would choose to risk my own, my wife's and my children's lives only to end up living a life looking over my shoulder and being marginalized every way you turn.....and still take that chance....

topper75

wexie wrote: »

Seems to me that the word abduction is perfectly appropriate here.

I'm pretty sure it is the Latino illegals bringing the kids in.

Have a think about it - if I dumped a baby on your doorstep tonight - did you abduct that baby?

Trump and the U.S. staff who are tasked with a difficult thankless task abducted precisely nobody.

erica74

20Cent wrote: »

It's an inhuman policy.



https://www.thedailybeast.com/bible-quoting-jeff-sessions-makes-little-children-suffer

Marco Antonio Muñoz who was separated from his wife and three-year-old son while attempting to apply for asylum at the Rio Grande border. When the frenzied father learned that his family would be separated and his child was torn from his arms, he became “disruptive and combative” and was removed to another facility where he hung himself.

Holy fucking shit.

To the people who think this is a fine idea, what do you propose happen to these children now being kept in entirely unsuitable living conditions? They're now going to go into the care system and all of this will just end up costing the taxpayers a shitload of money.

wexie

topper75 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it is the Latino illegals bringing the kids in.

Have a think about it - if I dumped a baby on your doorstep tonight - did you abduct that baby?

Trump and the U.S. staff who are tasked with a difficult thankless task abducted precisely nobody.

You think that's a comparable situation? It's not. Nobody is dumping babies across the border.

A comparable situation would be if a couple with a baby showed up on my doorstep looking for help and I locked the couple in one shed and the child in another.

And yes that would be abduction.

topper75

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

These people are not welcome in the USA. Why are they being afforded anything? Not welcome, please turn around and leave. These people know they aren't welcome, they know they will be illegal in the country, they know the repercussions for their actions. They are to blame for this, not any us politician.

Why do so few people on here get this?

Are media optics of crying children that powerful? Are people that irrational?

Is a Latino heritage or brown skin a charter to go wherever and whenever you like and anybody who puts the arm out to check you is some kind of callous ogre?

If your average boards poster was on this detail, the country would go down in months.

RocketRaccoon

wexie wrote: »

All of which is true, I won't argue with any of it.

But just to put it in perspective : most of these people will know all of this, they probably know that if they did make it into the US they could end up living the rest of their lives looking over their shoulder for ICE, have no benefits, work ****ty jobs, own no property etc. etc. They also know they are risking their lives (and their children's lives) trying to get there in the first place.

And yet they still come...

Now I'm not saying I agree with them, or that they should be let into the country. (which, let's face it, makes no difference to me whatsoever).

But I can't imagine being in a situation so so dire that I would choose to risk my own, my wife's and my children's lives only to end up living a life looking over my shoulder and being marginalized every way you turn.....and still take that chance....

They are going to try and live the American dream and get a well payed job which they don't have in Mexico. That's the reason for the majority of these people, it's nothing to do with personal safety.