America's Child Abduction Policy

Captain Obvious · 17-06-2018 11:56am #1

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 · 17-06-2018 12:00pm

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 · 17-06-2018 12:05pm

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 · 17-06-2018 12:09pm

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

EdgeCase · 17-06-2018 12:11pm

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! · 17-06-2018 12:12pm

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

Sonics2k · 17-06-2018 12:13pm

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

Graces7 · 17-06-2018 7:21pm

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 · 17-06-2018 7:55pm

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 · 17-06-2018 8:17pm

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 · 17-06-2018 8:36pm

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 · 20-06-2018 9:48am

Audio recorded from one of the internment camps

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

topper75 · 20-06-2018 10:26am

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 · 20-06-2018 10:29am

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 · 20-06-2018 10:32am

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 · 20-06-2018 10:34am

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 · 20-06-2018 10:43am

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.

[Deleted User] · 20-06-2018 10:48am

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 · 20-06-2018 10:50am

Greatest country in the world!

steddyeddy · 20-06-2018 10:50am

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 · 20-06-2018 11:01am

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 · 20-06-2018 11:03am

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.

[Deleted User] · 20-06-2018 11:16am

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 · 20-06-2018 11:42am

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

RocketRaccoon · 20-06-2018 11:43am

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 · 20-06-2018 11:47am

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 · 20-06-2018 12:03pm

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 · 20-06-2018 12:04pm

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 · 20-06-2018 12:05pm

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 · 20-06-2018 12:09pm

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 · 20-06-2018 12:13pm

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.

America's Child Abduction Policy

Comments