|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 18:15:29 GMT -5
Hordini again, is this what you want? What value does despic's posting have? All he's doing is ragebaiting other users. You have all the power, and by inaction, you're tacitly approving of his behavior. If you want people to behave a certain way despite being behind anonymous accounts you need to have clear rules that are enforced equally for all users. Obviously, that includes myself. So go ahead and make rules then ban me according to them if you wish, anything would be better than you just insisting that we all just need to be nice to nazis like despic and grey. This is precious. You have instrumental to the downfall of places like Dakka's OT and that ETC forum. |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 18:19:44 GMT -5
I just want to point out again (As was ignored before he repeated the claim yet again) that this is what the Republicans do, not the Democrats. Unless you say 'you should treat everyone with respect' as being deeply divisive identity politics. We've seen him conflate asylum seekers with illegal immigration several times already in this thread. And it's funny how all the 'illegal' immigrants that people like him are concerned about all come from places where people have a higher melatonin content in their skin. It's almost like there is something other than just being an immigrant that is the issue... The vast majority of asylum seekers are economic migrants. It has nothing to do with the melatonin content of their skin. So, fuck off with your bigotry insinuation here... Non sequitur here. Whether asylum seekers are economic migrants has nothing to do with the fact that the right wing conflates them with illegal immigration even though seeking asylum is something that is legally allowed. The opposition to them very much does have to do with the contents of their skin. Funny how nothing is mentioned about the Canadian border here...Or immigrants from Europe. It's always Mexican, Hatian or Puerto Rico that are the places where they're coming from. (And yes, I know PR is part of the US, but that's glossed over or ignored by the right wing). Like I said, your constant mantra of conflating illegal and legal immigration and identity politics is nothing more than showing the old proverb true of 'every accusation by a right-winger is actually an admission'. Heck, look at all the right-wingers trying to force their religion down people's throats via the government. That's grade-A deeply divisive identity politics. Saying 'minorities exist and should have equal rights' is only deeply divisive identity politics if you think that cis white males should have special privileges. And quite frankly, you've been caught in so many lies that you don't get the benefit of the doubt that you're telling the truth any more. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 18:21:04 GMT -5
Only one person was instrumental to the downfall of ETC, and that is the snowflake that nuked it twice, the latter being after other people had taken over the funding and control of the site.
|
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 18:23:30 GMT -5
Hordini again, is this what you want? What value does despic's posting have? All he's doing is ragebaiting other users. You have all the power, and by inaction, you're tacitly approving of his behavior. If you want people to behave a certain way despite being behind anonymous accounts you need to have clear rules that are enforced equally for all users. Obviously, that includes myself. So go ahead and make rules then ban me according to them if you wish, anything would be better than you just insisting that we all just need to be nice to nazis like despic and grey. This is precious. You have instrumental to the downfall of places like Dakka's OT and that ETC forum. You were the primary instrument of the downfall of Dakka's OT. With the constant bad faith arguments and hiding behind the politeness at all costs even that of reality. You can't have a reasonable discussion with people that just want to troll. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 20:03:28 GMT -5
The vast majority of asylum seekers are economic migrants. It has nothing to do with the melatonin content of their skin. So, fuck off with your bigotry insinuation here... It's absolutely racism. You pretended originally that the issue was crime, now you're whining about the standards for LEGAL immigration not being strict enough. And you and I both know why you object to that legal immigration. Well... if your premise is that when a batch of migrants jumps a fence from Mexico to US (breaking the law), and gives themselves up to Border Patrol to make an asylum claim, knowing that they have to return to immigration court a year plus into the future as legal immigration. We have nothing to debate because we won't be able to agree to definitions. You have literally just described an act of legal immigration. That is how the law for seeking asylum works: you enter the country, declare your intent to seek asylum, and your act of crossing the border is legalized by the asylum claim. You can rage all you like about how you think too many people are allowed to legally enter the country for the "wrong" reasons but it is indisputable fact that they are doing so legally. And, once again, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR FRIEND'S DEATH. Regardless of what standards should or should not be applied to asylum claims it is utter lunacy to suggest that cartel drug smugglers are handing themselves over to the cops. You are not having a rational response to a tragedy, you are merely using that tragedy as flimsy justification for doing the thing you were already committed to doing. |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 487
|
Post by skyth on Nov 7, 2024 20:13:48 GMT -5
Besides the fact that most drugs come in through ports, not by people 'jumping over the fence'.
|
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 20:39:01 GMT -5
Besides the fact that most drugs come in through ports, not by people 'jumping over the fence'. And a sizeable amount are brought over by American citizens when they are smuggled by mules. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 21:21:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 22:00:59 GMT -5
So, is it your position that you don't think it's fair to argue that when this current administration is advertising to the world that his border policies are liberalized, and that there are NGO's here to "help" this migrants... that it doesn't necessarily mean it would cause a spike? Really? No. Again, I explicitly said that it's an argument that isn't absurd, read what I'm writing. I'm saying that you haven't actually shown that it's true, you've simply assumed that because it could be true it must be, and that it explains the entire increase. You were onto the point yourself just a post ago when you pointed out that the spike in the late Trump admin could be explained by other factors than policy. You're right, it could and kinda would have to given that Trump's policies hadn't been ended by Biden at that point. Why, then, would the same not potentially be true for the stats during the Biden administration? Proving that something happened because of something else requires eliminating alternative explanations, not just positing that it's plausible that there's a causal link between two variables. Even then such a link might well exist and simultaneously only explain a portion of the increase. Without digging deeper as a hypothetical, would it not be possible that deteriorating conditions in South America could explain the increase in 2019 and that the dip in 2020 is simply a result of Covid fucking over everything everywhere before the same worsening conditions kicked back in 2021, with Covid-related factors making it even worse? Again I'm not saying that this is necessarily instead of policy changes, I'm trying to get through to you that you haven't gone the entire line out in your argument to show how it's Biden's revocation of Trump's policies and nothing else that caused the spike in immigration. This is also why I've brought up the contrast to Obama; during Obama's last four years the apprehension numbers were roughly the same as the start of Trump's administration. If Trump's policies were what was holding back immigration, why were the numbers holding steady at Obama levels until spiking in 2019? The given explanation from your point of view, I assume (and correct me if I'm misrepresenting here) would be that the numbers during Trump would have increased had he not implemented those policies, correct? Assuming this is a fair representation, there would then have to be some factor that was driving immigration up that was being counteracted by Trump's policies. The follow-up question then would have to be "what factors were counteracting the downward pressure of Trump's policies to keep immigration at the same level as during Obama's tenure?" followed immediately by "and how do we know that it wasn't those factors increasing further, rather than a policy change, that is to blame for the surge in numbers?".
Let me steelman your position to keep this succinct: a) You acknowledge that there is a surge of emigration during the Biden administration. b) You are positing that the surge could be explained from other facts besides whatever policies the Biden administration have chosen. c) You are asking me to provide an actual linkage that I can point to substantiate my position, which is I'm as "the Biden polices is encouraging more illegal immigration". If a, b, c are wrong, please correct me. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 22:04:03 GMT -5
c) You are asking me to provide an actual linkage that I can point to substantiate my position, which is I'm as "the Biden polices is encouraging more illegal immigration". Except your actual position is "Biden's policies are expanding legal immigration in ways I don't like". |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 22:08:31 GMT -5
The vast majority of asylum seekers are economic migrants. It has nothing to do with the melatonin content of their skin. So, fuck off with your bigotry insinuation here... It's absolutely racism. You pretended originally that the issue was crime, now you're whining about the standards for LEGAL immigration not being strict enough. And you and I both know why you object to that legal immigration. Please pound sand Assassin Advocate™. Nope. I'm describing a despicable border policy that is encouraging illegal immigration, that forces the current administration to issue Incorrect. In order to claim asylum, you must go to either your embassy in your nation, or to the next contiguous nation and claim asylum in that embassy. All the migrants coming thru the border is mostly non-Mexicans. What the Biden administration is doing is abusing the law by illegally "paroling" the claimants. You don't know that. No one does. But, there's no debate that Biden's border policies has fucked it up so bad, that he's making the Drug Cartels billions simply because of it. It's not just drugs either... its human trafficking too. But you don't care, because you believe unfettered immigrations is a way to create a new Democrat-voting bloc for power. |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 22:22:10 GMT -5
c) You are asking me to provide an actual linkage that I can point to substantiate my position, which is I'm as "the Biden polices is encouraging more illegal immigration". Except your actual position is "Biden's policies are expanding legal immigration in ways I don't like". It's illegal immigration. Biden's policy breaks the law. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1225That is the presumptive rule. Even aliens who may have a valid “fear of persecution” claim are supposed to be kept in custody until that claim is adjudicated. They are not to be released into the United States. That is a congressional statute, and there is no plausible claim that it is unconstitutional. Therefore, the president’s sworn duty is to execute it faithfully. But, wait! There are two exceptions to the presumptive rule: Firstly, under sec. 1225(b)(2)(C): www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1225If an alien arrives on land “from a foreign territory contiguous to the United States,” the attorney general “may return the alien to that territory pending” a removal proceeding. This is the section on which Trump relied to establish the “Remain in Mexico” policy that (with Mexico’s cooperation) required aliens who tried to get in from Mexico to wait there until we could hold their removal hearings, which they were almost certain to lose. This stopped many aliens from making the perilous trip northward in the first place, so it is not only an eminently legal exercise of sovereignty, it is a humanitarian policy. Secondly, under sec. 1182(d)(5)(A): www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182the attorney general may parole otherwise ineligible aliens into the United States, but only “on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit”. The next subsection (1182(d)(5)(B)) is emphatic that this is only for individual aliens, not mass parole: So that’s what the law says: Aliens who are apprehended trying to enter our country illegally are supposed to be detained. Only two exceptions are: a) return to contiguous country to await removal hearing, or b) parole based on individual circumstances, and only if supported by compelling US interests. There is no mass parole authority. The Biden administration claims that it must mass parole because there is insufficient detention space to hold the millions of aliens flooding the border due to its catastrophic policies. If we do not have enough space to detain the illegal aliens who seek entry, the answer is to close the border. Biden and his allied progressive immigration activist agencies would claim this violates the laws that allow aliens to seek asylum. But what this means is that, one way or the other, a law must be violated. If that’s the choice, then detention must be the answer. Why? Because asylum is not a right of the alien... it is a discretionary act of government. By contrast, the statute directing that illegal aliens be detained is a mandate... it’s not a grant of discretion to the executive branch to do what it thinks best, it is a command based on Congress’s conclusion that this is what national security requires. The Biden administration has flouted the law on this. To TL;DR this...my premise is that the Biden administration has created incentives to make illegal immigrants to abuse the system, at their encouragement, in order to build out a Democrat-leaning voting bloc. Frankly, Biden should've been impeached over this, but there was never going to be enough in the Senate to actually convict. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 22:23:35 GMT -5
Please pound sand Assassin Advocate™. It's hilarious how triggered you are about that given your choice to align yourself with the party that parades around with "kill your local pedophile" signs/bumper stickers/etc. I would think this is one topic we could both agree on! No, that would be your ignorance of how immigration law works. Seeing asylum is legal immigration. No, that would be your ignorance of how immigration law works. First of all, asylum can only be applied for if you are physically located in the US. You can not apply at an embassy in the country you are leaving. See: www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum"You may only file this application if you are physically present in the United States, and you are not a U.S. citizen."Second, US law does not require legal entry into the country. See: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158(a) Authority to apply for asylum
(1) In general
Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.
You are indisputably wrong on this topic and you need to educate yourself before continuing to debate it any further. These are clear facts of law, not opinions. So please do tell me how exactly it is plausible that a cartel drug smuggler would enter the US with a cargo of illegal drugs and then hand himself over to the cops to claim asylum. You do understand that the goal of a smuggler is to enter without getting caught, deliver the cargo, and return to continue the process? I said no such thing, that would be your straw man argument. I am simply pointing out your indisputable factual errors about immigration law and your blatant bait and switch tactics arguing against legal immigration with the crimes done by illegal immigrants. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 22:30:50 GMT -5
The Biden administration claims that it must mass parole because there is insufficient detention space to hold the millions of aliens flooding the border due to its catastrophic policies. And here we come to the fatal flaw in your argument. The Biden administration claims the authority to enact a particular policy and has done so. Until/unless overturned in court that is the law and an immigrant complying with that law is a legal immigrant. In your opinion that is the answer. That answer is a matter of policy, not law. No law requires the closure of the border under those circumstances. The fact that you dislike the policy positions chosen by the Biden administration does not make actions taken in compliance with them illegal immigration.
And please stop with this racist nonsense about illegal aliens. Asylum seekers, whether successful in their application or not, are legally entering the country and not illegal aliens.
And none of this has anything to do with your original claim about drug smuggling. Your issue here is not illegal drugs, it's that you don't like expanding legal immigration to allow in a bunch of voters who disagree with you. Also, you do know that a person who is granted asylum in the US must go through the normal citizenship process before they are allowed to vote, right? |
|
|
|
Post by steelmage99 on Nov 8, 2024 0:19:09 GMT -5
*I'm convinced that's what Trump means when he talks about people being shipped to the US from mental institutions. He doesn't know that claiming an asylum and housing people in a mental asylum (a completely outdated term) are different things.
I totally agree. I also think that is why Right wingers often claim that; "America isn't a democracy. It is a republic". I am convinced that Right wingers don't like that the word "Democracy" because it reminds them of the Democrat Party, and consequently prefer the word "Republic" because it reminds them of the Republican Party. |
|
