Immigrant Concentration Camps

[ZiprHead]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/us/politics/texas-migrant-centers.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Women held in rooms without running water, sleeping bags set up on concrete and children left apart from their families: That was what Democratic lawmakers said they heard about on Monday as they toured two Texas border facilities.

Their emotional, and graphic, descriptions came on a day when ProPublica reported the existence of a secret Facebook group for current and former Border Patrol agents. Posts on the group’s page included jokes about migrants’ deaths, obscene GIFs and doctored images of Hispanic lawmakers, the report said. Some of the most offensive posts were directed at Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York.

Monday’s visit to the border by more than a dozen members of Congress — including Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Representative Veronica Escobar of Texas — was a specific focus of some of the abuse on Facebook, ProPublica reported. One post used vulgar language to encourage agents to “hurl a ‘burrito’” at the two

It does give one the impression that some of our border patrol agents have a lot in common with Nazis. The articles says that people are comparing these places to prisons, but I hope we treat our actual prisoners more humanely than the way these people are being treated. I imagine that most of you heard about the agent that told a woman to drink water from a toilet. Nice guy.


I tried to look at the ProPublica report but the link in the Times didn't work for me. Then I tried to find it without using the link. I think someone must have taken it down, or maybe hacked into the site?

https://www.propublica.org/article/secret-border-patrol-facebook-group-agents-joke-about-migrant-deaths-post-sexist-memes

 

[Angry Floof]

What is the alternative? Do nothing? She isn't complicit, McConnell is.

Right wing mentality is typical abuser behavior. "Look what you made me do."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What is the alternative? Do nothing? She isn't complicit, McConnell is.

Right wing mentality is typical abuser behavior. "Look what you made me do."

PyramidHead isn't a right-winger.

 

[Angry Floof]

What is the alternative? Do nothing? She isn't complicit, McConnell is.

Right wing mentality is typical abuser behavior. "Look what you made me do."

PyramidHead isn't a right-winger.

I know that, but the general mentality that seems so infectious these days, even among people who are not politically right wing, is the bully/abuser mentality. It's a disease, and seems to be pretty virulent. All it takes is one hateful moron to make a cartoon, especially one that demonizes a woman, and the monkey brains respond before the executive functions can kick in.

 

[PyramidHead]

What is the alternative? Do nothing? She isn't complicit, McConnell is.

Right wing mentality is typical abuser behavior. "Look what you made me do."

PyramidHead isn't a right-winger.

The problem does not boil down to any individual person, but I thought the move was an apt demonstration of why our political system is non-functional. When someone essentially kidnaps a bunch of children for ransom and says "hey, in addition to the ransom, could you fork over some cash to cover the toilet paper and cereal I need to give these jerks, and also by the way I will use that money to do more kidnaps because I actually have plenty of money for TP and cereal", what possible alternative could there be to giving them all the money they ask for? Sadly, Jimmy is right: the time for Pelosi to establish the precedent for not tolerating abuses of power that lead to innocent suffering was sometime during Bush's second administration. It's too late now; the Senate and House are already stocked like salmon ponds with pants-wetting former consultants and communications majors who she would have to actually mobilize into a unified opposition against what ICE is doing. It would fail, but it would be better than once again rolling over, once again presenting no principled objection to anything Trump does whatsoever, once again missing a golden opportunity to define the Democratic caucus by its steadfast opposition to an obvious evil.

The fact that her immediate capitulation here is being interpreted as the only possible course of action she could have taken is evidence that rescuing our political system is basically impossible at this point. We can't salvage it simply by voting for whoever we think is the smartest or the most experienced. We need mass action like the stand-ins and blockades that happened yesterday, we need a nationwide general strike, we need actual moral leadership and not strategic posturing that accomplishes nothing.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

PyramidHead isn't a right-winger.

The problem does not boil down to any individual person, but I thought the move was an apt demonstration of why our political system is non-functional. When someone essentially kidnaps a bunch of children for ransom and says "hey, in addition to the ransom, could you fork over some cash to cover the toilet paper and cereal I need to give these jerks, and also by the way I will use that money to do more kidnaps because I actually have plenty of money for TP and cereal", what possible alternative could there be to giving them all the money they ask for? Sadly, Jimmy is right: the time for Pelosi to establish the precedent for not tolerating abuses of power that lead to innocent suffering was sometime during Bush's second administration.

That could be right, but based on the numbers, impeaching W wouldn't have worked and could have backfired... giving the Republicans the '08 election. *barfs*

It's too late now; the Senate and House are already stocked like salmon ponds with pants-wetting former consultants and communications majors who she would have to actually mobilize into a unified opposition against what ICE is doing. It would fail, but it would be better than once again rolling over, once again presenting no principled objection to anything Trump does whatsoever, once again missing a golden opportunity to define the Democratic caucus by its steadfast opposition to an obvious evil.

McConnell is in control of the Senate. And he has shown a clear joy of enacting authoritarian powers and willing to risk the nation in doing so. When one of the parties in the nation is willing to risk it all in a game of political chicken, you can only resist so much. He controls the Senate and nothing will change that short of an election 2020.

The fact that her immediate capitulation here is being interpreted as the only possible course of action she could have taken is evidence that rescuing our political system is basically impossible at this point.

That is to be seen. But right now, the GOP is a hyper-partisan party that is giving the finger to democracy. And their brown shirt supporters seem to be quite happy with the deplorable change in tactics. I heard an AM radio asshat host say that the GOP doesn't need supporters, they need fighters. The rhetoric is getting more and more dangerous as the right-wing has become more and more extreme.

We can't salvage it simply by voting for whoever we think is the smartest or the most experienced.

Well, had the Electoral College done the only job it was supposed to do in 2016, we wouldn't have this problem right now.

We need mass action like the stand-ins and blockades that happened yesterday, we need a nationwide general strike, we need actual moral leadership and not strategic posturing that accomplishes nothing.

We saw how well the Occupy Wall Street protest was taken by the general populace. Indeed, we could be at a point of no return. Or maybe 2020 will finally see the turnout needed to crush this despotic movement.

 

[PyramidHead]

That could be right, but based on the numbers, impeaching W wouldn't have worked and could have backfired... giving the Republicans the '08 election. *barfs*

Is there any meaningful, consequential opposition to Republicans that will not be opposed by Democrats for fear that it will backfire and lose an election? Republicans have gained growing footholds in local, state, and federal offices in a steady pattern since 2008. Maybe the strategy that led to that happening and couldn't prevent it from accumulating into Trump isn't what we should be reminiscing about fondly as sound political maneuvering.

McConnell is in control of the Senate. And he has shown a clear joy of enacting authoritarian powers and willing to risk the nation in doing so. When one of the parties in the nation is willing to risk it all in a game of political chicken, you can only resist so much. He controls the Senate and nothing will change that short of an election 2020.

The same argument could be made in reverse: Pelosi controls the House, and both the Senate and the House are needed to pass any legislation or fund any government expenditure. The issue here has nothing to do with funding anyway; every immigrant family could be set up in a Holiday Inn somewhere for less money than it's costing the US government to detain them on bare blankets with no ventilation or sanitation, so the entire argument that de-funding the operation would result in worse conditions is unfounded. It's literally the least a responsible opposition party could do.

We saw how well the Occupy Wall Street protest was taken by the general populace. Indeed, we could be at a point of no return. Or maybe 2020 will finally see the turnout needed to crush this despotic movement.

OWS pushed the window of acceptable discourse to the left in a way that it hasn't experienced for almost a century. It established terminology and clear battle lines, and produced slogans that are now commonplace in politics that were basically unheard of before the movement began. It made mass protests a part of the arsenal of resistance against corporate overreach on a scale capable of regularly making nationwide news. It enlivened a generation of young people who are just now being elected to office in districts across the country, running on the same principles that were established in the protests. If there was a similar uprising today in solidarity with migrants, asylum seekers, minorities, and refugees, it could spur permanent changes in the political landscape in much the same way.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Why can't these applicants simply stay out of the US (with their kids staying with them) until their applications are processed? They are in Mexico and not their state of origin before coming to the US. Why can't they just stay in Mexico until the application process is done? Wouldn't that satisfy the concerns of both the Democrats and Republicans? Mexico can probably be convinced to allow it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Why can't these applicants simply stay out of the US (with their kids staying with them) until their applications are processed? They are in Mexico and not their state of origin before coming to the US. Why can't they just stay in Mexico until the application process is done? Wouldn't that satisfy the concerns of both the Democrats and Republicans? Mexico can probably be convinced to allow it.

Is this really relevant to how right-wingers are treating them?

I mean, let's suppose white separatists get their way and create a new nation-state named Gilead somewhere in a big chunk of the US. Would you also ask why can't black people just stay out of Gilead so they don't get put in camps? It's not really the right question, is it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why can't these applicants simply stay out of the US (with their kids staying with them) until their applications are processed?

You mean going against existing treaties?

They are in Mexico and not their state of origin before coming to the US. Why can't they just stay in Mexico until the application process is done?

Why shouldn't Mexico house the people form El Salvador and Guatemala?

Wouldn't that satisfy the concerns of both the Democrats and Republicans? Mexico can probably be convinced to allow it.

Allow it? As in have the beds, food, medicine, etc...? If the US refuses to handle it, the answer from up north is let the Mexicans deal with it?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Why can't these applicants simply stay out of the US (with their kids staying with them) until their applications are processed? They are in Mexico and not their state of origin before coming to the US. Why can't they just stay in Mexico until the application process is done? Wouldn't that satisfy the concerns of both the Democrats and Republicans? Mexico can probably be convinced to allow it.

Is this really relevant to how right-wingers are treating them?

Yes. Because if they stayed out of the country until their applications are processed, said right-wingers would not be treating them at all. There would be no concentration camp issue. There would be no separation of kids from parents. The US wouldn't be involved other than to process the application. You could then argue for faster processing etc, to tell the actual refugees from the mere economic migrants, and to admit the economic migrants as the country can absorb them (which IMO is much higher than the current rate).

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Why can't these applicants simply stay out of the US (with their kids staying with them) until their applications are processed? They are in Mexico and not their state of origin before coming to the US. Why can't they just stay in Mexico until the application process is done? Wouldn't that satisfy the concerns of both the Democrats and Republicans? Mexico can probably be convinced to allow it.

Is this really relevant to how right-wingers are treating them?

Yes. Because if they stayed out of the country until their applications are processed, said right-wingers would not be treating them at all. There would be no concentration camp issue. There would be no separation of kids from parents. The US wouldn't be involved other than to process the application. You could then argue for faster processing etc, to tell the actual refugees from the mere economic migrants, and to admit the economic migrants as the country can absorb them (which IMO is much higher than the current rate).

But the underlying cause of the problem is virulent, common racism. The observations we are seeing are just highlighting that problem because it is exacerbated by the number of persons on both sides: minorities and right-wingers in charge of them. Moreover, putting this on Mexico is not a practicable solution because Mexico does not have the resources. You have presented a theoretical solution masquerading as something more practicable, but that isn't.

I will add that after my question I clarified it further beginning with the phrase "I mean..." but you seemed to have snipped it in order not to address it. Here is what I asked in clarification:

I mean, let's suppose white separatists get their way and create a new nation-state named Gilead somewhere in a big chunk of the US. Would you also ask why can't black people just stay out of Gilead so they don't get put in camps? It's not really the right question, is it?

Is it?

Again, if you try to say "yes, it's the right question because it solves everything," then you're wrong, it doesn't. So why are you avoiding the obvious racism. You seem to do that a lot around here for some reason.

 

[Derec]

and to admit the economic migrants as the country can absorb them (which IMO is much higher than the current rate).

US already takes a million legal immigrants each year. I do not know if US need a much higher rate of legal immigration.
In any case, legal economic immigration should be based on US' needs and also people from different countries should get the shot. People from Central America should not get precedence just because they show up at the border trying to game the system.
Furthermore, US economy needs more educated workforce. People with perhaps a 6th or 8th grade education who do not speak English are not prime candidates for a sensible immigration policy.

 

[Derec]

But the underlying cause of the problem is virulent, common racism.

It's NOT racism to not want unrestricted mass migration taking place.

Moreover, putting this on Mexico is not a practicable solution because Mexico does not have the resources.

They should have thought about that before leaving their southern border wide open and even hiring buses for the mass migrants to transport them to the US border. Mexico should keep them out in the first place.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It's NOT racism to not want unrestricted mass migration taking place.

Oh you can try to re-frame racism with an obvious straw man, but most people can see through that.

Moreover, putting this on Mexico is not a practicable solution because Mexico does not have the resources.

They should have thought about that before leaving their southern border wide open and even hiring buses for the mass migrants to transport them to the US border. Mexico should keep them out in the first place.

Nice try, but this does not excuse racist hatred, abuse and neglect.

 

[Derec]

This word of the asylum scam (asscam for short) at the US border has spread all over the world.
At a crowded Mexican shelter, migrants wait months to claim asylum. Some opt to cross the river instead.

Over the weekend, The Texas Tribune interviewed migrants from around the world — they had come from Central America, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Cameroon and even Bangladesh. Seven Bangladeshis at Senda de Vida, speaking in halting English, said they were kidnapped and robbed at gunpoint of everything they had — at least $700 and all their belongings — in Nuevo Laredo.

Bangladesh? I really don't feel bad for them for getting robbed. They are obviously trying to asscam their way into US. It's common for Bangladeshis.

This article is about Deshis trying to asscam their way into Europe, but the idea is the same.

'Broken dreams' - Bangladesh's returning migrants struggle at home

Like many poor Bangladeshis, Komol Shohlagar thought moving overseas for work would change his life. It did - but not in the way he hoped.

Not fleeing for his life. Not persecuted. Just poor.
The government encourages their citizens moving abroad and sending money back.

The country depends heavily on foreign remittances and has an official policy of encouraging citizens to look for jobs abroad.
According to official data, at least 1 million Bangladeshis secured jobs overseas in 2017 - the highest number ever recorded.[...]
“The state does not have a proper system to support the returnees,” said Shariful Hasan, who heads the migration department of Bangladeshi aid group BRAC.
“All our policies are focused on sending people abroad. We don’t even have a system that can count the total number of returnees every year.”

Again, the migrants from Bangladesh are purely economic migrants, even though they engage in asscam when they reach their destinations.

Mohammad Jakir Hossen, 40, worked as a technician in a garment factory before he paid a broker to take him to Italy in search of more lucrative work.[...]
“You may think that I am crazy, but if I get a chance to go outside, I will take a loan again,” Hossen said. “Five people including my old mother depend upon me right now. And what I earn is clearly not enough.”

This is not legitimate asylum seeking!

 

[Derec]

Oh you can try to re-frame racism with an obvious straw man, but most people can see through that.

BS. There is nothing racist about protecting one's borders.

Nice try, but this does not excuse racist hatred, abuse and neglect.

When 100,000 mass migrants show up at your border each month it's difficult to take care of them. That is not racist. Neither is it racist to expect Mexico to protect their own borders. If they are so eager to let these mass migrants in so easily, maybe they should give them asylum whether or not they legally qualify.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Oh you can try to re-frame racism with an obvious straw man, but most people can see through that.

BS. There is nothing racist about protecting one's borders.

Nice try, but this does not excuse racist hatred, abuse and neglect.

When 100,000 mass migrants show up at your border each month it's difficult to take care of them. That is not racist. Neither is it racist to expect Mexico to protect their own borders. If they are so eager to let these mass migrants in so easily, maybe they should give them asylum whether or not they legally qualify.

Everyone can see through you re-framing the issue with straw men, Derec. We all read the tweets by Trump and know about the people in charge of the asylum seekers. We heard about the drinking out of toilets and know about the deaths of kids. You can keep re-framing it, but we see through that.

 

[Derec]

the answer from up north is let the Mexicans deal with it?

Why not. They let them in in the first place. They should have protected their southern border instead of inducing more and more mass migrants to start the journey by doing things like chartering buses or looking the other way when the migrants ride La Bestia.

 

[Derec]

Everyone can see through you re-framing the issue with straw men, Derec. We all read the tweets by Trump and know about the people in charge of the asylum seekers. We heard about the drinking out of toilets and know about the deaths of kids. You can keep re-framing it, but we see through that.

It's not straw men, it's getting to the underlying issue, which is the huge numbers of mass migrants who showed up at the border in recent months.
I agree that they should be treated humanely, but that is just the band aid and will not solve the underlying problem.