Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The ambivalence of being an immigrant kid

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16


    See here's the thing about "migrant caravans."

    If I wanted to get into the United States, the last thing I would do is join a "caravan" that you can track from space.

    That's more of a political stunt, paid for by who I don't know.

    But the point is, if you want to break into a mansion, you don't stand at the gate and throw rocks at the guard.

    You don't twitter from 3000 miles away, "hey I just joined a group, we're gonna break into the mansion."

    If you want to slip in, you slip in.

    It's also probably alot easier to fill out a form, keep working to save money while waiting for visa etc etc than to walk thousands of miles and play games with the riot police hoping to gain "asylum."

    Asylum.

    "I need asylum, El Salvador is too much crime!"

    Where do the Americans go for asylum away from the asylum-seekers throwing rocks at the cops?

    It's obvious they're not the type who understand "no means no."

    "The immigration officer said no, so I punched him in the face. Then I went to California and I saw a pretty lady, she said no so I said, well ok sorry for bothering you."


    Comment


    • #17


      Originally posted by simpleman View Post
      I am highly upset about this because it takes me 2 minutes to correct your bad info... but you spit it out every 2 seconds...
      Aww, poor baby, am I inconveniencing you?

      Immigration <> Asylum

      Maybe try a little reading comprehension next time.

      Remember when asylum meant, some family trying to escape from East Germany with bullets hitting the ground and guards yelling "ALT! ALT!"

      And now asylum just means some guy from Culiacan who's tired of working at KFC.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        You are going to tell me that if the democrats advance Bernie instead... people would have gone for him over Trump?
        Yes. I know this for a fact. I am one. I'm a registered Democrat. In the primaries, I voted for Bernie. In the actual election, Trump. I voted that way because I didn't agree with Hillary on any major issues. I at least agreed with Trump, somewhat, on immigration issues and on the repeal & replace the ACA (Obamacare). No, I'm not happy with the way that particular point turned out. But, like I said, I was only somewhat for it. (Meaning I agreed with some aspects of it but not all.) For the record, I didn't agree with Bernie on immigration.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        The truth is that people that voted for Trump are at some level racists, even if they deny it
        That's a bigoted point of view. It's also not factually correct.

        I, for one, am very much against illegal immigration. And while the majority of illegals come here legally and just stay illegally (expired visas) I still support the wall as well. Mainly because I know it won't work and I'm tired of hearing about how ignorant people want it to stop illegal immigration. I say, give it to them; then, when it fails to work as promised, I can ask them, "Now what?"

        What I didn't do? Vote for anyone because of skin color.

        You should really stop talking shit. All it does is tell us how much your opinions stink.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by dubs View Post
          If I wanted to get into the United States, the last thing I would do is join a "caravan" that you can track from space.
          Well I don't know the situation of those people...

          I am pretty sure it is easy for you to sit on your ass and imagine how superior and righteous you would handle your business... comparing with the people in the caravan, and everywhere else...

          But someone like me...

          I don't know enough of their personal situations to judge why they feel safer to move on group. It is not the the first time time that there is mass travelling in the history of humankind... and all the other stances of it, as far as I know, are justified under the idea that if you travel in groups you are less vulnerable to become victim of certain situations...

          So the idea of traveling in group does no sound suspicious to me. I can easily understand the benefit of doing it... and the downsides to it too... That is what they decided was goign to work for them, and so they take go for it.

          That's more of a political stunt, paid for by who I don't know.
          The evil jews pay for it, because they hate whites... have you not got the latest alt-right updates? there is a truck with the star of david transporting this migrants... What other evidence do you need to find out that they have being right about hating jews?

          What we really need is someone going down there and start tracking down how they organized themselves, and started that up...

          If you want to slip in, you slip in.
          The deeps of your wisdom... I am just about to start calling you Master...

          It's also probably alot easier to fill out a form, keep working to save money while waiting for visa etc etc than to walk thousands of miles and play games with the riot police hoping to gain "asylum."
          This is the thing... if you can actually do things like have a job... live in the same address for more than 3 months... tell people your real name and where are you from... things like those... I would say that person will get the asylum application declined...

          To obtain the status... the aplican petty much need to be in a situation where if they don't leave where they are and move... they will get killed. So it is run or die... and when you are in a situation where, you have to run for your live, it becomes highly difficult to do things like this: "keep working to save money while waiting for visa"

          Where do the Americans go for asylum away from the asylum-seekers throwing rocks at the cops?
          Wherever you can... Just look at this:

          "Snowden applied for political asylum to 21 countries."
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward...m_applications

          It's obvious they're not the type who understand "no means no."
          I already explain to you the process of application...

          You can't apply for asylum from out the country... in that case they will need to apply for refugee status... but the thing is that you can't really tell them what status they can and can't apply, they will apply for what the can and that is that...

          "The immigration officer said no, so I punched him in the face. Then I went to California and I saw a pretty lady, she said no so I said, well ok sorry for bothering you."
          Well, the "immigration officer" cant say no, that is not his job... please educate yourself on how the system works.

          And no... punching a guy in the face does not make you a potential rapist... don't be such a mangina.

          Comment


          • #20


            Asylum is for people who are being threatened by their government.

            Not for people who simply want a better life.

            Everyone on the planet wants a better life.

            The good news : The US takes in 1.1 million immigrants every year from around the world.
            The bad news : You have to fill out forms and wait.

            Alternately may I humbly suggest fixing your own country instead of showing up expecting someone else to give you a better life. There are 8 billion people on the planet, all of them can't move to America, also remember that America has its own people who need help, we have our own people who are on food stamps, who need medical care, who need education, who need help. In other words, we have our own problems too.

            Don't get me wrong, there are opportunities for win/win.

            Handled correctly, immigration can be a great source of filling up taxpaying jobs.

            But that requires a process and people who are willing to submit themselves to that process.

            If you just want to kick the door down and start demanding shit, that's lose/lose.

            "America" is not just "white people."

            "America" is everyone that's already here, including former immigrants, including you, including me, including other people who came from Honduras, Venezuela, Mexico, etc.

            And yes, we do know who's paying for and organizing the caravans.

            They're a group called Libre, a group aligned with the ousted former President of Honduras who is a close friend of Maduro in Venezuela and ties to the Castro regime.

            In other words, basically Marxist revolutionaries, these caravans were timed with the US midterm elections to try to provoke or embarass the current administration.

            I assume you approve of that sort of thing, but it's really no different than the Russians trying to meddle with our elections.

            Now that the midterms are over, the caravans seem to be dissipating, isn't that ironic.


            Last edited by dubs; 11-10-2018, 08:04 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by dubs View Post

              Asylum is for people who are being threatened by their government.
              You keep pulling definitions and laws out your ass...

              Can you quote the law that give this definition???

              here... check this definition giving by Act 101(a)15P

              "(42) The term "refugee" means:

              (A) any person who is outside any country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or

              (B) in such circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 207(e) of this Act) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term "refugee" does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this Act, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.
              "
              https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/...0-0-0-195.html

              then again a simple search on a website that I already linked you before give the legal definition... but instead of that, you decided to made up that BS claim that the person have to be threatened by their government... because you don't give a fuck about what the law actually says...

              Why don't you quote me the law that says what you claim?

              Or better yet... why don't you stop pulling BS out of your ass and start educating yourself?

              In other words, basically Marxist revolutionaries, these caravans were timed with the US midterm elections to try to provoke or embarass the current administration.
              I don't think Trump need any help to embarrass himself...

              Now that the midterms are over, the caravans seem to be dissipating, isn't that ironic.
              I have an idea of what is going on.. but I already wasted your quota of time giving you links of easily to find information on US laws... so no more time for you...

              Comment


              • #22
                https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/r...-asylum/asylum

                "Under United States law, a refugee is someone who:
                • Is located outside of the United States
                • Is of special humanitarian concern to the United States
                • Demonstrates that they were persecuted or fear persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group
                  Is not firmly resettled in another country
                • Is admissible to the United States

                A refugee does not include anyone who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion."

                https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

                "There is a common misconception that U.S. embassies and consulates are basically the same as U.S. soil. It is true that international law protects national embassies and consulates from being destroyed, entered, or searched (without permission) by the government of the country where they are located (the host country). However, this does not give those embassies or consulates the full status of being part of their home nation’s territory. Therefore, U.S. law does not consider asylum seekers at U.S. embassies and consulates to be “physically present in the United States” (or at a U.S. border or point of entry).

                However, this does not mean that embassy personnel cannot offer any help at all to people who are in danger and seek their protection. In extreme or exceptional circumstances, U.S. embassies and consulates may offer alternative forms of protection, including (in most countries) temporary refuge, a referral to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, or a request for parole to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security."

                They didn't try this path in Honduras. They didn't try this path in Guatemala. They didn't try this path in Mexico (though some did opt to stay in Mexico). They could have, but they didn't. These people are demanding admittance simply because they're coming. I, for one, can not condone that attitude. You know what would have happened if they had? They would have had food, shelter, and medical attention until they were denied and sent home (at which point they could try again) or until they were permitted legal entry. This tactic they're using is saying we're coming whether you like it or not. As such it is nothing less than a direct challenge to the sovereignty of the US Government and its land and its people. Put simply, it's an invasion. Perhaps a passive aggressive invasion, but an invasion nonetheless.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by JamesNunya View Post
                  They didn't try this path in Honduras. They didn't try this path in Guatemala. They didn't try this path in Mexico (though some did opt to stay in Mexico). They could have, but they didn't. These people are demanding admittance simply because they're coming. I, for one, can not condone that attitude. You know what would have happened if they had? They would have had food, shelter, and medical attention until they were denied and sent home (at which point they could try again) or until they were permitted legal entry. This tactic they're using is saying we're coming whether you like it or not. As such it is nothing less than a direct challenge to the sovereignty of the US Government and its land and its people. Put simply, it's an invasion. Perhaps a passive aggressive invasion, but an invasion nonetheless.
                  Your legal definitions are correct.

                  The media have interview some of the cases that are coming on the caravan, for what I can tell around 60% of what I can see are not eligible.

                  So in that matter they will eventually get their applications rejects and be deported.

                  After this they will not be able to apply again... there is wordings on the law about that...

                  The cost of them... I think the faster it gets process the less money got espend on that... however they already can't take more than 180 days for the whole process...

                  I would say no give them work permits, expedite the applications as fast as it can be done... I do think around 60% of them can be rejected in 1 or 2 weeks... and hammer them with the "frivolous application" so they can't apply in the future...

                  Sending the troops is not goign to cut it... if Trump really want to discourage that caravan he should say that considering the situation he have send hundreds of immigration officers to receive the asylum applications and give answers in less than 3 days.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                    So in that matter they will eventually get their applications rejects and be deported.
                    My understanding is that each will get an initial hearing. If it's not immediately apparent that any given applicant is ineligible, then they will have a full hearing scheduled in 6-12 months and be released. A large percentage of these will never show up for their full hearing and just live undocumented inside the US. It seems highly likely that of the people who fail to show up for their full hearing, a large fraction will be people who know that that they're not actually eligible for asylum.

                    In fact, the mere fact that they walked through multiple countries in which they could have applied for asylum makes a compelling argument that they're specifically trying to backdoor immigration into the US and not just to escape a dangerous situation. The nautical term is "Any port in a storm" not "only the best port in a storm".

                    Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                    Sending the troops is not goign to cut it... if Trump really want to discourage that caravan he should say that considering the situation he have send hundreds of immigration officers to receive the asylum applications and give answers in less than 3 days.
                    That doesn't discourage them because many of them aren't going to show up for the follow-on hearings. Never mind that "immigration officers" aren't making the determination; Federal Immigration Judges are. So if we wanted to expedite the processing, we'd have to send a cadre of federal judges, not immigration officials (unless I'm being unfair in distinguishing federal judges from immigration officials). But that doesn't necessarily act as a deterrent unless you're holding immigrants until their full-hearing. Because if they get an initial hearing and then get released into the country, they simply don't show up for the second hearing, whether it's in a week or 9 months.

                    It will be hard to send a bunch of federal judges though, because the federal circuit court has 111 current vacancies and we have Democratic Senators who literally vote against every single judicial appointment that Trump makes regardless of the nominees qualifications for the job.

                    "...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
                    "The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

                    Comment


                    • #25


                      Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                      "(42) The term "refugee" means:

                      (A) any person who is outside any country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or

                      (B) in such circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 207(e) of this Act) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term "refugee" does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this Act, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.
                      "
                      https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/...0-0-0-195.html
                      So in other words, people who are being threatened by their government.

                      "b-but what if it's a genocide and the government is ineffective!"

                      Well then people are being threatened by their government being ineffective.

                      This is not a complicated topic.

                      You're simply a very passionate xenophile and really, really, want to be right.

                      Unfortunately your basic understanding of how the world operates is flawed.

                      I didn't win this argument, the argument won itself, the entire planet can't come to one country.

                      The US already has an immigration system and globalist machinations that are very precise and measured.

                      Hyperbolic accusations of racism will not speed or improve those machinations, nor does it obfuscate your zeal to flood western countries with hostile aliens.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Mifune View Post
                        My understanding is that each will get an initial hearing. If it's not immediately apparent that any given applicant is ineligible, then they will have a full hearing scheduled in 6-12 months and be released. A large percentage of these will never show up for their full hearing and just live undocumented inside the US. It seems highly likely that of the people who fail to show up for their full hearing, a large fraction will be people who know that that they're not actually eligible for asylum.
                        No for asylum... there is in consideration that the applicant is in a desperate situation, and so the law is worded accordingly, this is the timelines:

                        "For asylum applications filed on or after April 1, 1997, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that the initial interview should take place within 45 days after the date the application is filed. A decision should be made on the asylum application within 180 days after the date the application is filed, unless there are exceptional circumstances. See INA section 208(d)(5)."

                        So the whole thing about 6 to 12 months is not the regular timeline here. it will be 180 days at most, but in reality they usually get it done a lot faster than that.

                        In fact, the mere fact that they walked through multiple countries in which they could have applied for asylum makes a compelling argument that they're specifically trying to backdoor immigration into the US and not just to escape a dangerous situation. The nautical term is "Any port in a storm" not "only the best port in a storm".
                        I don't know... each country have their own regulations... they being in Mexico can apply to asylum in Mexico and/or refugee in US... this are the options I think they are taking now. THis is the peopel that is actually eligible.

                        This argument looks pretty weak, anyway... I don't think it will fly... THe law is no worded this way... the EU does have it worded this way though...

                        That doesn't discourage them because many of them aren't going to show up for the follow-on hearings. Never mind that "immigration officers" aren't making the determination; Federal Immigration Judges are. So if we wanted to expedite the processing, we'd have to send a cadre of federal judges, not immigration officials (unless I'm being unfair in distinguishing federal judges from immigration officials). But that doesn't necessarily act as a deterrent unless you're holding immigrants until their full-hearing. Because if they get an initial hearing and then get released into the country, they simply don't show up for the second hearing, whether it's in a week or 9 months.
                        It is my understanding that the decision is executive... made by an asylum office director...

                        Keep in mind that you can't really just walk in and say "I want asylum" you have to present an application form that is 12 pages long with supported evidence about you being a victim of persecution... no limit here but this usually goes over a 100 more pages...

                        https://www.uscis.gov/i-589

                        It is very likely that they will not send and investigator to figure out if you are real r fake, they will make a decision based on the paperwork you present.

                        They will investigate you though... for instance they will get your criminal records from your country of origin, and the so...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by dubs View Post
                          So in other words, people who are being threatened by their government.
                          If by "other words" you mean the words that you pulled out of your ass... then yes... but still, they will use the words that are in the law, no the "other words".

                          This is not a complicated topic.
                          Actually... it is a complicated topic... you will need 5 years of legal studies, then an specialization on international laws with focus on migration...

                          Anyway... understanding 2 paragraphs of legal wording is not that hard... yet... you are failing.

                          You're simply a very passionate xenophile and really, really, want to be right.
                          Up to this point I have being quoting you US laws... I have intentionally avoid international treaties and the so, just because I think you don't have the mental ability to deal with that...

                          Anyway, I am glad that I am coming trough as passionated... I do no like using fault language, but I have being thinking on some words that GrumpyOldMan told me, that I am coming trough as fake and insincere... and something about me playing games... I contemplated the possibility that my lack of bad words was negatively affecting my image, so I have decide to start implementing some of those words to see how that works... I decided to use you for this, because i don't care about you. Anyway... besides my worries that I was going to come trough as rude, it turns out that GrumpyOldMan was right, and I have come trough as passionate, witch is better than fake... Fascinating how some people actually enjoy being mistreated, but there you are, praising me for treating you like my dirty bitch. GrumpyOldMan knows you well, I will take more advice from him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                            Anyway, I am glad that I am coming trough as passionated... I do no like using fault language, but I have being thinking on some words that GrumpyOldMan told me, that I am coming trough as fake and insincere... and something about me playing games... I contemplated the possibility that my lack of bad words was negatively affecting my image, so I have decide to start implementing some of those words to see how that works... I decided to use you for this, because i don't care about you. Anyway... besides my worries that I was going to come trough as rude, it turns out that GrumpyOldMan was right, and I have come trough as passionate, witch is better than fake... Fascinating how some people actually enjoy being mistreated, but there you are, praising me for treating you like my dirty bitch. GrumpyOldMan knows you well, I will take more advice from him.
                            lol, look at you, Justin Bieber got a tattoo, you're a bad boy now.

                            You're not adding anything to the conversation with copypasta legalese, but trying to impress me is a good start and I encourage you to work on it.

                            Brevity is the soul of wit ; ad homs are a sure sign of a losing argument.



                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by dubs View Post
                              copypasta legalese
                              How I am not surprised... all your talking that you care so much about the law, abut what is legal, about who is legal... all that talk... nothing but BS.

                              I show you the law that literally say the opposite of what you like... and just like that... laws are not important for you anymore...

                              I have meet a lot of people on my life, never someone as hypocrite and cretin as you... Congratulations!

                              Comment


                              • #30

                                The spirit and intent of the law is exactly what I said.

                                The word "asylum" means to seek protection, for example protection from political persecution.

                                This "protection" is the first safe place you can stop running for your life.

                                Not, "we have to keep going to the US, they give more money."

                                At that point this is no longer running for your life, this is economic migration.

                                And "Asylyum" becomes "backdoor immigration."

                                All of this is very simple, very clear, very easy to understand.

                                Cut and pasting blocs of legal verbiage is a dishonest attempt to obfuscate the meaning/intention of "Asylum" with red herrings.

                                At this point, Simpleman, you are not an honest actor.

                                Last edited by dubs; 11-13-2018, 02:13 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X