Biden still locks kids in cages

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,241
3,065
118
Country
United States of America
Why is proof needed that nothing has changed, but no proof is needed that things have changed?

Surely a continuation of the previous situation is the null hypothesis, so the burden of proof rests on those saying its different now.
And to be clear, I'm asking because I literally cannot find reliable information that points in either direction. I've heard some people say that migrant families are still being separated and that unaccompanied children are unaccompanied mostly because of that separation. And I've heard the opposite. And I'm wondering if people who are making more declarative statements have found reliable answers or if they're just assuming an answer based on the president not being Trump anymore. Every article I've read about this subject leaves such details unstated.

Does anyone actually know if children can leave if their parents arrive to pick them up? Or if some of them can and others can't and why? Or if the answer is yes, but only by deportation?
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,029
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
And to be clear, I'm asking because I literally cannot find reliable information that points in either direction. I've heard some people say that migrant families are still being separated and that unaccompanied children are unaccompanied mostly because of that separation. And I've heard the opposite. And I'm wondering if people who are making more declarative statements have found reliable answers or if they're just assuming an answer based on the president not being Trump anymore. Every article I've read about this subject leaves such details unstated.

Does anyone actually know if children can leave if their parents arrive to pick them up? Or if some of them can and others can't and why? Or if the answer is yes, but only by deportation?
I expect the opacity is by design. And if information is hard to come by, that itself is a red flag. Abuse flourishes in opaque, unreported conditions.
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,113
3,283
118
And to be clear, I'm asking because I literally cannot find reliable information that points in either direction. I've heard some people say that migrant families are still being separated and that unaccompanied children are unaccompanied mostly because of that separation. And I've heard the opposite. And I'm wondering if people who are making more declarative statements have found reliable answers or if they're just assuming an answer based on the president not being Trump anymore. Every article I've read about this subject leaves such details unstated.

Does anyone actually know if children can leave if their parents arrive to pick them up? Or if some of them can and others can't and why? Or if the answer is yes, but only by deportation?
Best parody of this: They'll release children to their parents as soon as they can identify themselves with some form of US issued ID.
 

Revnak

We must imagine Sisyphus horny
Legacy
May 25, 2020
2,944
3,099
118
Country
USA
Best parody of this: They'll release children to their parents as soon as they can identify themselves with some form of US issued ID.
Also possible, ICE deports any parents they find before the kids can be reunited with them. Absurdly possible given ICE is operating independently of the administration already, and the kids are being held by private contractors who don’t actually do the job of finding people.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,962
118
And to be clear, I'm asking because I literally cannot find reliable information that points in either direction. I've heard some people say that migrant families are still being separated and that unaccompanied children are unaccompanied mostly because of that separation. And I've heard the opposite. And I'm wondering if people who are making more declarative statements have found reliable answers or if they're just assuming an answer based on the president not being Trump anymore. Every article I've read about this subject leaves such details unstated.
Well, it's fair to say that people higher up the pecking order tend to not know things if they are not told. And if an agency's staff are obstructive, or are not running with systems of transparency and accountability, even someone well-meaning running it may be (unwittingly) running a clusterfuck.

I can totally believe that the clownshoes Trump administration did not organise ICE competently, and (as with their usual habits) little transparency and accountability.
 

Eacaraxe

Elite Member
Legacy
May 28, 2020
1,592
1,233
118
Country
United States
And a hotel won’t have purpose built facilities for medical examinations, interviews and recreation (that don’t have be shared with other guests paying out of their own pocket) for any detainees to use. So sure the hotel looks cheap, but only if you look at the end result of a breakdown and not what that breakdown contains.
They're economic and political refugees, not an invading army.

But God forbid anyone in the United States ask themselves why or how they're political and economic refugees to begin with.

The US will spend exorbitant amounts of money to make them refugees in the first place in one imperialist boondoggle after another, then spend exorbitant amounts of money ensuring they're treated as inhumanely as public opinion will allow -- and as we've seen, that's nowadays everything short of outright genocide -- but the nanosecond someone suggests a more cost-effective solution to "fiscal conservatives", well hold the phones, that's treating refugees better than we treat poor and working class Americans and we can't have that!

But God forbid anyone in the United States ask themselves why the poor and working class in the wealthiest and "most advanced" country on the planet get treated like an third world underclass to begin with.

The point isn't about what's cheapest or most effective, or even what will "deter illegal immigration". The point is dehumanizing the economic and political refugees the US creates then "has" to deal with. The US, after all, needs a permanent underclass to do the jobs no one else wants, that haven't been automated yet and are likely going away soon to automation anyways. Hell, not that the US is neither unique or even exceptional in this regard, we're basically taking notes from the way the Palestinian diaspora is treated between Israel and its Gulf state bedfellows; but, the point is this hullabaloo isn't and never was about any humanitarian concern save manufacturing consent for exploitation of imported labor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kwak

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,580
3,538
118
The point isn't about what's cheapest or most effective, or even what will "deter illegal immigration". The point is dehumanizing the economic and political refugees the US creates then "has" to deal with. The US, after all, needs a permanent underclass to do the jobs no one else wants, that haven't been automated yet and are likely going away soon to automation anyways. Hell, not that the US is neither unique or even exceptional in this regard, we're basically taking notes from the way the Palestinian diaspora is treated between Israel and its Gulf state bedfellows; but, the point is this hullabaloo isn't and never was about any humanitarian concern save manufacturing consent for exploitation of imported labor.
Some credit should go to Australia, the US is cribbing some of our ideas. Though, here, it seems less about keeping an underclass and more that the problem of not being cruel to refugees is easier to fix and tell the public about than the real problems Australian society has.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,468
923
118
Country
USA
but the nanosecond someone suggests a more cost-effective solution to "fiscal conservatives", well hold the phones, that's treating refugees better than we treat poor and working class Americans and we can't have that!
Did you even read the post you were responding to? They were explaining to you that hotels are cheaper because they are a worse solution, that the united states isn't just shoving people in rooms with beds, the facilities for children especially have recreational, educational, and medical facilities that hotels don't. Shoving people into a hotel with guards and not giving the kids education, outdoor activity, or medical care would be cheaper sure, but it'd be awfully inhumane.

The US isn't making the refugee children, the US is giving them acceptable living conditions, you're on the wrong side of the argument.
 

Eacaraxe

Elite Member
Legacy
May 28, 2020
1,592
1,233
118
Country
United States
Did you even read the post you were responding to?
Yes and it was wrong, just like you. For, you see,

They were explaining to you that hotels are cheaper because they are a worse solution, that the united states isn't just shoving people in rooms with beds, the facilities for children especially have recreational, educational, and medical facilities that hotels don't. Shoving people into a hotel with guards and not giving the kids education, outdoor activity, or medical care would be cheaper sure, but it'd be awfully inhumane.
Most hotels already have recreational facilities on site. And for all else, there are these really cool things called "busses" that you can put kids on and drive them to a local school where they'd be enrolled, playgrounds for scheduled rec time hotels can't provide already on site, and nearby hospitals and clinics for health care. In fact, most hotels also have these things called "conference rooms" where you could have on-site tutoring for catch-up education and English classes, and even for health care-related services like check-ups and vaccinations! Non-profit organizations even provide those exact services for free, the government could partner with for at-cost provision!

Because using already-existing infrastructure and finding low-cost solutions through NPO's will always be cheaper than multi-million-dollar facilities, the infrastructure to support those facilities, and paying for-profit corporations to staff and administrate those facilities!

The US isn't making the refugee children, the US is giving them acceptable living conditions, you're on the wrong side of the argument.
No, you just reject reality and substitute your own. We've had this conversation multiple times about how Mexican immigration post-NAFTA is attributed to the collapse of the ejido system, a consequence of US interference with the Mexican government and economy. And, how post-Clinton immigration from central and southern America is attributed to US interference in Honduras, Venezuela, Guatemala, and El Salvador, including but not limited to decades of sanctions, trade manipulation, and political coups. I'm not having it with you again, because you're willfully ignorant of it.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,029
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
The US isn't making the refugee children, the US is giving them acceptable living conditions, you're on the wrong side of the argument.
People seek refuge from warfare, destruction and instability at home. The US has waged various wars overseas, often toppling the government and failing to replace it with a stable or representative substitute. The US military has been known to obliterate residential areas and hospitals in the countries in which it is involved. It has also effectively sponsored other expansionist military efforts (such as that currently ongoing in Yemen), creating even more war zones and unlivable areas. Vast swathes of foreign countries have been rendered unsafe.

Yes, these efforts create the circumstances in which people need to seek refuge for safety.
 
Last edited:

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,468
923
118
Country
USA
We've had this conversation multiple times about...
Pretty confident you're thinking of someone else.

People seek refuge from warfare, destruction and instability at home. The US has waged various wars overseas, often toppling the government and failing to replace it with a stable or representative substitute. The US military has been known to obliterate residential areas and hospitals in the countries in which it is involved. It has also effectively sponsored other expansionist military efforts (such as that currently ongoing in Yemen), creating even more war zones and areas. Vast swathes of foreign countries have been rendered unsafe.

Yes, these efforts create the circumstances in which people need to seek refuge for safety.
Sure, but you're not talking about current day Guatemala. The current migration crisis out of central America has decidedly occurred after the era of US interventionism in the region. People crossing the southern US border aren't fleeing US bombs.
 
Last edited:

Revnak

We must imagine Sisyphus horny
Legacy
May 25, 2020
2,944
3,099
118
Country
USA
But they are fleeing the repercussions of a century and a half of US interventionism and aggressive foreign policy in the Americas, especially in the last fifty years or so with the War on Drugs. They aren't fleeing literal US bombs, but a lot of the social issues plaguing the nations they are migrating from are indirectly caused by the US constant meddling in domestic politics to ensure US friendly regimes are in power.
They’re also quite often still fleeing very literal US bombs. School of the Americas is still an ongoing thing, despite various rebrandings, as the recent coup attempts in Venezuela and Bolivia demonstrate.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,468
923
118
Country
USA
But they are fleeing the repercussions of a century and a half of US interventionism and aggressive foreign policy in the Americas, especially in the last fifty years or so with the War on Drugs. They aren't fleeing literal US bombs, but a lot of the social issues plaguing the nations they are migrating from are indirectly caused by the US constant meddling in domestic politics to ensure US friendly regimes are in power.
And by total coincidence I'm sure, once the US friendly regimes are out of power, people begin fleeing the countries.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,029
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
You think closed borders were preventing a crisis of illegal immigration?
The substitution of "refugees" for "illegal immigrants" hasn't gone unnoticed. Nor the unseemly implications that go along with it.
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 1, 2016
2,069
1,206
118
Country
United States
You think closed borders were preventing a crisis of illegal immigration?
Refugees are legal immigrants.....

Did you not know that or do you just not care? Alternatively, this could just be your unconscious bias against these people whether that's due to race, wealth, or simply not "winning" the genetic lottery to be born in the US.