Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
GlitterRose

US Senator denied access

543 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

GlitterRose
1 minute ago, Michelle said:

Our local women's shelter is totally anonymous. You can't take a donation to them directly because it is never revealed by the staff where the facility is. If you want to donate you have to take it to a central location that distributes all the donations.

Sometime there are mitigating circumstances we aren't privy to. Not working with them directly, but hearing some of their plights, made me understand why this is necessary. I regularly donate clothes and they volunteer in the distribution center. I've gotten to know quite a few who have confided in me.

All this is by no means a new thing.

We're not talking about a place where we hide children people are trying to harm. 

We're talking about ripping children from their mothers' arms and sending them sometimes thousands of miles away to facilities no one can even inspect. 

It's sad that you are trying to justify this. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
1 minute ago, ChaosRose said:

We're talking about ripping children from their mothers' arms and sending them sometimes thousands of miles away to facilities no one can even inspect. 

Sometimes their mother's are the ones they need to be protected from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
3 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Sessions announced this beauty. I'm sure it comes from on high. 

It's meant as a cruelty. It's supposed to deter people from coming here at all, even to seek asylum. 

It might very well work, but at what cost?

We sure might have to take down the Statue of Liberty. 

Well, if this escalates any further as to the detrimental affects on separating children from their mothers. This could very well back-fire on the government in a colossal way. If stories should emerge of any type of abuses committed against children whilst in these facilities whom are not being properly protected, cared for etc....well, it certainly wont look too good for Mr Sessions and Co..

One thing people usually do not tolerate very well...is any form of abuse where children are concerned. I think just separating them from their parents is already a form of psychological abuse.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
14 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Sometimes their mother's are the ones they need to be protected from.

Yes, but we can't lump all mothers into the same basket.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
President-Elect Acidhead

Jeff Merkley

you are absolutely nuts if you believe a word this guy is insinuating

i believe most of you, except a couple, are more intelligent than this

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
4 minutes ago, Astra. said:

Yes, but we can't lump all mothers into the same basket.

That's true. The thing is, we don't have any idea who the people are coming illegally over the border. Do we allow them to live in migrant tent camps or do we try to find out if they have a legitimate reason for being here? With checks and balances there is red tape.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
2 hours ago, and then said:

My guess is that part of the reason for the segregation is that once the word gets out down south that their children will be removed from them, a LOT of them may decide not to feel free to come and break our laws.

Added - and this from Michelle..?:

Quote

Sometimes their mother's are the ones they need to be protected from.

:td::no:

Words fail me.  I can't say what I think of those attitudes and remain within forum rules.

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
1 minute ago, Michelle said:

That's true. The thing is, we don't have any idea who the people are coming illegally over the border. Do we allow them to live in migrant tent camps or do we try to find out if they have a legitimate reason for being here? With checks and balances there is red tape.

Of course I understand that. And you certainly have a right as to who you are allowing into your country. We also have strict guide lines. But was it really necessary to separate the children from their parents ?....Iv'e gotten the impression so far, that's it's turned into a mess more than anything else.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
16 minutes ago, acidhead said:

Jeff Merkley

you are absolutely nuts if you believe a word this guy is insinuating

i believe most of you, except a couple, are more intelligent than this

Putting your partisan views aside for a moment, I thought the man was being sincere with his concern.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
2 hours ago, and then said:

That is a GUESS on my part.  Yeah, it is a hard thing for the children to endure but let's not lose sight of the fact that no one is going to these countries and coercing or abducting any of these mothers and children.  THEY (the mothers) are making this choice.  If this tack causes a few thousand not to make the trip then it lessens the pressure on our country and facilities.  The bottom line is that America does not owe the world a place to live as well as free food and shelter any more than OZ does...

Don’t go measuring your humanity by the standards of the Australian Federal Government And Then, you’ll find yourself in a very dark place if you do.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

FWIW if I was this senator, once the coppers were called my next words would have been “well, might as well give them a good reason to arrest me” and push my way into thr facility. 

Possibly after Nutting the bloke who called the police.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
30 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

I can't say what I think of those attitudes and remain within forum rules.

Pretty much my daily struggle in this political section...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Words fail me.  I can't say what I think of those attitudes and remain within forum rules.

When I have people in my own city outright selling or pimping out their kids for money? Or do you think they are all a different ethnicity than me and that is what makes the difference? Poor is poor and then trash is trash. It knows no ethnicity.

I have my own experiences with my poor, white, trash extended family. It's not prejudice...it's a fact of life. It extends beyond ethnicity.

Edited by Michelle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
1 hour ago, ChaosRose said:

He was only denied entry to the child holding facility at the old Walmart.

He was allowed access to a processing facility and some sort of mission run by a church. 

It was the processing facility in Texas where he saw the children in cages.

He also called and tried to set up a tour of the Walmart facility before coming down there, and he was denied.

This is what prompted his visit.

Also, he's not just anyone.

He's a US Senator.

If he can't get in and make sure everything's ok, then I don't know who would be able to. 

Would child welfare / service officers have any legal rights to gain access to this particular facility Rose as to check on the children. Surely they would also have healthcare / medical staff on site. Especially in light of the number of children that are being kept there. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

I would advise any country not to accept people in my own family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
3 hours ago, Michelle said:

I would advise any country not to accept people in my own family.

Oh, I hear ya!...some of them can certainly be a pain.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
9 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

The "choice" they are making when seeking asylum is to flee for their lives or stand still and be killed. 

That's not really much of a choice, and I would not consider someone a criminal for trying to survive and trying to keep their children alive. 

Liberals wrongly link 2014 photo showing illegal immigrants in cages to Trump administration

Some liberal activists and journalists scrambled Sunday and Monday to delete tweets and social media posts incorrectly linking the Trump administration to an old photo of detained illegal-immigrant minors being held in a cage.

The 2014 shot was actually taken during the Obama administration.

The photo went viral as liberals — perhaps spurred by unrelated reports that Homeland Security “lost track of” almost 1,500 illegal-immigrant minors after they were released — mistakenly assumed the shot was taken much more recently, and rushed to criticize Trump administration “cruelty.”

“This is happening right now, and the only debate that matters is how we force our government to get these kids back to their families as fast as humanly possible,” former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau said on Twitter.

Mr. Favreau deleted the tweet, though not before it had been screen-captured.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/28/illegal-immigrants-cages-photo-2014-enrages-libera/

 

The hypocrisy is never ending with the democrats or whatever they are.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

well most would consider someone who brakes into their home ,criminal, even if trying to survive. ring the bell, ask permission,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
31 minutes ago, aztek said:

well most would consider someone who brakes into their home ,criminal, even if trying to survive. ring the bell, ask permission,

These ones legally applied for asylum. They did ring the bell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Just now, Likely Guy said:

These ones legally applied for asylum. They did ring the bell.

since i know plenty of immigrants who came here with kids, i do not believe that for a second, if they did apply and got permission, aka visa, they would not be locked up and kids separated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
10 minutes ago, aztek said:

since i know plenty of immigrants who came here with kids, i do not believe that for a second, if they did apply and got permission, aka visa, they would not be locked up and kids separated.

There's a difference between a legal asylum seeker and a legal immigrant. One applied at the border, the other applied before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Just now, Likely Guy said:

There's a difference between a legal asylum seeker and a legal immigrant. One applied at the border, the other applied before.

no, it is not like that at all, but thanks for showing me how clueless you are about our immigration laws,

feel free to read https://www.uscis.gov/

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles

There is too much that we don't know about this,   Too many people are jumping to conclusions.   Perhaps there was a valid reason the child was removed from the mother.   Perhaps not.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Just now, Myles said:

There is too much that we don't know about this,   Too many people are jumping to conclusions.   Perhaps there was a valid reason the child was removed from the mother.   Perhaps not.  

of course there was, adult detention centers do not allow children,and no one with completed paperwork and permission to enter gets detained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey

We have one side of the story, now here's the other. Or rather, here's some clarification on how the law is actually written when it comes to illegal immigrant families crossing the border:

Quote

"Democrats like Merkley are insisting that the best way to fix the law is just not to enforce the law at all. Just anyone who comes across the border with a kid, we let go straight into society. This is why Merkley is in favor of sanctuary cities; this is why he’s been in favor of catch-and-release policies that allow illegal immigrant parents to just be released and then they never show up for their court date. If you’re going to enforce immigration law, under the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, you must take the kids away from the parents.

That’s not the fault of a bunch of conservatives; that’s the fault of a bunch of people on the Left who sit on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and are beloved by Democrats the world over."

A few reasons law enforcement might separate children from parents:

  • There is no way to immediately determine if the children are the biological kids of the parents accompanying them
  • Law enforcement needs to verify the children are not being brought in to sex slavery
  • Without paperwork, there is no way to determine the true history of the children

All these problems can be solved by following the legal immigration path, ensuring children don't have to be separated from their parents in the first place. You don't have to take Shapiro's words as gospel because the truth is usually some where in the middle. Yes, (illegal) children are being separated from their (illegal) parents at the border and placed in holding/processing centers but there is a good reason for that and at the end of the day, the law states the children cannot be held for longer than 20 days. This Senator may very well have been pulling a stunt for the cameras to make a shallow point about illegal immigration. 

Remember, Democrats are counting on illegal votes more than ever so it's in THEIR best interests to stop enforcing the law, not yours. They are the party of deception and "useful idiots" - they managed to garner support for "Sanctuary Cities", after all. Bubbles of potentially limitless votes. If they had nothing to hide, I wouldn't need to post the rest of the facts here. A large part of the public reaction to this is due to ignorance of the existing laws and the Dems are counting on that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.