IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags DeSantis , electioneering , florida , immigration

Reply
Old 26th September 2022, 07:18 PM   #601
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 27,904
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I know I can't do that. If could do that I wouldn't be saying I don't know the correct answer. I would be saying I know the answer and here is the evidence.

Your repeating the same source over and over doesn't make it any better. If it's really so important to you that I, some anonymous person on the internet, change my mind from "they might all be illegal" to "they are all illegal" then find an expert to confirm it.

For the record here, newyorkguy just presented a link to support "RY is right". I don't accept his source either. It's biased. I had already seen it and did not think that it settled the matter.
I've given several sources, not "the same source".

NYG's post:
Quote:
Someone who believes they are legally entitled to be granted asylum in the United States is to go to a border checkpoint and request asylum. That is a legal process protected by both US and international law. Legally they have not entered the United States until they are accepted as asylum seekers by the people at the border.
Yes, they have the right to request asylum. That is not in dispute. But notice the highlighted part: they did NOT go to a border checkpoint. I've said that repeatedly.

Requesting asylum is a right, but crossing at a point that is not an immigration checkpoint is not legal.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2022, 08:39 PM   #602
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 12,664
Following the end of WWII many nations, including the United States, began to adopt policies to protect persons fleeing "well-founded fears of persecution." One of the factors driving this was the certain knowledge that many of those murdered in Nazi Germany might have survived if they had been able to flee, knowing other nations would accept them. Two landmarks.
Quote:
  • 1948 - U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared that “everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.”
  • 1950 - For the first time, America adopted a legal provision to allow people at risk of persecution to remain in this country, the precursor of today’s asylum provision.
Well Founded Fear documentary website
None of this 'just happened.' The right to seek asylum is well-established both in U.S. and international law.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2022, 10:34 PM   #603
Lurch
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,285
To the froth-flecked anti-immigrant ragers, it would appear that a singular, brief moment of illegality in setting foot across the border is in no way ameliorated by immediately presenting to authorities in the legal act of claiming asylum. In their fevered minds the initial act is technically determinitave to the exclusion of all else.

Not that even the fully legal course adhered to by other 'undesirables' escapes their ire, but here there are no grounds to justifiably (in their view) vomit their venom in discriminating company.

Last edited by Lurch; 26th September 2022 at 10:36 PM.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2022, 11:01 PM   #604
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 27,904
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Following the end of WWII many nations, including the United States, began to adopt policies to protect persons fleeing "well-founded fears of persecution." One of the factors driving this was the certain knowledge that many of those murdered in Nazi Germany might have survived if they had been able to flee, knowing other nations would accept them. Two landmarks.


None of this 'just happened.' The right to seek asylum is well-established both in U.S. and international law.
I don't think anyone is denying that the right to seek asylum exists.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:20 AM   #605
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 27,904
Maybe this will clear things up for some people:

Quote:
Did the immigrants sent to Martha's Vineyard enter the U.S. illegally?

There is a political debate over whether people who cross the border to apply for asylum are entering the country illegally. DeSantis and others say that people who come in without any prior authorization are doing so illegally, even if they ultimately apply for asylum.

"America is apparently the only nation on earth where you can enter by violating our laws and then a week later sue the government whose laws you violated," Rubio said in a Sept. 21 Instagram post.

Immigrant rights advocates argue that because physical presence in the U.S. is a requirement to apply for asylum, their entry should not be considered illegal, even if they were apprehended by or turned themselves into Border Patrol agents.

Debate aside, immigration experts told PolitiFact that people have the legal right to seek asylum in the United States.

"While people who present themselves at the border to claim asylum may not have status at the time of their arrival at the border, they are exercising their right to request asylum," said Bush-Joseph, from the Migration Policy Institute.

One thing is clear: Once people have asylum applications in process, they are allowed to remain in the country as they await a resolution of their immigration case.

Notice that the immigrant rights advocates don't claim they did enter legally, only that they should not be considered illegal.


From the Washington Examiner:

Quote:
This is the simple fact: It is illegal to enter the U.S. without authorization, as all the Venezuelans did when they waded across the Rio Grande into Texas. Again: It is not legal to do that — wading across the Rio Grande is not a legal way to enter the U.S.
Quote:
"If you run across the border and you don't stop and talk to an official, that's called entering without inspection," said Joe Edlow, a former acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. "That is a federal offense, and you can be prosecuted for that. It is a criminal law, so your breaking that law has no bearing on your reason for entering the United States. There is no defense in that law as written that says, 'I was coming in to seek asylum.'"
Quote:
"The Venezuelans (and other border-jumpers) are using an asylum claim as a defense against deportation," noted Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors stricter immigration enforcement. "They can't even make the asylum claim until they're in removal proceedings for having entered illegally."

So the illegal border crossers are in removal proceedings. Why are they in removal proceedings? Because they entered the U.S. illegally.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:39 AM   #606
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 19,069
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
That's a pretty good quote. There are probably also people working at Burger King who could have been star running backs in the NFL, under different circumstances.

Who cares.
have you noticed that the same argument can be made about Abortion?
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:07 AM   #607
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,676
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
To the froth-flecked anti-immigrant ragers, it would appear that a singular, brief moment of illegality in setting foot across the border is in no way ameliorated by immediately presenting to authorities in the legal act of claiming asylum. In their fevered minds the initial act is technically determinitave to the exclusion of all else.

Not that even the fully legal course adhered to by other 'undesirables' escapes their ire, but here there are no grounds to justifiably (in their view) vomit their venom in discriminating company.
Racists and bigots almost always out themselves eventually. This is especially so when they are pressured into justifying the unjustifiable, excusing the inexcusable and defending the indefensible.

That is when the spittle-filled fury comes out; the morally repugnant attacks on "The Other"; labeling them as criminals and disease-ridden; implying they are subhuman and intellectually backwards; vilifying them for having the misfortune to be born in what the racists and bigots refer to as "****-hole countries"

That is when we find out who and what they really are... and that what we have suspected about them is in fact the truth. They tell is with their own words!!
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:15 AM   #608
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 56,838
Looks as if Hurricane is going to hit Florida hard,but De Santis seems more interested in his stupid political stunts then in protecting thepeople of Florida.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 02:02 AM   #609
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,676
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Looks as if Hurricane is going to hit Florida hard,but De Santis seems more interested in his stupid political stunts then in protecting thepeople of Florida.

Off to Cancún in 3... 2... 1...
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 03:45 AM   #610
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,646
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Skipped learning anything about what happened before commenting, eh?
Are you surprised? Republicans find facts anathematic.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 03:49 AM   #611
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,646
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
Not very impressive. That cage photo is from 2014 during the Obama/Biden Admin. Chain link fence enclosures have been the norm for some time in detention facilities.
You're lying again.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 03:55 AM   #612
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,646
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
The largest group of illegal immigrants is caused by...overstaying a legally issued visa.
Ah, facts.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 04:55 AM   #613
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 12,664
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
...Notice that the immigrant rights advocates don't claim they did enter legally, only that they should not be considered illegal.
Below this statement are quotes from the Washington Examiner which is a right wing news outlet. The Examiner quotes the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. The Center for Immigration Studies is an anti-immigration think tank which the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified as a hate group. I don't find these to be "immigrant rights advocates."
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 04:57 AM   #614
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 106,004
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Looks as if Hurricane is going to hit Florida hard,but De Santis seems more interested in his stupid political stunts then in protecting thepeople of Florida.
God's punishment for DeSantis's actions?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 06:03 AM   #615
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Maybe this will clear things up for some people:
The Washington Examiner??? The paper that spread the "prayer rugs found on my border ranch" story. Good gawd.

But thanks for confirming the issue I'm asking about is debatable and doesn't have a clear answer yet. If you can't drop this how about taking it to a new thread (not promising I'll join)?
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 06:32 AM   #616
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Below this statement are quotes from the Washington Examiner which is a right wing news outlet. The Examiner quotes the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. The Center for Immigration Studies is an anti-immigration think tank which the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified as a hate group. I don't find these to be "immigrant rights advocates."
Stacyhs didn't adequately explain that or quote it clearly. The statement you quoted attributed to immigrant rights activists comes from the Austin American-Herald. It doesn't seem to identify those advocates. But note that is says they should not be considered illegals.

ETA: Here is an attributed quote from the conclusion of the Austin Ameican-Herald article.

Quote:
One thing is clear: Once people have asylum applications in process, they are allowed to remain in the country as they await a resolution of their immigration case.

The same law that provides for the removal of people who are found to be inadmissible carves out an explicit exception for asylum seekers, Legomsky said. That law requires immigration officers to refer applicants for asylum interviews, not remove them.

Asylum seekers, he said, "have the unqualified right to remain in the United States unless and until their applications are denied."
Basically, the one trustworthy source she cited says the issue is debatable.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 27th September 2022 at 06:45 AM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 06:43 AM   #617
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Out back preparing the bunker for the next Civil War
Posts: 51,771
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
I still reckon it is just a continued attempt to bait posters here who won't drop the dead squirrel.
Exactly. EVERYBODY STOP PLAYING WITH THE DEAD SQUIRREL!!! This thread has become nothing but bickering with a dead squirrel who is making you look like fools! And he's right! You are fools!
__________________
Counting the days to Civil War II.
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 07:12 AM   #618
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Out back preparing the bunker for the next Civil War
Posts: 51,771
I hope DeathSantis stays home in the governor's mansion for Hurricane Ian. I hope Ian destroys it. Unless, of course, he fled to Mexico like Ted Crud.
__________________
Counting the days to Civil War II.
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 07:24 AM   #619
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 12,664
Are the attempts to address the illegal entry issue bickering or foolish? I don't really agree because I think it goes to the heart of what DeSantis did and the support he gets from the right.

The wingers want to establish that the asylum seekers 'entered the country illegally.' Therefore 'they broke the law,' and what do we call people who break the law? As the library cop told Jerry on a Seinfeld episode, "We call them criminals!" That plays into the following right wing meme. "Biden's granting asylum to criminals. Or trying to." As I quoted someone writing on another forum, that's bad because:
Quote:
People's lives might literally be at stake if the wrong kind of idiocy is allowed to spread too far.
So I'm willing to take the 'fool' hit because in this case I think it's important to push back.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg What do you call people who break the law.jpg (102.9 KB, 5 views)
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 07:47 AM   #620
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 7,287
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The wingers want to establish that the asylum seekers 'entered the country illegally.' Therefore 'they broke the law,' and what do we call people who break the law?

...

So I'm willing to take the 'fool' hit because in this case I think it's important to push back.

What exactly are you "pushing back" against? Reality?

First, it is painfully obvious that these individuals entered the country illegally. Because "unauthorized" is really not an ambiguous term. To most, anyway.

But, let's pretend they didn't, just for fun. There are still tens of thousands being apprehended each month, entering illegally. And, at least at some points, those with special exceptions make up nearly half of them. And the administration embraces these illegals upon capture.

At the end of day, whether the MV Venezuelans entered legally or not (they didn't), they are small potatoes compared to the number of illegals with exceptions that are swarming our border.

As I have said repeatedly, this stunt by DeSantis is symbolic. And it is doing a good job of drawing attention to the way that Dem's are embracing criminal action at our border, apparently.
__________________
Break on through to the other side.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 08:48 AM   #621
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 12,664
What am I pushing back against?

Attached Images
File Type: jpg It is annoying.jpg (92.2 KB, 4 views)
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 09:01 AM   #622
arayder
Illuminator
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,255
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
As I have said repeatedly, this stunt by DeSantis is symbolic. And it is doing a good job of drawing attention to the way that Dem's are embracing criminal action at our border, apparently.
That's completely arse backwards.

DeSantis interfered with the lawfull immigration of the people he hoodwinked into getting on the bus to Martha's Vineyard.

You can roll around in the little misinformation bubble you have created for yourself. But the truth is you are wrong.
arayder is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 09:09 AM   #623
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 7,996
Here I sit, still waiting for somebody to quantify the harm done to the richest country that ever existed by immigrants, whether legal or illegal.

Or interlegal? Is that a category? A spectrum? Hey, where's Steersman when you need him?
__________________
If you would learn a man's character, give him authority.

If you would ruin a man's character, let him seize power.
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 09:42 AM   #624
arayder
Illuminator
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,255
Originally Posted by sackett View Post
Here I sit, still waiting for somebody to quantify the harm done to the richest country that ever existed by immigrants, whether legal or illegal.

Or interlegal? Is that a category? A spectrum? Hey, where's Steersman when you need him?
Judging by his age and location I suspect our impulse powered poster was around during the Mariel boat-lift* which has colored his thinking ever since.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift
arayder is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:00 AM   #625
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,646
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Evidence for these three claims - you know what I'm going to say next...

Put up or shut up!
Given their unquestioning lapping up of anti-vaccine and anti-medicine nonsense, it's USAian Republicans who are "infectious" .
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:01 AM   #626
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,646
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Has this been evidenced?
Warpie doesn't do "evidence" , that would require thought and effort.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:27 AM   #627
arayder
Illuminator
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,255
The ruse is to present your premise as your conclusion. That way when you are questioned about your conclusion you can just repeat your premise. . .and vis-versa.
arayder is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:29 AM   #628
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,391
Using whatever semantics you like... there is a fundamental difference between coming to seek asylum and coming in to reside clandestinely.

Why should they be discussed as if they have the same motivations, the same expected behavior, the same impact?

I suggest it is because opposition to illegal residents is well-engrained and it's easier to galvanize opposition around that to both populations by conflating the issue, than it is to sell that we should be preventing people from requesting asylum. It's a cynical trick not based in the reality of the situation.

An example of this is the focus on "sanctuary cities", a situation which applies to the second group but not generally the first. Nobody's set to deport asylum seekers if someone checks their status. They're already in the system awaiting their appropriate hearings.
__________________


Last edited by gnome; 27th September 2022 at 11:33 AM.
gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:47 AM   #629
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 19,675
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
As I have said repeatedly, this stunt by DeSantis is symbolic. And it is doing a good job of drawing attention to the way that Dem's are embracing criminal action at our border, apparently.

Of course it's symbolic. As if it could possibly be anything else. The Republicans have no more desire to stop illegal immigration than the Democrats do, so they're limited to ineffectual ("symbolic" LOL) stunts.
__________________
A zřmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 11:53 AM   #630
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 27,904
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Below this statement are quotes from the Washington Examiner which is a right wing news outlet. The Examiner quotes the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. The Center for Immigration Studies is an anti-immigration think tank which the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified as a hate group. I don't find these to be "immigrant rights advocates."
You misread. Neither I nor the quote ever said that The Center for Immigration Studies IS an "immigrant rights advocates" group.

I'm well aware that the National Examiner is a right wing news outlet but the other multiple sources I quoted and cited were being handwaved away with the argument that it isn't clear that this quote from the New York Times means they entered illegally: "Venezuelans who had crossed the southwest border without authorization and had turned themselves in to border officials" (New York Times) . The response to that was "When that person says "without authorization" do they mean "no passport or visa"? If so, that doesn't make the person illegal." Apparently, RY is questioning if "without authorization" means "without permission". By its very definition, it means exactly that: "authorization: a document giving permission or authority" (Oxford Dictionary).

According to US Customs and Border Protection, 08/15/2022 :

Quote:
"Under Title 8, those who attempt to enter the United States without authorization, and who are unable to establish a legal basis to remain in the United States (such as a valid asylum claim), will be quickly removed.
IOW: they entered illegally but can remain legally if they have a valid asylum claim. Nowhere does it mention exceptions for TPS countries like Venezuela.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:03 PM   #631
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Apparently, RY is questioning if "without authorization" means "without permission".
No, that would be stupid since those are definitionally the same.

I'm questioning whether "without authorization" equates to "illegal" (you should be able to tell because that's the word I used in quote you supplied from me). And it's apparent it doesn't. Your own quote establishes it's not a cause to deport you if you can establish a valid asylum claim.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:06 PM   #632
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 27,904
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
The Washington Examiner??? The paper that spread the "prayer rugs found on my border ranch" story. Good gawd.

But thanks for confirming the issue I'm asking about is debatable and doesn't have a clear answer yet. If you can't drop this how about taking it to a new thread (not promising I'll join)?
You brought the question up. I've answered it multiple times with citations. Is it that you don't understand or don't want to?

According to US Customs and Border Protection, 08/15/2022 :

Quote:
"Under Title 8, those who attempt to enter the United States without authorization, and who are unable to establish a legal basis to remain in the United States (such as a valid asylum claim), will be quickly removed."


IOW: they entered illegally but can remain legally if they have a valid asylum claim. Nowhere does it mention exceptions for TPS countries like Venezuela.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:22 PM   #633
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,676
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
What exactly are you "pushing back" against? Reality?

First, it is painfully obvious that these individuals entered the country illegally. Because "unauthorized" is really not an ambiguous term. To most, anyway.

But, let's pretend they didn't, just for fun. There are still tens of thousands being apprehended each month, entering illegally. And, at least at some points, those with special exceptions make up nearly half of them. And the administration embraces these illegals upon capture.

At the end of day, whether the MV Venezuelans entered legally or not (they didn't), they are small potatoes compared to the number of illegals with exceptions that are swarming our border.

As I have said repeatedly, this stunt by DeSantis is symbolic. And it is doing a good job of drawing attention to the way that Dem's are embracing criminal action at our border, apparently.
Can you please explain the procedure that an asylum seeker would need to follow if they are not permitted to enter the US at all in order to seek asylum. Perhaps you think they should apply for asylum while in their own country, and wait there for 6 months while their application is processed, when any attempt to do so would involve dealing with their own authorities, an act is very likely to get them killed?
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:26 PM   #634
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
"Under Title 8, those who attempt to enter the United States without authorization, and who are unable to establish a legal basis to remain in the United States (such as a valid asylum claim), will be quickly removed."

IOW: they entered illegally but can remain legally if they have a valid asylum claim. Nowhere does it mention exceptions for TPS countries like Venezuela.
Your arguments are becoming increasingly desperate and stupid. It is definitely not illegal to enter the country without passport/visa to request asylum. You've demonstrated an absurd reading of that sentence.

You're not even attaching that to the requirement that they enter outside of a checkpoint. Isn't it obvious that you are reading that sentence incorrectly? Your interpretation would make it impossible to request asylum anywhere except an embassy.

At this point it's not even clear that the requirement to enter at a checkpoint isn't trumped by the asylum laws.

If this is such a slam dunk then find a good argument.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:26 PM   #635
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,676
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
No, that would be stupid since those are definitionally the same.

I'm questioning whether "without authorization" equates to "illegal" (you should be able to tell because that's the word I used in quote you supplied from me). And it's apparent it doesn't. Your own quote establishes it's not a cause to deport you if you can establish a valid asylum claim.
Correct. It is not illegal to cross a border from one country to another without authorization; but it is illegal to do so and stay there unless you are applying for asylum.
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 12:35 PM   #636
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Can you please explain the procedure that an asylum seeker would need to follow if they are not permitted to enter the US at all in order to seek asylum.
Yeah. I was typing a similar question to the other person on this bandwagon while you were typing that (and I see you've seen that).

I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that the people we are discussing* are not illegal in any sense of the word and that it doesn't even depend on entering at a checkpoint. The simple reason I have for that is that the only judgement I see coming from a judge is that they are legally in the country while their asylum claim is judged (for 18 months as I understand it). The process I see is investigation followed by declaration of demonstrated legal status. No intermediate "you're illegal until proved otherwise" stage as far as I can tell.

You've got the normal presumption of innocence during the investigation and for that matter I don't even know if they are charged with anything during the investigation.

* "People we are discussing" = people who make their asylum claim at the earliest opportunity.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:01 PM   #637
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 7,287
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Yeah. I was typing a similar question to the other person on this bandwagon while you were typing that (and I see you've seen that).

I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that the people we are discussing* are not illegal in any sense of the word and that it doesn't even depend on entering at a checkpoint. The simple reason I have for that is that the only judgement I see coming from a judge is that they are legally in the country while their asylum claim is judged (for 18 months as I understand it). The process I see is investigation followed by declaration of demonstrated legal status. No intermediate "you're illegal until proved otherwise" stage as far as I can tell.

You've got the normal presumption of innocence during the investigation and for that matter I don't even know if they are charged with anything during the investigation.

* "People we are discussing" = people who make their asylum claim at the earliest opportunity.

Yeah, it's like totally legal for immigrants to cross a river, navigate a tunnel, or scale a wall to enter into the US. As long as they have a special exception, no problem.

Why don't we think for a second here. What if they don't get caught and they go about their merry way, without seeking asylum? Is it illegal then? Of course. So, any non-prosecution hinges on events that take place after they have already broken the law. It is a misdemeanor for the first offense, btw.

Quote:
The first offense is a misdemeanor according to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which prohibits non-nationals from entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place which has not been designated by an immigration officer, and also prohibits non-nationals from eluding inspection by immigration officers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_entry

I mean, this is supposed to be a forum of "critical thought". This is just embarrassing.
__________________
Break on through to the other side.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:10 PM   #638
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
Do you fade out before reading to the end of a post? See my last sentence.

Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Why don't we think for a second here. What if they don't get caught and they go about their merry way, without seeking asylum? Is it illegal then? Of course.
That's stupid. Are you illegal for the few seconds it might take you to get your passport out at the border?

BTW in regards to "if they don't get caught". Look at the video I cited earlier. The people in that video headed directly to the border patrol and some sat down in front of them. It looks like they even waited on the correct side of the border.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 27th September 2022 at 01:17 PM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:11 PM   #639
arayder
Illuminator
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,255
His cold cold heart our impulse powered poster doesn't seem able to fathom that people and families could be so ravaged by violence, conflict and persecution in their home countries that their only choice is to flee to the safety of a more stable country.

To him these cases are just "sob stories" told by deceased riff raft who are trying to game the system.

I sense a bit of projection.
arayder is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2022, 01:13 PM   #640
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 7,287
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Do you fade out before reading to the end of a post? See my last sentence.


That's stupid. Are you illegal for the few seconds it might take you to get your passport out at the border?

BTW in regards to "if they don't get caught". Look at the video I cited earlier. The people in that video headed directly to the border patrol and some sat down in front of them. It looks like they even waited on the correct side fo the border.

You are missing the entire damn point that they have already broken the law by crossing illegally.

Quote:
The first offense is a misdemeanor according to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which prohibits non-nationals from entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place which has not been designated by an immigration officer, and also prohibits non-nationals from eluding inspection by immigration officers.

Good Lord. Like I said, embarrassing. Clearly you won't let facts deter you. Carry on.
__________________
Break on through to the other side.

Last edited by Warp12; 27th September 2022 at 01:15 PM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:52 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.