Texas Sends Armed Troops to Defend the Border

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
The border crisis that Obama has manufactured for political purposes only seems to be getting worse, as illegals pour in hoping for amnesty and being dumped at bus stations in Texas and Arizona by the feds.

Texas has had enough of it, which is why they’ve decided to stop waiting on the feds to do their job and just shut down the border themselves.

The state’s Republican leadership has approved of $1.3 million per week in additional border security to stop the wave of illegal immigration into Texas.

Read Full Article here ===> http://conservativetribune.com/tx-armed-troops-at-border/
 

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
Armed Mexican Troops Have Crossed the U.S. Border More Than 300 Times Since 2004

McALLEN, TEXAS – Armed Mexican military troops and Mexican law enforcement officials have crossed the United States border more than 300 times since 2004, according to a written response from the Department of Homeland Security to a California congressman. The offenders have reportedly never been prosecuted for crossing illegally with loaded weapons.

House Armed Services Committee member Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) said that DHS confirmed on Tuesday that 152 of these incidents involved a total of 525 armed subjects. Hunter has been fighting for the release of Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, who has been held in a Mexican prison for more than two months since he crossed into Mexico through the San Ysidro Border in San Diego after he allegedly took a wrong turn.

“In light of the incarceration of Andrew Tahmooressi, who is still in Mexican custody, I asked DHS to provide data specifically on Mexican military and law enforcement incursions,” said Rep. Hunter in a press release. “DHS states that the number of incursions is ‘relatively few,’ but that is a misrepresentation of the frequency of these occurrences, which Mexico invites through its activities along the international border.”

Hunter said there “is a clear lack of consistency among DHS in handling these incidents, especially in cases of unauthorized incursions with armed authorities.”

In fact, a 2006 DHS map obtained by this reporter revealed that the Mexican military had crossed into the United States 216 times from 1996 to 2006. One of the maps had the seal of the president’s National Drug Control Policy.

U.S. officials, Border Patrol agents and law enforcement officials working along the border claim that some of the incursions are not accidental, but that members of the Mexican military are being paid by the drug cartels to aide in the movement of narcotics and contraband across the border.

“We’ve had Mexican military cross our border here in the Rio Grande Valley sector,” said a Border Patrol agent, who spoke on condition of anonymity as the agent was not authorized to speak on the matter. “It’s not always by accident, sometimes we just process them and send them back — other times they just return on their own.”

Hunter said in Tahmooressi’s case, Mexico has “shown its intolerance for the same action that its police and military initiated hundreds of times in the last several years alone.”

Tahmoorhessi had been seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder in San Diego and was traveling with all of his belongings in his car, including his firearms. TheBlaze was the first to report on the 911 call made by Tahmoorhessi when Mexican border police began to surround his car at the crossing in San Ysidro. The Marine was meritoriously promoted to sergeant on the battlefield in Afghanistan and had survived several attacks while serving in combat.

“It’s time for the U.S. to reconsider its treatment of the incidents and send a direct message to Mexico that incursions won’t be tolerated along the international border,” Hunter added.

According to documentation provided by the DHS, there have been 81 armed encounters, of which a total of 131 subjects were detained.

“While the number of unauthorized incursions by Mexican authorities is relatively few, it is imperative for our officer safety to handle each situation assertively but with sensitivity and professionalism,” the DHS told Hunter.
 

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
White House plans more detention centers to address border crisis


Obama administration officials announced new measures Friday to detain and process an influx of families streaming over the southern U.S. border in recent months, primarily from Central America.

Officials plan to open new temporary immigration detention centers to house the families, and will send more immigration judges and government lawyers to the epicenter of the crisis in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas to speed processing of immigrants’ cases, officials said during a Friday briefing.

“We are surging our resources to increase our capacity to detain,” said Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas.

He would not say whether the new detention facilities would be on military bases, where officials have opened other shelters for immigrant youths in recent weeks. The government currently operates only one detention facility for immigrant families, a transitional facility in Berks County, Pa., which can hold about 80 individuals.

The T. Don Hutto detention center in Taylor, Texas, stopped holding families in 2009 after lawsuits exposed poor conditions for children. Friday’s announcement marks the first time that immigration officials have expanded the use of family detention centers in more than five years.

Mayorkas emphasized that the new facilities would be equipped to detain families humanely, and that officials will also use alternatives to detention, such as ankle monitors for those released pending immigration court proceedings.

He said 39,000 adults had been caught crossing the southwestern border with children from Oct. 1, 2013, the start of the federal government's fiscal year, through the end of May. Another 52,000 unaccompanied children had been caught as of June 15, he said.

Mayorkas said deploying National Guard troops to the border, as House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and others requested Friday, would not help.

“The question before us is how can we make the process more efficient given the surge in the number of individuals who are being apprehended, and how can we address those individuals in terms of their humanitarian claims for relief,” Mayorkas said. “That is not a process in which the National Guard is involved.”

The White House announcement came within hours after Boehner sent a letter to the president blaming his policies for the surge in illegal border crossings. "The policies of your administration have directly resulted in the belief by these immigrants that once they reach U.S. soil, they will be able to stay here indefinitely," Boehner wrote.

Boehner called for the administration to, among other things, "find a way to ensure that apprehended adults and their family members do in fact appear for their deportation hearings."

He also urged the administration to work with Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras to develop "an aggressive communications effort to fully articulate the dangers and struggles children and families will face if they attempt to migrate to the U.S." He also wrote that the Mexican government's "lax enforcement" of its own southern border was contributing to the flow.

The issue has moved center stage on Capitol Hill, with a hearing scheduled for Tuesday and lawmakers moving to allocate tens of millions of dollars to respond to the crisis.

Separately, a group of House GOP leaders also sent a letter to Obama on Friday calling for, among other things, broadcasting public service announcements on U.S.-based, Spanish-speaking television reporting on the deprivations and dangers of crossing from Central America through Mexico to the United States.
 

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
Boehner urges military help for border crisis

WASHINGTON (AP) — The leader of the U.S. House of Representatives urged President Barack Obama on Friday to send troops to the Mexican border to help deal with the surge of unaccompanied minors from Central America, calling it a "national security and humanitarian crisis."

In a letter to the president, Speaker John Boehner blamed Obama administration policies for the huge increase in children making their way here from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, and said the president must act.

The speaker's letter underscores that the issue has increasingly become a political problem for the Obama administration, which had hoped to spend the spring and summer pressuring House Republicans to pass comprehensive immigration legislation but is now increasingly occupied with the unaccompanied minor issue.

Boehner made no mention in his letter of immigration legislation and the House appears to have no inclination to move on it, particularly after the surprise primary defeat last week of Majority Leader Eric Cantor at the hands of a conservative who accused him of supporting "amnesty."

Boehner said the troops could help ensure the safety of the children and their families. And he said the State Department should work with Central American nations to help speed processing times to return children and families to their countries and to make sure that people know of the dangers of heading north.

"The policies of your administration have directly resulted in the belief by these immigrants that once they reach U.S. soil, they will be able to stay here indefinitely," Boehner wrote.

"While we understand that many of these individuals are coming to this country to escape violence and hardship in their home country, the current climate along the border and our enforcement policies are only encouraging them to risk their lives and those of their children. It is time that we confront the crisis along the border head-on through immediate and aggressive action."

The Border Patrol says the number of minors coming from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras has soared more than 1,000 percent. Administration officials have said it's largely because of conditions in their home countries, but there's also a belief among some of the migrants that they would be allowed to stay once in the U.S.

The White House had no immediate response to Boehner.
 

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
Flow of minors into U.S. is a humanitarian crisis not meat for a negative ad

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Here’s a take on a news story you don’t get much these days: Lawmakers resist pressures to turn the flood of minors coming into this country over the Mexican border illegally into a partisan blame game and persist in treating the problem sensibly, as a humanitarian issue. It’s true.

And because this influx of children over the southern border generally hasn’t been grist for the Polarization-Industrial Complex and the talk show arguers, you may not have heard a lot about it. So here is some background:

Tens of thousands of children are on the run in the Americas.

By year’s end, as many as 90,000 unaccompanied children are expected to cross the southern border into the U.S., compared to only 24,000 in 2013. They are not primarily Mexicans looking for work or economic security, but young people trying to get away from violence in Central America.

So many are coming, that Vice President Biden is in Guatemala on Friday meeting with Central American leaders to try to encourage a regional response to the crisis. And he’s also bringing a tough message to the children: Even if you make the dangerous journey, there’s no guarantee you can stay.

These unaccompanied minors illegally crossing into the U.S. are coming mainly from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. They are defying the common perceptions of illegal immigrants in America; indeed, if this were happening in another country, we would probably be calling these children refugees, not illegal minors.

Most experts inside and outside the government believe they are fleeing for safety, not for economic reasons. Honduras has the world’s highest murder rate; El Salvador and Guatemala are not far behind, ranked forth and fifth in worldwide murder rates respectively. Much of the violence they face stems from gang activity and many of the kids are fleeing forced gang recruitment.

Earlier this year, the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees interviewed 404 children who crossed into the U.S., illegally and alone, from Central America and Mexico. More than half, 58%, said they had suffered, been threatened, or feared serious harm" that might merit international protection.”

Lesly Velez, one of the authors of the UNHCR report told the National Journal that these kids are running for their lives:

"We liken the situation very much to the situation of the recruitment of child soldiers on other continents. Children are particularly vulnerable, they are susceptible to harm, they are easily terrorized, and the very fact that they are children is the single factor in the harm that they are experiencing. They are specifically being target to be recruited."

Now, not everyone sees the situation that way.

“Word has gotten out around the world about President Obama’s lax immigration enforcement policies, and it has encouraged more individuals to come to the United States illegally," said Rep. Robert Goodlatte, the Republican Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz argued at a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that “the numbers [of unaccompanied children] spike[d] dramatically” after President Obama created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program in 2012.

DACA allows some young immigrants who arrived in the country illegally as children to apply for a deportation waiver. Applicants must have been in the country since June 2007 and have arrived before they turned 16. That means DACA doesn’t actually apply to these new arrivals and that’s the message Biden is sending today.

Former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was a rare Republican leader who was pushing comprehensive reforms of immigration policy. But his dramatic downfall to an anti-immigration Tea Party candidate has clouded the future of those efforts. And some are trying to use the current border crisis as a weapon in the broader immigration fight.

So far they aren’t gaining too much traction. The White House has avoided being drawn into a political battle and Congress is approving funds to deal with the issue.

The U.S. is treating the situation mostly as a humanitarian crisis. By law, unaccompanied children caught crossing illegally from countries other than Mexico are treated differently.

After being apprehended by the Border Patrol, they must be turned over within 72 hours to a refugee resettlement office that is part of the Department of Health and Human Services. Health officials must try to find relatives or other adults in the United States who can care for them while their immigration cases move through the courts.

In response to the dramatic increase in unaccompanied child migrants this year, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted to give the Obama administration $2 billion. So many unaccompanied children have arrived in the U.S. that three special detention centers have been set up at military bases in Texas, Oklahoma and California to house them.

And the White House announced a new program to provide lawyers from children facing deportation.

The situation is obviously volatile. For example, there are accusations of abuse of these minors inside the U.S. detention centers. And the political truce could break down as the mid-term elections get closer.

But for now, it’s a man-bites-dog story: Politicians respond pragmatically to humanitarian crisis.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
YOU pointing out racism has become a joke to all but the few that wanna hang with the bully.

You are the little boy that don't understand things past a simple simple level so you cry racist. It's comical really, keep it up.
so explain to me the totally deep, non-racist meanings of some of the quotes of yours in my sig then.

be a big boy and use your words to explain yourself.

because to anyone reading those, that is the work of a racist.
 

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
so explain to me the totally deep, non-racist meanings of some of the quotes of yours in my sig then.

be a big boy and use your words to explain yourself.

because to anyone reading those, that is the work of a racist.
Would you actually read it and try to see a different perspective? I don't think you will, so I'll pass. No matter what I type, I frustrate you in debates, so it's an auto RACIST from you.

For real man, can you think of any good reason to take you seriously?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Would you actually read it and try to see a different perspective?
i'm in need of some assistance here.

can you tell me what perspective i should take when reading the first quote, where you imply that obama is from kenya? because try as i might, i can't find a non-racist perspective to that one.

ditto the last one, where you imply that blacks should just deal with denial of service at restaurants, gas stations, and other businesses because otherwise racist people would spit in their food. is there some perspective i am missing there? should blacks simply deal with denial of service so as to not inflame racist folks' hostilities even further?

and the third one, which you posted in a debate about race and intelligence, seemed to hint that some "geograpgical regions" are simply less intelligent because they evolved that way. would you care to point out some of these "geographical regions" please, or are we just supposed to take a wild guess for you?

thanks again for helping me with my "perspective" on your racism.
 

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
i'm in need of some assistance here.

can you tell me what perspective i should take when reading the first quote, where you imply that obama is from kenya? because try as i might, i can't find a non-racist perspective to that one.

ditto the last one, where you imply that blacks should just deal with denial of service at restaurants, gas stations, and other businesses because otherwise racist people would spit in their food. is there some perspective i am missing there? should blacks simply deal with denial of service so as to not inflame racist folks' hostilities even further?

and the third one, which you posted in a debate about race and intelligence, seemed to hint that some "geograpgical regions" are simply less intelligent because they evolved that way. would you care to point out some of these "geographical regions" please, or are we just supposed to take a wild guess for you?

thanks again for helping me with my "perspective" on your racism.
OK, the first one is not me implying he's Kenyan, that's his own words, not mine. Guess what I'm Italian but wasn't born there. The fact that it's so offensive to you that He's Kenyan shows YOUR racism not anyone else.The fact that it gets under your racist skin means you need to be prepared to be offended for awhile. I bet Obama would say, yeah, so? Why do you think that's bad. I don't O, I don't, but Bucky does.

The last one;
I believe we have advanced to the point in society where if someone tried to open an all white business we would boycott, picket and shame the owner into failure. By not allowing this, we keep the racists in the closet instead of allowing them to expose themselves. By forcing a racist to serve someone against their will, they may do something untoward to that persons meal. I know you don't mean to, but you keep the racism hidden. I want it out in the open so I can make sure I don't patronage that person. Your way prevents us from knowing that and we will inadvertently give our money to a racist dirt bag, I'd rather not.

I agree that it caused harm, have always agreed that it caused harm and never said that it didn't... 50 years ago. A different time man. We can't move forward with force, we move forward by choice. I feel our country is grown and mature enough to make that choice now, you don't. I have the fact that we elected a black president, Detroit elected a white mayor and Donald Sterling as proof. You have a 1940's greenbook as yours.

You see my stance as racist, I see yours as bigoted. But you are an idiot, so there's always that.

The third one.
I have no idea if there is any difference between races in intelligence and maintained that the entire time while you insistently screamed YOU MEAN BLACKS. No, I don't mean blacks. I don't mean whites, I don't mean any color.
You can compare physical traits that were developed for survival through evolution in people of the same race. Some are taller as a people, some are stronger, some process dairy better etc. To think that certain cognitive skills wouldn't also differ among people is taking PCness to the height of stupidity. I never made it about race, you did. I never claimed one geographical region is superior to another. I did claim however that dismissing the possibility that a fishing community developed spacial relations better while a nomad community developed other cognitive characteristics better is foolish and based on fear of being unPC. Again, race has nothing to do with it.


TL;dr version

I don't give much more than a gnat's ass worth of fuck about what you think. But just in case others go by what you say I meant instead of what I actually said, there it is.
 
Last edited:

greenlikemoney

Well-Known Member
so explain to me the totally deep, non-racist meanings of some of the quotes of yours in my sig then.

be a big boy and use your words to explain yourself.

because to anyone reading those, that is the work of a racist.
Buck, your DAD is a racist, you even said so. Call him up and piss and moan everyday.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
OK, the first one is not me implying he's Kenyan, that's his own words, not mine. Guess what I'm Italian but wasn't born there. The fact that it's so offensive to you that He's Kenyan shows YOUR racism not anyone else.The fact that it gets under your racist skin means you need to be prepared to be offended for awhile. I bet Obama would say, yeah, so? Why do you think that's bad. I don't O, I don't, but Bucky does.
again, will you please show me where obama said that he's kenyan, in his own words?

we've been over that one, you're lying.

there is no non-racist perspective to calling obama a kenyan. plain and simple.

The last one;
I believe we have advanced to the point in society where if someone tried to open an all white business we would boycott, picket and shame the owner into failure. By not allowing this, we keep the racists in the closet instead of allowing them to expose themselves. By forcing a racist to serve someone against their will, they may do something untoward to that persons meal. I know you don't mean to, but you keep the racism hidden. I want it out in the open so I can make sure I don't patronage that person. Your way prevents us from knowing that and we will inadvertently give our money to a racist dirt bag, I'd rather not.
so in other words, you feel that blacks should endure denial of service, which is harmful, so that we don't inflame the racist hostilities of people like you.

got it. thanks for clarifying.


I agree that it caused harm, have always agreed that it caused harm and never said that it didn't... 50 years ago. A different time man. We can't move forward with force, we move forward by choice. I feel our country is grown and mature enough to make that choice now, you don't. I have the fact that we elected a black president, Detroit elected a white mayor and Donald Sterling as proof. You have a 1940's greenbook as yours.

You see my stance as racist, I see yours as bigoted. But you are an idiot, so there's always that.
so basically you're proclaiming that racism is over since we have a black president, who you then call kenyan (he's hawaiian, but no matter). and to boot, no one even acts on bigotry anymore. it's not like cake shops and flower shops deny service to gays and keep their doors open just fine, even though they do.

got it. thanks for clarifying.


The third one.
I have no idea if there is any difference between races in intelligence and maintained that the entire time while you insistently screamed YOU MEAN BLACKS. No, I don't mean blacks. I don't mean whites, I don't mean any color.
You can compare physical traits that were developed for survival through evolution in people of the same race. Some are taller as a people, some are stronger, some process dairy better etc. To think that certain cognitive skills wouldn't also differ among people is taking PCness to the height of stupidity. I never made it about race, you did. I never claimed one geographical region is superior to another. I did claim however that dismissing the possibility that a fishing community developed spacial relations better while a nomad community developed other cognitive characteristics better is foolish and based on fear of being unPC. Again, race has nothing to do with it.
so are you gonna be a pussy and not name the "geographical regions" where they didn't evolve from the neck up?

and it totally wasn't about race, which is why you chose to bring it up in a discussion about race and intelligence?

you didn't clarify a thing.




TL;dr version

I don't give much more than a gnat's ass worth of fuck about what you think. But just in case others go by what you say I meant instead of what I actually said, there it is.

if you honestly think people will read what you have written and conclude that you are not a racist, then you are deluded.

and about the "segregation by choice", did blacks just choose to segregate themselves to disproportionate inner city plight? was that their choice?
 
Top