Moderator: Community Team
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
armati wrote:Skimming the thread I get the impression people figure there is a difference between obama,bush,tump or hillory even.
You guys know that Prescot Bush made his millions with the nazis right?
Working to kill americans and allies was just business Im sure, but then his son and grandson become president?
Strike anyone as a little odd?
Does anyone think the american people understand whats happening? or has happened might be a better way to say it.
The presidents mean nothing, they are puppets of the ...as Carlin put it "owners", others like to say, cabal,deep state,mic,bankers...I have concluded at this point its Zionists .
This is nothing new, Mark Twain — 'If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.' If it wasnt him its still true.
The only time I know of the people rising up and making a dif was the war of independence, and that was supposedly for liberty which was a lie from the start.
Back to my point, there is no dif between presidents, they are all taking orders, they belong to the same club, whether thats Masons or Jesuits or bankers, its the same club.
Dukasaur wrote:mrswdk wrote:Dukasaur wrote:If you were living in a Third World country, and the only thing your children could look forward to was starvation, beatings by paramilitary thugs, and (best case) exploitation in some sweat shop at subsistence wages
You have a really weird world view.
I know these things seem weird to you. When you're hungry, you ring a bell and Jeeves comes running with a platter of canapés.
I've spent most of my life among people who work for a living. My perspective may seem odd to you, certainly.
I've never been hungry for any really long period (though there were a few months when I had nothing but plain potatoes) but I've seen real hunger while traveling. In Guatemala, I was in a convoy with a bunch of Mormon missionaries. I saw them buying babies in poor villages. Depending on the villagers' haggling skills, they would get between $40 and $80 per baby (mind you, this was in '76 -- the going rate has probably gone up). The Mormons would get up to $20,000 per, once they got them back to the states and "placed" them with some middle-class American couple with defective gonads. The mestizo mothers would bawl and bawl, but the missionaries would patiently explain that by sending the child to America, it would have a chance to actually go to school and not be constantly hungry like everyone else in the village, at which point the parents would reluctantly accept.
Until you've seen real poverty and real suffering, you have no idea.
armati wrote:@mookiemcgee
wow, thats insightful.
armati wrote:@mookiemcgee
Sounds like you got it all figured out.
Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
2dimes wrote:Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
Wate wat?
Only about 8% of their asylum application have been approved, however, meaning the vast majority have been turned down and are being deported straight back to their home countries.
Canadians are broadly supportive of immigration," Radchenko said. "But Canadians truly believe in order and well-managed immigration.
2dimes wrote:Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
Wate wat?
mookiemcgee wrote:2dimes wrote:Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
Wate wat?
Yeah it's true, patches tried to get in but they said no. Can't really blame either side for this one.
The difference in the Canadian system is that intelligent laws were created, so things like camps for stray kids don't happen.
patches70 wrote:mookiemcgee wrote:2dimes wrote:Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
Wate wat?
Yeah it's true, patches tried to get in but they said no. Can't really blame either side for this one.
The difference in the Canadian system is that intelligent laws were created, so things like camps for stray kids don't happen.
Yeah, Canada just flat out deports people who illegally enter Canada. Illegal being anyone who enters anywhere that is not a Port of Entry.
The US is the exact same way, except we don't just deport those who enter illegally, so yeah, Canada's policy is much more intelligent.
Since January 1,2017, about 28,000 people crossed into Canada illegally. 1,000 of them have already been deported and the Canadian government estimates that 90% of those illegals claiming asylum will be denied and deported eventually.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/immigra ... -1.4652722
It's easy when you only have to deal with a mere 28,000 illegal aliens entering your country in a year. In the US that's how many come in a week. How would Canada's "intelligent" laws and court systems deal with 28,000 illegal aliens coming a week instead of a year? Not too well I'd imagine.
This is what Canada does with illegal aliens entering Canada outside Ports of Entry-
That's one thing ya'll non Americans don't seem to grasp, the sheer immensity of the US. You can't compare the systems of little countries like Canada (little as in population, GDP, economy, etc etc) and somehow think that translates to compare with the US. Canada couldn't hope to handle the number the US has to deal with. Where as the problem you face in Canada is like a tiny drop of water as compared to the metaphorical ocean of humanity clamoring to to get into the US. Hell, the EU is getting overwhelmed by number of asylum seekers and even that is a drop in the bucket compared to what the US faces.
And absolutely, I agree with you, Mook, something needs to be done. It'll take Congress though to do it, and they ain't too keen on doing that. The Dems think this issue is what is going to win them the Congress, but that pony they think they are riding is actually a dead horse. And the Republicans are spineless saps.
Because Americans in general, are of the same thinking as the Canadians. All for legal immigration but taking a dim view on illegal immigration. But by all means, keep thinking this is a winning strat for pushing Trump out. Nothing else has worked, so why not try this now? It ain't gonna work, but I'll give ya'll an "A" for effort.
mookiemcgee wrote:patches70 wrote:mookiemcgee wrote:2dimes wrote:Canada has extremely stringent immigration and asylum laws, far worse than the US.
Wate wat?
Yeah it's true, patches tried to get in but they said no. Can't really blame either side for this one.
The difference in the Canadian system is that intelligent laws were created, so things like camps for stray kids don't happen.
Yeah, Canada just flat out deports people who illegally enter Canada. Illegal being anyone who enters anywhere that is not a Port of Entry.
The US is the exact same way, except we don't just deport those who enter illegally, so yeah, Canada's policy is much more intelligent.
Since January 1,2017, about 28,000 people crossed into Canada illegally. 1,000 of them have already been deported and the Canadian government estimates that 90% of those illegals claiming asylum will be denied and deported eventually.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/immigra ... -1.4652722
It's easy when you only have to deal with a mere 28,000 illegal aliens entering your country in a year. In the US that's how many come in a week. How would Canada's "intelligent" laws and court systems deal with 28,000 illegal aliens coming a week instead of a year? Not too well I'd imagine.
This is what Canada does with illegal aliens entering Canada outside Ports of Entry-
That's one thing ya'll non Americans don't seem to grasp, the sheer immensity of the US. You can't compare the systems of little countries like Canada (little as in population, GDP, economy, etc etc) and somehow think that translates to compare with the US. Canada couldn't hope to handle the number the US has to deal with. Where as the problem you face in Canada is like a tiny drop of water as compared to the metaphorical ocean of humanity clamoring to to get into the US. Hell, the EU is getting overwhelmed by number of asylum seekers and even that is a drop in the bucket compared to what the US faces.
And absolutely, I agree with you, Mook, something needs to be done. It'll take Congress though to do it, and they ain't too keen on doing that. The Dems think this issue is what is going to win them the Congress, but that pony they think they are riding is actually a dead horse. And the Republicans are spineless saps.
Because Americans in general, are of the same thinking as the Canadians. All for legal immigration but taking a dim view on illegal immigration. But by all means, keep thinking this is a winning strat for pushing Trump out. Nothing else has worked, so why not try this now? It ain't gonna work, but I'll give ya'll an "A" for effort.
You seem to miss the entire point patches. Danada deals with 28,000 illegals a year, because it has a functioning system to allow temporary works in. If it had the laws the US did, it would have 500,000 illegals trying to gain entry not 28,000. Yes USA is a larger country, but there is a need for workers and no system to support it. And rather than change the laws to make sense and actually function, instead you are going to build a wall. Good luck with that.
HitRed wrote:If you leave your kids in the car on a hot day in Texas expect to be arrested. Child endangerment.
If you dangle your kids off the side of a 50 story building expect to be arrested. Child endangerment.
If you take your kids around the boarder wall with the paid help of a smuggler (instead of surrendering at a crossing) walking for 5 to 7 days in the blistering hot rattlesnake filled Texas desert with 2 gallon of water expect to be charged with child abuse and child endangerment. At least you should be.
thegreekdog wrote:This whole thing is fascinating to me. It should be obvious that separating children from parents is not exactly something we should be doing. However, the argument seems to be how bad Trump is vs. how Obama (and Bush and Clinton) did it too. First, there were no threads on CC dealing with this issue until the last couple of weeks so obviously we really didn't care that this was going on until Trump became president. That's really all that needs to be said on that topic.
As someone said, Trump's executive order is violative of the law so it will be challenged in court (and the executive order will be overturned). So Congress has to act. And that comes down to Democrats and Republicans working together which does not look like it will happen. The Democrats want to make this an issue for the mid-term elections (i.e. blaming Trump for separating families).
Comparisons between Trump and Obama on immigration usually focus on deportations of unauthorized immigrants living in the US. Trump has been rapidly expanding enforcement, but the numbers are still comparable to Obama’s first term. (Obama holds the record for deporting more immigrants than any president, with more than 2 million deportations over eight years — though he scaled back enforcement in the last two years of his administration.)
But the effects of the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy for prosecuting illegal entry this spring — the separation of families as a matter of standard government practice for about six weeks, and now (thanks to Trump’s executive order) a coming court fight over the indefinite detention of families seeking asylum — are reminiscent, for those of us who’ve been following immigration for a while, of what the Obama administration did in 2014.
The comparison to Obama’s policies is especially relevant now that the Trump administration is seeking to keep families in immigration detention for weeks or months. The reason that Trump can’t do that under a current judicial order is that the courts stepped in to stop Obama from doing it.
Now Trump is trying to remove the shackles placed on his predecessor.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users