Can't help but think there's some really bad 'what you did for the least of these' juju building up. The folks at ICE had to be feeling pretty good about themselves last week, since for once there's an immigration disaster another federal agency can be blamed for. In testimony to a Senate subcommittee on Homeland Security Thursday, an official from the Department of Health and Human Services had to admit the agency had lost track of nearly 1,500 children who had been placed with sponsors after crossing the border, and can't guarantee that some haven't ended up with human traffickers or working in sweatshops or as unpaid laborers on farms. The disturbing news was disclosed by Steven Wagner, acting assistant secretary of HHS’s Administration for Children and Families, the agency tasked with placing unaccompanied kids who cross the border; most go to parents or other family members. We suppose you could argue HHS needs better follow-up, although of course the ICEstasi knows the real answer is to keep all the kids in kid jail until they can be deported.
No, I am suggesting losing track of 1,500 children is a reality of illegal immigration. I think the danger of victimization at the hands of smugglers, traffickers and gangs is worthy consideration in support of legal immigration. The route north includes the danger of kidnappings, extortion and violence. Many migrants are victimized on route. Amnesty International estimates 60% of female migrants are raped.
I am sure the majority if not all migrants are well aware of the dangers they will face. Its probably an accepted factor in escaping their daily conditions. However, thats not to say it shouldn't be a factor in considering US immigration policy.
Do you support open borders? If not, what kind of immigrations limitations to you imagine?
I am not an advocate for complicated codes and pointless bureaucracies. However, I am also not an advocate open borders. I am not sure where between the two a balance should be made.
10-1 odds are only really doable if the armies you're fighting are incompetently led, are manned by men who don't much care for the fight, and are armed with inferior weapons. I can't speak for that first one, but the Iranians are armed by Russian weaponry (best described as "good enough"), and they showed their moxie during the Iran-Iraq war.
Going to war against them would be foolish in the extreme.
How does one misinterpret the job description of a major agency called the Department of HEALTH and HUMAN Services as really being the Department of CRUELTY and CORPORATION'S SECURITY?
My point is this has been going on for a long time. He didn't start it. He's not helping -- he's making it worse -- but it would be happening even if he hadn't been elected.
When is Pruitt getting kicked to the curb?
Can't be too soon.
No, I am suggesting losing track of 1,500 children is a reality of illegal immigration. I think the danger of victimization at the hands of smugglers, traffickers and gangs is worthy consideration in support of legal immigration. The route north includes the danger of kidnappings, extortion and violence. Many migrants are victimized on route. Amnesty International estimates 60% of female migrants are raped.
I am sure the majority if not all migrants are well aware of the dangers they will face. Its probably an accepted factor in escaping their daily conditions. However, thats not to say it shouldn't be a factor in considering US immigration policy.
Do you support open borders? If not, what kind of immigrations limitations to you imagine?
I am not an advocate for complicated codes and pointless bureaucracies. However, I am also not an advocate open borders. I am not sure where between the two a balance should be made.
10-1 odds are only really doable if the armies you're fighting are incompetently led, are manned by men who don't much care for the fight, and are armed with inferior weapons. I can't speak for that first one, but the Iranians are armed by Russian weaponry (best described as "good enough"), and they showed their moxie during the Iran-Iraq war.
Going to war against them would be foolish in the extreme.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c... BillO is a turn off in any context.
Ah, you're the one I've heard say that. GMTA.
I'm O.K. with open borders. Let people move about as freely as we have allowed trade and capital to be transferred between countries.
How does one misinterpret the job description of a major agency called the Department of HEALTH and HUMAN Services as really being the Department of CRUELTY and CORPORATION'S SECURITY?
That is an oddly comforting thought. But I think Bolton is hot for war.
I think you might be right; I was thinking of the Iraqi army, not the Iranian one. Iran is in better shape.
Still, I wouldn't bet against the Israelis. More to the point, the Israelis might think they could win...
Did you check the freezer?
My point is this has been going on for a long time. He didn't start it. He's not helping -- he's making it worse -- but it would be happening even if he hadn't been elected.
Dildo? Wha'...??? (Looks confused.)
best to leave it it's the return of the slow golf clap of ideas moran labio
we need to nuke ourselves from orbit