Danny Bateman Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said: Not really a fan of it. But, it's not quite as it seems. These people fill out a form on line and book an appointment with an agent in the US. They are then flown to other parts of the US other than the border which is overwhelmed. We should know who they are from the form they fill out. They are being seen by an agent and processed. If only there were a group of people tasked with working to create new rules and outline specific procedures and protocols that could restore order to this system and help it actually work how it’s supposed to for the betterment of the country and its citizens… But as far as I know nothing like that exists. I guess we’re just SOL. 2 1 Link to comment
teachercd Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 20 hours ago, DevoHusker said: This is actually a much better way to handle it. 1 Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 22 hours ago, BigRedBuster said: Not really a fan of it. But, it's not quite as it seems. These people fill out a form on line and book an appointment with an agent in the US. They are then flown to other parts of the US other than the border which is overwhelmed. We should know who they are from the form they fill out. They are being seen by an agent and processed. I am not a fan of it either. If it was such a good deal, why the secret status that had to be "revealed"? 1 1 Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 hours ago, teachercd said: This is actually a much better way to handle it. So, flying "someone that filled out an app" to interior regions of the US is better? In what way 1 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 22 hours ago, BigRedBuster said: Not really a fan of it. But, it's not quite as it seems. These people fill out a form on line and book an appointment with an agent in the US. They are then flown to other parts of the US other than the border which is overwhelmed. We should know who they are from the form they fill out. They are being seen by an agent and processed. So, they're not "illegal aliens." They're working through the legal immigration process. Makes you wonder why a certain poster constantly posts right-wing disinformation, and then has to backtrack when the rest of us explain the whole story. You'd think after one, two, fifty times of doing that, that they would learn to think more critically about the things they post. 2 2 1 1 Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 13 minutes ago, knapplc said: So, they're not "illegal aliens." They're working through the legal immigration process. Makes you wonder why a certain poster constantly posts right-wing disinformation, and then has to backtrack when the rest of us explain the whole story. You'd think after one, two, fifty times of doing that, that they would learn to think more critically about the things they post. I assume you are making reference to me, since I shared the post. It's okay to let me know directly. These folks were "inadmissible" with regards to current statutes/regulations. https://cis.org/Bensman/Government-Admission-Biden-Parole-Flights-Create-Security-Vulnerabilities-US-Airports And, if you pay attention, I am definitely not against expanded legal immigration, and realize that the backbone of the Midwest could not function without them. However, you have to secure the Federal border first. "Aliens who cannot legally enter the U.S. used the CBP One to apply for travel authorization and temporary humanitarian release from those unnamed airports. Under this parole release, migrants are able to remain in the U.S. for two years without obtaining legal status and meanwhile are eligible for work authorization." "The Center for Immigration Studies found last year from January 2023 to December 2023, at least 320,000 illegal immigrants were allowed to fly into the U.S. from their home country through a controversial program of the Biden administration using the Customs and Border Patrol app, the CBP One app that was created to let migrants apply for parole into the US. The Parole program allows for two-year periods of legal status during which adults are eligible for work authorization." "The unusual program, kept from the public, involved at least 320,000 illegal immigrants the administration admits are “inadmissible” immigrants, far more than previously reported. Despite facing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from the Center for Immigration Studies, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection has refused to identify the 43 airports it is dumping immigrants at after direct flights from Latin America." 1 1 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, DevoHusker said: I assume you are making reference to me, since I shared the post. It's okay to let me know directly. These folks were "inadmissible" with regards to current statutes/regulations. https://cis.org/Bensman/Government-Admission-Biden-Parole-Flights-Create-Security-Vulnerabilities-US-Airports And, if you pay attention, I am definitely not against expanded legal immigration, and realize that the backbone of the Midwest could not function without them. However, you have to secure the Federal border first. "Aliens who cannot legally enter the U.S. used the CBP One to apply for travel authorization and temporary humanitarian release from those unnamed airports. Under this parole release, migrants are able to remain in the U.S. for two years without obtaining legal status and meanwhile are eligible for work authorization." "The Center for Immigration Studies found last year from January 2023 to December 2023, at least 320,000 illegal immigrants were allowed to fly into the U.S. from their home country through a controversial program of the Biden administration using the Customs and Border Patrol app, the CBP One app that was created to let migrants apply for parole into the US. The Parole program allows for two-year periods of legal status during which adults are eligible for work authorization." "The unusual program, kept from the public, involved at least 320,000 illegal immigrants the administration admits are “inadmissible” immigrants, far more than previously reported. Despite facing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from the Center for Immigration Studies, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection has refused to identify the 43 airports it is dumping immigrants at after direct flights from Latin America." Appreciate you providing the clarification and correct info for us. I know I was uncertain why this program was secret and didn’t realize these illegals were inadmissible through normal processes. 2 Link to comment
teachercd Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 If you were coming from another county…what state would you pick to end up in? 2 Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 21 minutes ago, DevoHusker said: https://cis.org/Bensman/Government-Admission-Biden-Parole-Flights-Create-Security-Vulnerabilities-US-Airports It can't be an accident that you continually post info from sources on the fringe of right-wing nationalism. Do you research your sources at all? CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists. While CIS and its position within the Tanton network have been on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) radar for years, what precipitated listing CIS as an anti-immigrant hate group for 2016 was its repeated circulation of white nationalist and antisemitic writers in its weekly newsletter and the commissioning of a policy analyst who had previously been pushed out of the conservative Heritage Foundation for his embrace of racist pseudoscience. These developments, its historical associations and its record of publishing reports that hype the criminality of immigrants are why CIS is labeled an anti-immigrant hate group. CIS reports have been widely criticized and debunked by groups such as the Immigration Policy Center and the CATO Institute. Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at CATO, said in early 2017: “Oh, I’m convinced that [CIS executive director Mark Krikorian is] wrong about all the facts and issues. They’re wrong about the impact of immigrants on the U.S. economy and on U.S. society.” Speaking about CIS to Univision in August of 2017, Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez stated: “Their research is always questionable because they torture the data to make it arrive at the conclusion they desire, which is that immigrants are criminals and a burden on the U.S. and our economy. It is the worst kind of deception, but politicians, the conservative media and some Americans eat it up because it always looks somewhat legitimate at first glance.” CIS has also defended the usage of “anchor babies” and released a report on “terror babies,” popular concepts among the nativist movement. @DevoHusker Can you name this program you posted about? Can you tell us why these are "illegal" immigrants? Can you find a source that discusses the Biden Administration's "admission" about this program? Can you find quotes from a Biden Administration official discussing this "admission?" Can you do any of the above without using a right-wing media source? 1 1 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 47 minutes ago, teachercd said: If you were coming from another county…what state would you pick to end up in? Euphoria. 1 Link to comment
Decked Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 51 minutes ago, teachercd said: If you were coming from another county…what state would you pick to end up in? Texas (hunting opportunities and land), Montana/ Wyoming (pretty & low population), Georgia (cool place IMO but not sure on economic opportunities) Florida (diverse groups but $$) Probably about the opposite states an immigrant would choose to live in minus maybe Texas and Florida. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 14 minutes ago, Decked said: Texas (hunting opportunities and land), Montana/ Wyoming (pretty & low population), Georgia (cool place IMO but not sure on economic opportunities) Florida (diverse groups but $$) Probably about the opposite states an immigrant would choose to live in minus maybe Texas and Florida. Depends on the immigrant, I suppose. Georgia has a large agricultural sector, so there's lots of migrant workers there depending on when harvest is. Remember a few years ago when they changed their immigration laws in 2011 and farmers had no one to help with harvest? Immigrants, especially the southern border immigrants we've been talking about so much lately, spread all over the country, following lower-wage blue collar jobs that Americans don't want to do anymore. Personally, I'd never live in Georgia or Florida, or Texas, on a permanent basis, mostly because half the year the climate is WAY too hot for me. I don't know how people live in Georgia. Florida at least has ocean/gulf breezes. Texas, even Houston, is just too freaking hot. Georgia is hot and humid as hell. Ugh. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, DevoHusker said: I assume you are making reference to me, since I shared the post. It's okay to let me know directly. These folks were "inadmissible" with regards to current statutes/regulations. https://cis.org/Bensman/Government-Admission-Biden-Parole-Flights-Create-Security-Vulnerabilities-US-Airports And, if you pay attention, I am definitely not against expanded legal immigration, and realize that the backbone of the Midwest could not function without them. However, you have to secure the Federal border first. "Aliens who cannot legally enter the U.S. used the CBP One to apply for travel authorization and temporary humanitarian release from those unnamed airports. Under this parole release, migrants are able to remain in the U.S. for two years without obtaining legal status and meanwhile are eligible for work authorization." "The Center for Immigration Studies found last year from January 2023 to December 2023, at least 320,000 illegal immigrants were allowed to fly into the U.S. from their home country through a controversial program of the Biden administration using the Customs and Border Patrol app, the CBP One app that was created to let migrants apply for parole into the US. The Parole program allows for two-year periods of legal status during which adults are eligible for work authorization." "The unusual program, kept from the public, involved at least 320,000 illegal immigrants the administration admits are “inadmissible” immigrants, far more than previously reported. Despite facing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from the Center for Immigration Studies, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection has refused to identify the 43 airports it is dumping immigrants at after direct flights from Latin America." What does "inadmissible" mean? I like the bolded part. I'm guessing these aren't the millions of rapists and murderers that Trump claims are being cleaned out of their prisons and sent here. These people are actually using a legal way to get into the country. 1 1 Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 29 minutes ago, knapplc said: It can't be an accident that you continually post info from sources on the fringe of right-wing nationalism. Do you research your sources at all? CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists. While CIS and its position within the Tanton network have been on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) radar for years, what precipitated listing CIS as an anti-immigrant hate group for 2016 was its repeated circulation of white nationalist and antisemitic writers in its weekly newsletter and the commissioning of a policy analyst who had previously been pushed out of the conservative Heritage Foundation for his embrace of racist pseudoscience. These developments, its historical associations and its record of publishing reports that hype the criminality of immigrants are why CIS is labeled an anti-immigrant hate group. CIS reports have been widely criticized and debunked by groups such as the Immigration Policy Center and the CATO Institute. Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at CATO, said in early 2017: “Oh, I’m convinced that [CIS executive director Mark Krikorian is] wrong about all the facts and issues. They’re wrong about the impact of immigrants on the U.S. economy and on U.S. society.” Speaking about CIS to Univision in August of 2017, Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez stated: “Their research is always questionable because they torture the data to make it arrive at the conclusion they desire, which is that immigrants are criminals and a burden on the U.S. and our economy. It is the worst kind of deception, but politicians, the conservative media and some Americans eat it up because it always looks somewhat legitimate at first glance.” CIS has also defended the usage of “anchor babies” and released a report on “terror babies,” popular concepts among the nativist movement. @DevoHusker Can you name this program you posted about? Can you tell us why these are "illegal" immigrants? Can you find a source that discusses the Biden Administration's "admission" about this program? Can you find quotes from a Biden Administration official discussing this "admission?" Can you do any of the above without using a right-wing media source? Why is it always about the "source"....and not the information? I can find "sources" that say the SPLC is a liberal mouthpiece, but it doesn't change the fact that over 300,000 inadmissible foreign citizens were flown, in secrecy, to 43 undisclosed airports within the US borders in the past year, by the current administration. Because they filled out a form on an app. Then to be released from 43 airports with a promise to appear in two years for additional hearings. That doesn't even make sense. Did you know that 25%- 40% of those awaiting additional hearings don't even show up? They have simply disappeared within the US. That is a low ball estimate. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/26/how-many-migrants-show-up-immigration-court-hearings/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/234386/failure-to-appear-for-us-immigration-court-proceedings/ CBP One? Because they would not qualify for admission if they presented in person at the border. Not sure what you mean. All the information regarding CPB One has come from a Freedom of Information Act request. No, because the Administration was keeping it hidden. 1 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 https://www.uscis.gov/laws-and-policy/other-resources/unlawful-presence-and-inadmissibility This seems to indicate that that term doesn't have anything to do with them being bad people that we don't want here. It simply is the status of not being given permission yet. So...they go through the legal channels to get permission and they are let in. I'm not seeing a huge issue with this. 2 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts