(November 5, 2018 at 9:00 am)Mermaid Wrote:

(November 4, 2018 at 1:13 am)onlinebiker Wrote: The Libertarian Party will thank you for your vote - as they are the only party which promotes open borders.

Bear in mind more people (2.7 million) were deported under the last ( D ) administration than any other in history.


Numbers don't lie.

https://www.wnyc.org/story/no-one-though...president/

Deportations and shooting at refugees at the border are hardly the same thing.

I would agree.

Please cite the case (s) of refugees being shot at the border. I missed that.



And...


Consider - is a Honduran refugee on the Mexican/ US border really a refugee????

It could reasonably argued that they are not.

When they crossed the southern Mexican border - they become Hondurans taking refuge in Mexico.

The fact is - they simply aren't happy with being out of Honduras - they insist on going to the US. 

Why? Better economics. AND - economic advantage is NOT considered a justifiable reason for claiming refugee status.

Splitting hairs?

Absolutely.

And you can count on those hairs being split by Customs and Immigration.

They do it every day.

(November 5, 2018 at 9:57 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 9:00 am)Mermaid Wrote: Deportations and shooting at refugees at the border are hardly the same thing.

I would agree.

Please cite the case (s) of refugees being shot at the border. I missed that.



And...


Consider - is a Honduran refugee on the Mexican/ US border really a refugee????

It could reasonably argued that they are not.

Quote:...the term “refugee” shall apply to any person who ... owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence ... is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it...

UNHCR || UN 1967 Protocol Relating To The Status Of Refugees

(November 5, 2018 at 10:46 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 9:57 am)onlinebiker Wrote: I would agree.

Please cite the case (s) of refugees being shot at the border. I missed that.



And...


Consider - is a Honduran refugee on the Mexican/ US border really a refugee????

It could reasonably argued that they are not.

Quote:...the term “refugee” shall apply to any person who ... owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence ... is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it...

UNHCR || UN 1967 Protocol Relating To The Status Of Refugees

It' s Mexico - not Syria.


I' ve been to Mexico. People vacation in Mexico.

Compared to Honduras it' s a damned nice place.

Many parts of it a far safer than the US.

Don' t believe it?

Parachute into Detroit, and see if you survive.

(November 5, 2018 at 11:06 am)onlinebiker Wrote: It' s Mexico - not Syria.


I' ve been to Mexico. People vacation in Mexico.

Compared to Honduras it' s a damned nice place.

Many parts of it a far safer than the US.

Don' t believe it?

Parachute into Detroit, and see if you survive.

Apparently you're a dumbass with reading comprehension issues.

(November 5, 2018 at 11:37 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 11:06 am)onlinebiker Wrote: It' s Mexico - not Syria.


I' ve been to Mexico. People vacation in Mexico.

Compared to Honduras it' s a damned nice place.

Many parts of it a far safer than the US.

Don' t believe it?

Parachute into Detroit, and see if you survive.

Apparently you're a dumbass with reading comprehension issues.

And apparently you ran out of points of argument but not insults.


Go with what ya got.

(November 5, 2018 at 11:39 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 11:37 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: Apparently you're a dumbass with reading comprehension issues.

And apparently you ran out of points of argument but not insults.

Since you didn't refute the point I had made, the situation didn't require anything but insults. But by all means, keep proving that you're a dumbass.

(November 3, 2018 at 8:19 pm)chimp3 Wrote: I would rather live next door to anyone that travels this far north to escape tyranny and despair than anyone who will vote for Trump in 2020!

El Salvador and Honduras aren't Tyrannical governments. They are basically non-functioning states. The people traveling north are escaping poverty by and large.

Otherwise they'd just go to another country in central America, not the US.

(November 5, 2018 at 11:42 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 11:39 am)onlinebiker Wrote: And apparently you ran out of points of argument but not insults.

Since you didn't refute the point I had made, the situation didn't require anything but insults.  But by all means, keep proving that you're a dumbass.

You need to learn grasshopper - that not agreeing with an answer is not the same as not being answered.

Nobody is required to give you answers you approve.

(November 5, 2018 at 11:47 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 11:42 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: Since you didn't refute the point I had made, the situation didn't require anything but insults.  But by all means, keep proving that you're a dumbass.

You need to learn grasshopper - that not agreeing with an answer is not the same as not being answered.

Nobody is required to give you answers you approve.

You claimed that whether a Honduran on the Mexican border was a refugee was debatable. I showed it was not. Then you post some irrelevant crap about Mexico not being a bad place to be. That's an example of ignoratio elenchi, a fallacy, because even if true, it doesn't change the definition of what a refugee is according to U.S. law as a result of our agreeing to the 1967 UN Protocol. Responding with an invalid answer may indeed be answering my point, but it is not in any sense refuting my point. My points (both of them) stand. You were wrong about a Honduran refugee presenting at the Mexican border legitimately being a refugee and you are indeed a dumbass.

Now bring something relevant instead of these grade school taunts or fuck the hell off, douche bag.

(November 5, 2018 at 10:46 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(November 5, 2018 at 9:57 am)onlinebiker Wrote: I would agree.

Please cite the case (s) of refugees being shot at the border. I missed that.



And...


Consider - is a Honduran refugee on the Mexican/ US border really a refugee????

It could reasonably argued that they are not.

Quote:...the term “refugee” shall apply to any person who ... owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence ... is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it...

UNHCR || UN 1967 Protocol Relating To The Status Of Refugees

I don't really see how this caravan fits that definition. Honduras is a shithole, but Costa Rica and Nircaragua are very safe countries right next door. A lot cheaper and easier to get to than the US. Costa Rica has lower crime then the US.

What they don't have is jobs. Which is why these people are, for the vast majority of them, coming here. Otherwise you wouldn't. You'd stay in Mexico, not walk thousands of miles to a country that doesn't even speak the same language.

Now I think it would be fine to let more immigrants in. The US has lots of work to be done, and if you believe that the American system is a good one that functions and works, then it only makes sense that it would continue to work with immigrants as well. I mean, that's basically the idea of America, that the American system of economic freedom works. You can't say "well it only works if we have the right type of people here"

BUT. They clearly don't fit the bill of refugees by that definition. They aren't being persecuted because of race, religion or any of that. They are fleeing poverty and maybe gang violence in the worst case scenario. But none of that mean they are being persecuted.