Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I have stated in here I'm not for using violence unless it's absolutely necessary. However, as I have also said I lost any compassion for them when they were offered asylum and jobs in Mexico and most refused.
They were not offered jobs. They were offered temporary work permits but only if they stayed in the rural south - in Chiapas and Oaxaca - two the poorest states in Mexico.
Your stance was exactly the same before Mexico offered sanctuary.
It doesn’t matter what anyone’s stance was now. If they passed on asylum in Mexico they’re invaders and should be stopped by any means necessary.
Well, your article said a "few" tried to cut through the fence, so not exactly a mob. But they fired tear gas into them, and that's what it is there for.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Your stance was exactly the same before Mexico offered sanctuary.
Not for those who aren't bogus asylum seekers and apply at a legal port of entry. However, as I said we already have 750,000 cases that are back logged. Is there a point when we have to say no more and they should apply for asylum with another country?
It doesn’t matter what anyone’s stance was now. If they passed on asylum in Mexico they’re invaders and should be stopped by any means necessary.
Yeah, except for that's not what our laws say.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Not for those who aren't bogus asylum seekers and apply at a legal port of entry. However, as I said we already have 750,000 cases that are back logged. Is there a point when we have to say no more and they should apply for asylum with another country?
Again, that's not our law. It is legal to apply for asylum anywhere, it is ALSO legal to claim asylum even after you have been caught being in the country illegally.
You can say no more, but you do have to do it legally.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
They were not offered jobs. They were offered temporary work permits but only if they stayed in the rural south - in Chiapas and Oaxaca - two the poorest states in Mexico.
You're wrong again! I'm not going to dig up the link that I already posted again. Doesn't matter if Chiapas is poor that's mainly the state that they were offered jobs in. So you're admitting that they just want to flee poverty then? Um, that's not a legitimate asylum claim to enter the U.S. Kinda caught you on that one, didn't I?
Again, that's not our law. It is legal to apply for asylum anywhere, it is ALSO legal to claim asylum even after you have been caught being in the country illegally.
You can say no more, but you do have to do it legally.
And what was pointed out with a link there are exceptions to that law that the president can exercise.
Again, that's not our law. It is legal to apply for asylum anywhere, it is ALSO legal to claim asylum even after you have been caught being in the country illegally.
You can say no more, but you do have to do it legally.
It's easy enough to change - just have Congress pass comprehensive immigration reform as they have been talking about doing for 20+ years.
It doesn’t matter what anyone’s stance was now. If they passed on asylum in Mexico they’re invaders and should be stopped by any means necessary.
They were not offered asylum. They would be allowed to stay and work in Chiapas or Oaxaca. And why would that not be a good idea? Because Chiapas for instance has a large migration out to other parts of Mexico driven by 75% poverty levels - the worst in Mexico. So basically the Mexicans offered jobs where there are no sustainable ones and where the natives are leaving.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
