Massive difference between wanting secure borders, and enacting a zero tolerance “lets rip the kids away” policy that sticks people in internment camps in Texas in the summer. People will come here. Some on planes, some over walls. If they’re here and have a legit asylum claim let’s figure that out. If not send them back but my god have a humane process. It’s not a crime against someone else. It’s an act of attempting to find a better life situation - something many of our own grandparents, give or take a generation, could relate to.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good news story with lots of emotion.....

DHS reported that of 12000 illegal kids detained, some 10000 came without their parents. Many were in the custody of coyotes or others even suspected in human trafficking...

Parents send the kids unaccompanied because they know the gov will not deport them. They then make arrangement to cross themselves later, after the children have been fed, given medical attention, and certified asylum... so they can be reunited, hopefully. It's a twist on the anchor baby scheme.

Of course , if you or I commit a crime with our kids in tow, and the kids have no home-they are separated and "detained" also in government facilities.

Obama was an incompetent moron. Disgusting use of FBI and the IRS against his political opponents. Obama was a nothing...one of his last acts was to approve Norwegian Air...complete tool

Wait. You’re talking about inappropriate use of political power against an opponent and he’s your go to?

Right, tell it to Trump, who while signing an Executive Order to stop families from being separated said: “I didn’t like the sight or the feeling of families being separated.”

Huh? Think he's gonna send people across the border to find these kids parents?

Hey ya know Oscar has a really big beach house in Jax that he doesn't use much. Prolly room for about 2 dozen unaccompanied illegal kids there. For that matter, how many have you given CBP permission to house with you?

The narrative has gotten a bit skewed.

It has not been considered illegal in the past to try and gain entry into the USA as a refugee. While in the past the US has denied entry to some requesting status, criminalizing such a request is a new twist.

We send capital, military advisors, and intelligence operatives to their countries. This is thought of, by the powers that be, as meet, right and salutary. Perhaps it shouldn't be just a one way exchange.

I typed a bit of my family history and deleted it because I decided not to go there. Suffice it to say there are few people on this planet who are in as mortal a danger as those who are stateless. We are truly a soulless people when we forget, or worse ignore, this aspect of our world.

Last name starts with a B, I don’t remember. Why dont you look it up? Educate yourself.

I’m digging being back at the Westin in Vegas. Cheap buffet and nice pool scenery.

Honest?
 

Can we be honest for a minute...…

We are talking about ILLEGAL immigration. Not refugees - they can go to an office at ANY border location (and typically at an embassy in THEIR country) to apply. Legal immigrants continue to apply and be accepted into our land.

We are talking about people that CHOOSE to bypass the entire system that has been established for them..... they CHOOSE to circumvent the laws of our nation.

The libs want you to think that Trump doesn't care.....that he has no empathy....no sympathy..... but I recall him (and Obama and those before him) placing his hand on a bible and promising to uphold the CONSTITUTION of the United States.....to uphold our laws...… those PESKY things to you libs.....

So I suppose - if you are a liberal (mentally challenged) person - you would assume the above, means - only the laws and parts of the CONSTITUTION that you like on that day.

Haha! But the joke is on the libs! Unfortunately we live in a constitutional republic (look it up). The law of the land rules. If you don't like it - change it.

But I'm sure all you libs - have your front door unlocked at night -- just come on in -- regardless of who you are. Right?

You are all FRAUDS! LAWLESS FRAUDS! That's what you liberals are. You are opposed to everything this country stands for.

Any wonder why we have buried millions upon millions of Americans on American soil? That is/was because we believed in and fought for what was right - our IMPERFECT union. As a matter for fact - it is so RIGHT - that others are trying to break into it!

How about staying home and fighting for what is right, and dying for your country and freedom - just like our forefathers did. Make Guatemala Great Again....

Oscar is a joke. Complete moron to take sides......another CEO failure at United.....let me count....my 9th. No bother - will be gone soon enough.

BTW - why does United crew scheduling not let American pilots fly our planes......they are great people too.....why do we have company names ..... borders......totally RACIST! BIGOTED!!! They are just pilots wanting to fly planes......ITS NOT FAiR!!

Actually, the issue is the separation of children whose parents are seeking asylum… Not illegal immigrants, not people sneaking over the border… People who are attempting to come here and seek asylum.

But the facts haven’t mattered to Republicans since March of 2002-so why should they start mattering now

Ever been to a border crossing on land? Ever talk to the agents there? Ever been inside the building?

That's what I figured. Let me guess where you "heard" the story.

Not with all your erroneous assertions and weak-minded insults. Better luck with your second post.

I see you are a new-hire, but most United pilots are American.

hahahaha!

typical LIBTARD.

So refugee arrives in El Paso - goes to the refugee office...…..and is separated and imprisoned! That's how it does.? Right...…….you are a DOLTARD just like they taught u to be on CNN.

Do me a favor. Next time u land in Mexico City....just run through immigration...…..if you are senior to me - I applaud it.


Damn CONSITUTION and RULE OF LAW keep getting in the way for you LIBS!!!!!! If only this where are Monarch rules by Queen Hillary!!!!!


BTW - YOU LOST!!

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. As someone who has conducted surveillance on the Texas border, and who has been out hunting in South Texas along the border I disagree. There is nothing to do with heart or heartless. It's simply border security, and National Sovereignty. For local folks around the border regions it's also physical security. For those interested in counter-terrorism it's all about protection of national and regional centers of gravity. If you are interested in drug trafficking, human trafficking, and illegal weapons trafficking then you should pay attention. You can either have security, or you can have something less than that. I submit heart or heartless has nothing to do with security. A cop wearing a bullet proof vest feels more safe and more secure. A home owner locking his or her doors at night is simply prudent for taking proper security measures. A car owner locking his doors and arming his alarm is simply managing and mitigating risk.

If you want to enter the USA, there are two ways to do it. Legally, or illegally. It's like making a withdrawal from a bank. You can either fill out your withdrawal slip or you can go in with a gun and a bag. One's legal, and the other one ain't.

We are either a nation of laws or we ain't. You are either pregnant or you're not.

Pretty simple really. Just follow the damn law. There's a bonus: we don't have to raise our domestic taxes to pay for illegal immigration and undocumented foreign nationals. We don't have to incarcerate them, educate them, or treat their physical and mental problems. They are foreign nationals, they are tax payers and citizens of other nations. They should simply follow the rules, comply with the law, and wait their turn.

Still is not illegal...IF you present yourself at the border to an agent and ask to apply for refugee status. That's not what is happening here, as I'm sure you know unless you live under a rock. These people are crossing the border illegally, and trying to avoid authorities. When they are captured, they then cry "Refugee" as they have been coached. Those adults are processed, which takes time and includes an identification process which takes a long time in many cases because they lie about never being here before illegally. During that process, the small minority, less than 18% who have their own children with them are separated because they are in fact breaking the law and must be sent back. Our government is not so heartless as to house those children with other adults or leave them wandering the desert, so,they are kept with only other children to protect them.

Now if you come to the border to apply for asylum, you are given forms to file, and then told to wait on the other side of the border for the investigation and a hearing....with your children.

This was all explained to me by a BP agent escorting a prisoner to Newark for deportation. Every week now same thing. People from India are coming across the southern border. Those are the ones they catch, who can't pass themselves as Hispanic.

Btw, many of the girls they find as young as 11 have birth control pills given them by their parents when they sent them across with a group and a coyote, because so many are raped south of the border by the coyotes...who are sometimes caught as well.

The president has really stepped on his crank when he caved. There are just not enough facilities to house families securely, as a unit while protecting the kids from other adult detainees.
CBP is in a tizzy about what to do now.

If you’re going to say the WSJ you’d be correct.

I noticed you didn't mention about the unnecessary separation of children from their parents. How convenient.

Lots of these people are trying do just that and the Trump Administration is sending them away from the valid ports of entry and there are a myriad of other gray areas. I know that might make some uncomfortable, but it is not black and white.

So easy to say when yours and your children's lives aren't being threatened. As I said, heartless.

Actually, it is happening, but the Trump administration is saying that it is now illegal and only presenting yourself at port of entry from which they are turning people way is legal.

The decision was formerly left to the discretion of US attorneys like a myriad of other issues for the last nine years. Trump took the discretion out of their hands with regards to immigration, zero tolerance.

Cool. How long does that take? Are those safe environs on the other side of the border?

Wow. Maybe they should have thought of that before they changed the policy.

Let’s see...ISIS gone, NoKo no longer shooting missiles over Japan or testing nukes, Tax cuts, Reduced corporate tax rates, booming economy, renegotiating horrible trade deals to make them FAIR to the USA, funded military ..... draining swamp of corrupt FBI/ DOJ officials....I’ll take Trump over Obama any day.. Obama was a complete disaster. Incompetent idiot.

I.....didn't know I was a lawless fraud???? I feel so violated....that's a bit more than a micro aggression. :D

People like are a fifth column.

Being from a poor country isn't an excuse to claim asylum.

Siding with Kaepernick speaks for itself. Pettifogging the issue with the civil rights movement is pathetic and disingenuous. I’m glad to have an open dialogue about polarizing issues like this one. What I am tired of is having our CEO take (IMO) the wrong side of the issue time and time again for 5 minutes of political correctness.

How bout focusing on improving the operation, Proving better customer service and reclaiming HVC. Not, alienating passengers by attacking the NRA, a lawful practice with deportees, or apologizing for the Dao incident which united employees had nothing to do with and doubling down on express who did.

As a person of color I fail to feel oppressed. But I guess one can see “injustices” around every corner if one chooses too. It’s always easier to play the victim.

P.S.
I would never attempt an act that may separate my children from me. No matter the reward.

Actually those people were denied asylum and snuck over anyway. They were illegal no question about that.

Get your facts straight... asylum seekers who cross border legally (don’t jump fence, cross rio grande) are not separated from children if they can prove they are their kids... only those who cross illegally or can’t prove they are legal parents are separated... primarily because the parents who cross illegally are held in lockup like the criminals they are. Notice how I use the word illegal.... look up in dictionary.

Actually, I think separating minors from those traveling in their party is an important piece of investigating their legitimacy. I would also DNA test the adults and the children to determine if they are in fact related, or if they are merely traveling in their company.

Parents in the USA putting their children in harms way would be taken away from them by child protective services. Same goes here. The minor children should be removed to child protective services during the investigative phase.

You can say "heartless" all you want. Big deal. Here's the really big deal. If you want to protect your children and you are from another country looking to move to the USA, do it legally. Don't put your children in harms way. Have a heart, and be a responsible parent. Avoid the deserts of the southern USA and avoid the disreputable people smugglers, etc.

The "valid ports of entry" are only applicable if you have a passport and a visa. undocumented foreign nationals are citizens of other countries. Abide by the law, follow the law, obey the law, respect our laws, and respect our National Sovereignty. Pay your own way, and pay your own bills for you and your family. Apply, and do it legally. Otherwise, you are putting yourself and your family at risk and putting an undue and unfair burden on the tax payers.

Have a heart and respect our laws!

Life is hard. Life can be tough. Glad I was born in the USA. We can't control to where and to whom we are born. Everyone has a personal struggle of some sort. Safety and security are just as important as food and shelter. However, the USA has limited resources, not unlimited resources. If someone chooses to come here, they need to be able to support themselves and their famalies. Both their National State (State of citizenry) and the accepting state need to sign off on their repatriation.

It's all about the law. Within the legal system there are opportunities for judges to "judge" the merits of someone's case. This is when and where, get this..."judgement" can be applied. Feelings, or "heart" can be applied by those in a postion of authority and who are sworn to enforce our laws and uphold the Constitution.

I suggest a brief history lesson regarding the Mayflower, the Mayflower Compact and the early settlement of the 13 colonies. Maybe a bit of research of who John and Priscilla Alden were and why their commission from King George is just as relevant today as it was in 1620.


Many historians credit John Alden as being the first legal immigrant to the colonies as he had a commission as a "cooper", or barrel maker from King George and he was first off the boat. The commission from King George was only granted because he had skills that added value to the colony. He could pull his weight and help those in the colony with valuable skills.


Same goes today....we should only admit those that add value to our community, and the first step in determining if they add value is investigating their criminal record. History of illegal activity is a non-starter for me. Illegal border crossing to me means you don't care for our National sovereignty or the rule of law. That translates to go back to your home country and start over.

Read this. Maybe Fox made it up?! Seriously I think the Dems just like using this issue as a club. They're wholly f'd in the head since Trump became president and are largely grown emo-adults tantrumming. MY FEELINGS COME BEFORE THE LAW!!!!

Janet Reno v. Flores

HURWITZ, Circuit Judge:
In 1997, the plaintiff class (“Flores”) and the government
entered into a settlement agreement (the “Settlement”)
which “sets out nationwide policy for the detention, release,
and treatment of minors in the custody of the INS.”
Settlement ¶ 9. The Settlement creates a presumption in
favor of releasing minors and requires placement of those
not released in licensed, non-secure facilities that meet
certain standards.
In 2014, in response to a surge of Central Americans
attempting to enter the United States without documentation,
the government opened family detention centers in Texas
and New Mexico. The detention and release policies at these
centers do not comply with the Settlement. The government, however, claims that the Settlement only applies to
unaccompanied minors and is not violated when minors
accompanied by parents or other adult family members are
placed in these centers.
In 2015, Flores moved to enforce the Settlement, arguing
that it applied to all minors in the custody of immigration
authorities. The district court agreed, granted the motion to
enforce, and rejected the government’s alternative motion to
modify the Settlement. The court ordered the government
to: (1) make “prompt and continuous efforts toward family
reunification,” (2) release class members without
unnecessary delay, (3) detain class members in appropriate
facilities, (4) release an accompanying parent when releasing
a child unless the parent is subject to mandatory detention or
poses a safety risk or a significant flight risk, (5) monitor
compliance with detention conditions, and (6) provide class
counsel with monthly statistical information. The
government appealed, challenging the district court’s
holding that the Settlement applied to all minors in
immigration custody, its order to release parents, and its
denial of the motion to modify.
Although the issues underlying this appeal touch on
matters of national importance, our task is straightforward—
we must interpret the Settlement. Applying familiar
principles of contract interpretation, we conclude that the
Settlement unambiguously applies both to accompanied and
unaccompanied minors, but does not create affirmative
release rights for parents. We therefore affirm the district
court in part, reverse in part, and remand.

It really goes back further than Presidents Obama and Clinton. The democrats have been making hay over immigration for a while. To them, it's a way of tilting the voting scales on election day. Dems feel by pandering to immigrants and potential immigrants they can get to power and stay in power for generations. That translates to socialism and socialism for all. No way can we afford unlimited and unregulated immigration. Someone's gotta pay for their food, housing, and education of their children.....

Obama wasn't successful in fully socializing our way of life. The European model is what Obama was going for. Dems have been incrementally and systematically socializing our life and that means taxes will and must continue to go up in order to support their social programs, social justice, and social agenda. A chicken in every pot really translates to much-much more. That means it's your job, and your responsibility to provide those chickens to each and every poor person, and illegal immigrant. It means you and your families American dream take second place to some stranger from Nicaragua, or some less fortunate persons two states over.


Recent history should also be examined. Likely the last Democrat President who "got it" was JFK. Likely the last responsible and law abiding Dem... Remember, JFK was a Naval Officer (hero) from WWII. I think his oath of office as an Naval officer gave him pause...

In 1897, Congress imposed a literacy test on immigrants, but it was vetoed by President Cleveland. Taft and Wilson vetoed similar bills; but in 1917, with war tension rising, Congress overrode Wilson's 2nd veto. By now, wrote JFK, "Those who were opposed to all immigration and all 'foreigners' were joined by those who believed sincerely, and with some basis in fact, that America's capacity to absorb immigration was limited."

Kennedy's stance is understandable, for in 1958, he was courting liberals and intellectuals in a bid for the presidency. And the political forebears of those liberals were progressives who had joined Negro leaders and union leaders in seeking to halt the waves of immigrant labor that were depressing wages and taking jobs from our native-born, both black and white.

This was a time, recall, when 156,700/year was the quota limit, and JFK did not seem to object: "There is a legitimate argument for some limitation upon immigration." And Kennedy reassured Americans that his proposal "does not seek to make over the face of America."

Part of making America great again is simply following the law....We should all be for following the law. Democrat or Republican, shouldn't matter, but sadly for democrats it's really all about European immigration, the progressive agenda, and unlimited socialism. That's the end goal.

A large number of these people are not just from a poor country. Some are fleeing for their lives.

Also a reality for all of them that is completely ignored, (probably because it would require volumes of books and research to fully grasp) is that there is no country in Central America that is completely sovereign in the sense that people raised in the states think of it. Their economies, (ie job opportunities, cost of food, availability of health care etc) are by and large a subset of what has been set up for them (IMF, trade agreements written by multinational corp, world bank, mining and logging rights...the list is long). Their governments have learned that they not only must be friendly, they must agree to whatever conditions that the US demands, so they agree. Any dissent that becomes organized will be dealt with; often with lethal force outside an official govt role.
(I have a friend from Guatemala whose mother bought he and his brother here some years ago in just such a situation...his father had been murdered and she was informed they were next when they got around to it)

It is complicated beyond my bits of knowledge and no one is saying making open borders. But it is ignorant and dishonest to pretend that the USA is not part of the reasons for why people are trying to migrate.

Drug cartels, gangs and bullets have a way of separating children from their parents. Many of these parents in Latin America face choices unimaginable for Americans.

I would agree that many are in harms way... but flee to the nearest country and ask for asylum... don’t go through three or four countries... waters down the harms way rationale.

It is you who need to get the facts. This humanitarian crisis is the result of the Trump Administration changing the rules in April. They took away US attorneys discretion about which immigration cases to prosecute, required asylum seekers to go to ports of entry vice turning themselves in to any CPB agent on the border while they are turning people away at the ports of entry.

Here is a description of what they did legally that caused this mess.


https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/b...sis-conscience

First, the response just doesn’t comport with reality. The number of illegal crossing arrests has drastically declined, from a high of about 1 million in 2000 to slightly more than 300,000 in 2018. In fact, we haven’t seen numbers this low since the Nixon Administration in the early 1970s. Yet the Trump Justice Department has been directed to respond as if hordes of immigrants were storming America’s ramparts like an invading force.

Second, implementation of the blanket zero tolerance policy threatens to overwhelm available resources. The Justice Department prosecutes a total of about 70,000 cases each year, including some 20,000 immigration cases. The overall number will explode to more than 300,000 if “zero tolerance” is applied literally. And if zero tolerance results in all 300,000 cases being prosecuted by the Justice Department, federal court will have to hold mass hearings, mass trials, and mass sentencing, and the whole affair could double the current number of incarcerations from approximately 200,000 to over half a million.

Zero tolerance may make a catchy bumper sticker, but it is the very definition of bad public policy. Context must be considered if we are to maintain our world-class criminal justice system. The clear majority of these cases will be misdemeanor offenses of “entry without inspection,” which carries a maximum one-year sentence.

Federal court traditionally has been reserved for prosecuting serious violators of federal law — drug traffickers, terrorists, white-collar criminals, and felons with firearms to name a few — not people who want to work in the United States without proper inspection or permission.

OMG. You might want to get a map of Central America out and review their choices. The fact that they are willing to literally risk everything is prima facie evidence that their asylum request are likely valid.

Costa Rica, Guatemala, Belize, Panama and Mexico should all get them out of harms way and are much closer.

Do you discount possibility that they are looking for the best economic conditions as well? Economic migrants are not granted asylum. These are the 5 conditions listed where asylum may be granted. Which category would you place them in?

Race.
Religion.
Nationality.
Membership in a particular social group.
Political opinion.

There are allot of countries in the world that can offer asylum, assistance, or a place to live. America doesn't have to be everyone's "one stop shopping" for a decent place to live.

If anyone wants to take in, or individually sponsor a family they are free to do so. Just go to the US Government and tell them what you want to do as a private citizen. You can sponsor folks. But, that's a personal choice for you and your family. You are free to spend you income any way you wish, and open up your home to anyone you feel comfortable with.

At some point your value based decision is driven by or effected by economics. Your personal wealth and your square footage of space to house and take care of folks is a limitation, even for those of vast wealth, they too are limited. Heck, Sally Struthers didn't sponsor the entire Continent of Africa, and even Oprah has limits.

Interesting though.....Most folks offer support to where the support is needed. Build a school, support democracy, dig a water well, doctors without borders, various charities. We, as a country do our fair share. Time for the rest of the world to step up.

The fleeing Syrians could be supported somewhere in the middle east. The Venezuelans could be supported somewhere down south. The Mexicans could patrol their side of the border. Not the USA's obligation to solve everyone else's problem...all the time.

No, but they are free to pick the country from which they choose to seek asylum as long as their fleeing is based on one of the legitimate reasons you listed.

A right and proper deterrent would be adequate border security and properly enforced immigration laws. We are either a nation of law and order, or we are in chaos.

If our country didn't provide a means or a pathway for hard workers to rise above, or offer opportunity to those willing to sacrifice and ultimately achieve a better life then people wouldn't want to come here. Our beacon of hope doesn't have to be akin to a lantern for all insects to be attracted to. People need to find solutions to their problems closer to home, or in their home towns and countries, and in their regions. We can't be a life boat for everyone who is suffering and/or in poverty around the world.