Top ICE Lawyer Accused Of Identity Fraud Against Detained Immigrants
from the such-a-lovely-organization dept
For many, many years we’ve questioned the bizarre lawless nature of ICE — Immigration and Customs Enforcement — going back to the days when it was illegally seizing blogs, based on false claims of copyright infringement. We questioned what ICE had to do with censoring blogs in the first place. Of course, in the last year, ICE has been getting a lot more negative attention for something that is clearly under its purview: enforcement of immigration laws. Specifically, ICE has been almost gleefully demonstrating how they are thuggish bullies who are eager to deport as many people as possible. It’s disgusting and inhumane — and if you’re going to be one of those people who pop up in our comments to say something ignorant about how if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible, go somewhere else to spout your nonsense. Also, seriously: take stock of your own priorities and look deeply at why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.
But ICE’s violent, gleeful thuggery seems to come easy to the organization — and thus it should be little surprise that one of ICE’s top lawyers has been charged with identity fraud and wire fraud in trying to use the identities of at least seven immigrants who were being processed by ICE. The indictment against Raphael Sanchez, the chief counsel for ICE in Seattle is quite a read.
Beginning in or about October, 2013, and continuing until on or about October 25, 2017, in the Western District of Washington, the defendant,
RAPHAEL A. SANCHEZ,devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud financial institutions, including American Express Company, Bank of America Corporation, Capital One Financial Corporation, Citibank, Discover Financial Services, and JPMorgan Chase Co., by using the personally identifying information of seven aliens in various stages of immigration proceedings with the United States Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, and in doing so, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of wire communications in interstate or foreign commerce, writings, signals, and email communications for the purpose of executing such scheme and artifice to defraud; including but not limited to the following email “that SANCHEZ caused to be sent via interstate wires:
April 18, 2016: Email message sent from Raphael.Sanchez@ice.dhs.gov to Raphael.Sanchez@ice.dhs.gov and Raphael_sanchez@yahoo.com, containing a Puget Sound Energy bill addressed to R.H. for service at 3516 South Webster Street #A Seattle, Washington, and an image of a United States permanent resident card and the biographical page of a Chinese passport issued to R.H., originating in Washington and utilizing email servers in West Virginia and Mississippi.
That’s the wire fraud part. The identity fraud part includes:
On or about July 5, 2016, in the Western District of Washington, the defendant,
RAPHAEL A. SANCHEZ,did knowingly transfer, possess, and use, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person, including the name, Social Security number, and birth date of R.H., a real person, during and in relation to a felony violation enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(c), to wit, wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, as charged in Count One of this Information, in violation of 18 § U.S.C. 1028A(a)(1). .
I assume as the case against Sanchez moves forward, more details will come out about what exactly happened here. But, remember, this is at the very same time as ICE is asking to be reclassified from a law enforcement agency to an intelligence agency, giving it much greater access to surveillance data — without a warrant. Just imagine the kinds of identity fraud ICE lawyers could pull off with that access….
Filed Under: homeland security, ice, identity fraud, immigraiton, raphael sanchez, wire fraud
Comments on “Top ICE Lawyer Accused Of Identity Fraud Against Detained Immigrants”
They need to get their own TSA Bob to tell the public its an isolated incident each time it happens.
People mistreated in custody.
People dying in custody.
People denied medical care in custody.
(For the xenophobic cheer-leading section, you might feel that familiar tingle down below but you might want to temper it with if we allow them to ignore the law regarding these people that someone might decide you don’t deserve those protections when they decide you should go to jail.)
One wonders how we can trust anything coming out of this agency. It took them nearly 5 years to figure out this scheme, this isn’t even a case of demanding they be held to a higher standard because of their position, this is wondering how the fsck this happened and continued unnoticed or unreported.
We really need to overhaul these systems, its not been funny for a long time. We are out dated, paying above top dollar for crappy contracts on products that were outdated 5 years before we ordered them.
How can they keep us safe from all those scary illegals, when they are to busy committing fraud, abuse, & murder?
Re: Re:
It’s society’s fault that certain groups commit more crimes and murder at rates 30 times higher than the rest and are overrepresented in prisons.
I think we can say it’s not this lawyer’s fault it really is society’s dont blame him or the government.
Re: Re: Re:
The excuse machine is hard at work early this morning.
Re: Re: Re:
You know, I think we might just find that the group committing crimes at 30 times higher than the rest of us, but going to jail 30 times less often, is employees of ICE.
Re: Re: Re:
Oh pookie… that is a cute tired trope.
A white man with powder cocaine gets a free massage at a spa.
A black man with rock cocaine of any amount gets federal time.
If you want to talk about the higher rates, you might have to admit that the law is biased to appease people liek you who are just mad you can’t just lynch those damn darkies anymore for looking at a white girl.
Re: Re:
hOW TO BE A tHUG…
Dont care they have been in this country for ALONG TIME
Dont look up personal history
DONT CARE they have paid taxes ALL THE TIME HERE..
DONT care they have family
Dont care they are PAYING BILLS..Ask the CC corps how they feel of loosing those extra payments..WHO will pay?? YOU WILL.
ASK..Who is part and parcel of this?? the DHS..look who they are overcharge of..almost EVERY USA gov. agency. WHY??
FOR ALL the police state we are, running around the world HELPING others(?) what the HELL is going on in Central and South America..and are WE AT FAULT??(I wont say yes, but WE FIXED most of the elections)
OUR COUNTRY: WROTE THIS…
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/
But do we STAND BY THIS..
WE keep screaming that WE NEED JOBS…
the Corps DONT WANT you to have jobs, they WANT MONEY..
Start asking questions on how to CREATE more Companies to COMPETE with these idiots..WE CAN IMPORT..get people together and start fighting back..
my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
> and if you’re going to be one of those people who pop up in our comments to say something ignorant about how if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible, go somewhere else to spout your nonsense. Also, seriously: take stock of your own priorities and look deeply at why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.
– Mike Masnick
Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
I’ve hit the “plus” button on this 17 times already and may just hammer away at it for the next 10 minutes while I drink coffee.
Re: Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
Erm, you do realise that the lol and insightful buttons are toggles, right?
Re: Re: Re: my vote for Most Awesomely Good Comment
You mean…it doesn’t matter how hard I hit it? Damn. 😉
Journalistic Objectivity
Nowadays the so called journalists just want to get up and throw tantrums.
Re: Journalistic
(“For many many years we’ve questioned the bizarre lawless nature of ICE ” )
… and you regularly found them to be very bad boys. The important next logical step should be to figure out why that is…. rather than just further cataloging ICE misdeeds. Mere bean counting gets us nowhere.
Why does the ICE leadership tolerate (or encourage) such criminal behavior? Are there some fundamental problems with the ICE mission, organization, and ineffective Federal legal constraints upon it ?? (you betcha). What possible remedies exist for fixing this serious ICE problem?
Somehow government employees and intitutions eager to do their jobs is disgusting and inhumane. I know we’re not used to the government doing its job but you’re going a bit far Mike.
Re: Re:
Doing inhumane jobs in an inhumane fashion is inhumane. So is causing harm by refusal to do a job. So is doing illegal shit by abusing position.
Not a very clever bit of re-framing you have there.
Re: Re: Re:
I was trying to be ironic and funny but I guess it didnt come out that way since way too many right-leaning people roam the comment section of this site, everything is taken at face value…
Re: Government efficiency
I was under the impression that the current administration was trying to reduce the reach and influence of the government because our government institutions are too eager to do their job. This is an example of an agency that is not just eager to do their job but also taking steps to intimidate and mistreat some of our most vulnerable people and tear families apart. It is difficult for one to go too far by merely pointing out this kind of tyranny.
Re: Re: Government efficiency
“the current administration was trying to reduce the reach and influence of the government “
That is what they say … what they do is a different story.
Re: Re:
“Somehow government employees and intitutions eager to do their jobs is disgusting and inhumane. “
If they do it in a disgusting and inhumane way, of course it is. “I was just doing my job” doesn’t excuse you if you choose to do it in the worst way possible, even if you agree with the nature of the job itself.
Re: Re: Re:
The Justices of the US Supreme Court, sitting in judgement at Nuremburg, decreed that “just following orders” is not a defense against wrongdoing. That became part of US law.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Briefly. America’s torturers, and those who issued the orders, were not prosecuted.
One of those torturers, Rick Saccone, is now the GOP nominee in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district. He’s ahead in the polls too.
Nuremburg ain’t Pennsylvania.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
“So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause.”
Yuck!
Re: Re:
Government employees and institutions eager to do disgusting and inhumane things*
… is disgusting and inhumane.
if you're going to be one of those people
There is a number. While that number is not published anywhere, it has been calculated by many governments around the world. That number, is the total number of persons this planet will sustainably support, given the most reasonable expectation of energy efficiency.
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
And once you calculate that number, if the current population is above that number, it stops being about the what, and starts being about the who.
And while I take a humanitarian view, and generally respect the principles inscribed on the statue of liberty, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in that. I probably use my Air Conditioning too much. I drive a car more than I should. I have a black roof on my house instead of a white one. I use fertilizer on a grass lawn, which shouldn’t even BE grass. I own a bunch of shit I don’t need or really want.
All of those things reflect burned watts that ultimately reflect a disregard for the afore mentioned number. Consumerism is the ultimate anti-humanitarianism. And while I generally disregard fundamentalism right wing views, I can’t help but think about that number every time I hear one about immigration.
If I was a betting man, I would say that number has already been reached. And if it has, that means that ALL of the worlds national economies need to be refactored with severe prejudice.
That some people are assholes about immigration is beside the point. We are all assholes. That is why they come here. They want to be assholes too.
Re: if you're going to be one of those people
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Whooops finger trouble
In IOW, everything; EVERYTHING can be measured in watts. Our food, our water, our air, our cozy air conditioned homes. All of those watts come from the sun, and there is only so much of it we can use without sustaining an unrecoverable ecological debt.
It is way more complicated than that.
Firstly – all of those watts don’t have to come from the sun. Ever heard of nuclear energy?
Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway.
Thirdly – whilst you make some good points about over consumption in developed countries (of which the US is the worst by a country mile), one thing that is worth noting is that assholes (as you put it) generally don’t have lots of kids – so having more assholes tends to result in a lower population.
The native populations of most of the western world are now reproducing at below replacement rates and conventional wisdom says that the immigrants will do the same once established. Of course the conventional wisdom could be wrong on this point – but the consequences don’t bear thinking about.
Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
—all of those watts don’t have to come from the sun Ever heard of nuclear energy?
Since we do not yet have nuclear fusion you must be speaking of fission. You do realize that those heavy elements were created by other suns, right?
Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
“Ever heard of nuclear energy”
I get your point. But no, fission reactors do not solve the ecological debt problem.
“It is way more complicated than that.”
Yes it is complicated. There are many many factors that have to be calculated. But it still comes down to a watts/person ratio. We are in a fishbowl, with the vacume of space instead of glass walls. If the ratios aren’t right, we’re fucked. You don’t need to take my word on it, ask your kids goldfish.
“Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway.”
I disagree. We don’t have to use every resource to begin a cascade failure. And we could be well into a cascade failure and not know it. Large ecological systems have buffering capacity. We don’t know at this point how deep we are into that buffer, if at all. But my guess is maybe 30% of this planets reserve capacity for sustaining our species is gone.
Of course that is just a WAG. (wild ass guess) like your declaration is. I base that belief on Google maps. CO2 sequestration rates of forests are higher than industrial agricultural lands. If you consider how much previously forested land is now farm land, and consider the CO2/O2 conversion rate, we are looking at a fraction of the conversion capability that this planet had before the industrial age. And that is before we start talking about the ocean.
“the western world are now reproducing at below replacement rates”
Yes, but they are using more energy and natural resources per person than other countries. The system has to be in balance. The industrialized nations are not only completely out of balance, but they are encouraging other countries to become more out of balance as well.
The WTO is working on economic models that are not based on a wholistic ecological management viewpoint, but rather an industrial age viewpoint. This is driven largely by the fact that it is hard to measure things like CO2 sequestration rates in plants under various environmental circumstances. Yet those number are more important right now, that the market leverage you get from dumping newfangled chemicals on rice paddys.
IOW, all economists are working with bad data. The way you know that, is there isn’t a thousands of environmental scientists trolling around your state employed to get good data. And the reason those guys aren’t there, is that there is no consumer market demand for that data. Of course there will be when we can no longer breath. But I guess there will be a product for that. For a little while anyway.
If resources per person is R, population is P, maximum total sustainable resource output during equilibrium is S, then the maximum sustainable human population is: H = P when (R*P/S = 1).
Nobody has solved for H? Really? That would seem like the most important number on the planet, and nobody has any idea? I doubt that seriously.
To bring this back to the OP, “H” should be a public number, because it will help to contextualize immigration. “Them or us” may or may not be a valid viewpoint. We don’t know. All of us would like “H” to be a bigger number than the current world population. But I doubt it is. And frankly we could afford to bring more folks on board with us, if we managed our economy with consideration for “H” in every respect.
Calling each other dicks is a complete waste of time. There is a ton of work that needs to get done to resolve our ignorance. And make no mistake, every position on this subject is rife with ignorance, including my own. I should like to correct that.
How about you?
Re: Re: Re:2 if you're going to be one of those people
_"Secondly we are not even remotely near that limit anyway."
I disagree. We don’t have to use every resource to begin a cascade failure. And we could be well into a cascade failure and not know it. Large ecological systems have buffering capacity. We don’t know at this point how deep we are into that buffer, if at all. But my guess is maybe 30% of this planets reserve capacity for sustaining our species is gone.
Of course that is just a WAG. (wild ass guess) like your declaration is. _
My declaration isn’t a "wild ass guess"
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy#/media/File:Solar_land_area.png
Re: Re: Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Nuclear is not the panacea you claim it to be.
Re: if you're going to be one of those people
“That is why they come here.” …….. (to be assholes)
Perhaps some immigrants are fleeing the third world due to rampant violence, tyranny, oppression, starvation ….. caused by first world carpet baggerz.
Re: if you're going to be one of those people
Most of the estimates I’ve read put that number around 10-12 billion and the UN predictions I’ve read have the human population plateauing at around 10 billion later this century. We should be fine.
ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
The GOP is fully aware that an enormous and still-growing backlash against Donald “Putin’s obedient bitch” Trump is coming. They were faced with two choices: (1) repudiate him or (2) go all-in on supporting him.
Of course these lacked the courage to do (1), so it’s (2). Which means that they’re going to have a much harder time winning elections, IF THOSE ELECTIONS ARE CONDUCTED FAIRLY.
So now they’re doing everything possible to keep that from happening. In Georgia, they’re trying to make all security research illegal so that nobody can find out what’s wrong with voting systems. In Pennsylvania, they’re threatening to impeach the state supreme court rather than fix gerrymandering. Yesterday in Washington, they eliminated the only federal agency charged with security voting systems. And so on: there really are too many of these to list here.
And then there’s what ICE is doing, which is explicitly designed to intimidate anyone who’s any kind of immigrant: legal, illegal, somewhere in between. The goal is to frighten people into avoiding any contact with government, especially including voter registration. Because even someone who’s here legally, even someone who’s become a citizen, now has to wonder if ICE goons won’t show up in the middle of night and point loaded guns at their children.
You can say “they shouldn’t worry” but YOU’RE NOT THEM. You’re not one of the ones being targeted. And ICE is only getting started: I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the plan is to have them accompany census takers in order to scare people into not responding, in order to artificially reduce the population count in some areas, in order to reduce representation of those areas in state and federal legislatures and to decrease their allocated funding.
This isn’t the only initiative undertaken by the Trump administration with the same goal of tilting elections toward the GOP — there are many others that are designed to disenfranchise and disempower — but this one is being done with particular cruelty.
That’s not an accident.
Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
I remember the days before the election where every media outlet laughed at Trump when he said that the election was rigged against him and then laughed at him when he said that he would contest the results. They assured everyone that the election was fair and untemperable.
But incredibly, he won. And out of thin air a story about Russia and Putin came out of the left saying he somehow cheated and Russia stole the election…
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
“They assured everyone that the election was fair and untemperable. “
And in light of compelling evidence they still say this.
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
“And out of thin air a story about Russia and Putin came out of the left”
Once again, right-wingers cling to the opposite of reality. It doesn’t take much searching to find Trump making comments about Russian hacking in 2014, and you can bet your ass that had the election gone the way the popular vote said it should, he’d be the one screaming about it now.
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Why is it that both sides still use Russia as a bogeyman – communism ended in 1991. Russia is no longer the champion of a competing worldview that is trying to take over. It is just a country and its ambitions now are limited to trying to get back it bit of what we grabbed from them when the Soviet Union fell.
Plenty of other countries in the world behave worse and are more of a threat to our way of life and yet “Russia” is always the bogeyman.
Re: Re: Re:2 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
“Why is it that both sides still use Russia as a bogeyman”
Because there appears to be documented evidence that they have actually done many of the things they’re accused of doing? Because the mindset of ex-KGB workers and the like didn’t magically change when the institutions around them fell?
I agree that they might not be the absolute number one danger, but there’s not zero threat either.
Re: Re: Re:3 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
_I agree that they might not be the absolute number one danger, but there’s not zero threat either._
Threat of what exactly?
Of course the real problem is that WE really are the number one threat to THEM.
The “west” has attacked Russia, essentially unprovoked, on at least four occasions in the last 200 years (Napoleon, Crimean war, WW1, WW2) – go back further in time and you get the Baltic Crusades etc.
In return Russia has never attacked/invaded the west except during the endgame of WW2, when they were attacked first.
Try looking at things from the Russian point of view for a change.
Re: Re: Re:4 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
“Try looking at things from the Russian point of view for a change.”
I’d try, but then I wouldn’t be able to get the smell out of my hair for days.
Re: Re: Re:4 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
It’s interesting that military action is the only threat you seem to be able to perceive. You should try widening your worldview.
Re: Re: Re:4 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Only one of those happened in the last 100 years.
while we have
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
(finland)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1944)
(a number of baltic states.)
And that’s just in the space of a few years.
You have no clue what you’re talking about.
Re: Re: Re:2 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Manufacturing was exported to China, not Russia, so they are more cautious about using China as the bogyman.
Re: Re: Re:3 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Well, that’s true as well. When so much US business is dependent on China, it’s better to redirect attention to NK and Russia than risk upsetting the people you use to generate your profit.
Re: Re: Re:4 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Or the people you buy your oil from…
Re: Re: Re:5 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Don’t get me started!!
Re: Re: Re:2 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
“Plenty of other countries in the world behave worse and are more of a threat to our way of life and yet “Russia” is always the bogeyman.”
Hey, Putinsucker: did you notice the indictments that were just handed down today? 13 of your fucking so-called “bogeymen” now face federal charges — and that’s just the beginning.
Re: Re: Re:3 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
You sound just like the old Soviet Kremlin.
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Apropos of nothing, a grand jury has just indicted 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian entities for interfering in US elections.
That’d be from the Mueller investigation, led, of course, by Robert Mueller, who was appointed FBI Director by noted left-wing liberal George W Bush.
Re: Re: Re:2 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Yup. Robert Mueller is a Republican, appointed the Director of the FBI by President George W. Bush in 2001.
The head of the FBI is Trump appointee Christopher Wray, who Trump said is “a man of impeccable credentials.” Wray himself says that the Republican House memo is false and misleading.
The renewal of the Carter Page FISA warrant was done by Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General appointed by Trump. He worked on Ken Starr’s Whitewater investigation into Bill and Hillary’s real estate dealings.
Rosenstein wrote the memo for Trump that Trump used to fire James Comey. Comey is a registered Republican who served in the Bush Administration and donated to the Presidential campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney.
All 11 FISA judges were appointed by Republican appointee John Roberts
The left really stacked the deck there.
Re: Re: Re:3 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
And probably swung the 2016 election to Trump.
Re: Re: "The election is rigged!" "You won." "...I did? Well then, the election was totally above board!"
Trump when he said that the election was rigged against him and then laughed at him when he said that he would contest the results.
The funny thing is as soon as he said that he shot his own foot and basically barred himself from claiming otherwise(or at least he would have were he honest). Claiming that the only way you could possibly lose is if the election is rigged opens the door to that very same accusation used against you, that of people pointing out that you yourself said the system was compromised so how are they to trust that you didn’t benefit from that?
(And of course there’s the ongoing investigation that seems to come up with new evidence supporting the idea of foreign interference on a semi-regular basis.)
Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
You must read only the uniformly biased "mainstream media" — not even The Drudge Report.
Actually, Trump’s State Of The Union went over well, the "economy" is reasonably well claimed to be okay (even the MSM aren’t yelling about homeless and poverty), and opinion polls support that the MSM, again, has simply over-reached in the false claims that it was Trump colluding with "Russians" when in fact was Clinton / DNC / FBI / Deep State / various paid operatives who simply allege "inside" contacts in Russia though haven’t been there for many years.
So basically, you clearly don’t even recognize that there are other views, nor that people on "your" side may be going to jail for their crimes.
Weird. Sad. Propaganda bubble.
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Nice try, Ivan. Keep Putin’s cock nice and safe in your willing mouth.
Re: Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Homophobic much?
Re: Re: Re:2 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Oh, heck no. I’m just exploiting a well-known vulnerability in Putin’s sockpuppet army and Trump’s base. If I thought some other insult would work better, I’d use that.
Re: Re: Re:3 ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
Nope. Won’t work.
There’s an old saying, “The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy.”
The evangelicals have stuck with Donald Trump through multiple wives, “grab her by the pussy”, Stormy Daniels, white supremacy, his endorsement of Roy Moore and much much more. The old saying is no longer true.
Re: Re: ICE's actions should be viewed in a larger context
As if “The Drudge Report” is not yellow journalism.
You are incorrect – obviously. The economy is not doing well, poverty is still a problem and getting worse as is homelessness. But you knew that and are simply doing your minimum wage tasks of polluting the net with propaganda – good for you, gotta put food on the table somehow. It just gets a bit difficult sometimes I imagine – like when they want to to make up excuses for the murder of 17 people or even worse, claim it is a hoax, has anyone yet made that claim? If not they will soon.
Do you ever pass a homeless vet sitting on the sidewalk and say “thank you for your service”? If so – did they say anything in response? What was it? Because I’m pretty sure it was not a nice response.
Reasons
Specifically, ICE has been almost gleefully demonstrating how they are thuggish bullies who are eager to deport as many people as possible.
Same sort of thing happens in the UK – and I guess for the same reasons.
It goes like this:
People in the 1% who live in gated communities have a conscience about refugees from war-torn countries etc and push for more immigration from those countries.
People outside the 1% who actually have to live with the impact of 1) become upset about it – sometimes even justifiably.
Populist politicians capitalise on 2) and introduce "draconian" rules and "targets" for immigration.
Enforcement officials get assessed according to these "targets" and are pressed into enforcing them to the letter (with many unintended consequences).
Very soon no-one who has any common humanity wants to work in immigration enforcement.
It is important to note that everyone in this sequence is at fault in some way – not just the nasty people at the sharp end of it.
Whilst :
why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.
seems like a reasonable, compassionate, position it is not a practical one becaue simply admitting anyone who seeks that better way of life would destroy it for everyone, including themselves.
There have to be restrictions, and those restrictions have to be enforced but somehow we need to find a way of attracting people with some humanity into the job, and allow them to bend the rules on occasion to cope with the most difficult cases.
In the meantime we need to address the root causes of these problems – to wit the vast inequalities in wealth between rich and poor countries – largely reinforced by the activities of major US corporations.
Re: Reasons
The 1% feel bad about the repercussions of their actions?
I find this difficult to believe, perhaps there is some data.
The 99% are to blame for everything, amirite? Divide and conquer has worked for many centuries and continues to be a useful tactic to subvert the wishes of the public by turning them against themselves. Meanwhile the spectacled Daddy war Bucks sips his brandy while smoking fine cigars laughing it up all the way to the lobbyists to get more.
Re: Reasons
So wrong, on so many points.
1) Refugees, asylum seekers are all immigrants, but not all immigrants are refugees or asylum seekers. The rich don’t have influence over immigration by way of compassion pleas. Immigration is determined by legislation, executive order, and government bureaucracy, often in coordination with the UN and/or other national governments.
2) The other 99%, the regular folks, are not harmed or negatively affected by this supposed more direct “consequence” of a diverse society. Immigrants are just scapegoats for the nationalist populist (similarly the white nationalist lay blame for societal ills on black people, complaining ‘haven’t we given them enough already?’) agenda. It’s easier to blame the “others” and whip up a frenzy of political action against a common “enemy”. Life is not a zero sum game.
3) Law enforcement is not pressured into anything. They can be as utterly incompetent as any other government entity and we will foolishly keep shoveling money at them, faster the more incompetent. There is no enforcement purpose in destroying life-sustaining emergency supplies supplied by humanitarian groups in remote and perilous desert locations. ICE and CBP are not uniquely cruel and inhumane by comparison to any other law enforcement agency.
4) Allowing conditional immigration to anyone who does not have a violent history, and will not likely need government welfare (barring an emergency) and who wants to make a better life for themselves will not destroy anything. Competition between workers, citizen or immigrant, means that the worker must leverage his personal value to an employer by being better or faster, conceding working conditions such as agreeing to be migratory or taking lower pay, or by acquiring/utilizing an additional skill/service like translating for non-english speaking co-workers, providing reliable transportation, or taking on a managerial role. No one is entitled to a job as a birth right, competition is part of life.
5) Arguing that arbitrary restrictions on immigration are needed because many immigrants come from socialist nations, and that they will either change or influence the electorate to vote democrat and pro-socialist agenda is another straw-man. The only reason immigrants are more democrat is because the democrats aren’t hostile towards them. Immigrants from socialist nations are escaping that hell, they know first hand how awful socialism is.
6) Wealth inequalities between rich and poor nations is the fuel for immigration? And US corporations have a share of blame? Huh? I would agree if you said it was US government that has interfered with some nations’ ability to flourish, and contributing to refugee crisis. But what are harms do businesses cause? US companies outsource jobs, like manufacturing, to poorer nations which creates economic opportunity for struggling people. Jobs at sweatshops are preferable to starvation and prostitution, as awful as sweatshops seem to first-worlders. Some think trade deficits are a bad thing, thinking it’s a zero-sum game that harms the US, so I don’t understand how your claim fits in this dynamic.
Re: Re: Reasons
Eh, Cattress, I’ve got two bones to pick with you:
1) Red scare-ing over socialism. Stop it. http://on-t-internet.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/venezuela-what-is-going-on-there-why.html
2) Jobs at sweatshops. Why does some poor sod have to take one for the team that the rich may grow richer?
There’s a world of difference between healthy competition that benefits us all and a frantic race to the bottom where the Golden Rule applies: he who has the gold makes the rules.
How did we get to a place where enforcing our law is considered being heartless and a bad human being?
Re: Re:
You see, that’s the thing isn’t it …. enforcing what law – one they just made up in their little minds? Yes, I am allowed to steal because I’m enforcing the law!
Re: Re:
No one’s saying that this ICE officer being prosecuted is being heartless. And no ones arguing that the people prosecuting him are bad human beings.
He’s a filthy piece of shit and a disgrace to anyone in law enforcement.
Re: Re:
How did we get to a place where enforcing our law is considered being heartless and a bad human being?
Didn’t work as a defence at Nurenberg.
Re: Re:
The problem is not that we’re just “enforcing the law”, it’s that we’re refusing to own up to what we sowed. If we were enforcing our immigration laws properly, we wouldn’t be abruptly throwing the lives of asylum applicants into chaos by abruptly rearranging the line in the waiting room or throwing sand in the gears of the credible fear process. We wouldn’t be trying to prosecute denaturalization cases based on irrelevant fibs (SCOTUS round-filed that theory with not a whit of dissent from the judgement in sight in Maslenjak v. United States). We wouldn’t be revoking temporary status in a retaliatory fashion based on First Amendment protected activities.
Any of that stuff sound like good law enforcement to you?
Re: Re: Re:
Well … Donald only wants white folk
“ICE is asking to be reclassified from a law enforcement agency to an intelligence agency”
So, this asshat will be given immunity?
… Figures.
The comment about “how did we get to a place…” is in response to ” and if you’re going to be one of those people who pop up in our comments to say something ignorant about how if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible, go somewhere else to spout your nonsense. Also, seriously: take stock of your own priorities and look deeply at why you are so focused on destroying the lives of people who are almost certainly less well off and less privileged than you are, and who are seeking a better way of life.”
Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
No, FIRST you state exactly what right illegal immigrants have to invade MY country.
You even KNOW it argues for getting illegal immigrants OUT of the country before they have time to put down roots, try to get ahead of the obvious solution!
In any case, I’m NOT going elsewhere, you don’t get a little walled garden in which to spew your hate of America, masnicks.
You put the alleged rights of illegal immigrants over those of citizens and the country to control borders, while vilifying agency and agents with Techdirt’s characteristic abundance of pejoratives. I like the clear stance.
The usual rabid anti-Americanism came out! — It’s okay to vilify the entire country over one corrupt lawyer, but pro-Americans must not resent the invasion of millions, eh?
Seems most of the frequent commenters at Techdirt aren’t even Americans! You have NO say in MY country.
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
“No, FIRST you state exactly what right illegal immigrants have to invade MY country.”
Why should he? He;’s never claimed anything of the sort, only that they don’t magically lose human rights and the right granted to them by your laws just because they don’t have documented permission to be there.
Once again, you only have something to say by lying about the world around you. What a sad pathetic life you lead.
“Seems most of the frequent commenters at Techdirt aren’t even Americans! You have NO say in MY country.”
Actually, dickhead, the First Amendment of the US constitution gives me that right 100%. Ignorant xenophobes such as yourself do seem to get very confused about your own laws for some reason.
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
But you don’t have it in the "Kingdom" which owns you, serf.
So YOU have power in MY country, eh? By what right, since you aren’t even a person where you live?
Is accurate: you can SAY what you want, but don’t have any (legal, actual) power other than whatever persuasion on Americans.
And you aren’t going to persuade the majority to let in unlimited illegals.
But THANKS for exampling the rabid, arrogant, anti-Americanism I stated.
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
You do love to lie about the laws of other countries, don’t you? Is it because your fragile ego can’t accept that your country allows other people a voice?
“And you aren’t going to persuade the majority to let in unlimited illegals.”
Again, nobody has said they want to, least of all me.
Do you not get tired of lying?
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
No, FIRST you state exactly what right illegal immigrants have to invade MY country.
Didn’t work for the Native Americans….
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
In any case, I’m NOT going elsewhere, you don’t get a little walled garden
The line taken by Techdirt isn’t always perfect – but those of us who want a rational discussion are dismayed when this kind of irrational nonsense is the major contrary voice.
Then the comments column fills up with "me too" type dismissal and everything else is buried.
Please can everyone just ignore these comments. Don’t respond – don’t even click the report button – it just gives him something to complain about.
(Me too in the Zantac rather than Harvey Weinstein sense of the words)
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
That’s all I’ve ever asked — comments not hidden — and which Techdirt is obliged to afford by way of the forms contract, lack of rights reserved, and general opinion, I mean common law, that this is a discussion forum, not a false partisan front which only tolerates one view.
Re: Re: Re:2 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
https://xkcd.com/1357/
“That’s all I’ve ever asked — comments not hidden”
You could easily solve that by not being an insufferable liar. Give it a shot, you might be shocked by the results!
Re: Re: Re:3 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
We could fix it too by not clicking the button – because it seems to have the opposite effect to that intended.
The report button was put in originally for genuine spam.
Re: Re: Re:4 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
No, the button has always mentioned trolling and abuse as its intended use on top of reporting spam. People just didn’t count on this asshole having the reaction he gets whenever he’s correctly flagged.
The problem is, every other viable solution I’ve seen discussed would require people to log in in order to comment, and Mike has repeatedly stated he’s against this. I can’t think of any better solution that would enable people to identify and not see the comments from deliberate idiots, but also allow people to post without having to create an account. If there is one to be suggested, I’m sure it would be considered.
Re: Re: Re:5 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
I don’t care about seeing the original comments – but if you flag them he posts again – and people respond again and the whole comment section gets clogged.
Re: Re: Re:6 Flag and move on
Have you seen some of the recent comment sections? Whether he/she’s flagged or not he/she still dumps comment after comment(where they differs from Hamilton when that individual was around is that blue at least doesn’t tend to reply to their own comments). Whether their comments are reported or not they’re still going to spam the comment section, at least by flagging them they don’t take up so much space and don’t distract from comments left by others as much.
Re: Re: Re:2 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
I just hit the lol button when I see your words on the page.
It is to laugh – Daffy Duck
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Ok – so you are a hypocrite – got it.
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Given that Canada has had refugees crossing our border by the thousands from the US over the last year or so, we have every right to comment on your immigration policy. 15,000 just in the first half of last year, many of them in the US legally but seeing the writing on the wall.
Given that ICE (in its earlier INS incarnation) has been responsible for kidnapping and torturing Canadians, we have every right to comment on them too.
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Actually, you have NO "rights", you are SERFS of the inbred chinless wonders who descend from German robber-barons.
Fix your own problems, we’ll tend to ours.
YOU complain that US policies are driving people into Canada, eh? — WHAT’S THE PROBLEM? WELCOME THEM WITH HUGS AND FREE GOODIES! — See, YOU just admitted that large numbers of immigrants ARE a problem.
Silly Canadian. Petarded with your own hoist!
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Canadians are citizens. We have all the rights that Americans have. Even your Cato Institute ranks Canada higher than the US on their Human Freedom Index.
The royals are ceremonial. On paper they have power, but only with the understanding that don’t use it. Canadians are horrified by the thought of dropping the monarchy, but only because of the inevitable bickering over who would replace them on the currency. It’ll be like a Trump/Cruz/Hillary debate lasting for years.
Welcome folks with hugs and free goodies, and they tend to be good friends. The US was built on large numbers of immigrants.
Re: Re: Re:2 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
HA, HA! — Oh, you’ve been indoctrinated with that falsehood since birth and it soothes your feelings to believe, though also know full well that:
A) "the royals" have veto power over all laws in Canada too
B) the Kingdom has TWO classes, and YOU are in the LOWER class
C) "the royals" STILL own about 30 percent of the land in Britain
D) "the royals" STILL have overwhelming control of ALL that goes on in the "Kingdom"; there’s an entire army division dedicated to protecting the (one) person and family
E) There’s only ONE person in the whole UK who can operate a private car on the roads without being licensed, and that’s the monarch, because OWNS the roads. PERIOD.
F) You are DISARMED serfs, DO NOT HAVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO OWN AND KEEP FIREARMS. That’s the KEY point of rights. You are too dangerous to be armed. — Heck, in Britain, they even take away long knives!
What you stated about having rights is lie and illusion — indeed it’s the only view that you are permitted to hold. I’m happy to expose the lie and ruin your illusions too.
Re: Re: Re:3 Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
On paper, with the understanding that they don’t use it. They could override Canadians’ wishes once, but that power would quickly be gone.
Nope. Just one class in Canada. We stopped allowing the monarch to grant knighthoods, baronetcies, and peerages almost a century ago.
The Canadian government owns a similar percentage in Canada. It’s sometimes called "crown land", but again that’s a ceremonial thing. Legally it’s "public land" and not owned by the monarch. Likewise, the US federal government owns 28% of US land.
Also military drivers, because in theory they get their orders from the queen. (There’s a funny story there….) But again, in theory. It’s the Canadian military handing out the orders. The queen is a ceremonial figurehead. Legal power which would quickly disappear if she ever tried to wield it.
Incorrect on all points. We have stricter controls on handguns, but you can own them.
Consider the Quebec man who killed a cop and disabled another with his handgun in his home because he legitimately believed he was about to be killed by armed robbers. (No-announce search warrant in the middle of the night). Found not guilty. Try that in America. They’d have given him the electric chair.
Again, even your right-wing Cato institute ranks Canada higher than the US on its Human Freedom Index.
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
And here, ladies and gentleman is “one of those people who pop up”.
Your bigoted, hateful self is showing. I pity you.
Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
Masnick tries to condemn the whole US of A over what one LAWYER does. I simply point out — perhaps a little too slyly — that condemning groups for actions of one is wrong.
Not bigoted, not hateful, just using Masnick’s technique.
Thanks for the pity, though! (Actually, I’m pretty sure that you mean "despise", as "pity" means sympathy and well-wishing.)
Re: Re: Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
” condemn the whole US of A “
I do not feel this way, why do you attempt to speak on my behalf? I never asked for that and ask that you stop doing so in the future. You do not speak for me.
Re: Actually discredits Hispanics and lawyers. But besides blame all of ICE and its mission to keep out foreign invaders, I'm sure you blame "Republicans", Trump, and Russians too.
while vilifying agency and agents with Techdirt’s characteristic abundance of pejoratives
Vilifying agency and agents with pejorative? You mean like the small-handed orange retard does on a daily basis?
Yeah, you can stick that comment right up your self-righteous ass, there dipshit. Keep on proving exactly how stupid you low-IQ voters really are.
Why do you think that United States Laws should be ignored? If they are bad laws, they should be changed, not ignored. Do you think it is a good idea to just ignore laws?
Re: Re:
“Why do you think that United States Laws should be ignored?”
Why do you think anyone has said they should be? Most of what’s written is about problems with the way they’re being enforced, not the laws themselves.
It is interesting, however, that people are coming in here to spout off about Mike daring to correctly state that illegal immigrants have rights, rather than having problems with the criminal activities associated with the ICE agents. You’re so offended by people being there without permission (usually a civil violation) that you’ll happily support criminals and assume they are deporting people correctly because of the badge they wear. It’s rather fascinating.
Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Umm, great. "Illegals" have rights by virtue of violating the law, eh? And the US of A has NO right to control its borders?
Even better smear is "happily support criminals" — NO, WE DON’T! Severe problem with ONE lawyer committing CRIMES has been found and is being dealt with. He’ll get a fair trial and then, I hope, go to jail for years.
And YOU have the infernal gall to complain about people lying, eh? You just smeared the entire country, and feel virtuous about it, way you serfs do when allowed to attack the US of A, though you don’t dare criticize your own illegal hereditary rulers.
Rave on some more hate at the US of A, serf, you’re allowed that.
Re: Re: Re: @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
“”Illegals” have rights by virtue of violating the law, eh?”
No, they have rights by virtue of being human beings and by virtue of your constitution granting them those rights. You fascists just don’t get to strip those rights away because you believe they didn’t get the correct paperwork.
“And the US of A has NO right to control its borders?”
So, what is it that keep causing you to hallucinate people saying things they didn’t say? Is it too many drugs, or not enough?
“Even better smear is “happily support criminals” — NO, WE DON’T!”
Then why the desperate flailing attempts to put the focus on something else other than the criminal discussed in the story? There’s nothing to say that you can’;t be critical of both the criminals in ICE and the actions of the illegal immigrants, so if you’re that eager to distract attention you must support the criminals in some way?
“You just smeared the entire country”
I didn’t, but even if I did that’s what free speech is, I could say that if I wish. You do really seem to oppose your own First Amendment.
Re: Re: Re:2 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Re: Re: Re:3 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
“Who’s been stripped of rights in this?”
Nobody. But, there sure seem to be a lot of people like yourself who would prefer if immigrants didn’t have the rights they’ve been afforded. Sorry, they still get things like due process even if their presence offends you.
“YOU don’t get to strip away the right of the US of A to control its borders against foreign invaders “
Good thing I’m not trying to, then. Again, what is it that’s causing you to imagine a different discussion to the one in front of you? Are the things people are actually saying too accurate for you, so you have to erect a handy strawman to dismantle instead?
“Why the attempt to divert from the immigration policies of other countries?”
It’s not on topic. If you started bitching about Linux in a discussion of Apple’s policies or started talking about Volkswagen in a discussion of Honda’s legal team, I’d also tell you to talk about the subject at hand.
Here, it’s the criminal activity of American government employees, so Israeli policy doesn’t enter the discussion, even if your favourite fascist supporters have written a story ab out it.
Re: Re: Re:4 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
FIRST YOU SMEAR AND ACCUSE:
To which I asked "Who’s been stripped of rights in this?"
And you now reply: "Nobody. But, there sure seem"
You just admitted that you were fabricating harm.
You repeatedly use the word "fascist" when know full well that I oppose corporatism, ALL lawyers, and fully support the US Constitution.
You try going on to: "Here, it’s the criminal activity of American government employees, so Israeli policy doesn’t enter the discussion, even if your favourite fascist supporters have written a story ab out it."
It’s ONE gov’t employee, in the news precisely because caught. You are LYING with the plural.
I compared on-topic with far worse implications, and you explicitly do NOT care when it’s Israel.
Then another "fascist" charge.
IF this site were fair as pretends, then YOUR comments right here would be voted down and hidden.
Re: Re: Re:5 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
“You just admitted that you were fabricating harm”
No, I stated that people like you openly wish that they didn’t have rights. Which they have in every recent thread that the subject has been discussed in.
Look, I know reading is really hard for you, but it helps when you don’t invent your own narrative while doing so.
“You repeatedly use the word “fascist” when know full well that I oppose corporatism, ALL lawyers, and fully support the US Constitution.”
None of that precludes you having fascist tendencies, especially given your choice of news sources. The cesspit you wallow in, judging by the links you spam, is full of them.
“It’s ONE gov’t employee”
There’s multiple instances mentioned in the story, even though there is only one person involved in the main case being discussed. I’m referring to the wider context, not whichever part of the story your tiny mind decided was the most important.
“I compared on-topic with far worse implications, and you explicitly do NOT care when it’s Israel.”
I also don’t care about a couple of hundred other countries when the discussion is not about one of them. The real question is why you’re suddenly so obsessed with the policies of Israel when the discussion is specifically about the US.
“Then another “fascist” charge.”
Yes, the Daily Mail openly and publicly supported fascists before WWII, and I’ve seen no evidence that their tendencies have changed any, only that they’re better at doing it with subtlety. If you’re still confused, Might I suggest you research your news stories before blindly posting everything they say that you agree with – they’re often lying to you.
Re: Re: Re:6 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
Re: Re: Re:7 @ "PaulT" who wrote: "you'll happily support criminals"
“It’s been very clearly established by SC cases that rights of persons start AFTER the border. “
Yes, and we are discussing the rights of people who have already crossed the border. Your point?
“Anyone crossing the border without permission is thereby a criminal, with reduced “rights”.”
Citation needed. Most illegal immigration isn’t even in violation of criminal law, just civil.
“Those inbred chinless wonders still sometimes get caught dressing like Nazis!”
OK, so again what’s your point? You don’t like some Nazi and fascist supporters, so that makes it OK for you to get your news from other fascist supporters?
“But keep on proving that you hate America”
I don’t. I do hate liars and fascists, but Americans who aren’t in those groups are usually fine by me. If only you’d stop lying about me…
Re: Re:
Another “Law ‘n Order” type. Must own stock in a private prison company or some other prison industrial complex machinery.
And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
https://qz.com/1190856/israel-to-pay-civilians-to-arrest-african-migrants-and-refugees/
"Israel offers to pay tens of thousands of African migrants to leave within 90 days or face jail after Netanyahu said their presence is ‘a threat to the country’s Jewish character’"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5231587/Israel-offers-pay-African-migrants-leave-threatens-jail.html
But it’s okay if you’re Jewish, right?
Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
“Techdirt remains silent over”
…Israeli migration enforcement. Yes, they do. Again, you seem confused about the nature of this site, it’s certainly not a place to discus minutae of every single piece of international immigration law.
Though, it is interesting that you felt you had to distract from the criminal activity of your government agents with babbling about another country’s immigration policies. It’s also funny that you picked the Daily Heil as support for an anti-Israel stance, given their support of literal fascists and Nazi sympathisers in the run up to WWII.
Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
Re: Re: Re: And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
“No, I’m not. It’s anti-American.”
Not really, unless you think that “anti-American” means “not licking the jackboots of government agents even when they’re breaking your own laws and violating human rights”. In which case, I guess they’d be proudly so.
“You foreigners barge in here screaming over MY gov’t agents”
Yes, as is my right to do so. You do seem to have a real problem with people exercising their rights, don’t you?
“it’s out of bounds to criticize another country, eh?”
No, you can do that all you want. You’d be better served picking a relevant venue, reliable sources and acting like a sane adult while doing so, but you can criticise other countries (and often do, usually with lies, but still…)
It’s just funny that you’re so desperate to do so when the criminal activities of your country are under discussion, and even funnier that you pick known liars and former (?) fascist anti-semite supporters to make your case.
Re: Re: Re:2 And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
Re: Re: Re:3 And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
“It’s NOT criminal to control borders”
It is if you commit criminal activity while doing so, as the subject of the article did.
Please, do keep up rather than inventing a fantasy version of the discussion in your head.
“It’s not diversion to give an on-topic link”
Then why did you paste two that are clearly off-topic?
“By the way, do you know that the UK and Europe are also under attack by waves of immigrants”
They’re not. Not at the levels claimed by the known liars at the Daily Mail and the Express, anyway. We can deal with it, and do so without violating the rights of the people who get here.
“many of them almost literaly shipped in by globalist politicians in order to ruin and split the host countries”
Do you have any non-fiction evidence? Most of your reading material seems to come from the fantasy aisle.
“Been on teh internets for months.”
So has the new Star Trek series, that doesn’t mean it’s a documentary.
Re: Re: Re:4 And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
I wrote: "It’s NOT criminal to control borders"
You reply: "It is if you commit criminal activity while doing so, as the subject of the article did."
This is your typical truism and expansive paraphrase.
First, illegal immigrants commit criminal activity by that very act which merits the name. Ever think of that?
2nd, you CANNOT deny, so simply deflect and divert. It’s all you have. I’m happy to see you go on, but you’re not even arguing now, just paraphrase-and-rant.
Re: Re: Re:5 And of course, Techdirt remains silent over far larger and more blatant anti-immigration: "Israel will pay civilians $9,000 to capture African migrants"
“2nd, you CANNOT deny, so simply deflect and divert. It’s all you have.”
Pot, meet kettle.
You just want desperately to have reality fit your own way of thinking. Sorry dude, borders can and should be protected but agents caught committing crimes while “protecting” them should be prosecuted. Simple as that. All the rest of your ramblings that nobody is discussing right now have absolutely zero relation to the topic (even if they are delusional as well). Funny thing, you’d be wrong even if you were on topic.
Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
“Give me your hungry, your tired your poor I’ll piss on ’em
that’s what the Statue of Bigotry says
Your poor huddled masses, let’s club ’em to death
get it over with and just dump ’em on the boulevard”
— “Dirty Blvd.”, Lou Reed, from “New York”, 1989
Re: Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
Trumps fault.
Re: Lou Reed had ICE's number almost thirty years ago
Your poor huddled masses, let’s club ’em to death
I thought he was talking about Canadians and seals at that point…
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/15/former_ice_chief_counsel_identity_theft/
A parallax view, in case anybody is interested.
Re: "Jeffrey Nonken"
Yes, I noticed just today YOUR name on The Register!
A "JohnFen" appeared there too, long since left this cesspit — even when I wasn’t here, kids! Masnick’s "Democrat" notions ran him off, my bet.
Wrong word, "parallax" — unless you meant an "error in observation".
But it’s not actually different. For perspective, you could try even the relatively neutral Drudge Report", which links to the rather large site, Zero Hedge — and not to tiny little Techdirt.
Most here
aren’t truly reading what Mike wrote. The fact that the accused lawyer worked for ICE is almost incidental. The real story is the criminal activities that government employees so brazenly and willfully participate in.
And, BTW, for those who are dissing Trump on this, the criminal activities went on for years during the Obama administration and wasn’t detected, investigated, and indicted until Trump became POTUS.
Re: Most here
That means that either they have become more brazen due to Trump being president, or we are taking a harder look at what happens during immigration because of Trump’s nationalist sentiments.
“for those who are dissing Trump on this, the criminal activities went on for years during …”
and what has been done to stop it? nothing? yeah, thought so.
Re: Re:
People have been indicted. That’s a very good start considering that the Constitution requires that we hold a trial BEFORE punishing someone.
Re: Re: Re:
Criminal activity has been going on for years – we now have an investigation and indictments which some in the cross hairs are trying to stop because that is what they do. Like coach roaches, cannot stand the light of day so they scurry to their favorite hiding places.
Nice way to pat yourself on the back for your first word comment. Ego much?
Re: Re:
So in your esteemed estimation, what is the true crux of the story? We look forward to your insights.
Re: Re:
Nice way to pat yourself on the back for your first word comment. Ego much?
Um. I didn’t do that. The FW/LW choices are done by insiders who choose them. If it were up to me, that would not be up there.
Re: Re: Re:
The fact that the first word was removed from the top of the comments of the prior article about ICE and immigration, likely because of the opinion it espoused, is rather interesting. Why was that removed, but the First Word on this article which is basically “If you have an opinion that runs contrary to mine, you should shut up and leave the site, you aren’t welcome here” allowed to stay up?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I believe I know which one you’re talking about, and my guess would be that it wasn’t ‘removed’, it was simply flagged enough times to be minimized, and minimized comments don’t show up as First Words. Simply a matter of how the system is set up, nothing to do with ‘the opinion is espoused.’
As for this First Word, it’s simply because someone with a FW credit found that part of the article good enough to post and then make as the first word. As for seeing it as ‘if you don’t agree with me go away’, that’s certainly not how I read it, I saw/see it as simply ‘if you’re going to comment on something that’s been dubunked multiple times, do it somewhere else and don’t waste everyone’s time here.’
Re: Re: Re:
I did not know that, my apologies.
Re: Re:
Nice way to lose every argument proposed to far & then resort to name calling about something that doesn’t actually work that way… its like you reuse to accept reality & are waiting for it to adjust to you.
"Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
http://freebeacon.com/issues/analysis-immigrants-arrested-ice-prior-convictions/
"74 percent of those arrested by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency in FY2017 had past criminal convictions, according to a new analysis from the Pew Research Center."
"The remainder of those arrested by ICE were further broken down by those with pending criminal charges-16 percent of the total-and those with no criminal charges-just 11 percent of the total."
SEVENTY-FOUR PERCENT are repeating criminals NOT due every last nicety.
Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
They’re not saying that 74% of immigrants are criminals. They’re saying that of those who are, 74% are repeat offenders.
How does that compare with non-immigrant arrestees?
Wikipedia: Recidivism: United States:
So immigrants are about average then.
Re: Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
Recidivism is part of the private prison business model.
Re: Re: Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
No argument there.
When I’ve read the stories here about the steep fees charged for prison phone use, I have to wonder if they’re deliberately trying to isolate prisoners from those who would support and encourage them upon release. Driving up the recidivism rates and profit.
Re: "Analysis: Most Immigrants Arrested by Ice Have Prior Convictions"
Yep we really are well served by the deportation of a Doctor, married to a citizen, has children, & works in a hospital saving lives… because when he first arrived in the country over 30 years ago he got a ticket once.
It wasn’t what anyone, but your xenophobic mind, would call an actual crime… but he beeds to be thrown out to appease your ego.
And once again the thread is derailed and no lessons were learned
If Mike Masnick wins comment of the week, nameless pony or whatever the hell is his current login will probably appear to decry how this is a conspiracy by “Big Internet Comment” and demand Mike’s birth certificate.
Re: Re:
Close… but to be fair horse with no name/Whatever/Just Sayin’/MyNameHere has been surprisingly absent after his exile, instead of jumping in with another pseduonym. (Which is a better track record than average_joe promising not to visit the site, then start spamming his “fuck off and die, Masnick” comments while not logged in, from the same IP address… but then again, it’s not hard to have a better track record than average_joe.)
“Big Internet Comment” is also a characteristic of extinct troll bob, who regularly appended “Big” in front of groups and industries he intrinsically disagrees with.
“Absolute power corrupts absolutely”
if someone is here illegally they have no rights and should be booted as quickly as possible
Re: Re:
How desperate do you have to be to come into a thread a week late and spout the most ignorant kind of comment that’s already been debunked so many times?