Connect with us

Immigration

Family separation is necessary when navigating a broken system

Published

on

There is no understating that the immigration crisis is truly a crisis. There is an overload of illegal immigrants in the system and the relevant agencies aren’t able to expedite the deportation process. The media has resurrected the issues of family separation in an effort to maintain their propaganda onslaught. The Trump administration responded tactfully with an executive order undermining their efforts to oppose him. Since then a quieter policy has emerged. Illegals are given the option to withdraw their asylum claim and agree to self deportation. In return, they would be united with their children. It’s a hardball policy.

Playing Hardball

However, playing hardball is the most cost effective and speediest way to alleviate America’s migrant crisis. In the criminal justice system, all sorts of agreements are made to alleviate the overload the courts often face. There are plea bargains, PBJs, and stet dockets. Immigration needs to apply similar measures to take control of the migrant crisis or else let the crisis control us. The “zero tolerance” policy provided a leverage for the US Government. After all, one would assume that parents would be as enthusiastic as the media in ending family separation.

Evidently not. The Department of Homeland Security noted that parents have elected to be deported without their children. Abandoning children in a foreign land is a pseudo-sacrificial way for a parent to care about their child. Sure being an orphaned illegal immigrant carries the chance of a better life, but in actuality it is the abdication of parental responsibilities to the state, a foreign state at that. What caring parent would do such a thing? Time found itself printing fake news over its cover featuring Trump and an illegal immigrant child. Turns out, the mother had a track record of not being a good mother. I raise the claim that parents bringing their children, or worse, shipping their children, across the border are not good parents.

This reveals a few flaws in the voluntary deportation for unification strategy. The first flaw being the logistical impracticality. Business Insider tells the story in which an illegal is trying to rescind his agreement. He and his daughter were/are detained at separate locations in separate states. It’s not the easiest plan to ship children to their parents prior to deporting them both. As it would seem, America doesn’t have a hub-and-spoke method for deporting illegal immigrants.

The second flawed outcome is the orphaned children, as noted by the DHS. This creates a whole new issue. The US government would be in custody of another country’s children. This is not ideal, inexpensive, or easy to resolve.

Real Solutions

The Trump administration is doing the best it can do under current immigration law. Family separation remains the best way for the US Government to navigate a deeply flawed system. While people protest under the emotional premises established by the media, they offer no real solutions aside from granting asylum seekers amnesty. Rewarding them for lying and illegally crossing into our land will only exacerbate the migrant crisis. Real solutions must be offered. Currently Ted Cruz is leading the pack on real solutions.

Key points of the Protect Kids and Parents Act:
  • Double the number of federal immigration judges, from roughly 375 to 750.
  • Authorize new temporary shelters, with accommodations to keep families together.
  • Mandate that illegal immigrant families must be kept together, absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to the children.
  • Provide for expedited processing and review of asylum cases, so that—within 14 days—those who meet the legal standards will be granted asylum, and those who do not will be immediately returned to their home countries.

Ted Cruz’s bill would equip the government to better handle the crisis, but it will by no means put an end to it. But it is a moderate first step.

Guns and Crime

Attorney General Sessions sets guidelines for judges to dismiss deportation cases

Published

on

Attorney General Sessions sets guidelines for judges to dismiss deportation cases

Most conservatives are aware of the open floodgates of illegal immigrants coming into the country. Many are not aware that there’s another open floodgate in the legal system itself through which activist judges dismiss deportation cases freely and frequently. Attorney General Jeff Sessions just made a move to change that.

The new guidelines for judges to have “specific and circumscribed” reasons for dismissing case, including an inability to prove the case or exceptional circumstance of need. In other words, judges can’t dismiss deportation cases because they simply want fewer people deported.

Sessions limits ability of judges to dismiss deportation cases

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/407560-sessions-limits-ability-of-judges-to-dismiss-deportation-casesWhen a deportation case is dismissed, it does not grant legal immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security can re-file charges to attempt to spark deportation procedures, but the practice of dismissing cases has often given immigrants time to pursue different avenues of obtaining legal citizenship, according to Reuters.

A group representing immigration lawyers with cases before the Justice Department, the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association, slammed Sessions’s latest decision as the latest move by the attorney general to undermine the independence of judges in the agency.

My Take

There is a fine line being drawn here. On one hand, it’s good that fewer deportation cases are dismissed. On the other hand, the judiciary must be trusted to make decisions based on the law. Are there activist judges? Yes. Are there good judges who will be affected by this since now they have to demonstrate their reasons for dismissing cases? Yes.

I’m just glad to see Sessions in the news for doing his job rather than for being attacked by his boss.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Disasters are a true taste of socialism. Why would anyone vote for that?

Published

on

By

Disasters are a true taste of socialism Why would anyone vote for that

Leftists always promise a paradise, while the results of their socialist agenda are always a disaster, why would anyone want to replicate that?

Take a look at any disaster area and note how it is always similar to end stage socialism.
Chaos, failing infrastructure, shortages, martial law and catastrophic effects are endemic to both situations. While the causes are somewhat different, the results are always the same, so why would anyone want this brought upon their society?

Selling Socialistic Slavery with promises while ignoring the costs.

Leftists are usually long on promises and short on funding sources when trying to sell their societal slavery. They will tout all the freebies without mentioning how they plan on paying for them. Worse yet, they pile promise upon promise of government goodies in a perverse competition to see who can spend the most of other people’s money without stating the source of their largess.

Meanwhile they skip over just how ‘From each according to his abilities’ will work without coercion in a free-society. Never mind that it’ll be impossible to pay for all of the goodies. We’re already $21 Trillion in the hole and the nation’s Socialist Left wants to dig even deeper.

It will be the ‘The Glorious world of next Tuesday’ don’t worry about who is going to foot the bill, they will gladly do it… knowing a bullet scarred wall awaits them if they don’t.

Reality is never to kind to progressive promises of paradise.

But something always gets in the way on the road to paradise. Basic psychological principles show that a behaviour will increase with a reward while a behaviour will decrease when punished. Many will be on board for the free health care, free college, free housing, free childcare and of course, free money. The problem is that someone has to pay for it at some point. Take other people’s money away from them and they will stop working as well. Soon enough, it all looks like a disaster area.

Scandinavian Socialism is a myth.

We can dispense with the ‘Nordic model’ red herring the Left is forever trotting out to somehow ‘prove’ the functionality of socialism. Small, culturally homogenous Scandinavian countries that can fund large welfare states with funds from natural resources and without the need for defense spending fail as proof that collectivism can work.  Most have higher ratings in liberty than the states, and some have stated flat out that they aren’t socialist.

Sorry Leftists, the ‘Mixed economy’ myth also proves socialism doesn’t work.

Then there is the ‘Mixed economy’ dodge that ironically proves the opposite of what it’s supposed to prove. Socialistic Slavery is very much akin to a poison in a biological system with higher dosages being ever more harmful. Socialism retards economic activity, with higher dosages having increased adverse effects. Rather than proving socialism can work, it proves the opposite.

A living being can survive with a certain amount of poison, just as a healthy economy can survive the societal poison of socialism, but that’s hardly an argument to increase the dosage. Eventually, both would succumb to the poison, so it would only make sense to flush it out of the system instead of making the situation far worse with more of the same.

Leftists promise paradise and it never comes to pass.

To hear it from the Left, their incredible ideology will usher in a Utopia of inestimable proportions. Free healthcare, free tuition, free income, free housing, free childcare, etc. etc. Never mind who is going to pay for all of this free stuff, everyone will dance and sing while unicorns prance around over rainbows in a perfect progressive paradise.

The reality of Socialism is quite different, resembling the short-term situation of a disaster area.

Anyone familiar with disaster situations and areas controlled by the Left cannot help but notice that they are eerily similar. While the causes are slightly different, the results are the same in both scenarios. Compare disaster areas to the promises of paradise made by the Left in trying to sell their socialist snake oil.

Shortages/Long lines.

Whenever a disaster is to befall an area or has taken place, people often have to queue up to get the most basic of necessities. Supplies of water, milk, toilet paper and petrol often run short causing panic amongst the populace. These are an everyday occurrence in a ‘worker’s paradise’. Since there is no incentive to produce, these basic consumer goods end up in short supply. Quite often a socialist government will parcel these items out in a bid to buy loyalty while punishing the opposition. In the case of the wondrous Leftist paradise of Venezuela, home of the world’s largest oil reserves, people even have to queue up to buy gas.  That socialist nation has continual shortages of basic necessities including water. Food is so scarce, people have to regularly rummage through the garbage to find something to eat. Many have lost an incredible amount of weight on the ‘Maduro diet’.

Failing infrastructure/Power outages.

Disasters will often result in power outages and infrastructure failure. In the case of a nation under socialism, the fundamental flaws of the that ideology cause these problems.

People fleeing the area.

Disaster situations will see multitudes of people leaving to get out of the danger zone. An area under the societal slavery of socialism will see people leaving to escape the destruction of Liberty endemic to the Left’s national agenda.

Looting/Crime.

The lack of law and order in a disaster situation will have some take advantage of the situation to steal from others. Collectivism is in effect an official policy of looting, with Liberty control, empowering both the government and the criminal element, with crime running rampant after the innocent have been disarmed.

Martial law/Death.

Often times, order is maintained with the military in a disaster area, as is often the case under a socialistic regime. Accidental deaths will often result from these situations. Oppression as well as deaths deliberately caused by said regimes are a staple of socialism.

The Key difference between a natural Disaster and the disaster of socialism.

The primary difference between a socialist system and a disaster is that the latter is a temporary condition. The people in the midst of a disaster only have endure it for a short time period. Those under the yoke of socialistic slavery have to endure it for years if not decades. Conditions will most often quickly improve in a disaster situation. Not so, for those suffering under socialism, who have to deal with the shortages, queuing up, failing infrastructure, power outages, crime, oppression and deliberate mass murder without relief.

These facts clearly indicate why those bent on attaining power under socialism never talk about it’s true reality. Their promises are always for something that never comes to fruition, for no one would willingly accept the permanent disaster of socialism if they were the least bit truthful of it’s final results.

Continue Reading

Immigration

Opposition to illegal immigration is not condemnation of the Hispanic community

Published

on

Opposition to illegal immigration is not condemnation of the Hispanic community

It is not racist to expect others to not break the law. It is not indecent to point out that the man accused of killing Mollie Tibbetts is an illegal immigrant. It is definitely unfortunate that the Trump administration has become the unofficial representation of what it means to oppose illegal immigration. These three realities have a hard time coexisting in today’s charged political debate.

Mollie’s father, Rob, has asked not to use his daughter’s death to promote a political agenda that she personally opposed.

‘Don’t Use Mollie’ To Push Racism, Says Dad Who Points To ‘Heartless’ Donald Trump Jr.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dont-use-mollie-tibbetts-death-to-promote-racism-says-dad_us_5b8b45dfe4b0511db3d94eb1The father of slain University of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts lashed out Saturday at those who are using her tragic death to promote their own political agendas. To do so is “despicable” and “heartless,” Rob Tibbetts wrote, throwing Donald Trump Jr.’s own words back at him in an opinion piece in the Des Moines Register.

Tibbetts said the family was “grateful” to those who respected their pleas to not turn his daughter’s death into a political confrontation.

Out of respect for the family’s wishes, I won’t discuss the crime nor Rob’s daughter. However, there’s a major problem with the way he’s handling this. By framing “racism” as he’s doing in his plea to not politicize the crime or promote an agenda, he’s politicizing the crime and promoting a different agenda.

I’ve personally written before against illegal immigration. I’m a legal immigrant myself as are many of my aunts, uncles, and cousins. I am not racist and would love to see an increase in legal immigrants (gasp!), but NOT until we are able to prevent illegal immigration. That means some of the policies proposed or enacted by the White House actually make sense.

Unfortunately, Rob Tibbetts makes the mistake of pointing out racism that wasn’t there. I’ve read the article by Don Jr. referenced by Mr. Tibbetts. I don’t like Don Jr., but there’s no racism in his article. He rips on the Democrats (which is ironic since he’s a former Democrat himself pretending to be a Republican for pops), but does not overtly nor subtly display racism of any sort in the article.

Donald Trump Jr.: Democrats’ reaction to Mollie Tibbetts’ death is heartless

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2018/08/31/donald-trump-jr-democrats-reaction-mollie-tibbetts-death-heartless-illegal-immigration-border-wall/1143005002/Liberal media outlets went through great pains to cover the story without actually covering the story. Instead of truthful headlines such as “Illegal immigrant arrested in connection with murder of Mollie Tibbetts,” multiple outlets ran headlines such as “Man arrested in connection to disappearance of Mollie Tibbetts.” They don’t want you to know what happened to her — and they certainly don’t want you to know who is responsible.

Worse still, a number of media outlets and pundits insisted that conservatives and Republicans were “politicizing” Mollie’s murder — an absurd claim coming from the same people who used family separation at the border to call for the abolishment of ICE and jump at the opportunity to exploit any tragedy involving guns to call for the end of the Second Amendment as we know it.

Perhaps Mr. Tibbetts believes Trump Jr. is racist regardless of the article. Maybe he just doesn’t like the tone; it really is a poorly written article and fails to make its points well. Regardless of his beef with Trump Jr or his article, the accusations of racism are unfair. It’s an insertion by Mr. Tibbetts that frames the whole discussion poorly. He made it seem as if those opposed to illegal immigration have a problem with the Hispanic community. That’s simply not true, at least for the majority of conservatives who see no difference between an illegal immigrant coming from Venezuela or England. Either way, it’s breaking the law.

I can’t imagine what the Tibbetts family is going through following this heinous crime. Mr Tibbetts doesn’t want his daughter’s death politicized. That’s fair. But dismissing the foundation of the right’s argument against illegal immigration as purely racist is simply wrong. The vast majority of racists are against illegal immigration, but being against illegal immigration does not make someone racist.

Some of us simply want people coming to our country to do so through legal channels regardless of their race or nation of origin. Saying we’re all racists, as many on the left like to do, is as false as saying something stupid like all Muslims are terrorists.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report