My attitude exactly – illegal immigration and DACA

Organized by People Without Borders. Evil. Illegals aliens, disease, drugs, terrorists, gang members coming in over our southern border. Enough is enough!

Also see:

https://stellasplace1.com/2016/01/21/be-sure-your-vaccinations-are-up-to-date-the-refugees-are-coming/

https://stellasplace1.com/2016/02/24/why-illegal-immigration-is-a-problem-part-1/

https://stellasplace1.com/2016/03/24/why-illegal-immigration-is-a-problem-part-2/

https://stellasplace1.com/2016/05/17/22-percent-of-resettled-refugees-in-minnesota-test-positive-for-tuberculosis/

https://stellasplace1.com/2017/09/01/good-reasons-to-eliminate-the-daca-program/

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Crime, Government, News, Politics, Refugees & Aliens, Terrorism. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to My attitude exactly – illegal immigration and DACA

  1. auscitizenmom says:

    This is an invasion. They should NOT be able to step foot on our soil. PTrump must treat this as an INVASION.

    Liked by 7 people

  2. hocuspocus13 says:

    Emergency…

    Line our border with the US Military

    Catch and Release…

    Catch them and Release them back to Mexico

    Liked by 4 people

  3. czarowniczy says:

    I’m wondering how many of these non-Mexican Latinos in these caravans are non-Mexicans we’ve caught and returned to Mexico? Mexico’s had some of these folks for a while and some we deport back to their homelands get right back to schlepping thru Mexico for the US. Why not rid themselves of these troublesome hangers-on and PO the US in one fell swoop?
    There’s also the question of how much the cartels, who have a lock on illegal immigration into the US, have to play with these caravans and how much the Mexican government and the cartels are interacting to get these people through?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. stella says:

    Seen on Facebook:

    ames Woods on the “caravan” of thousands of illegals from Honduras who are marching toward our Southern border to force their way into the United States:

    “It is this simple. Speaker Ryan must go. While this alien horde marches toward our southern border, we need to find new leaders. We have approximately two weeks before this invasion. The clock is ticking on Paul Ryan. Do something, you worthless Republicans without Balls!

    Send the National Guard to the border until you can rid Congress of Republicans without Balls. We need to elect a Congress that will do something about this invasion of illegal aliens. Once this mob gets through without a problem, you don’t think this is going to be happening on a regular basis?

    These People Without Borders are headed to the right place. Thanks to Democrats without Principles and Republicans without Balls, America is now a nation without borders as well. There is no hope to stop this invasion until we rid ourselves of EVERY current member of Congress who will not stand up to this.”

    This is the first attempt to recreate the invasion of Europe in America. These people have cell phones, are properly clothed, fed, sheltered. They are being marched here for the cameras. The cynic in me wonders if the organized “caravan” marching toward our Southern border will end with another Aylan Kurdi moment. Aylan Kurdi was the three year old Syrian boy whose body was photographed, on a Turkish beach, after he drowned supposedly trying to make it to Europe with his family. His death, on September 2, 2015, flung Europe’s borders WIDE OPEN.

    The whole of Europe reacted with horror and guilt. Angela Merkel used the emotional moment as an excuse to significantly increase migration into Germany and Sweden. Facts did not matter. Emotion, combined with guilt, opened the borders wide, and triggered the flow of millions of migrants, wave after wave after wave, mostly young men, into Europe (versus the “families” narrative we saw on TV.)

    The facts behind that picture were quite different. The Syrian boy’s father was not an asylum seeker. He was gainfully employed in Turkey and had no reason to leave. They had lived there 3 years, had $5,000 in savings and lived in an apartment paid for by a sister in Canada.

    They obviously did not get very far because the boy was photographed on a Turkish beach. Critics believe the photograph was staged. The father declared he saw his family drown in front of his eyes and then later stated he looked for them lost on the beach. His story had many holes. But the photo was powerful and tugged on Europe’s heartstrings. It changed Europe forever. It will never recover.

    20 years ago, in Europe, 16 children were slaughtered in the Dunblane school shooting. It horrified Europe. Within a year, UK lawmakers made registration mandatory for shotguns, banned semi-automatic and pump-action weapons and banned private ownership of handguns. In the wake of the Florida school shooting, eerily similar to the UK shooting two decades ago, the gun grabbers are using the event to emotionally justify repealing the 2nd amendment and our right to bear arms. The little children are shouting: “No more guns. Never again.” It worked in the UK. They are hoping it will work in America.

    Never underestimate the power of a single horrific event, doctored narrative or frothy emotional appeal to move people to change their minds on positions they said were unchangeable. As the first caravan marches toward our Southern border, ask yourself what America will do when faced with its own Aylan Kurdi moment.

    Liked by 5 people

    • czarowniczy says:

      Back to my original point…why California and not Texas, New Mexico or Arizona? Could it be due to California being a self-proclaimed sanctuary state?
      The National Guard belongs to the state’s governor, the feds have to ‘Federalize’ them to get them from under the governor’s control and that can be a fight. Do you see Moonbeam Brown giving up control of the Guard easily to fight the basic tenents of being a sanctuary state? Do you see the states outside of California being as accommodating as California?
      This was planned and I wouldn’t be surprised if California government officials had a hand in it, just look at the logistics.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. litenmaus says:

    just poor little Hondurans and Mexican ‘refugees’…no Palestinian terrorists, un-uh, move on, no need to look closely…

    The statistics for Islam in Honduras estimate a total Muslim population of 5,000- 6,000 representing 0.1 percent of the population.[1] Although there are no official statistics, it is estimated that between 150,000-200,000 of the country’s eight million inhabitants are of Arab descent, and of these, the great majority are Palestinian Arabs.[2] However, the vast majority of these Arabs are of Orthodox and Catholic Christian descent. No other country in the Western Hemisphere has a higher proportion of Arab immigrants and, in absolute numbers, Honduras ranks seventh after the United States, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Canada and Chile.[3] There are two known Islamic organizations in Honduras, including the Centro Islámico de Honduras in San Pedro Sula led by Yusuf Amdani, and the Comunidad Islámica de Honduras in Cortés. – Wikipedia

    Like

  6. michellc says:

    IMHO if people are openly planning to invade your country that is a declaration of war. Send the military to the border and shoot any who cross, including women. Tell Mexico the children are their problem.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. joshua says:

    Bush, Pentagon Weigh Deploying Troops to US-Mexican Border
    Saturday, 13 May 2006 .

    Pentagon Mulls Options for US Border Security Role [

    Bush Weighs Deploying Guard to US Border
    By Lolita C. Baldor
    The Associated Press

    Saturday 13 May 2006

    Washington – Once again the Bush administration is turning to the military to help solve a domestic problem. But instead of hurricane aid or preparations to cope with avian flu, the Pentagon is being asked to possibly provide thousands of National Guard troops to shore up the U.S. border with Mexico, as part of President Bush’s effort to gather support for an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws.

    According to senior administration officials, Bush is considering plans to use federal funds to pay for National Guard troops deployed along the southern border.

    One defense official said military leaders believe the number of troops required could range from 3,500 to perhaps 10,000, depending on the final plan. Another administration official cautioned that the 10,000 figure was too high.

    The officials insisted on anonymity since no decision has been announced.

    The president was expected to reveal his plans in an address Monday at 8 p.m. EDT. It will be the first time he has used the Oval Office for a domestic policy speech – a gesture intended to underscore the importance he places on the divisive immigration issue.

    The key questions Friday were exactly how many National Guard troops might be deployed, for how long and at what cost to federal taxpayers – as well as the problem of possible disruption of upcoming deployments to Iraq and elsewhere overseas.

    As discussions among the White House, the Pentagon and the states continued on how the military could be used to secure the southern border, defense officials said that states want the federal government to pick up what will be a significant tab for the increased security. Officials had no estimates on that cost.

    Bush’s speech Monday night is intended to build support for broad immigration overhaul by taking substantive steps to secure the border. His focus on the military echoes statements he made after Hurricane Katrina, saying the military may need to play a stronger role in disasters. He also later suggested he would consider using the military to enforce a quarantine in the event of a bird flu pandemic.

    “We need to beef up those (border) operations and the cost will be substantial,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, in an interview. “People are just not going to accept comprehensive immigration reform unless they are assured the government is going to secure the border. People have lost confidence in the federal government because they simply haven’t addressed this in a dramatic and effective way.”

    Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense, asked officials earlier this week to offer options for the use of military resources and troops – particularly the National Guard – along the border with Mexico, according to defense officials familiar with the discussions.

    Cornyn said state officials are also looking for more unmanned aircraft, ground sensors, surveillance cameras and military training to help with border patrols.

    Defense officials said the National Guard may be used only until significant additions to the existing civilian border patrols can be fully funded and completed.

    Currently there are about 100 National Guard troops involved in counter-drug operations, including some along the border, said Guard Bureau spokesman Jack Harrison. He said there are also between 10 to 15 Guard members – mostly engineers – helping border patrol agents with vehicle and heavy equipment support.

    The discussions this week underscored the importance of the border and immigrations issues, yet were tentative enough to reflect worries about drawing the nation’s armed forces into a politically sensitive domestic role.

    Southern lawmakers met with White House strategist Karl Rove earlier in the week for a discussion that included making greater use of National Guard troops to shore up border control. And on Capitol Hill, the Senate is poised to pass legislation this month that would call for additional border security, a new guest worker program and provisions opening the way to eventual citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country.

    Currently, the military plays a very limited role along the borders, but some active duty forces have been used in the past to help battle drug traffickers.

    The National Guard is generally under the control of the state governors, but Guard units can be federalized by the president, such as those sent to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Active duty military may not be used for law enforcement unless the president authorizes it.

    .

    Pentagon Mulls Options for US Border Security Role
    Reuters

    Friday 12 May 2006

    Washington – The Pentagon has begun exploring options for the potential use of troops and equipment to help secure the U.S. border with Mexico, where hundreds of thousands of migrants enter the country illegally each year, a defense official said on Friday.

    Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld discussed border issues at the Pentagon with his Mexican counterpart, Defense Minister Gen. Gerardo Clemente Ricardo Vega. Mexico and the United States share a 2,000-mile border.

    “The U.S. and Mexican governments continue to work together to control the border and collaborate on these important efforts,” said U.S. Navy Lt. Cmdr. J.D. Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman.

    “This cooperation includes limited U.S. assistance with training, equipping and funding Mexico security forces so that they can better meet our shared challenges in protecting the border,” he said.

    Immigration has emerged as one of the top U.S. political issues of 2006. President George W. Bush will address the nation on immigration reform on Monday as the Senate renews debate on a bill to tighten border security and give millions of illegal immigrants a way to legalize their status.

    A defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue, said the Defense Department is exploring options for possible use of troops or military assets to help with border security.

    Another defense official said the possible use of troops or military equipment to assist with border security “is not a decision that the Defense Department will make.”

    That authority would be reserved for the president, as commander-in-chief.

    “Border security, policing, is not the primary role or mission of the United States military,” the official said.

    Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said the Pentagon ought to be backing up the Department of Homeland Security along the border.

    “We can and must do more to maximize military assets along the border until the DHS has adequate assets to ensure our border security,” he said in a statement.

    “Ivasion Cited”

    Citing what some members called “an invasion” of illegal immigrants across the southern U.S. border, the House of Representatives voted 252-171 on Thursday to permit the Pentagon to assign forces to help in border protections.

    Gordon noted that while the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, under the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for securing the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada, the U.S. military performs a limited support role.

    For example, military unmanned aerial vehicles have provided border surveillance.

    He said any further military role would be temporary until more civilian border agents could be recruited and trained.

    Gordon noted that border security is a civilian law enforcement function. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, enacted during the post-Civil War reconstruction period, prohibits federal military personnel from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States.

    However, National Guard troops come under the command of state governors, who can deploy them for purposes such as border security. The president also has the power to federalize these troops.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Sharon says:

    Obviously the wall is a good idea, but if there is not a willingness to forcefully enforce our immigration laws, there will be a thousands options around the wall. A failure of will with regard to law enforcement is the core problem, not the absence of a wall. My opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. stella says:

    Part 2: Massive caravan of illegal aliens lists demands to U.S. (videos, photos)

    http://dennismichaellynch.com/part-2-massive-caravan-of-illegal-aliens-lists-demands-to-u-s-videos-photos/

    We demand of Mexico and the United States:
    -That they respect our rights as refugees and our right to dignified work to be able to support our families
    -That they open the borders to us because we are as much citizens as the people of the countries where we are and/or travel
    -That deportations, which destroy families, come to an end
    -No more abuses against us as migrants
    -Dignity and justice
    -That the US government not end TPS for those who need it
    -That the US government stop massive funding for the Mexican government to detain Central American migrants and refugees and to deport them
    -That these governments respect our rights under international law, including the right to free expression
    -That the conventions on refugee rights not be empty rhetoric

    “The border is stained red!”
    “Because there they kill the working class!”
    “Why do they kill us? Why do they murder us…”
    “If we are the hope of Latin America?”

    Sincerely,
    2018 Refugee Caravan “Migrantes en la Lucha”
    Pueblo Sin Fronteras

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.