Death toll at the border

[SkyDekker 1,465]

21 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

"There is no comprehensive legal instrument at the international level that establishes a framework for the governance of migration."

https://www.iom.int/international-migration-law

I was talking about those seeking asylum, which would be refugees. The treatment of refugees is most certainly covered under international treaty of which the US is a signatory.

[billvon 3,111]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

"There is no comprehensive legal instrument at the international level that establishes a framework for the governance of migration."

https://www.iom.int/international-migration-law

Did you hope no one would check what you posted?

Here's what that paragraph actually says without your edits:

Although there is no comprehensive legal instrument at the international level that establishes a framework for the governance of migration, a set of legal rules constrain, regulate, and channel state authority over migration. Such rules – which have been created through state- to-state relations, negotiations and practice – are enshrined in multilateral and bilateral treaties, non-binding instruments, or have become part of customary international law.

So to echo Skydekker - why not just follow the rules?

[BIGUN 1,483]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

Did you hope no one would check what you posted?

So, if I was that malicious; I wouldn't have posted the source. I replied to SkyDekker because he made the allegation of "International Law: in more than one post, but posted no source. Even challenged others to use their google-fu while not able to use his own. In short, he made and continues to make statements without a source, I found no "International Law" as he inferred. On a final note; if you're going to quote something; then know to quote International Humanitarian Law - which has more clout. Don't send everyone on a wild goose chase thru google-land. If you make a claim - then cite your source. Don;t just tell everyone to go look it up.  Course, he'll be along shortly to tell us that's what he meant. 

  . 

[turtlespeed 226]

On 5/31/2019 at 5:19 PM, SkyDekker said:

I was talking about those seeking asylum, which would be refugees. The treatment of refugees is most certainly covered under international treaty of which the US is a signatory.

Yes.

IF - and only IF - they cross or follow the proper channels and laws.

 

Added

Such rules – which have been created through state- to-state relations, negotiations and practice – are enshrined in multilateral and bilateral treaties, non-binding instruments, or have become part of customary international law.

 

State to state relations - Could mean State to State relations - which are not international.

Enshrined does not equal "Written In Law" common practice is not a written law any more than culture is.

 

BUT - One can find many laws from MANY countries that directly, and specifically oppose what was posted as International Law..

Edited June 3, 2019 by turtlespeed

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

IF - and only IF - they cross or follow the proper channels and laws.

That's not true either. Why do you have so much trouble following the law? You even have the benefit of time and unlimited access to the internet. You hold people fleeing violence and persecution to a standard you are unable to maintain yourself.

Article 31 of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees says that no penalties shall be enforced on refugees who entered illegally in search of asylum if they present themselves without delay.

[turtlespeed 226]

2 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

That's not true either. Why do you have so much trouble following the law? You even have the benefit of time and unlimited access to the internet. You hold people fleeing violence and persecution to a standard you are unable to maintain yourself.

Article 31 of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees says that no penalties shall be enforced on refugees who entered illegally in search of asylum if they present themselves without delay.

All that is required is proof that they didn't delay then.

Please present that in all cases relevant.

[billvon 3,111]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

All that is required is proof that they didn't delay then.

Please present that in all cases relevant.

Nope.  Innocent until proven guilty.  The onus to prove that they are guilty of a crime is on YOU.  The onus is not on them (or anyone else) to prove they are innocent.  If the law allows them to do something, then they are allowed to do it until it is proven they are breaking the law.

[billvon 3,111]

From the office of the Inspector General, some insight on why we may be seeing deaths in holding facilities:

"According to PDT Border Patrol processing facility staff, the facility’s maximum capacity is 125 detainees. However, on May 7 and 8, 2019, Border Patrol’s custody logs indicated that there were approximately 750 and 900 detainees on site, respectively. TEDS standards provide that “under no circumstances should the maximum [cell] occupancy rate, as set by the fire marshal, be exceeded” (TEDS 4.7). However, we observed dangerous overcrowding at the facility with single adults held in cells designed for one-fifth as many detainees (see Figures 1 through 3). Specifically, we observed:

- a cell with a maximum capacity of 12 held 76 detainees (Figure 1);

- a cell with a maximum capacity of 8 held 41 detainees (Figure 2); and

- a cell with a maximum capacity of 35 held 155 detainees (Figure 3).

. . . On May 8, 2019, we returned to PDT for another unannounced spot inspection and observed that some family units and adult females had been transferred, but overall numbers were even higher as additional detainees had arrived for processing. According to Border Patrol staff, on May 8, 2019, the total number on site was approximately 900."

https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Mga/2019/oig-19-46-may19-mgmtalert.pdf

[turtlespeed 226]

23 hours ago, billvon said:

Nope.  Innocent until proven guilty.  The onus to prove that they are guilty of a crime is on YOU.  The onus is not on them (or anyone else) to prove they are innocent.  If the law allows them to do something, then they are allowed to do it until it is proven they are breaking the law.

So why have border patrol at all?

[billvon 3,111]

29 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

So why have border patrol at all?

To patrol the border.  To keep drug mules out.  To send refugees to the right courtrooms.  To send legal border crossers to the right border crossings.  To keep illegal immigrants from crossing.  To help us back across the border when we land out.  To save the lives of border crossers who are dying in the desert.  Things like that.

Of course, for that to work, you have to actually _have_ those courtrooms and staff them so refugees can use them.

[billvon 3,111]

Even lawyers are coming out against what Trump is doing to kids at the border.

=============================

Statement of ABA President Bob Carlson, re: Detention of immigrant children in poor conditions

WASHINGTON, June 25, 2019 – The American Bar Association is appalled by credible reports of hundreds of children being held in unsafe and unhealthy conditions in violation of federal and state law, court settlements and common decency.

This week, the American public learned that children, including infants, were being held for up to weeks at a time in overcrowded federal facilities that lack the most basic of human necessities. The law requires that children who are held must be transferred to the custody of Health and Human Services within 72 hours.

The U.S. Department of Justice has argued that bedding, soap, showers and toothbrushes are not necessary to maintain “safe and sanitary” conditions for immigrant children in federal custody, which are required by the 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement, which restricts the time children can be held in immigration detention and sets minimum standards for their care while in custody.

The ABA calls on federal authorities to immediately end this inhumane and illegal treatment of children and provide attorney access to facilities operated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. We urge Congress to pass supplemental appropriations to ensure the appropriate treatment and care of unaccompanied immigrant children in government custody. And we call on the administration to enforce laws and settlements that guarantee humane, minimal standards of care for vulnerable children, no matter how they arrived in our country.

===========================

 

[rifleman 70]

Slavery was legal - helping slaves to escape was a criminal offence.

There are at least two cases ongoing in Europe where captains of refugee rescue ships operating in the Med are being prosecuted for plucking people from overloaded boats. This is in direct contravention of International Maritime law that places an obligation on a ship's master to render all aid possible to prevent loss of life at sea.

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

6 hours ago, billvon said:

The American Bar Association is appalled by . . . 

Hi Bill,

Wait for it:  'Fake News'

I am expecting a tweet any moment now.

Jerry Baumchen

[turtlespeed 226]

3 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Bill,

Wait for it:  'Fake News'

I am expecting a tweet any moment now.

Jerry Baumchen

I'm just surprised lawyers are appalled at anything but an unpaid bill.

[billvon 3,111]

13 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm just surprised lawyers are appalled at anything but an unpaid bill.

I know.  To get them actually outraged by something it's got to be _really_ bad.

[turtlespeed 226]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

I know.  To get them actually outraged by something it's got to be _really_ bad.

Like a moderator without a giraffe steak.

[billvon 3,111]

2 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Like a moderator without a giraffe steak.

Ever since my giraffe steaks were all confiscated by Willem, I've been madder than a lawyer with no one to sue.

[airdvr 210]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/immigration-border-facility-aoc-hispanic

“I read the reports, saw the news clips. I just wanted to see what was actually happening in order to better enable our efforts to find a fair and a just solution to our broken immigration system," Rodriguez, who has advised President Trump and both Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush on immigration reform, noted. “To my surprise, I saw something drastically different from the stories I’ve been hearing in our national discourse. Even as a veteran of immigration advocacy in the U.S., I was shocked at the misinformation of the crisis at the border."

[turtlespeed 226]

14 hours ago, airdvr said:

Even as a veteran of immigration advocacy in the U.S., I was shocked at the misinformation of the crisis at the border."

This doesn't surprise me in the least.

Spin it to win it!

[billvon 3,111]

14 hours ago, airdvr said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/immigration-border-facility-aoc-hispanic

“I read the reports, saw the news clips. I just wanted to see what was actually happening in order to better enable our efforts to find a fair and a just solution to our broken immigration system," Rodriguez, who has advised President Trump and both Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush on immigration reform, noted. “To my surprise, I saw something drastically different from the stories I’ve been hearing in our national discourse. Even as a veteran of immigration advocacy in the U.S., I was shocked at the misinformation of the crisis at the border."

Imagine that!  They went on a planned tour and saw only good stuff.  I guess all the stories about dead kids are a Chinese conspiracy.

[airdvr 210]

DO you get sand in your eyes?

[turtlespeed 226]

4 hours ago, airdvr said:

DO you get sand in your eyes?

I look at it like this -

There are the ones that believe without a doubt that there was nanothermite

There are those that believe that the whole climate change thing is bunk.

And there are those that believe that the media will give you an unbiased story - as long as it agrees with your view, and isn't Fox News. 

There is NO AGENDA.

[wmw999 2,587]

And don't forget those who think that the only unbiased story is the one from Fox News (or The Blaze, or Patriot News, or your brother's uncle's cousin who was really there, and he bounced and lived!)

Wendy P.

[turtlespeed 226]

48 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And don't forget those who think that the only unbiased story is the one from Fox News (or The Blaze, or Patriot News, or your brother's uncle's cousin who was really there, and he bounced and lived!)

Wendy P.

 

48 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And don't forget those who think that the only unbiased story is the one from Fox News (or The Blaze, or Patriot News, or your brother's uncle's cousin who was really there, and he bounced and lived!)

Wendy P.

I don't forget.

I don't watch those shows anymore - I just can't take it.

Now I just like shows where some people did some things.