Children deported from US back to Honduras are being killed

[qh4dotcom]

Ok, so much for that silly argument that they came for the "incentives". Never mind the high murder rate in their country.

http://www.latina.com/lifestyle/our-issues/children-deported-honduras-killed

[HOLLYWOOD]

Well then, send NATO in ASAP to attack and assassinate the Honduran government and military, like they have done repeatedly in "protecting lives" of innocent civilians.

PS: Any substantial reserves of Oil in Honduras? Is Honduras a threat to the Federal Reserve FIAT trade currency? Nevermind...

[green73]

They write:


The Los Angeles Times reports that undocumented migrant children who are being deported back to Honduras are being murdered upon their return to their native country.

Hector Hernandez, who runs a morgue in San Pedro Sula, told the paper that between five and 10 children who have been brought to his morgue had been recently deported from the United States.

From the LA Times Article (my bold):


In the Aug. 16 Section A, an article about what happens to children who are deported from the U.S. to Honduras quoted Hector Hernandez, who runs the morgue in the city of San Pedro Sula, as saying that five to 10 of the 42 homicide victims younger than 18 who were taken to the morgue since February had previously been deported from the U.S. Hernandez subsequently said that only one of them had been deported from the U.S.

[qh4dotcom]

They write:



From the LA Times Article (my bold):

So green73....because only one got killed instead of ten....that means it's OK to deport them back to a dangerous country with a high murder rate? Wouldn't it be better if none got killed and they all could stay?

[green73]

So green73....because only one got killed instead of ten....that means it's OK to deport them back to a dangerous country with a high murder rate? Wouldn't it be better if none got killed and they all could stay?

It would be best to end the war on drugs, of course, since that's where so much of the violence stems from.

Do you want to change the thread title?

[tod evans]

This idea that the worlds children are a national issue for the taxpayers is insane!

But only some children, right?

If their countrymen have oil it's perfectly okay to bomb them in their homes...

Government is out of hand and voting and SWLOD's aren't going to fix it.

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Want to solve the issue? End the war on drugs and stop incentivising the government there with foreign aid. Their motive will continue to be enabling the drug lords, in order to encourage the gravy train called foreign aid.

[RJB]

Maybe they should blame the murderers in their country rather than U.S. citizens.

[qh4dotcom]

Want to solve the issue? End the war on drugs and stop incentivising the government there with foreign aid. Their motive will continue to be enabling the drug lords, in order to encourage the gravy train called foreign aid.


Yes, sure...I definitely agree with ending the war on drugs....but as long as the Americans keep consuming, demanding drugs and supporting the corrupt politicians that don't want to end the war on drugs, they are responsible for the big mess in Central America....so they should take responsibility by not deporting the children back. You break it, you fix it.....what about sending them back when the war on drugs is over and drugs are legalized?

[Origanalist]

I see the thread title still hasn't been changed.

[JK/SEA]

it would be nice if more people showed compassion for all the innocent children MURDERED in Gaza and now the bombing campaign in Iraq.....i digress. Sorry for the thread hijack.

[kcchiefs6465]

Maybe they should blame the murderers in their country rather than U.S. citizens.
Considering the death squads trained in American schools and funded by American dollars, (not to mention the war on drugs) it is possible that there is some blame for this.

'Blame' in the same way that Americans are to blame for what is happening in Iraq.

[William Tell]

So green73....because only one got killed instead of ten....that means it's OK to deport them back to a dangerous country with a high murder rate? Wouldn't it be better if none got killed and they all could stay?

And if one had been killed here, and none in Honduras, we should then have deported them all so they would be safe?

[MelissaWV]

If only you were there to adopt and assist those children, OP. See, when it's someone else's resources being allocated, it's all fine and dandy. When someone tells you that if you feel so strongly about something, you should fund it, it tends to go south.

There were way more than a few children here in this very country killed this week, or severely injured. Are you suggestion, as William Tell asked you, that we deport our children so they are not slain?

Even at face value, the "children deported back from the US" that were killed (later debunked, but let's take it at face value) were a miniscule portion of a percent of those that have come over. And yes, they came over here for the benefits. If there was no promise of education, food, housing, and some healthcare, there would be fewer people coming here.

[staerker]

Maybe they should blame the murderers in their country rather than U.S. citizens.

No one is saying that U.S. citizens murdered anyone. But when you close your door on those seeking refuge...

[staerker]

If only you were there to adopt and assist those children, OP. See, when it's someone else's resources being allocated, it's all fine and dandy. When someone tells you that if you feel so strongly about something, you should fund it, it tends to go south.

There were way more than a few children here in this very country killed this week, or severely injured. Are you suggestion, as William Tell asked you, that we deport our children so they are not slain?

Even at face value, the "children deported back from the US" that were killed (later debunked, but let's take it at face value) were a miniscule portion of a percent of those that have come over. And yes, they came over here for the benefits. If there was no promise of education, food, housing, and some healthcare, there would be fewer people coming here.

Are you in favor of deporting those children? Then you are in favor of "someone else's resources being allocated." Unless you think the administrative and transportation costs of deportation = 0.

It takes absolutely no resources to leave sovereign human beings to themselves, and allow them to travel as they see fit.

[aGameOfThrones]

I see the thread title still hasn't been changed.

insert vagina

[William Tell]

insert vagina

That doesn't even make sense.....

[aGameOfThrones]

That doesn't even make sense.....

origanalist knows what I mean

[Origanalist]

That doesn't even make sense.....

It does here.

[William Tell]

origanalist knows what I mean

I do too, I'm just sayin';)

[Origanalist]

Are you in favor of deporting those children? Then you are in favor of "someone else's resources being allocated." Unless you think the administrative and transportation costs of deportation = 0.

It takes absolutely no resources to leave sovereign human beings to themselves, and allow them to travel as they see fit.

Except there is that pesky thing about the resources they will consume now that they've "made it" here.

[acptulsa]

No one is saying that U.S. citizens murdered anyone. But when you close your door on those seeking refuge...

Oh? These are political asylum seekers, are they?

Or are they terrorists holding their own children hostage in hopes that they can have more children and pawn them off on us?

Do you really think we should be negotiating with terrorists? Wouldn't that just encourage more terrorists? Or is it better that these people kill only one child, see that it doesn't get them what they want, and be discouraged from killing more children?

[thoughtomator]

Considering the death squads trained in American schools and funded by American dollars, (not to mention the war on drugs) it is possible that there is some blame for this.

'Blame' in the same way that Americans are to blame for what is happening in Iraq.

Let's put the blame where it belongs - on the transnational oligarchy, not the American people. Our government does not answer to us, nor does it give us accurate information about what it is doing in our name.

[staerker]

Except there is that pesky thing about the resources they will consume now that they've "made it" here.

So you agree with my above statement?

Then it appears that there is only one problem, the theft that is the welfare state (assuming every individual fits your preconceived judgement: guilty until prov-- err, deported)

Then don't promote the theft that is deportation, and create two problems. Two evils does not make a right.

[MelissaWV]

Are you in favor of deporting those children? Then you are in favor of "someone else's resources being allocated." Unless you think the administrative and transportation costs of deportation = 0.

It takes absolutely no resources to leave sovereign human beings to themselves, and allow them to travel as they see fit.

So you're in favor of undocumented children being utterly free-range? That's mighty unique.

I am not in favor of the administrative bullshit going on related to immigration law enforcement. That doesn't mean it's not already happening. It also doesn't mean the answer to one child that was deported dying in their home country is to leave them all here, provide them with housing, food, education, and healthcare, and pretend they're going to grow up to be just the most amazingly productive citizens ever (with more advantages than a number of children whose parents are citizens).

The whole thing is silly on both sides, and there's too much money to be made in pretending there are no solutions.

[staerker]

So you're in favor of undocumented children being utterly free-range? That's mighty unique.

I am not in favor of the administrative bullshit going on related to immigration law enforcement. That doesn't mean it's not already happening. It also doesn't mean the answer to one child that was deported dying in their home country is to leave them all here, provide them with housing, food, education, and healthcare, and pretend they're going to grow up to be just the most amazingly productive citizens ever (with more advantages than a number of children whose parents are citizens).

The whole thing is silly on both sides, and there's too much money to be made in pretending there are no solutions.

I am in favor of the least coercive action. They should be free to seek help from giving individuals if they believe they need it. If they don't, they do not have to.

Either way, they should not be deported, using your own argument.

[thoughtomator]

No one is saying that U.S. citizens murdered anyone. But when you close your door on those seeking refuge...

We simply can't accept everyone who seeks refuge - the sheer numbers would crush us.

The solution to situations where there are large numbers of people from a country who seek refuge here is to arm them and send them back. Ultimately if people want their rights respected, it is their responsibility to fight for them.

A number of countries use our asylum policy as a way to dump their undesirables on us - Castro famously emptied his prisons to dump them on our shores. Our policy facilitates the continuation of tyranny in these nations, acting as a release valve for the pressure which would otherwise overthrow them.

If Mexico hadn't been able to dump tens of millions of its people on us, it wouldn't be able to continue as the corrupt crony state it is.

[MelissaWV]

I am in favor of the least coercive action. They should be free to seek help from giving individuals if they believe they need it. If they don't, they do not have to.

Either way, they should not be deported, using your own argument.

Actually, using my argument, they should not be "processed" at all... nor eligible for any benefits, including education, healthcare (unless a private/charitable hospital decides to provide it, obviously), free/reduced housing, etc.. That cow has left the barn. You're "in favor" of a theory, but in practice what you're in favor of is providing numerous freebies --- which really do entice others to come here, despite what the OP would like to argue.

Strange, I still don't see you guys offering to put up these kids in your home rather than allow them to live in their dangerous homeland.

[RJB]

So you're in favor of undocumented children being utterly free-range? That's mighty unique.

That's how I see it. These kids will be raised loveless in government institutions. They are not going to be freely living their lives or magically have a family to take care of them.

[staerker]

Actually, using my argument, they should not be "processed" at all... nor eligible for any benefits, including education, healthcare (unless a private/charitable hospital decides to provide it, obviously), free/reduced housing, etc.. That cow has left the barn. You're "in favor" of a theory, but in practice what you're in favor of is providing numerous freebies --- which really do entice others to come here, despite what the OP would like to argue.

Strange, I still don't see you guys offering to put up these kids in your home rather than allow them to live in their dangerous homeland.

Yes, you are correct.

Whether the cow has left the barn or not, you are prodding it along, in a naive attempt to alleviate the pain. Supporting tyranny to reduce tyranny does not work, in the end.

[RJB]

Strange, I still don't see you guys offering to put up these kids in your home rather than allow them to live in their dangerous homeland.

Exactly.

[William Tell]

All these Illegals will be granted amnesty, and vote all of our liberties away. YAY! Go open borders, here comes the New World Order/ North American Union! Just like George Bush and Vicente Fox wanted! Those who support open borders are just pawns in a larger game. If you think the American Government is bad, wait for the World Government.

[staerker]

All these Illegals will be granted amnesty, and vote all of our liberties away. YAY! Go open borders, here comes the New World Order/ North American Union! Just like George Bush and Vicente Fox wanted! Those who support open borders are just pawns in a larger game. If you think the American Government is bad, wait for the World Government.

How would the World Government rule the armed, and educated populace of North America?

The same way the American Government rules the populace right now.

Now, neither would, if we were truly armed and educated. That does not come about by supporting tyranny.

[Dr.3D]

All these Illegals will be granted amnesty, and vote all of our liberties away. YAY! Go open borders, here comes the New World Order/ North American Union! Just like George Bush and Vicente Fox wanted! Those who support open borders are just pawns in a larger game. If you think the American Government is bad, wait for the World Government.
Isn't it ironic how those who want no government will push for something that ends up being World Government?

[thoughtomator]

Isn't it ironic how those who want no government will push for something that ends up being World Government?

There is an education gap with these people, best cured by a reading of Leviathan.

Sovereignty is essential to liberty. A government which cannot or will not defend its borders is practically by definition incapable of protecting the rights of its citizens.

Just ask anyone near the border what the effect of not enforcing sovereignty is on their property rights, and the right to life.

[staerker]

Isn't it ironic how those who want no government will push for something that ends up being World Government?

States->Federal->International Unions-> ???

You are a boiling frog.

[RJB]

Now, neither would, if we were truly armed and educated. That does not come about by supporting tyranny.

I'm not sure that these refugees raised in government ophanages will be taught the value of the 2nd amendment. Government schools don't. Nowadays it's passed down through families, which brings us back to: How many of these children do you plan to adopt?

[William Tell]

Isn't it ironic how those who want no government will push for something that ends up being World Government?

Damn straight, might as well vote for Hillary Clinton.

[Origanalist]

Actually, using my argument, they should not be "processed" at all... nor eligible for any benefits, including education, healthcare (unless a private/charitable hospital decides to provide it, obviously), free/reduced housing, etc.. That cow has left the barn. You're "in favor" of a theory, but in practice what you're in favor of is providing numerous freebies --- which really do entice others to come here, despite what the OP would like to argue.

Strange, I still don't see you guys offering to put up these kids in your home rather than allow them to live in their dangerous homeland.

Bingo.

[Dr.3D]

Damn straight, might as well vote for Hillary Clinton.
If they vote at all.

[William Tell]

If they vote at all.

Many of them don't, but they back up these policies. Some of these folks stay home, as they are too 'pure' to actually try to change things by electing Ron Paul Republicans. They would rather America burns to the ground, because as we all know. As soon as the American Government disappears, this landmass will automatically become an ancap utopia! Because no other thug nation like Russia, etc would ever think of trying to take our resources. The US is the only imperial gang in world history:rolleyes:
As soon as uncle Sam is gone, it will be all Rainbows and Willie Weed for everyone!

[green73]

Many of them don't, but they back up these policies. Some of these folks stay home, as they are too 'pure' to actually try to change things by electing Ron Paul Republicans. They would rather America burns to the ground, because as we all know. As soon as the American Government disappears, this landmass will automatically become an ancap utopia! Because no other thug nation like Russia, etc would ever think of trying to take our resources. The US is the only imperial gang in world history:rolleyes:
As soon as uncle Sam is gone, it will be all Rainbows and Willie Weed for everyone!

So much fail in that statement. FYI, every time someone says "ancap utopia" they expose themselves as total noobs on the philosophy.

[John F Kennedy III]

So green73....because only one got killed instead of ten....that means it's OK to deport them back to a dangerous country with a high murder rate? Wouldn't it be better if none got killed and they all could stay?

How about we end the war on drugs and they won't come here in the first place.

It is not up to us to provide sanctuary to the world.

[Origanalist]

37,000+ Unaccompanied Minors Ready To Enroll in U.S. Public Schools

(CNSNews.com)— Public school systems around the country preparing to begin a new school year will be facing the added burden of enrolling more than 37,000 unaccompanied minors who have entered the U.S. illegally.
According to the Administration for Children & Families’ Office of Refugee Resettlement, 37,477 alien children have been placed with relatives or other sponsors around the country so far this year while their immigration cases are being processed in court.

In the meantime, they are entitled to attend U.S. public schools, which have dropped out of the top 20 in global rankings for math, reading and science.

Only one illegal minor was sent to Montana between January 1 and July 31st, according to the ORR’s state-by-state analysis.

However, other states have received thousands of unaccompanied minors, which could create a strain on some school districts. The highest number were released to relatives or other sponsors in Texas (5,280), followed by New York (4,244), California (3.909), Florida (3,809), and Virginia (2.856).

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), 62,998 unaccompanied alien children under the age of 17 have illegally crossed the southern border since October of last year. So there are still thousands of children and teens in detention centers waiting to be processed before they are released throughout the U.S.

The vast majority are from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico, according to the CBP.

Many are unable to speak English. “We don't know the educational background (of the students), if they've even been to school, the language issue and operational issues that could raise costs,” Francisco Negron, general counsel for the National School Board Association, told USA Today

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/paul-lagarde/37000-unaccompanied-minors-ready-enroll-us-public-schools

[alucard13mm]

OP, we might as well welcome all children in the world to come on in to get a free education, free food at school, free medical and free stuff.

We welcome Syrians, Libyans, Egyptians, Nigerians, Iraqi, Afghani, Thai children. Hell, since we don't want their children to come alone, lets allow their dads, moms, siblings, uncles, aunts, cousins, friends, and neighbors in too. WOOOT!!! COME COME! We have plenty to go around! All sunshine and lolipops. Streets are paved in gold!

If we had a surplus and our economy is in good standing, we could maybe help out a bit. But we are 17 trillion in debt with most of our budget already allocated to welfare/ss.

More kids in school = more kids in your child's class = your child get's less teacher time = you screw your child over.

[Carson]

"Children deported from US back to Honduras are being killed"

This sounds like a trumped up story to me. I can't imagine that the criminals in the government deported any of the children they are bringing in.

[surf]

i'll bring this up again: on The Independents a guest mentioned that most of these migrant children have a written address in their possession when they show up here - a friend or relative to take care of them.

[puppetmaster]

Ok, so much for that silly argument that they came for the "incentives". Never mind the high murder rate in their country.

http://www.latina.com/lifestyle/our-issues/children-deported-honduras-killed

Right good source.....lol

[kcchiefs6465]

Let's put the blame where it belongs - on the transnational oligarchy, not the American people. Our government does not answer to us, nor does it give us accurate information about what it is doing in our name.
Indeed, for most here.

[kcchiefs6465]

Actually, using my argument, they should not be "processed" at all... nor eligible for any benefits, including education, healthcare (unless a private/charitable hospital decides to provide it, obviously), free/reduced housing, etc.. That cow has left the barn. You're "in favor" of a theory, but in practice what you're in favor of is providing numerous freebies --- which really do entice others to come here, despite what the OP would like to argue.

Strange, I still don't see you guys offering to put up these kids in your home rather than allow them to live in their dangerous homeland.
Do you think if I offered it would make a bit of difference?

[MelissaWV]

Do you think if I offered it would make a bit of difference?

I do not really see it being proposed at all. Are there thousands of willing homes where citizens are so scared for these children being sent back home, that they are willing to foster them and aid them through the legal process? I might have missed that.

Or are people much more compassionate when someone else's money is being used to do it?

[kcchiefs6465]

I do not really see it being proposed at all. Are there thousands of willing homes where citizens are so scared for these children being sent back home, that they are willing to foster them and aid them through the legal process? I might have missed that.

Or are people much more compassionate when someone else's money is being used to do it?
The "legal process" would be what would offer up someone else's money so your post is kind of a sort of conundrum. That is, you'd get a subsidy for taking in needy children. A subsidy for their possible development needs, a subsidy for their food. That wasn't at all what I was referring to.

In fact, offering help to the needy is frowned upon in certain regards. The parks' 'public' which supposedly owns the land wants you not there. The Health Department will bleach meat before it is offered to the hungry.

Certainly you could not be naive enough to think that someone could take in one of these children without severe potential repercussions. You can't feed the hungry without a permit [or two].

And rather than offering scraps to those coming across the border, a job would most benefit them best. But what happens then? What is the consequence of hiring the needy? Or even, what happens when some hire who they want to hire?

'Compassionate when someone else's money is used?' Hell, that'd be a step better than those who wish to use my money to be non-compassionate, wouldn't you say? All things being equal.

[surf]

I do not really see it being proposed at all. Are there thousands of willing homes where citizens are so scared for these children being sent back home, that they are willing to foster them and aid them through the legal process? I might have missed that.

Or are people much more compassionate when someone else's money is being used to do it?see my post: #48

I think that may answer your question

[oyarde]

I have enough responsibilities . I am not taking Honduran children , nor do I wish to pay for them . If you want to , I am sure there are charities for that. I have my own pet charities already.

[2young2vote]

I say we deport every illegal immigrant to Norway, Sweden, and Finland. I think they'll take care of it.

[Origanalist]

I say we deport every illegal immigrant to Norway, Sweden, and Finland. I think they'll take care of it.

Set up housing for them in the House and Senate Chambers and the White House.

[kcchiefs6465]

Set up housing for them in the House and Senate Chambers and the White House.
You're on to something now...

[The Free Hornet]

Maybe they should blame the murderers in their country rather than U.S. citizens.

U.S. citizens are responsible for the war on drugs (and associated international meddling) and the other wars of foreign agression. I know about TPTB. They aren't there to take the fall. We are, that is why it is our responsibility. As for murderers in other countries, there is always a thugish element that takes advantage of abusable situations. It is not that I don't blame them, rather, I take no responsiblity for their actions (in the same way I am responsible for American military deployments).

[Origanalist]

You're on to something now...

I'm sure the congress kritters, Senators and Obama would love to have their kids go to school with them.

[kcchiefs6465]

I'm sure the congress kritters, Senators and Obama would love to have their kids go to school with them.
Of course not.

[qh4dotcom]

If only you were there to adopt and assist those children, OP. See, when it's someone else's resources being allocated, it's all fine and dandy. When someone tells you that if you feel so strongly about something, you should fund it, it tends to go south.



No need for me to adopt....there are plenty of charities, churches, etc who are willing to use their own resources to assist the children.

as long as the Americans keep consuming, demanding drugs and supporting the corrupt politicians that don't want to end the war on drugs, they are responsible for the big mess in Central America....so they should take responsibility by not deporting the children back. You break it, you fix it.....what about sending them back when the war on drugs is over and drugs are legalized?

[Zippyjuan]

That morgue is pretty busy.

http://wamu.org/news/14/08/20/death_and_terror_await_many_deported_honduran_immi grants


Dr. Hernandez had to cut his interview with us short. Earlier that day, 12 people waiting to claim bodies—including one of a man Honduras news reports linked to criminal gangs—were machined-gunned outside his morgue. Nine died. Hernandez says it was a massacre.

[qh4dotcom]

That morgue is pretty busy.

http://wamu.org/news/14/08/20/death_and_terror_await_many_deported_honduran_immi grants

It sure is

[staerker]

I'm not sure that these refugees raised in government ophanages will be taught the value of the 2nd amendment. Government schools don't. Nowadays it's passed down through families, which brings us back to: How many of these children do you plan to adopt?

I think you mistake my argument. I am not arguing for any actions whatsoever. You however, are in favor of more governmental intervention.

Your argument could just as easily be applied to U.S.A. born children (who are more equal than non-U.S.A. born children, of course) If you don't want to support my child, then I have the right to call the government to forcibly inhibit the physical movement of my child.

See, at least my argument is consistent, treating all humans as equal.