"Does nobody see what's going on here?"
- Thread starter Synonym
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
It's lice; who the hell cares? I know someone had three kids exposed to a lice epidemic a few months ago.
The kids weren't out mixing with the little 'illegals' as FAUXnews so beguilingly puts it; they were exposed to this scourge at their $40,000-a-year elementary school.
What tight control on the media?
Normally we'd be inundated with pictures of minors whose parents didn't agree to allow news orgs to take their photos?
Lice, TB, swine flu, whatever those other creepy-crawly pests were, communicable diseases that we hope they are immunizing them for...
Well, I guess it's okay then. Since the story came from FAUXnews, and they never, ever, get anything right. And the Border Patrol Union is full of it too.
And as to the stories? Ah, yes. Where are the carefully crafted tales, (mentioning only first names), chronicling the harrowing trip from Guatemala and the ride on the Death Train? I can only imagine the reporters agitating to paint that picture. But they aren't.
It just seems odd to me.
Well, I guess it's okay then. Since the story came from FAUXnews, and they never, ever, get anything right. And the Border Patrol Union is full of it too.
And as to the stories? Ah, yes. Where are the carefully crafted tales, (mentioning only first names), chronicling the harrowing trip from Guatemala and the ride on the Death Train? I can only imagine the reporters agitating to paint that picture. But they aren't.
It just seems odd to me.
Syn, do you mean it just seems odd to you, or are you making a stronger point? Because it sounds like you're making a stronger point but backing away from it.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
Please don't use 'we,' as I don't think of people who happen to come from other countries as being covered in "creepy-crawly pests" or needing to be immunized before they interact with the impeccably health-conscious of America (the country that cares so much about health it has no blanket national health care).
I'm sure FOX gets stuff right on occasion. I'm also sure they routinely make shit up out of whole cloth, embellish things that are vaguely happening to sound like something altogether else, and attempt to whip their patrons into a frenzy.
Note that 'article' says six anonymous sources, including nurses, allege the government is covering up a very serious health threat. Notice the article doesn't actually NAME that very serious health threat.
It does go on to imply that it's TB, by saying a health care provider says that a nurse told them (so this isn't even a theoretical nurse source - it's hearsay from an anonymous source from a theoretical nurse, not backed up by a nurse. Nice reporting.) there's "definitely" TB there.
Ok, there's TB a lot of places. Oh, look, a quote from the Texas State DoH, saying there are three cases of TB in Austin.
Now look at the "article."
Notice a nurse DOES NOT SAY THAT to the "reporter." That's the exact same wording as two graphs above (nice copyediting, FOX), based on hearsay from an anonymous source talking about "nurses," which the "reporter" then turns into "nurses... said," which, I'm sorry, but fuck no.
What's the "definitely" based on? Which official diagnostic tests, procedures and etc. have been undertaken?
Oh. So the anonymous source, who is not a nurse, is quoting people the anonymous source claims are nurses, diagnosing based on symptoms that could be tied to 100 things. Good plan.
Now, notice this idiocy.
Then we have this -
This goes on liken the place to both an ER and an orphanage and then we get this gem -
The thing goes on with a member of congress so stupid I can't rightly believe he can spell his own name (golly, random people, even congressional representatives, aren't allowed to wander into medical facilities and talk to minors?! What're them gubmint people tryin' to hide?!), refer to the aforementioned 'orphanages' and 'emergency rooms' as 'camps,' and express horror that facilities holding unaccompanied minors had security.
I'm sorry, but I simply cannot with fucking FOX pretending to be any kind of journalistic endeavour. The first time I realized how far they'd go, it was early in the morning a few years ago.
Someone on a bicycle had thrown a small homemade explosive toward a building early in the morning. I read about it online and turned on the news. No one but FOX seemed to be covering it. They were talking about a pipe bomb exploding, taking out windows, midtown being shut down, and cops searching vehicles for other explosives. They had video of cops looking, in the dark, in car windows. They went back to the studio, where the am anchors said they'd have people on site but midtown was shut down - they gestured toward the windows behind them, where all was dark, and said how terrifying this was. I paused and glanced toward my window. It was light out. I flipped around. The other news stations were doing weather and such. I waited until the top of the half hour when the NBC local went to their SECOND story - someone on a bike tossed a small explosive at a building, which knocked a chunk off a planter and cracked a window. They went to their standup reporter, outside, in the daylight, 100 or so feet from the bldg in question, with pedestrians walking by behind her. She pointed down the block and said the area was cordoned off but you could see from where she was standing.
I turned back to FOX. Miraculously, it was still dark outside their studio, located about 1/5th of a mile from the NBC studio. They showed footage of the cops from at night again, implying it was current, and said parts of midtown were shut down because of a terrorist explosion. Yeah.
So, basically, I see zero evidence that there's any government coverup of anything.
See the links I posted earlier in the thread for interviews with some children and their parents involved, as well as some officials, if you're interested in their stories, as you mentioned.
As to the Fox News report about disease outbreaks from the illegal immigrant children: see cornflake's post above.
As to the OP:
I think its perfectly valid to ask how to address issues such as illegal immigration, how to address children coming up from Central America, and how to fund any such resolutions. However, to just
Do we deport illegal immigrants? It takes time to decide if they qualify for refugee status. It takes money to deport them. There's no guarantee they wont try to reenter the country and start the process all over again.
Do we imprison them? That costs money. Who has room for thousands of new inmates? What do we do with them once they serve their sentence, deport them?
Do we "secure the border"? That's a lot of border to secure, and it'll take a lot money to do it. And it doesn't address what to do about illegal immigrants already in the country, or what to do if people are caught crossing the border (deport, imprison, etc.).
I'd be happy if there were fewer cases of illegal immigration, especially children making the trek by themselves, but I have yet seen any plan that would do anything other than combat the symptoms of the real problem: people have no chance at a good life in their own country, so they come to the U.S.A. to find one. Except for giving money to said countries so they can combat crime and develop their economy to support their own citizens (but lots of people hate that idea because it's spending money on other people's economy and not our own).
As to the OP:
I think its perfectly valid to ask how to address issues such as illegal immigration, how to address children coming up from Central America, and how to fund any such resolutions. However, to just
doesn't answer anything. Which is why I suspect it doesn't sound politically correct.
Do we deport illegal immigrants? It takes time to decide if they qualify for refugee status. It takes money to deport them. There's no guarantee they wont try to reenter the country and start the process all over again.
Do we imprison them? That costs money. Who has room for thousands of new inmates? What do we do with them once they serve their sentence, deport them?
Do we "secure the border"? That's a lot of border to secure, and it'll take a lot money to do it. And it doesn't address what to do about illegal immigrants already in the country, or what to do if people are caught crossing the border (deport, imprison, etc.).
I'd be happy if there were fewer cases of illegal immigration, especially children making the trek by themselves, but I have yet seen any plan that would do anything other than combat the symptoms of the real problem: people have no chance at a good life in their own country, so they come to the U.S.A. to find one. Except for giving money to said countries so they can combat crime and develop their economy to support their own citizens (but lots of people hate that idea because it's spending money on other people's economy and not our own).
Last edited:
And I think that's the thing. It's illegal if the people in power think to legislate against it. (Which is, frankly, not a very nice thing to do, is it, really? I mean - how would you feel...?.
) but this is a topic that could probably be discussed more profitably with the first nations of most countries. I'm looking at you, Australia - because I imagine there are heaps of Americans already doing the Disapproving Granny Look at America...ETA: And can I just take a moment here to apologise once again to the rest of the world for Rupert Murdoch? I don't know how we didn't do a better job with him - I really don't. A very difficult child.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,313
- Reaction score
- 569
- Location
- MA
- Website
- eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
Even the best parents sometimes turn out bad eggs, it is the risk of reproduction.
Also: Anyone know what the youth eqivilent of the disappointed Granny is? Much as I do love my country, it makes me want to shake my head in disgust quite often. Disgruntled youth, or maybe disapproving Aunty since I am actually an Aunt?
Ah, youth! It's probably nothing that can't be fixed with a good dose of castor oil and time.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,313
- Reaction score
- 569
- Location
- MA
- Website
- eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
Thought you'd say that. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for this country to get it's act together. I mean, between this and the fact some deeply Catholic countries allow national Same-Sex marriage. We have a lot of catching up to do as a nation that supposedly cares about its citizens right to happiness.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2011
- Messages
- 6,543
- Reaction score
- 511
Pursuit of happiness. No one's promised anyone happiness unless they're selling something.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2011
- Messages
- 6,543
- Reaction score
- 511
I'll rephrase instead.
You have the right to chase the ice cream truck. No one promised you it would stop.
You have the right to chase the ice cream truck. No one promised you it would stop.
I see what's going on.
The elite (.01%) have given the body public someone else to be afraid of, to be mad at for destroying the country...like the .01% don't do that well enough all by themselves. Immigrants are easy targets to drum up outrage to take the focus off the government and their masters. It's an old, tired trick...
The elite (.01%) have given the body public someone else to be afraid of, to be mad at for destroying the country...like the .01% don't do that well enough all by themselves. Immigrants are easy targets to drum up outrage to take the focus off the government and their masters. It's an old, tired trick...
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 28,750
- Reaction score
- 2,933
- Location
- right here
- Website
- www.veinglory.com
If any of the kids have TB, we need to detect and treat it. I fail to see any other implications.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2012
- Messages
- 5,425
- Reaction score
- 1,911
- Location
- Denver, CO
- Website
- www.badfoodie.com
You know what? Adding a bunch of children that need food, housing, education and medical care to the population should create a whole new slew of job openings.
Tax money spent on American salaries to provide for these children will multiply as it is fed back into the economy.
Win-win.
Tax money spent on American salaries to provide for these children will multiply as it is fed back into the economy.
Win-win.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2009
- Messages
- 4,484
- Reaction score
- 437
- Location
- Atlanta, Georgia
- Website
- donnetowntoday.blogspot.com
Apparently we have an ocean of money to spend on useless wars. These kids are crossing the border (in large part) because of the consequences of our idiotic drug laws. We've got no moral standing to turn them away.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2011
- Messages
- 6,543
- Reaction score
- 511
We've got plenty of standing.
But, even at that, it does not immediately follow that we should turn them away.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,122
- Reaction score
- 10,882
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
We also expend resources to stop crimes like murder, bank robbery and arson right here in the US, but to what end? They keep happening anyway. Maybe we should stop spending money on police protection, because it clearly doesn't work.
Do you have statistics that suggest things would be no worse if we eliminated all support for these charitable organizations and foundations?
I hope you're being facetious, as we obviously can't stop trying to lessen criminal acts, and we won't stop sending supplies and assistance in hopes that it will reach the intended recipients. It's more of the people with power punishing those with none. Because they can. I can only hope there is a special place in hell for these tyrants. Obviously, the scorn of the rest of the world is something that has no effect on them, so...what do we do? Keep trying to do the right thing, and hope?
As far as the disease rumors are concerned, I have no doubt that there is some basis in fact. We are talking about the impoverished here, from countries with no concern for their health at all. I can only hope that we really are testing, treating, immunizing, and isolating when necessary--rather than cutting corners and shoving these unfortunate children down the road for some unsuspecting community to handle. Does that seem unreasonable?
We 'had' an ocean of money. Things aren't quite as rosy since we've sunk into this endless economic malaise. With only 47% of working age Americans holding full-time jobs, we aren't in a position to open our arms and support thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of children and refugees.
Cruel? Perhaps it sounds that way. Unfortunately, that's what happens when the well runs dry. Everyone feels thirsty. That is also why so many citizens are eying this influx of children with dismay. They are already scraping by, and are well aware that new demands on government support will only mean less to go around.
Our middle class income continues to shrink, rather than grow, partially due to the steady rise in food costs and incremental increases in taxes. It's evident that the only class that is actually maintaining their standards, or even growing, is that dastardly one percent. Even they don't have enough that can be taxed, confiscated, coerced, borrowed, or demanded to cover every need that a large group of unskilled, confused, ill-educated children will require until they can stand on their own. These are hard facts that many don't want to recognize. I'm sorry. Someone has to be the responsible, sensible adult. Or even the equivalent of that nasty banker that won't loan someone money, even though they really, really want it--but could never afford the payments.
It may be expensive to shut down the border, but I don't see how we can not do so. It's possible that the overwhelming needs of those poor people living to our South, pouring over the border in search of the promised land, will bankrupt our nation. Then where will they turn?
Maybe Canada should keep a sharp eye on their borders.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,924
- Reaction score
- 5,294
- Location
- Near the gargoyles
- Website
- www.alessandrakelley.com
We had an ocean of money after the Clinton administration balanced the federal budget and ran up an unprecedented huge budget surplus, hundreds of billions of dollars, a vast resource left to the next administration, that of George W. Bush.
It was the W. administration that blew through all that surplus cash and far more on useless wars, racking up a massive budget deficit in the process, a vast sinkhole left to the next administration, that of Barack Obama.
One could make the argument that since we just don't have the money, those children must die. We could call it hard reality.
And yet, even when Bush's government was flush with the Clinton budget surplus, there was never any mention of alleviating poverty, of any kind of charity whatsoever towards the poor. Instead the cry was "We have so much money, let's let the rich pay lower taxes!"
One might conclude that the strategy is to make sure the poor suffer and die no matter what our financial condition is, so long as we can rationalize away our responsibility for the least among us.
It seems cruel to tell raped and dying children that we will not help them because we spent all the money we might have used for charity (honest, we might have) on a binge for the rich.
Last edited:
I know it would piss off a lot of people but honestly, Obama should go to other first world nations who don't have as much of an influx of refugees and see if they're willing to take some in or chip in to help them. For instance, Canada has a lot of room. Maybe they can take the lion share of the kids to ease the situation.