America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

If we don’t house and protect them, they will end up in concentration camps… and stuff.

Bay State lawmen and lawmakers are urging Gov. Deval Patrick to reject President Obama’s request to shelter some of the thousands of children who have been surging across the nation’s southern border illegally, while immigration advocates are calling the crisis a humanitarian issue requiring immediate action.

“As long as there are signals being sent out that people can come here illegally and we’re just going to take care of them, then they’re just going to keep on coming,” Bristol County Sheriff Thomas M. Hodgson said yesterday from the Texas border on a fact-finding tour. “Neither the president nor the governor have come down to the border to see what’s happening — had they taken the time to come down, they would understand why sending people to Massachusetts is not the answer.”

Unaccompanied Central American children have been streaming across the border in recent months, with 90,000 expected to cross by Sept. 30, immigration experts say.

The crisis has prompted Obama to ask Congress for $3.7 billion to stem the tide and call upon state legislators to shelter kids at facilities nationwide.

“I don’t think as a commonwealth that we can turn away and turn our backs to children who are coming from desperate situations,” Patrick said. “My inclination is to remember what happened when a ship full of Jewish children tried to come to the United States in 1939 and the United States turned them away and they went to their deaths in Nazi concentration camps.”

The federal government would foot the bill for housing the minors, Patrick said, and they would be held in secure facilities and not released into neighborhoods if the state agrees to give them shelter.

Franklin Soults, communications director for the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, said labeling the children coming across the border as “illegal immigrants” is inaccurate.

“They’re children who are in need of help, who are facing death and gang violence of unprecedented proportions in their home country,” he said in backing Patrick’s call to house the youngsters.

Worcester Sheriff Lewis G. Evangelidis — also in Texas this week — said the best way to deter more families from crossing the border is to return them quickly to their home countries before the surge overwhelms states.

“The border patrol told us today that they just sent back a couple of planeloads of people and that it was becoming huge news down there,” he said. “The people who are paying the Mexican drug cartels for easy access to the U.S. need to see that they can be sent back.”

In Connecticut, officials rejected a request this week to temporarily house up to 2,000 children at a mostly vacant facility for developmentally disabled adults.

Patrick J. Scalfani, public affairs officer for the U.S. General Services Administration’s New England Office, said “a wide range of facilities are being evaluated” as “temporary shelter” for the kids in the Bay State.

House Minority Leader Bradley Jones questioned the logic of helping break immigration laws.

“This is a sad commentary about the governor’s steering the ship of state during the waning months of his administration,” Jones said. “If we address the needs of all the people coming across the border, isn’t that only going to encourage more of them to come across?”

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2014/07/gov_deval_patrick_urged_to_reject_obamas_request_to_help_shelter

lulz -- http://www.azcentral.com/story/brahm-resnik/2014/07/15/arizona-politician-mistakes-campers-for-migrant-children/12701279/

Saw that... hehehe...

That article was without a doubt... dumb.

"Let the rule of law prevail"? The current rule of law is that we have to provide a court date for non-mexican minors illegally in the US. If you deport them you will be doing the absolute opposite of our "rule of law".

Additionally, the bill referenced - H.1414 is a Massachusetts state bill. I have no idea what that's supposed to have to do with the problem at our "southern border". Does the author know where Massachusetts is?

I recall pics of your bar...waaaay nicer!

Of course the author know where Mass. Is..........they're one of the many " Dump Sites " mebbe you and your " girlfriend " should adopt just as many as you can, or would that be DUMB?



Jamie's article :


Share |Share on twitter Twitter
|Share on facebook Facebook
| 169 Comments | Print |Share on email Email
June 20, 2014
Stunning: DHS solicited bids for vendor to handle 65,000 unaccompanied minors -- IN JANUARY!
By Thomas Lifson


The Obama administration’s claim to have been surprised by the wave of children flooding over out borders may turn out to be another political lie of the year. Sundance of Conservative Treehouse noticed a very peculiar advertisement:

On January 29th of this year, the federal government posted an advertisement seeking bids for a vendor contract to handle “Unaccompanied Alien Children“.

Not just any contract mind you, but a very specific contract – for a very specific number of unaccompanied minors: 65,000.

• Why would DHS and ICE be claiming “surprise” by the current influx of unaccompanied minors on the border in June, when they were taking bids for an exact contract to handle the exact situation in January?

• Secondly, how could they possibly anticipate 65,000 unaccompanied minors would be showing up at the border, when the most ever encountered in a previous year was 5,000 total ?

The bid specifics are even more suspicious:

[...] The Contractor shall provide unarmed escort staff, including management, supervision, manpower, training, certifications, licenses, drug testing, equipment, and supplies necessary to provide on-demand escort services for non-criminal/non-delinquent unaccompanied alien children ages infant to 17 years of age, seven (7) days a week, 365 days a year. Transport will be required for either category of UAC or individual juveniles, to include both male and female juveniles. There will be approximately 65,000 UAC in total: 25% local ground transport, 25% via ICE charter and 50% via commercial air.

[...] In addition, the Contractor shall have personnel who are able to communicate with juveniles in their own designated language(s).

Link to the ad here.

This stinks to high heaven. It is time to subpoena the people who placed the ad to give testimony in Congress. We may have a Cloward-Piven strategy on illegal immigration underway.

Makes one wonder what Putin would do....

then that is what we should do.

The Three Amigos

Of course that would be dumb. I dislike children. Why would I adopt one? I leave that to people who claim to want them.

And Mass isn't a "dump site" at this time, it appears they are considering it however.



The article is wrong. The entire theme of the article is one of paranoia because "how could the gov't have known if the most encountered in a previous year was 5000". That is incorrect.
2008 - 8k
2009- 19k
2010 - 18k
2011 - 15k
2012 - 24k
2013 - 38k
2014 - 51k (to date)

I think it's a safe guess that based off the increase in 2013, the gov't realized it needed increased handling capacity. That doesn't mean the predicted 51k. That just means they expected more than 24k.



paranoid.

Do you have ANY idea how many of YOUR posts include THESE words??? But I'ma gonna bet yer a gude gessur!

They're interfering with all kinds of chit William....all kinds

When we KNOW for a fact that lids here in the US ( Mid-West for certain) are undernourished.....how in GODs name can we concern ourselves with the rest of the worlds underfed??

we should prolly laugh at them too....

Why don't you tell that to the residents here.....


http://www.gopusa.com/news/2014/07/23/towns-struggle-with-influx-of-illegal-aliens/?subscriber=1

I'm starving right now....

That's the difference between you and I TCBY.

I gather as much information about a subject as I can, and then I make an educated guess for the parts which are impossible to know. I highlight that using words like "I suppose" or "I guess" or "I think".

Whereas you don't seem to bother even reading what little information is dropped in your lap, and you treat items which you couldn't possibly have the necessary information to form a conclusion with the same certainty as items you've erroneously formed the wrong conclusion because you didn't bother reading the information.

You need to clearly define what you're talking about.
If you're referring to them as a "dump site" then I assume you're referring to the current issue with buses trying to drop off central american children:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/07/16/patrick-says-will-try-find-ways-for-mass-host-immigrant-children/ivsf0tVmqJKYHDAGtQ50FP/story.html

If you're just referring to them having a large increase in central american illegal immigrants that's a different phrase.

What's funniest about this is that your own article identifies at the end (I'll assume you didn't get that far)
"Gov. Deval Patrick has offered two possible sites to house young people after they are caught crossing the border illegally."

You realize what the word "possible" means there, right?

possibly...

Are you sure those aren't additional "shelter in place" locations? ;)

are you guessing or are you pretty sure?

Yes " I'm Guessing " he meant to say....Probable ( see what I did there )

And here's more on the darlings Illegally entering OUR Country :

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/border-crisis-migrant-minors/2014/07/23/id/584389/?ns_mail_uid=81019587&ns_mail_job=1578533_07232014&s=al&dkt_nbr=5cjapypg