AOC

[churchmouse]

To clarify, I do not think people awaiting a decision should be unnecessarily put in bad conditions.

But, if an invading horde comes to my house, I might have a hard time housing and feeding them.

That is just it Act......an "OVERWHELMING" invading Horde. You forgot "OVERWHELMING"

 

[actaeon277]

That is just it Act......an "OVERWHELMING" invading Horde. You forgot "OVERWHELMING"

I figured "horde" would be good enough.
When I "exaggerated" as a kid, I got smacked for "lying".
Even as an adult, I try to not be viewed as "exaggerating".

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You know, while AOC is a complete moron, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Those immigration detention facilities are in fact concentration camps. The same type of camps used by the British in the Boer War, and that America has used multiple times in our history, from interning Native Americans to interning Japanese Americans during World War II (which was ordered by the socialist hero, FDR), to the Cuban "refugee camps" in southern Florida in 1980. It's also been used by many other countries all over the world, and still is.

The conditions in these camps are deplorable and frankly, we should be embarrassed as Americans that our government is doing this. Regardless of how you feel about these people and what you think should be done with them (let them in or send them home), we should be treating them much better. Not because we approve of their actions, but because we, as Americans, are supposed to be better than this.

Anyway, where I think everyone is getting wrapped around the axle is that they conflate someone using the term concentration camp with the Nazi death camps. While the death camps were indeed concentrations camps, not all concentration camps are death camps (not that they are ever a happy or fun place to be and are usually full of complete human misery and mistreatment).

Now, honestly, I'm not sure I credit AOC with having enough gray matter to have made that distinction in her initial comments, but she at least has someone smart enough on her staff to have her issue a statement in rebuttal.

View attachment 77952

What gets me is this is nothing new. Trump didn't just start this policy. As you alluded to, it's been in place for years. However, I don't even think it's comparable to the internment of Native Americans or Japanese citizens. This is the result of the illegals using kids (sometimes their own and sometimes not), claiming "asylum" and overwhelming the system. They brought this on themselves, and Congress has done nothing to address it. Has absolutely nothing to do with Trump. At least with the threats of tariffs on Mexico he has made a positive step toward decreasing the flow coming out way through Mexico.

 

[Beowulf]

con·cen·tra·tion camp

/ˌkänsənˈtrāSHən ˈˌkamp/

noun

1.a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.

Powered by*Oxford Dictionaries




One might argue they are not being used as forced labor, or being executed.

The term itself from the Spanish governments use of "reconcentración" in Cuba to prevent guerillas from hiding amongst rural villages. The Brits did the exact same thing (both in the 1890s). The dictionary definition above even calls it out, saying it's most strong associated with the Germans, but honestly, that's because we do a crap job of teaching history in this country (and from what I can tell, most of Europe has this same problem).


French political cartoon from the 1890s about the British conduct in South Africa:

People don't have to be used in forced labor or be executed for it to be considered a concentration camp. It's the mass holding of civilians without due process, without intent to file charges. Which, by the way, is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the United States is a signer.

We could call it an Internment Camp if that makes everyone feel better. But either way, it's a travesty.

If they want to send them back, then send them back. Put them on a bus and send them back across the border. Or, if you want to try them for crimes, then put them on trial.

Locking people up for months at a time in bad conditions and taking away their children is just inhumane.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I heard this song on the radio today and it reminded me of AOC... "I'm not aware of too many things. I know what I know if you know what I mean."

[video=youtube;SlS0kJyUVjA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlS0kJyUVjA[/video]

 

[Beowulf]

What gets me is this is nothing new. Trump didn't just start this policy. As you alluded to, it's been in place for years. However, I don't even think it's comparable to the internment of Native Americans or Japanese citizens. This is the result of the illegals using kids (sometimes their own and sometimes not), claiming "asylum" and overwhelming the system. They brought this on themselves, and Congress has done nothing to address it. Has absolutely nothing to do with Trump. At least with the threats of tariffs on Mexico he has made a positive step toward decreasing the flow coming out way through Mexico.

Certainly this isn't anything new. In fact, it was done very heavily under Obama. Most of the Democrats don't really care about principles if it is their own guy doing it, just like most Republicans don't care about principles if it is their guy doing it.

Another day of hypocrisy in America.

But, I would say that the US government does bear some of the blame for this. One of the reasons we get flooded with people is political and economic instability in Mexico and Central America, something the US has had it's sticky fingers in for decades. Just look at the low grade narco civil-war going on in Mexico, with tens of thousands of people being brutally murdered, including police and politicians, each year. That is almost entirely driven by our idiotic drug policy.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

The term itself from the Spanish governments use of "reconcentración" in Cuba to prevent guerillas from hiding amongst rural villages. The Brits did the exact same thing (both in the 1890s). The dictionary definition above even calls it out, saying it's most strong associated with the Germans, but honestly, that's because we do a crap job of teaching history in this country (and from what I can tell, most of Europe has this same problem).


French political cartoon from the 1890s about the British conduct in South Africa:

People don't have to be used in forced labor or be executed for it to be considered a concentration camp. It's the mass holding of civilians without due process, without intent to file charges. Which, by the way, is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the United States is a signer.

We could call it an Internment Camp if that makes everyone feel better. But either way, it's a travesty.

If they want to send them back, then send them back. Put them on a bus and send them back across the border. Or, if you want to try them for crimes, then put them on trial.

Locking people up for months at a time in bad conditions and taking away their children is just inhumane.

They're being held (up to 20 days I believe) while awaiting adjudication of their "asylum" claims. Then they're turned loose, and 90+% never seem to make it to their hearings. Huh. Imagine that.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Certainly this isn't anything new. In fact, it was done very heavily under Obama. Most of the Democrats don't really care about principles if it is their own guy doing it, just like most Republicans don't care about principles if it is their guy doing it.

Another day of hypocrisy in America.

But, I would say that the US government does bear some of the blame for this. One of the reasons we get flooded with people is political and economic instability in Mexico and Central America, something the US has had it's sticky fingers in for decades. Just look at the low grade narco civil-war going on in Mexico, with tens of thousands of people being brutally murdered, including police and politicians, each year. That is almost entirely driven by our idiotic drug policy.

I don't disagree with this. Still nothing new. Still not attributable to Trump.

 

[churchmouse]

I figured "horde" would be good enough.
When I "exaggerated" as a kid, I got smacked for "lying".
Even as an adult, I try to not be viewed as "exaggerating".

 

[KG1]

Call it what you will. Don’t like it tell Congress to cut the political **** and deal with it. So much time wasted by Democrats denying the crisis.

What else would you expect with limited resources and inadequate legislative initiatives to deal with a massive influx born out of a passive response at dealing with a long standing illegal immigration issue?

 

[churchmouse]

Call it what you will. Don’t like it tell Congress to cut the political **** and deal with.

Winner.

It is not even funny how almost all of them voted for a wall under -O. But now, with TDS run amok they denies this and are grid locked.

 

[IndyDave1776]

You know, while AOC is a complete moron, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Those immigration detention facilities are in fact concentration camps. The same type of camps used by the British in the Boer War, and that America has used multiple times in our history, from interning Native Americans to interning Japanese Americans during World War II (which was ordered by the socialist hero, FDR), to the Cuban "refugee camps" in southern Florida in 1980. It's also been used by many other countries all over the world, and still is.

The conditions in these camps are deplorable and frankly, we should be embarrassed as Americans that our government is doing this. Regardless of how you feel about these people and what you think should be done with them (let them in or send them home), we should be treating them much better. Not because we approve of their actions, but because we, as Americans, are supposed to be better than this.

Anyway, where I think everyone is getting wrapped around the axle is that they conflate someone using the term concentration camp with the Nazi death camps. While the death camps were indeed concentrations camps, not all concentration camps are death camps (not that they are ever a happy or fun place to be and are usually full of complete human misery and mistreatment).

Now, honestly, I'm not sure I credit AOC with having enough gray matter to have made that distinction in her initial comments, but she at least has someone smart enough on her staff to have her issue a statement in rebuttal.

View attachment 77952

No sympathy here. If they don't like our hospitality, they should have refrained from illegally entering OUR country.

 

[Ark]

No sympathy here. If they don't like our hospitality, they should have refrained from illegally entering OUR country.

Bingo. Sucks that the conditions in the camps are bad, but they consented to all of this by coming here. At any point they were free to NOT cross a border illegally. If you don't want to deal with being in a detention camp until we decide what to do with you, go home.

 

[Dr.Midnight]

 

[jbombelli]

Are they not allowed to leave the "camps" and go back the way they came?

 

[Mongo59]

If it has a steady supply of food and water it is better than the conditions they had walking here, and probably better than the conditions they were walking from.

If we cycle them through a Holiday Inn Express, will it make them smart enough to go back to where they came from and try it legally?

 

[Mongo59]

It makes me think of when the interstate is being funneled into a single lane. Everyone who has any gray matter merges into the appropriate lane and some nimrod guns it and charges down toward the blocked lane and the "merges" causing the whole pattern to come to a stop.

Who doesn't want that yahoo to be sent back to kindergarten to start again?

 

[jamil]

People don't have to be used in forced labor or be executed for it to be considered a concentration camp. It's the mass holding of civilians without due process, without intent to file charges. Which, by the way, is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the United States is a signer.

We could call it an Internment Camp if that makes everyone feel better. But either way, it's a travesty.

If they want to send them back, then send them back. Put them on a bus and send them back across the border. Or, if you want to try them for crimes, then put them on trial.

Locking people up for months at a time in bad conditions and taking away their children is just inhumane.

Your etymology of the word is a technicality. What is important is what this term means to people now, and what AOC wanted it to mean. The colloquial meaning of "concentration camp" now is pretty much the definition contained in Acteon's post. The term was used by AOC to elicit exactly the response it got from the bat**** crazy left. It was intended to be hyperbolic to get people to detest its existence. And I think you're being hyperbolic about it too. Otherwise, why use that language?

We don't call them detention centers now because we want to make what we're doing sound more humane, but in reality isn't. We call them that because there's a distinction between the detention facilities at the border and the concentration camps from Nazi Germany. It's NOT the same. If you think they are, perhaps you should put the Rachel Maddow down.

It's not completely without due process. But the extent to which it is, is an artifact of activist judges making ****ed up rulings, and our ****ed up immigration laws, which neither side can find common to fix. They can't find common ground because there is no common ground between open borders and closed borders. Open borders is retarded. Closed borders are impractical. We can make our borders more secure. And we can have sane immigration laws. But bleeding heart bat**** crazy progressive Democrats, like AOC, will not vote for any law that doesn't open borders to all immigrants. There's probably a lot more room for compromise on the Republican side right now. But the "open borders" AOC loving left, skews the political geometry so far towards bat-**** crazy, the ground in the geometric center is unacceptably insane to sane people.

If in your objection you'd remove some things, maybe we could talk about better solutions. 1) They're not indefinitely detained, as in concentration camps. 2) they kinda chose that life by crossing the border illegally, unlike detainment in concentration camps. 3) they break the law by coming here illegally. 4) They can't just be released into the country. That's insecure. That's bat**** crazy. 5) They're held at the facility until their case is determined. It's not ideal due process, but it's not completely without due process. 6) The conditions at those facilities are not inhumane as AOC implies with charged language like "concentration camps". They are as human as we can make them in mass, with the resources we have. Congress could give Trump more money to make them better. And, those people don't have to come here. Surely they know what's up.

About the drugs, that's a political opinion. I favor much more liberal drug laws myself, because it doesn't appear to me that being "tough on drugs" has a positive effect on society. But it's not clear to me either that completely legalizing every illicit drug would have a better effect on society. Meth ****s people up. Heroin ****s people up. The way our laws are now, we're undoubtedly handling it wrong. Everyone is handling it wrong. But that's because it's not clear what the right way to handle it is. There's nothing nefarious about it. It's just a problem where there is no clear consensus on a solution.

It appears that legalizing MJ isn't causing externalities beyond the fact that it's not legal federally, or in every state. But MJ doesn't have the deleterious effect that meth and opioids have on people, and society. It's my understanding that people don't drown in their own vomit from smoking MJ. That one's probably okay to legalize. Meth? Heroine? Cocaine? That's a greyer area.

 

[MCgrease08]

It makes me think of when the interstate is being funneled into a single lane. Everyone who has any gray matter merges into the appropriate lane and some nimrod guns it and charges down toward the blocked lane and the "merges" causing the whole pattern to come to a stop.

Who doesn't want that yahoo to be sent back to kindergarten to start again?

Except the "nimrod" merging late is actually doing it right.

[video=youtube_share;35byJxDIX88]http://youtu.be/35byJxDIX88[/video]

 

[2A_Tom]

It makes me think of when the interstate is being funneled into a single lane. Everyone who has any gray matter merges into the appropriate lane and some nimrod guns it and charges down toward the blocked lane and the "merges" causing the whole pattern to come to a stop.

Who doesn't want that yahoo to be sent back to kindergarten to start again?

Very good. Repped.

Except the "nimrod" merging late is actually doing it right.

[video=youtube_share;35byJxDIX88]http://youtu.be/35byJxDIX88[/video]

I believe that the consensus of opinion is that you are wrong.