|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 4, 2019 11:42:17 GMT -5
So which camps are the concentration camps, and which are the death camps?
Are you saying you can't tell the difference between a camp where people entered voluntarily and are temporarily housed until their cases can be heard and camps where people are kept until they can be slaughtered en mass?
Bob
|
|
|
Post by lol on Aug 4, 2019 18:10:11 GMT -5
Please explain, then.
|
|
|
Post by lol on Aug 4, 2019 18:10:39 GMT -5
Which of the two is the concentration camp?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 4, 2019 19:47:40 GMT -5
Which of the two is the concentration camp?
Why are you so hung-up on names? Isn't the actual function more important?
Bob
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 4, 2019 20:38:36 GMT -5
Bob,
He isn't hung up on names. He thinks he is being clever. He overestimates himself in that area.
I do not accept his initial premise. He must prove that the border facilities function in exactly the same manner as those he is referencing in order to apply identical terminology.
Since video tape and the testimony of a pastor (who toured the border facilities the same day) proves Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a liar -- I wonder that he has the audacity to continue this farce.
Submit proof that the children are in "cages". The word "cage" implies that the children are unable to leave a small restricted space at any time whatsoever. Yet, the video clearly shows them in a cafeteria setting, a classroom, and playing soccer in a field. In what universe does a "cage" (in the sense he is implying) contain a soccer field?
No. No. And No!!!
He is supporting an outlandish lie concocted by a woman of questionable IQ and zero integrity and demands that you defend it as if it were reality. Do not buy into his nonsense.
The concept is preposterous!
Let him present proof of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's claims. I want to see a migrant stick his/her head in a toilet bowl and drink the water. That's their claim -- we're not from Missouri -- but we demand to be shown anyway.
Tell him to put up or shut up. He has to present pictures of children in actual "cages" six sided, single occupant, small confined spaces with no amenities whatsoever. In short, an actual "cage" and not fencing of the type found in every suburban backyard to designate property lines.
That fencing in the border facilities is used to designate one area from another-- in short, as a border. And as we already know, he doesn't grasp the concept of borders in the first place.
Most importantly, it sucks for those migrant children that their parent's broke the law. But they did break the law. The crux of the issue is right there. Democrats are lawless people. They don't like being told there are rules to be followed. So, they support those who break laws because they are kindred spirits. (Note: sentence added for clarity).
Too bad. So sad. There was a TV show many years ago that had the following catch phrase, "If you can't do the time, then don't do the crime." Nobody told those people to violate our borders. There is a proper procedure to follow. If they chose to try to cut in head of the line by attempting to force their way in illegally -- then they have to wait. And if they have to wait at a facility -- tough.
A facility is still a better place than a lot of homeless vets spend the night.
--Debutante
|
|
|
Post by lol on Aug 5, 2019 5:06:13 GMT -5
Which of the two is the concentration camp? Why are you so hung-up on names? Isn't the actual function more important? Bob
I see you still don't know the difference between a "concentration" camp and a "Death" camp. Which one of us is hung up on names, hm? Very well then, Bob. What is the function of a concentration camp?
|
|
|
Post by lol on Aug 5, 2019 5:12:46 GMT -5
A more interesting question, though:
Do you support these camps, Bob? Do you believe this is an appropriate way to deal with foreigners?
If yes, then why?
|
|
debbie_does_it_again
Guest
|
Post by debbie_does_it_again on Aug 5, 2019 5:17:11 GMT -5
Bob, He isn't hung up on names. He thinks he is being clever. He overestimates himself in that area. If you want to say something to me, say it to my face, you coward.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 5, 2019 8:06:59 GMT -5
You don't even seem to know who you are in this string, and you expect me to address you? Which of your multiple personalities do you have in mind? There is an axis for people who think they are "legion" by the way...but hey, if you want to go that route -- whatever floats your boat!
Are you threatening me? In addition to your concentration camp delusions, just why do you believe I quiver in fear of YOU? Do you intend to crawl through the computer screen wearing a black antifa mask? Seriously? Is there no end to your absurdities?
I merely pointed out (to Bob) the bullshit which, originated with AOC and is parroted by those with limited analytic capacity to evaluate reality. If however, you wish me to believe you have an IQ higher than a kumquat -- your only other option is to admit you are playing with language to manipulate and shame people into defending reality against a false construction by Trump's political opponents. Either stupid or manipulative-- the choice as to how you present yourself is yours.
However, I have high hopes for your redemption. I sincerely doubt that idiot AOC will remain in the house another term. Once relieved of this "synapse numbing influence" -- you may show promise if you stop gathering the lumps of crap that drop from the mouths of communists in the false assumption they are gold.
-- Debutante
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 5, 2019 12:14:07 GMT -5
Why are you so hung-up on names? Isn't the actual function more important? Bob I see you still don't know the difference between a "concentration" camp and a "Death" camp. Which one of us is hung up on names, hm? You of course. To concentrate people, of course. But people can be concentrated for different purposes. They can be voluntarily concentrated while they are waiting for their applications for asylum to be processed, as is happening today in the Southern U.S. border. Or they can arrested and "concentrated in a Death Camp while they wait to be killed. Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 5, 2019 12:15:45 GMT -5
Bob, He isn't hung up on names. He thinks he is being clever. He overestimates himself in that area. If you want to say something to me, say it to my face, you coward.
LOL! This is an open forum. It's not as if she is trying to keep something secret from you.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2019 12:39:53 GMT -5
Which one of us is hung up on names, hm? You of course. To concentrate people, of course. But people can be concentrated for different purposes. They can be voluntarily concentrated while they are waiting for their applications for asylum are waiting to be processed, as is happening today in the Southern U.S. border. Or they can arrested and "concentrated in a Death Camp while they wait to be killed. Bob So we are in agreement that the US government is running concentration camps.
Do you support these camps?
If yes, why?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 5, 2019 12:49:17 GMT -5
You of course. To concentrate people, of course. But people can be concentrated for different purposes. They can be voluntarily concentrated while they are waiting for their applications for asylum to be processed, as is happening today in the Southern U.S. border. Or they can arrested and "concentrated in a Death Camp while they wait to be killed. Bob So we are in agreement that the US government is running concentration camps.
Do you support these camps?
If yes, why?
No, we are not in agreement here at all.
"Concentration Camp" is an ambiguous term since it is applied to both camps where people are temporarily "concentrated" while they are waiting for forms to be filled out AND places where people are forcibly taken to be killed en mass.
For this reason, "concentration camp" should be replaced by two different terms which clearly show the two different functions.
The camps in the Southern USA are temporary temporary processing centers.
The Nazi "concentration camps" were Death Camps.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 5, 2019 16:31:59 GMT -5
Again, you are attempting to make this a language issue rather than one of comparative features. You have not proven that the border facilities have features in common with "Nazi concentration camps" as per the claims of that idiot Alexadria Ocasio-Cortez. Let me be perfectly clear. Produce a photo illustrating that the illegal aliens at the border are being tattooed with identification numbers. The following photo depicts the arm of an Auschwitz survivor: Produce a photo showing involuntary medical experimentation on illegal aliens in the border facilities. The following photo depicts just one of the experiments performed on prisoners at real Nazi concentration camps. Produce a photo showing a gas chamber at the border facilities. The following photo depicts the gas chamber at Auschwitz. Produce a photo showing a cremation oven at the border facilities.The following photo shows a cremation oven at Auschwitz. It should be apparent to any feeling human being that YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF for even thinking of supporting such a comparison. HOW DARE YOU COMPARE MERE INCONVENIENCE TO TRUE HUMAN SUFFERING?Frankly, I find Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a disgusting human being and if you support her in this delusion -- you might want to consider how that makes you appear to people who do know what features define a concentration camp. Just cut the crap already. --Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2019 5:05:32 GMT -5
So we are in agreement that the US government is running concentration camps. Do you support these camps?
If yes, why?
No, we are not in agreement here at all. "Concentration Camp" is an ambiguous term since it is applied to both camps where people are temporarily "concentrated" while they are waiting for forms to be filled out AND places where people are forcibly taken to be killed en mass. I don't see any ambiguity in that term. A concentration camp is a camp where people are being detained by a government without any judicial process. It's just that different camps have different purposes. Your "ambiguity" only exists at the emotional level, because the name seems to make you personally uncomfortable. And you still haven't answered my question whether you support these camps, and why you do so. Who or what is being processed in these camps? Where is your evidence for that? The Nazis distinguished between concentration camps (KZ, Konzentrationslager) and extermination camps (Vernichtungslager). It is only into the extermination camps that people were transported specifically to be murdered in gas chambers. Most of the regular concentration camps existed to manage forced labor. And by the way, concentration camps were run by many different countries. The US ran concentration camps that were named as such to detain Asian Americans during WW2. Those were not extermination camps, either. I actually agree with you, Bob. We need to look at the purpose of concentration camps. What is the purpose of detaining foreigners in concentration camps on US soil?
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 6, 2019 7:57:47 GMT -5
Exactly what forced labor are the illegal aliens presently in the border facilities being forced to perform? To my knowledge they are receiving free services provided for by the US taxpayers while many of our own citizens go without. So again, there is NO COMPARISON. The internment camps (note the proper terminology used during WW2) had a specific purpose unique to the time and place. You may not agree with the wartime decisions made by those whose job it was to consider such things -- but you were not there, you were not privy to intelligence gathered that made such a decision necessary, and quite frankly, the general mood of the populace after Pearl Harbor was such that these people were probably safer in the internment camps than out among a populace enraged by the sneak attack. The internment camps served a dual purpose: to protect the country from possible Japanese operatives, and to keep Japanese-Americans from getting their asses kicked in by fellow citizens pissed about Pearl Harbor and perhaps not inclined to be discerning. You neither understand the historical response within context, nor the emotions of those whose peaceful world was turned upside down one fateful afternoon in December. In short: shit happens when a sleeping giant gets awoken. So although I have sympathy for those loyal Japanese-Americans who were kept under watchful eyes during the war -- I also understand the need for such measures. It was, after all, war. --Debutante Edited to add historical poster.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 6, 2019 13:24:09 GMT -5
No, we are not in agreement here at all. "Concentration Camp" is an ambiguous term since it is applied to both camps where people are temporarily "concentrated" while they are waiting for forms to be filled out AND places where people are forcibly taken to be killed en mass. I don't see any ambiguity in that term. A concentration camp is a camp where people are being detained by a government without any judicial process. It's just that different camps have different purposes. Thank you for that definition. With the U.S. camps, there is a judicial process. People are merely in line waiting for their turn. Ad Hominem. You have not refuted my claim about the ambiguity of the term "concentration camp." It is a fact that this term has been applied to totally different cases and you have not demonstrated otherwise. What I do not support is the way these camps have been totally mismanaged by government incompetence. Providing quick service would reduce the waiting time. Combine that with providing a decent place to stay while waiting for a cese to be heard would eliminate any problems. Don't you read the news? These people are applying for asylum. They fill out a form and they have to wait until their case can be heard. Forced labor is bad too. Or do you think otherwise? Plenty of people were killed in the forced labor camps too. They were worked to death. And these WWII camps were totally different from the camps today. They were set up for different reasons. And the Japanese families were sent to them forcibly. By contrast, all people have to do to avoid the temporary detention centers today is DON'T ENTER THE USA. They have to have someplace to stay while they are waiting for their asylum applications to be processed, don't they? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 11:58:07 GMT -5
I don't see any ambiguity in that term. A concentration camp is a camp where people are being detained by a government without any judicial process. It's just that different camps have different purposes. Thank you for that definition. With the U.S. camps, there is a judicial process. People are merely in line waiting for their turn. What judicial process consigned these people to camps? How many of the current victims of the US camp system have been tried in a free and independent court of law? Or are you argueing that it's okay to detain every foreigner before their cases are even heard? For me to refute anything, you would have had to bring an argument with supporting evidence first. You have not supplied any sort of evidence in support of that claim so far. Make a coherent argument with some evidence to support it, and we can talk about affirming or refuting it. Some supporting evidence that a concentration camp is "a decent place to stay" would be nice. All reports I have read suggest the exact opposite. And you haven't answered the question. Where is your evidence for any of this? Where does it come from? How were they "totally different"? What exactly was different about them? Does that mean everyone who enters America should be detained? Why do you think detaining immigrants is a valid exercise of government power? How exactly is it protecting you from violations of the non aggression principle? How is your government protecting your private property with this? They have to have someplace to stay while they are waiting for their asylum applications to be processed, don't they? [/quote] How is this sufficient reason to detain asylum seekers in concentration camps?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 12:05:34 GMT -5
Thank you for that definition. With the U.S. camps, there is a judicial process. People are merely in line waiting for their turn. What judicial process consigned these people to camps? The courts are jammed. There are thousands of people waiting and only a few courts. Those camps are merely waiting areas. Complex Question Fallacy. You haven't established that they are "victims", have you? What's your alternative? Have them wait outside in the street by the court until their case is called? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 12:09:42 GMT -5
What's your alternative? Have them wait outside in the street by the court until their case is called? Bob Fallacy of the Excluded Middle. You have not shown that the only alternative is to throw people on the streets. Why not allow these people to live where they want? Aren't people supposed to be free to do what they want if they do not violate the NAP or somebody's private property rights?
From a libertarian perspective, how is it a valid function of government to forcibly detain foreigners on US soil?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 12:23:19 GMT -5
Ad Hominem. You have not refuted my claim about the ambiguity of the term "concentration camp." It is a fact that this term has been applied to totally different cases and you have not demonstrated otherwise. For me to refute anything, you would have had to bring an argument with supporting evidence first. You have not supplied any sort of evidence in support of that claim so far. Make a coherent argument with some evidence to support it, and we can talk about affirming or refuting it. In other words, you have no refutation so you simply declare that I made no arguments. In fact, the term "concentration camp" has been used in different ways and you even posted two of them yourself. "Concentration Camp" was first used to describe German Camps in the 1920's that held refugees. You posted that. "Concentration Camp" has also been used to describe Nazi forced labor camps as well as Nazi Death Camps. The term is clearly ambiguous. Do you claim otherwise? Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 12:29:36 GMT -5
What's your alternative? Have them wait outside in the street by the court until their case is called? Bob Fallacy of the Excluded Middle. You have not shown that the only alternative is to throw people on the streets. Why not allow these people to live where they want? Aren't people supposed to be free to do what they want if they do not violate the NAP or somebody's private property rights?
From a libertarian perspective, how is it a valid function of government to forcibly detain foreigners on US soil?
Letting people go until their hearing comes up has been tried. It didn't work. Most never show up.
These people wander around and are forced to take poorly paying jobs from employers who know that no complaints will ever be made to the government.
Is that the outcome you prefer?
And that "detention" you refer to is simply people waiting for they applications to be processed.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 16:10:42 GMT -5
Fallacy of the Excluded Middle. You have not shown that the only alternative is to throw people on the streets. Why not allow these people to live where they want? Aren't people supposed to be free to do what they want if they do not violate the NAP or somebody's private property rights? From a libertarian perspective, how is it a valid function of government to forcibly detain foreigners on US soil?
Letting people go until their hearing comes up has been tried. It didn't work. Most never show up. And because people don't always show up to their asylum proceedings, the government needs to lock them up? It seems that you are argueing that these people need to be locked up for their own good. Is that correct? How can you defend this based on your libertarian beliefs? How are they 'forced' to take these jobs? Who or what forces them? If they are not being detained, then that means they are free to go and live wherever they want in the US. Is that actually the case?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 17:59:01 GMT -5
Letting people go until their hearing comes up has been tried. It didn't work. Most never show up. And because people don't always show up to their asylum proceedings, the government needs to lock them up? Yes. Just like leaving a store without paying for the items you are carrying is not permitted. Temporary waiting to be served does not constitute "being locked up." Easy. Property rights. No one has property rights (including the right of entry) over a country where they have never lived before. Right. They don't have to take those jobs. They can always steal food. Are you saying that people waiting in line to buy tickets for a popular concert are not being "detained" either. Would you claim they can just go in without a ticket? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 21:07:04 GMT -5
And because people don't always show up to their asylum proceedings, the government needs to lock them up? Yes. Just like leaving a store without paying for the items you are carrying is not permitted. You are talking about theft. What have these people stolen? Are they allowed to freely move anywhere at any point? Or are they confined to a specific place by force? If the latter, then they are being detained, or in common parlance, "locked up". Your reasoning is circular. You claim that I cannot have enter a country if you have never lived there, but I could not live in any country without being granted permission to enter first. Based on your argument, no American would have ever been allowed to live in America, because they wouldn't have been allowed to enter. In a free market, employers are free to offer any job to anybody, are they not? So foreigners have to pay admission in order to enter the US? Do you have any evidence to support that claim?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 8, 2019 11:24:54 GMT -5
Yes. Just like leaving a store without paying for the items you are carrying is not permitted. You are talking about theft. What have these people stolen? They have stolen the right to be in the country. It's the same as if someone moved into your home without permission from you and your roommates. What have they stolen? The right to be in your home without permission. So people waiting in a long line to get into a popular concert are also "locked up" because they are not permitted to simply walk into the theater? First of all, your sentence makes no sense. "...I cannot enter a country if you have never lived there"? Well which is it? Are you referring to you or me? And yes, if you have never lived in a country, you do have have permission to enter. As far as I know, every country in the world has that rule. This goes beyond countries. You couldn't live in your present home without first being granted permission by the landlord, could you? Of course you could have told the landlord that this was "circular reasoning." Somehow I don't think the landlord would understand. And based on your argument, the landlord would have never let you enter your home. What "free market?" There is none in this case. Employers are not permitted to hire anyone who enters illegally. In fact, the immigration service just conducted a raid a few days ago and arrested hundreds. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2019 12:45:04 GMT -5
You are talking about theft. What have these people stolen? They have stolen the right to be in the country. It's the same as if someone moved into your home without permission from you and your roommates. What have they stolen? The right to be in your home without permission. So nobody is allowed to live in America without permission from the government? How can you reconcile that with libertarian principles? So people waiting in a long line to get into a popular concert are also "locked up" because they are not permitted to simply walk into the theater? So what you are saying is that as a foreigner in America, I only have the two legal choices to either be deported, or to be kept in a concentration camp. And you consider that true freedom as per your libertarian principles. Is that correct? And you consider the absence of a free market a good thing, correct? How is that a libertarian position?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 8, 2019 14:53:04 GMT -5
They have stolen the right to be in the country. It's the same as if someone moved into your home without permission from you and your roommates. What have they stolen? The right to be in your home without permission. So nobody is allowed to live in America without permission from the government? Wrong. Citizens can live in America and the government can't do anything about it. Easy. I do it the same way you would do if total strangers suddenly moved into your place without permission from you or your roommates. Totally wrong. For one thing, you could have gotten the paperwork from the American Embassy and filled it out before you took your trip. Also, by referring to the temporary detainment centers as "concentration camps" you are trying to imply that they are like the Nazi Death Camps or the Nazi Forced Labor Camps. You haven't even presented a shred of evidence that these centers are anything like that. Third, you keep forgetting to mention that these people know that they are going to have to stay in these camps. Yet they come here voluntarily. And Libertarian Principles are all about voluntary actions. I never said that. You made it up. All I did was point out that in the case you presented, there was no free market. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2019 15:24:18 GMT -5
So nobody is allowed to live in America without permission from the government? Wrong. Citizens can live in America and the government can't do anything about it. How do people become citizens? What did you have to pay in order to become one?
How long did you stay in a concentration camp before you could buy your admission ticket?
Since it is the US government that runs these concentration camps and sets up border controls, this analogy implies that America is the property of the US government. Does that mean everyone needs permission from the US government in order to move or live in America? Then that means the US government controls who lives there. The government controlling where people live sounds like the exact opposite of 'libertarianism' to me. What do you think? So what you are saying is that I need to be friends with the US government in order to be allowed inside. Does that mean I also have to pay an admission fee? As usual, you fail to provide any evidence to support your claims. Where is your evidence that foreigners voluntarily enter these concentration camps? Can you cite a single source supporting this claim?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 8, 2019 20:52:53 GMT -5
Wrong. Citizens can live in America and the government can't do anything about it. How do people become citizens? What did you have to pay in order to become one? www.wikihow.com/Become-a-US-CitizenComplex Question Fallacy. Red Herring. You avoided answering my question. What would you do if total strangers would move into your house without permission from you or your roommates? Is that how it is in Austria? You have to be "friends" with the government before you can get any government services? I really feel sorry for you. It's not that bad here in the USA. All Americans have to do is go to the government offices. They don't have to be "friends" first. But that's what you are doing here. You just made a claim without providing any supporting evidence at all. What is your evidence that I didn't provide any evidence? Are you saying that foreigners are not coming to the USA voluntarily? Where is your evidence that they are being forced to make a log journey against their will? Are they being kidnapped and forced to cross the border? Central American caravans advance amid shifting border policies Thousands head north, some obtaining humanitarian visas in Mexico, while others fear US's 'Remain in Mexico' policy." www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/central-american-caravans-advance-shifting-border-policies-190204221315247.htmlNearly 1,000 Central American migrants in new caravans enter Mexico www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-caravan/nearly-1000-central-american-migrants-in-new-caravans-enter-mexico-idUSKCN1PC07KAnd there are no "concentration camps" in Mexico With more migrants moving north, and greater restrictions on entry into the United States, the number of migrants waiting along the Mexican side of the border has swelled. From Tijuana, on the western end of the border, to Matamoros on the eastern end, thousands of migrants have overflowed shelters, drawn down the emergency resources of local governments and civil society and tested the generosity and patience of residents. www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/world/americas/mexico-migration-border.htmlNow that is really strange. How come the places where migrants stay in the USA are "concentration camps" but the same sort of places in Mexico are "shelters?" Bob
|
|