Shortly after Christmas: Matthew's story updated slightly, made even more relevant to today...
When the Political Leader realized that he had been outwitted by the Wise People,
he was furious,
and this dim-witted, villainous leader gave orders to
kill all the boys in Bethlehem
and its vicinity who were two years old and under,
in accordance with the time he had learned from the Wise.
And he gave order to build Wall
to keep people from seeking safety
and to arrest them when they did
commit the crime
of seeking refuge.
Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:
“A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more.
And a voice was heard in
Guatemala
Mexico
Nicaragua...
Weeping and great mourning
Maria
Gabriela
Juana...
weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted
because those children are no more.”
“A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more.
And a voice was heard in
Guatemala
Mexico
Nicaragua...
Weeping and great mourning
Maria
Gabriela
Juana...
weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted
because those children are no more.”
There may indeed be a special place in hell for people like you who bastardize Scripture in order to push your hateful, anti-Christian, anti-American agenda. Shame on you!...since you clearly have none of your own! My God have mercy on you and grant you the epiphany you so desperately need, but will likely reject as gas.
ReplyDeleteAnd who are these "Wise People" by whom this allegedly "dim-witted, villainous leader" has been out-witted? The Democratic Party? Or, perhaps more absurdly, people like YOU?
No child died as a result of Trump's attempt to do his duty and enforce the laws enacted by the legislative branch. They died as a result of the actions of their own parents. Here's one fact-filled report that blows up the Trubue-arousing version of events of one such case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=166&v=sH87hbHUNcc
...and the following speaks to the more recent of the two cases:
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/31021-media-falsely-link-migrant-boy-s-death-to-trump-shutdown
So we see that in both cases, the kids in question did not die as a result of American immigration policy...policy their parents ignored and you pretend is somehow unjust.
The irony here is how you spend so much time attacking Trump as a liar, and here you are, once again, engaging in lying about Trump and American policy by pushing the false narrative regarding the deaths of these unfortunate children, whose parents clearly weren't good parents at all.
And the greater irony is in deceitfully connecting the murder of the innocents in the Bethlehem to Trump's policies, while maintaining your own murderous support for legalized abortion. And while I wait in vain for just one example of a Trump "lie" that has caused any tangible harm, the lies you tell regarding immigration and abortion have led to thousands of cases of legitimate harm inflicted upon Americans born and yet to be born.
Again, shame on you!
No doubt you'll delete this comment, coward that you are, rather than defend it...as if there was any possible way to do so.
It is a fact that children have been separated from their families by this administration.
ReplyDeleteIt is a fact that children have gotten sick and died while in ICE care.
It is a fact that families from Latin America report being terrified of staying where they are because of safety concerns and yet, recognize the terror that US policies might separate their families and that the trip itself is terrifying. They are stuck in a difficult situation.
It is a fact that IF US policy made it easier for people to simply engage in the basic human liberty to move from There to Here if they so choose (the liberty of self determination and to decide that "If this place is unsafe/dangerous and that place seems safer/less dangerous, then I will move there!" - OF COURSE WE ALL WOULD DO THIS and should have the liberty to do this! What monster would oppose moving to safety?!)... if the US made this easier, THEN the move would not need to be so clandestine and dangerous. The US (and other liberty loving nations) CAN do this. We make it a matter of policy to NOT make it easy for people to seek safety. It is THAT difficulty in the policy that led to these children dying, as a point of fact.
It is reasonable, therefore, to note the similarity between one story of a nation deliberately seeking to harm children and another nation deliberately instituting policies that will harm children. It is reasonable to many of us and I see no argument from you that suggests it isn't reasonable. Instead, I see a desire to defend a policy (almost certainly from a place of fear, not reason or justice or love of liberty) that is comparable - if not as horrifying - as Herod's.
ALL lies have the potential to cause harm.
ReplyDeleteLies about the free press cause great harm. For one thing, it causes people like you to decrease your trust in expert opinion and reality reported by the free press. Yes, the press is not perfect here or anywhere, but it is NOT an enemy of the state. That is a hellish lie and it has further eroded people's trust in expert opinion and the free press. THAT is harmful to ideals of human liberty.
And I could go on and on about how his lies have caused harm, but it should be pretty obvious to anyone but a deviant or someone embracing hedonism and deliberate ignorance.
Of course, it's just silly and irrational to suggest that advocating for policies that help people seeking Refuge from threats is somehow anti-christian or anti-American. Can you at the least admit the reality that that is just a ridiculous and, to be clear, pretty nutty claim? Or, at the least, can you see how you appear to be an irrational nutcase when you make that suggestion?
ReplyDeleteMarshall sounds like a 19th century slaver every time he puts his faith in the inhumane laws over a God of incarnate love.
ReplyDelete“No child died as a result of Trump's attempt to do his duty and enforce the laws enacted by the legislative branch. They died as a result of the actions of their own parents.”
Slavery was legal, too. Protected by Presidents and laws and enforced by official thugs. And Americans defended it just like Marshall does.
It is a fact that many of them lie about being terrified, provide no proof that they are under any direct threat by anyone
ReplyDeleteMarshall, you have ONE chance to answer these question directly, fully and clearly. If you don't answer it with support and details and honesty, I'm deleting the comments. I haven't read them yet and I don't care to, if this BS is all you have to offer.
1. How many of them are lying about being terrified?
2. What is your source?
3. What percentage is it of the refugees? 90% are lying? 1? How do you know?
4. What if there is no proof? If their lives were threatened, say, by a gang member who did not put it in writing? Does that mean we ignore the threat?
If you can't provide some VERY substantial support for what is almost certainly just "facts" pulled from your putrid ass, then you should apologize and admit you misspoke. If you can't make some reasonable response to 4 other than, "No proof, no entry," then to hell with you and your idiotic and evil words.
May you live to a time where you are needing to escape very real threats and are met by someone like yourself and, THEN, in the horror of that moment, may you repent.
One chance and it should come soon. I won't be patient for those who defend oppression and other evil shit.
Marshall posted several comments, one of which led with the ridiculous claim I quote in the last comment. I asked him to support his claims or apologize for misstating. He did neither, so I deleted the whole of the comments.
ReplyDeleteMy reasoning is this: We are having a very real problem with an attack on the free press and an assault on facts, experts, research and data. When people deliberately post claims that they can't support and/or that just aren't true/fact-based/reality-based, they are doing damage to facts and truth and assaults on facts and truth undermine a free republic and basic human decency. Thus, in an effort to combat these attacks on truth and facts, I'm deleting fake news/false claims, so as to not support them.
Marshall, in his response asked me some questions which I post here, by way of showing how one directly clearly and factually answers questions in a way that respects liberty and truth.
So now it's YOUR turn. What proof do you have that:
1. NONE of those claiming asylum are truly terrified for their own lives?
2. What is YOUR source?
3. What percentage is telling the truth and how do you know?
4. What IF there is no proof? If they're only saying that their lives are threatened in any way? Does that mean we just believe them simply because they make the claim?
1. I have not said that NONE claiming asylum are lying. I'm sure that some percentage in such huge numbers of people make up false claims.
Direct, clear, fact based (given reports that DO exist that lies DO happen... although that's common sense, too). See how that works?
2. I have expert counselors and reporters who worked with those in danger in Latin America and who counsel refugees here. My one colleague, for instance, has worked with, listened to hundreds, maybe thousands (I didn't ask the numbers, but she's worked with refugees and threatened folk in central America for well over ten years and I've heard her explaining what she's heard) over the years and she personally has never seen any people that appear to be lying and, from the trained eyes of an expert, she believes that they are all truly frightened. Also, having lived there and literally dug out the bodies of victims and dealt with the families, she has some good credibility. As does my reporter friend who (to deal with one of your canards about settling in another Latin America country) was not safe in his own nation OR in surrounding nations, due to the reach of the violent ones (the drug cartel, in his case).
But I have read of examples of people making things up, so I'm sure that it happens, just as it is human nature to stretch the truth. But even then, when lies have been told to try to better make the case to get in the US, what were the lies? Were they lying about a direct threat to their own person or family because they only had general threat of living in a dangerous community? That's not an irrational or immoral lie, of course. Or was it lying about being in a gang because they WERE in a gang because they were threatened into the gang and they had to join to survive, but they wanted to escape?
Even when lies occur, I'd be willing to bet that they were more of that sort.
Then, I'm sure, there are literal "bad guys" who are here to disrupt and harm who lie to get in, but I see NO data to suggest that this is any large threat. And you have NO DATA to support that suggestion or to make us want to operate based upon the TINY chance that MAYBE some are here to cause harm.
more...
3. Based on my expert opinion of people I know personally who work both here and there and what I read, it appears to be a small percentage who are lying for nefarious motives. JUST AS there are white men will lie about being racist when they are clearly racist... we don't blame the whole of White Men because some unknown minority is lying about their racism. Likewise, we don't blame all refugees because some minority might be lying.
ReplyDelete4. Innocent until proven guilty. Short of any evidence that they are lying, why WOULDN'T we believe a person who was desperate enough to leave their homes, travel such a long way seeking refuge? Fear of what they MIGHT do?
I'm not that cowardly.
Blaming the whole because SOME MIGHT be lying?
I'm not that irrational or anti-human rights.
Marshall also said...
How very Christian of you to wish threats to my life simply because I favor reasoned and rational immigration/asylum policy for the sake and safety of my fellow Americans!
Demonstrating his reasoning/motive for his opposition to refugees: Cowardice. Fear of what those brown people MIGHT do. Irrational blaming of the whole because he is a coward in his heart and he places his own comfort about his fear of brown people over the lives of people actually threatened.
That is how one truthfully and directly answers questions.
With all of this truthieness and directness going on, I missed any actual verifiable sources being cited. Just the same old “I know someone who..,”.
ReplyDeleteSame old crap, different day, still no citation of actual sources.
Of course no call to do anything but make government policy based on progressive christian dogma, open the borders to all, and propose absolutely zero solutions to the problems.
Maybe if they all followed the lead of Venezuela, things would be better with some socialism.
The people that I'm speaking of all remain anonymous because their lives are threatened back in Central America and there's some concern about the threat being extended here. So I will not divulge their names to satisfy your curiosity.
ReplyDeleteBut beyond my personal contacts who are experts in the field, and they ARE experts having lived firsthand what we're talking about and put their lives on the line literally, there's plenty of other information out there.
Are you asking because you doubt the accuracy that people by and large come here sincerely seeking safety and refuge? Because you appear to be in a place to be better informed than that. I would think you would know, but maybe you are ignorant of the information. If that's the case I'll look and see if I can't find some data that can be shared without putting people's lives at risk.
As for what I'm calling for? It's quite clear, I'm just asking that we recognize the basic human Liberty of self-determination. If person a lives in place one and thinks that his life is threatened there, and person Ada size place to is safer, then they should have the Liberty to move there. Again just a basic reasonable human Liberty. Self-determination. Are you against self-determination, against people deciding that this place is not safe for me or my family and so I am going to move to that place?
Put another way, do you think that most people who come here seeking refuge do so because they honestly seek refuge, either from starvation or a threat such as government or gang violence?
ReplyDeleteOr do you think most of these people are liars?
Or are you saying you have no idea and not even a way of guessing how many are seeking safety?
Do you think my experts are lying? Or do you think I'm lying about what they've said?
Or do you think you just have no way of knowing or even forming an educated guess?
Please answer directly and clearly these questions or don't comment here further. Thanks.
I’m questioning your citation of nameless experts because if they remain hidden from view there is no way to evaluate your claims. It’s simply you making second hand claims about the expertise of some unnamed expert and expecting that it be treated with the same gravity as the citation of a third party with specific, objective expertise. Your asking us to believe that these unnamed experts aren’t swayed or influenced by religious or political beliefs, just because you say so.
ReplyDeleteI’m not questioning the actual expertise of these people, how could I? I’m merely suggesting that if you’re going to expect others to provide any level of indecently verifiable support for their claims, that perhaps you should offer the same.
I have no idea why “most people” come here, I have some specific knowledge of why specific people came (including one with a fatwa issued by practitioners of the religion of peace because he had the nerve to talk about Jesus). So, I’m sure there are varied reasons.
As you’ve mentioned earlier, some of them are clearly lying about their reasons. Some may only lie a little, some a lot. I have no way know what specific motivations are and how honest they are. FYI, if they’re alive, they’ve most likely lied at some point.
I’m saying that I cannot speak to specific reasons why individuals choose to leave their country of origin, I’m sure there are multiple reasons, some honorable and some less so.
I have no way to confirm the existence and/or veracity of your “experts”, because you’ve provided no means to confirm. For the same reason I am unable to independently confirm your veracity in this matter. I find it suspicious that you can’t or won’t provide verifiable proof, but I couldn’t say that you’re lying. There’s just no evidence.
Of course I have no way of objectively “knowing” what the innermost motivations of “most” immigrants who choose extra legal means to enter the US I’ve never claimed otherwise (I do know some specifics of some legal immigrants), and certainly wouldn’t try to extrapolate what I know beyond those specific people.
I’m sure I could form an educated guess, but what purpose would that serve? Why would I want to judge individuals based on a “guess” I’ve made? Of course, even making that “guess” presumes 100% honesty on the part of a lot of people.
Since I responded to your comments in order, it will be interesting to see if you wait until the answers or not.
So, you are saying - over and over - that you have NO WAY of knowing that people are lying or why they're coming here AND that you are basically too ignorant to form a rational opinion?
ReplyDeleteOkay, well, I'm not ignorant. I'm aware of the data, the research, the stories.
As to what purpose it serves to make an educated guess... there are lives literally at stake here, man. It's time for good people to take action with the best knowledge and understanding they have.
Saving lives, stopping rapes, stopping starvation, supporting freedom of self determination.
THOSE purposes.
I'll provide you some data, later. I just had no idea you were so ignorant on the topic. I apologize for thinking you are more informed than you are.
No, I’m not at all. I’m saying, quite clearly, that I have no access to the actual reasons why “most” people choose to defy US immigration law. I also said quite clearly that there are multiple reasons, some honorable and some less so. I appreciate your need to te-cast my direct, specific answers into some other than what I said, but will correct you when you do.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your need to feel superior, and to provide data on the topic. Since, I’m perfectly capable of finding relatively unbiased data all on my own, you don’t need to bother.
I’d be much more satisfied if you’d provide the data on things you’ve been asked to provide data on.
I do admire your chutzpah, to take what I actually said and twist it into me being “ignorant” of the topic is quite impressive, even for you. I’m sorry that you have difficulty with the reality that I’m unwilling to “guess” about the motivation of millions of people and extrapolate my “guess” out from there. To do that would be just as stupid and foolish as if I was to try to extrapolate the stories from the hundreds of immigrants I’ve interacred with onto others.
I have no access to the actual reasons why “most” people choose to defy US immigration law.
ReplyDeleteSo, from what we've heard from the refugees themselves is that they are coming here for reasons of safety and security, including financial security and to send money back to their families to help them be more financially secure.
Do you know that this is what one hears from the refugees and immigrants themselves?
Now, because of your continued flaccid milquetoast response of "I just don't know what the actual reasons are...," are we to assume you're implying that they may be lying?
Do you have any reason to believe that most of these people are NOT coming here for reasons of security and safety?
If you're saying "I just have no way of knowing..." then aren't you say you're ignorant of the motives and reasons and you're at best agnostic about why they came here?
And by "unbiased" data, do you mean data directly from the source (the refugees and immigrants themselves)? Or do you mean from Breitbart or some other beacon of idiocy?
Yes, I am aware that some refugees say that. Neither of us has access to the direct statements of “most” of these immigrants, so you’re really making a “guess” about millions of people based on the comments of a few. Further, you have no way to demonstrate the veracity of the statements you’ve chosen to listen to.
ReplyDeleteI have no way of objectivly knowing the motivations of millions of people, so I refrain from “guesses” about their motivation.
I (like everyone) don’t know things that aren’t knowable, it’s pretty much the reality of things.
By unbiased, I mean unbiased. Are you unclear about what unbiased means? In the case of the stories from the immigrants in question, I’d suggest that their stories are the very definition of biased. Are you suggesting that the tellers of those stories have absolutely zero interest in the effect of their stories and how they might benefit?
“When A. Portillo, a 23-year-old woman from Honduras, was taken into custody by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in California earlier this month, her five-month-old was sick. The woman, who spoke to BuzzFeed News and asked to be identified by only her first initial and last name, was giving her baby an antibiotic but said she wasn’t allowed to keep the medication after she was detained.
ReplyDeleteHer baby got sicker as they were held in “freezing” cells — migrants refer to these as hieleras, or iceboxes — and when she pleaded with CBP agents for a doctor, she says they refused. “The agents told me I wasn’t in a position to be asking for anything and that they didn’t tell me to come to the United States,” she said. They also called her an “invader,” she told NBC News.
After being transferred to San Diego and then flying to North Carolina to be with family, Portillo was finally able to get her child to a hospital. The baby had a fever and at one point stopped breathing. Doctors said she had pneumonia. “If I had been able to keep the drugs, maybe they would have made my baby better,” she said.
This CBP horror story follows two others that came to light in the past week. Last Thursday, the Washington Post reported the death of Jakelin Caal. The seven-year-old Guatemalan girl died of a combination of septic shock, fever, and dehydration, just hours after she was taken into CBP custody.”
Haven't heard much about this. Dan hasn't mentioned it, either. Must be because the victim is a brown person.
ReplyDeleteOh...but there's nothing whatsoever to fear.
Marshall marches right over the dead girls body to make his fake, servile points.
ReplyDeleteBwaaaahasaaaa!!! Talk about a Matthew 7:5 problem!!! Over at his blog, Marshall lies like Trump, having guzzled the cool-aid. He’s buggin’ mad!
ReplyDeleteHahahahaha!!!
The compulsive Liar is not nearly as dangerous as these compulsive believers.
ReplyDeleteMarshall, I told you that you had ONE chance to answer the questions clearly and honestly and directly. You didn't.
ReplyDeleteThe right answer, given your responses, would have been something like, "I DON'T HAVE ANY DATA to support this charge, as if it were a serious problem. I was wrong to phrase it that way."
You didn't back down, however, opting instead to double down on the offensive and false nonsense.
One chance. You blew it.
I did leave the one comment above, just to serve to point out the lack of reasoning in your "reasoning." You said I haven't addressed a news story about ONE IMMIGRANT who was involved in a crime.
Of course, the reality is that I HAVE addressed that scenario, if not that specific story.
ONE PERSON COMMITTING a crime is not an indictment against all the people in that group. One racist old white guy attacking a person of color is not an indictment of all white men. It would be idiotic for me to say, "You didn't address the case of that white guy who attacked a brown guy, Marshall! You a hypocrite because you're not condemning all the brown people and failing to mention the story!"
This is the problem in your "reasoning," that lacks much in the way of reason: It's long on fear and prejudice and short on logic and data. Your "solution" comes down to "SOME of these people MIGHT be bad guys - I have no data or idea at all if any of them are and if so, how serious a problem it is, or IF it is a serious problem... but some of them MIGHT be, therefore, we should penalize ALL of them and treat them ALL as if they were liars and a threat."
My side, on the other hand, am coming down on the side of reason and justice:
* These people ARE facing serious and even life-threatening problems where they come from. Fact. Fact. Fact.
* Thus, if some people choose to move from There to Here, where THEY determine they'll be safer, that is a REASONABLE and MORAL conclusion and of course anyone would do that.
* Now, of the thousands who come here, there could be (and no doubt ARE) some portion of them doing so with ill intent, with plans to do harm... BUT, we have NO DATA WHATSOEVER ANYWHERE IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD that suggests that this is a problem with anything like a majority or a large minority of these people.
* Thus, given the KNOWN and REAL problems they face
AND given that we believe in self determination as a basic human right enjoyed by all people
AND given that there lives may well be threatened back home
...given all that, we have no moral or rational option but to let folk seeking refuge in. It is the ONLY option that we can embrace as moral and rational people who believe in human rights. THE ONLY ONE. *
more...
BUT, given that some tiny percentage of refugees/immigrants MIGHT be coming with bad intentions to do harm, it IS reasonable to have a screening process.
ReplyDeleteBUT, given that the threat behind them is real for the majority of these folk and given that they tend to be poor and desperate, we should provide some system to make it easy and safe to do the refugee process. IF we make it difficult and given the reality of the threats behind them, THEY WILL break laws to get in. Of course they will. So would any of us if our children's lives were threatened. So, given that, we should, instead of building walls (incredibly irrational/stupid do-nothing medieval "solution" that won't fix a thing but waste money and line the pockets of friends of politicians) and sending soldiers to the border, we should be sending facilitators to investigate and approve refugee claims in a timely fashion.
* There ARE other reasonable solutions in the long term. People WANT and NEED to be safe and prosperous in their own homes because we can't fit an endless number of people here. The long term solutions, then, are being good and responsible neighbors that help these nations stabilize themselves. But in the IMMEDIATE short term, lives are threatened and building a wall is not the answer and the only moral answer is finding a safe place for people to be able to find refuge.
Any other "solution" (such as sending them back to the threat or telling them "Tough, you're on your own" or "you're not 'threatened enough' for us to approve your application is an assault on human rights, decency, morality and justice and thoroughly contrary to the teachings of most major religions, especially/including Christianity.
Feodor, I don't really want to talk about any of these other bloggers here. They are free to make up false claims on their own blogs if they want. Shame on them for doing so, but it's a free country and one can vomit lies out of one's teeth if one so chooses. They just won't do it here, especially not while simultaneously accusing the victims of oppression of being at fault for their own oppression.
ReplyDeleteYeah, we wouldn’t want to get in the way of you spouting crap about others. But I admire the way you’ve guided the conversation is such a way as to portray others in the most negative light possible while passing on addressing the vast majority of the actual content.
ReplyDeleteWell done.
Yeah. Little children are dying, being slapped, dragged and pushed around. But Craig thinks the negative light is unjustified. Corrupt in the heart.
ReplyDelete"Surveillance videos obtained by the Arizona Republic show migrant children being slapped, pushed and dragged by employees at a since-shuttered shelter run by embattled shelter provider Southwest Key Programs. In one video, a male staffer at the Hacienda Del Sol shelter in Youngtown, Arizona, is seen pulling and dragging a young boy into a room before slapping him and pushing him against a wall. The child then appears to strike back at the employee who retreats from the boy and leaves the room. A second surveillance clip shows a female employee at the shelter dragging a child into a room. Another staff member is seen in the same video dragging and pulling another child across the floor."
“There was no collusion! No collusion. And even if it was collusion, that’s not illegal!”
ReplyDeleteRepublicans, having lost their hold on the immorality of brutality a century or more ago, now cannot even name what is legal, and dodge, divert, deny and lie in order to cover up simple morality.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! The feast of the Naming of Jesus.
ReplyDeletewww.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/12/30/sailor-ceremonial-homecoming-kiss-same-sex-spouse-wxp-vpx.hln