1. AOC and Judy Chu are alleging "refugees" are being forced to drink toilet water.
a. On the contrary, I've read these "refugees" are drinking potable water from sinks attached to toilets. That's different from drinking directly from the toilet itself. Apparently this how many US public facilities (e.g. prisons) are set up as well.
b. In addition: "So this is what happened with the migrant and drinking water from toilet: she wanted water, didn’t know how to use the faucet in the cell, and drank from the toilet. She never told AOC that we made her drink from the toilet."
c. Regardless, the water in the US is generally cleaner and safer to drink than water in Mexico and other Latin American nations. (And arguably this includes toilet water in many cases.)
d. Americans are generously providing "refugees" with shelter, food, water, and so forth when in truth "refugees" aren't entitled to shelter, food, water, and other goods from Americans. Granted, what's provided is anything but glamorous, but why should it be glamorous? AOC and Chu act like "refugees" deserve a presidential suite at the Palms Resort in Vegas, a five course meal prepared by Gordon Ramsay, and a bottle of Beverly Hills 9OH2O. Why is their standard the standard that "refugees" should be accorded?
2. Progressives are condemning CBP for "illegally" refusing to process applications in a timely fashion when "refugees" are legally allowed to apply for asylum at the border.
a. I don't know the legal situation, but what's legal isn't necessarily what's ethical. In any case, I'm far more concerned with the ethics.
b. Not all of them are genuine "refugees". Perhaps not even the majority of them. Lots of miscreants in the pack.
c. No one is entitled to camp out on someone's front yard and demand the person has so many days to process their application to enter their house. That's absurd. Why would it be wrong if CBP simply rejected most "refugees" at the border? It's not as if CBP have infinite personnel and resources to expend on processing any and all comers.
d. However, even if they were genuine refugees, it would take a considerable amount of time to vet each of them (e.g. medical checks, re-settlement).
e. How are there suddenly thousands of "refugees" at our border? Isn't this rather suspicious in and of itself?
3. What about AOC's own behavior? She screamed at border patrol in a threatening manner the moment she arrived and didn't even bother touring the facilities. This suggests she doesn't care about what's really happening or not happening at the border. She doesn't care about finding the truth. She's already made up her mind. She's already got her agenda. She's just grinding an axe and preparing to hack away at anyone who disagrees with her.
"How are there suddenly thousands of "refugees" at our border? Isn't this rather suspicious in and of itself?"
ReplyDeleteYes, it is. We're told by the media that the reason all of these people are fleeing Guatemala, Honduras, etc... is because these places are far too dangerous for them to stay. But, what is the source of that information? Why, the refugees themselves. Ok, fair enough; that is their claim and if true should lend credence to their asylum application.
However, when was the last time you saw a nightly news broadcast from a reporter sent to one of the places that the asylum seekers are fleeing? I can't recall any. When was the last time an official of one these countries was seen or heard pleading for assistance to help curb the 'out of control violence' in these countries? Where are all of NGO's requesting aid for these countries? Celebrities? Anyone?
From the anecdotal second hand accounts from the "refugees" through the media at the border that we're regaled with you'd imagine a humanitarian crisis of apocalyptic proportions. Yet, no there is no credible or visible reporting from the alleged Gates of Hell from which they are fleeing.
Color me skeptical.
Thanks, good points!
Delete