Immigrant Arrives at Texas Port of Entry Posing with Underage ‘Daughter’ he had been Raping

Deputy Chief Patrol Agent Raul Ortiz said he’s seeing a growing number of migrant children crossing the border with people pretending to be their parents.

A decades-old settlement, known as the “Flores agreement,” limits the amount of time U.S. officials can detain immigrant children – thus doing the same for their parents, which Ortiz said motivates many of the false relationships.

The problem became so prevalent that the agency began carefully tracking fraudulent family cases in the Rio Grande Valley, after agents noticed a heightened use of fake documents. In fiscal year 2018, Ortiz reported 600 instances.

Recently, border patrol agents rescued a 4-month-old Honduran child from a man falsely identifying himself as her father. In an interview with officials, he admitted purchasing the fraudulent document. Agents later discovered it wasn’t the illegal immigrant’s first time using a child to avoid long-term federal custody. In 2013, records revealed he smuggled an 8-year-old child across the border, claiming he was the father. They were released from federal custody because they received a family unit designation


“At no point should a child be placed in any harm or danger, and that’s exactly what’s happening,” Ortiz added. “They’re being used as a commodity to circumvent a loophole.”

On Thursday, officials revealed that in seven of 102 cases involving children under 5 separated from their guardians, the adult was determined not to actually be the parent.



It’s not a one off, it’s a growing trend
 
You have displayed an utter lack of of basic comprehension at every point in this exchange.
People are using children that are not their own to try and cross the US border

I’m sorry that you can’t comprehend, can I help get you some tutoring?
 
Deputy Chief Patrol Agent Raul Ortiz said he’s seeing a growing number of migrant children crossing the border with people pretending to be their parents.

A decades-old settlement, known as the “Flores agreement,” limits the amount of time U.S. officials can detain immigrant children – thus doing the same for their parents, which Ortiz said motivates many of the false relationships.

The problem became so prevalent that the agency began carefully tracking fraudulent family cases in the Rio Grande Valley, after agents noticed a heightened use of fake documents. In fiscal year 2018, Ortiz reported 600 instances.

Recently, border patrol agents rescued a 4-month-old Honduran child from a man falsely identifying himself as her father. In an interview with officials, he admitted purchasing the fraudulent document. Agents later discovered it wasn’t the illegal immigrant’s first time using a child to avoid long-term federal custody. In 2013, records revealed he smuggled an 8-year-old child across the border, claiming he was the father. They were released from federal custody because they received a family unit designation


“At no point should a child be placed in any harm or danger, and that’s exactly what’s happening,” Ortiz added. “They’re being used as a commodity to circumvent a loophole.”

On Thursday, officials revealed that in seven of 102 cases involving children under 5 separated from their guardians, the adult was determined not to actually be the parent.



It’s not a one off, it’s a growing trend
@hillelslovak87

What's your response to this?
 
People are using children that are not their own to try and cross the US border

I’m sorry that you can’t comprehend, can I help get you some tutoring?

My point has still managed to evade you entirely. Cool. I give it 3 weeks, the length it takes you to comprehend the simple point.

@hillelslovak87

What's your response to this?

I respond by saying you guys, particularly you, love to sensationalize any crimes done by illegals on the border. In support of your guy's anti immigration stance, you constantly bring up these anecdotes, with little or no evidence. This issue, it seems to be so little an issue, they have to bring up cases from 5 years ago to speak of it.

You have a Fox News story quoting a single border patrol agent, with neither a single piece of information, nor a time frame for the 600 case number. Just Raul Ortiz' assertion.

And it is also besides my point, which you guys have constantly missed.
 
This issue, it seems to be so little an issue, they have to bring up cases from 5 years ago to speak of it.

What are you talking about? The case in the OP is from this year, and DHS has documented hundreds of others over the past few months.

love to sensationalize any crimes done by illegals on the border

By "sensationalize", do you mean "report the facts of the situation"? Point me to the "sensationalistic" part of the OP.
 
Because you are all over the place.

Originally i was arguing that demand of drugs in America existed before drug cartels. And that drug cartels arose in Mexico after the US started cracking on the sea routes.



Im quite sure that most of Madagascar victims of trafficking are Madagascarians themselves.

Also you claim that being an island is a flaw in my logic when you were the one who said that England was lucky not to have a land border with Mexico.

So you are making an argument for both sides.



Non-sequitur

Also gun laws in Mexico work quite well when it comes to petty criminals access to them. Druglords are importing said weapons from places where guns are legal, like America.



Just to be clear.

Are you in favor of the death penalty for people pushing drugs?



The Portuguese problem was addressing demand, not offer.

America demand for drugs predates Mexican cartels by decades.
My comment about Britain is tied to my argument as a whole that the immigration river has become co-opted by the drug trade. In other words, the benefit of England being an island is that they aren't adjacent to Mexico, and don't have to deal with a flood of migrants (who bring the drugs and drug trade with them) extending down to Colombia itself. After all, Europe itself has begun capturing enormous shipments of heroin-- a rising unfamiliar trend:
2016 EU Drug Markets Report said:
The importance of the Balkan route
The Balkan route remains a key corridor for heroin entry into the EU. This area therefore remains a natural focus for law enforcement efforts. Important recent developments include the emergence of two new off-shoots to the Balkan route involving the Southern Caucasus and Syria and Iraq. Turkey, in terms of both organised crime activities and anti- trafficking measures, remains of central importance, especially given its proximity to areas of instability in the Middle East. Potential connections between flows of heroin and other drugs and terrorist groups in this region are a major concern, and Turkey is a key partner to help counter these threats.
What changed leading into 2016? I'm pretty sure the Balkans have always been there. Has any new problem seized the continent of Europe? While you ponder that, I'll remind you that even in Europe, with heroin, whose main producers are tied via the land bridge, the maritime route and its ports remains a chief concern:
2016 EU Drug Markets Report said:
Implications of large seizures
The recent increase in seizures of very large heroin consignments has important ramifications. Shipments of this size imply that relatively few consignments could have a significant impact on availability. The implications of this change need to be better understood as it may be important for understanding the relative importance of different trafficking routes, particularly those exploiting maritime and container trafficking opportunities.

Organised crime and changing business models
Production techniques, locations, trafficking routes and associated modi operandi appear increasingly flexible and dynamic and quick to adapt to successful law enforcement activities. Turkish, Albanian-speaking and Pakistani OCGs are key players for heroin trafficking into Europe. Cooperation between groups, and with local OCGs, exists and may be increasing. The use of decentralised business models facilitates the sharing of assets and logistics, and results in risk displacement. OCGs are involved in trafficking of multiple drugs, precursors, weapons, other illicit commodities and, sometimes, migrants.
A prescient observer might predict that Europe is simply on a track where they are 30 years behind us, in terms of both problem and response, and is likely to get slammed with a growing network of Turkish and Syrian cartels in the future who will attempt to co-opt any migrant stream that the EU tolerates. Ulimately, the gist of the point about England not sharing a land bridge was to demonstrate this potential migrant population for the drug traffickers to exploit is already controlled, and tied into a larger argument which highlighted your ignorant attempt to blame demand on legal prescriptions.

My point about gun laws isn't irrelevant. It was a simple and powerful refutation of your desire to cast Portugal as a model for the world. Draconian anti-drug laws in southeast Asia have proven more effective, in the long term, so why not study them? It was a gentle reminder that you need to focus on this drug market, and that you should start by learning more of its specifics. You're clearly ignorant to basic facts like gateway practices. There is more than one way to address demand.

You mention that American demand for drugs predates Mexican(-routed) supply. Clearly the real problems spiraled out of control with the advent of this supply. An overabundance of supply in the USA isn't curbing demand. That's why you're dumb when you point to Portugal. Ergo, it makes more sense to focus on supply. Otherwise, your attempt to blame our pharmaceutical companies makes no sense, either. According to your logic supply doesn't contribute to the problem. Perhaps this is why you see arguments for "both sides" rather than understanding how they conform to a singular, deeper thought.

You're terribly confused, and aren't aware how your own arguments contradict each other. Mine never does. After all...
I never said the US shouldnt control its borders, you tried to make it as this child migrants were moving the biggest payloads and thats a falsehood.

My point was that the land bridge is the reason why Mexican cartels became the powerhouses that they are.
Was it? I'm pretty sure this was my point, and I have mapped out how they achieved this by employing the migrants (not just minors who they ARE grooming) as their traffickers.

I demonstrated this both with known and unknown factors. With the known, I cited border agents who tell how cartels exploit immigrant crossings to bring across shipments of drugs. Pertaining to the unseen, I pointed to disproportionate rates of drug trafficking across the border via illegal ports of entry. Per the unknown, I pointed to the astonishingly high rates of violence associated with drug cartels observed in illegal immigrants once they are on this side of the border. You didn't attempt to address any point.
You are sending guns and money, we are sending drugs, both would benefit if the flow stopped. However its been demonstrated that its far easier (and humane) to attack demand than supply.
It's certainly more "humane" for migrant Mexicans, Central Americans, and South Americans. Otherwise, I don't need to execute any Americans to stymie demand, but I do appreciate that you are rational enough to acknowledge that the death penalty is an effective deterrent against crime in spite of its morally questionable nature.

Do you need help? I can help you with the strongest counterargument to the wall if you need it. You're playing into my hands by allowing the focus of this debate to be the drug problem.
 
My comment about Britain is tied to my argument as a whole that the immigration river has become co-opted by the drug trade. In other words, the benefit of England being an island is that they aren't adjacent to Mexico, and don't have to deal with a flood of migrants (who bring the drugs and drug trade with them) extending down to Colombia itself. After all, Europe itself has begun capturing enormous shipments of heroin-- a rising unfamiliar trend:

The original argument was that Mexico is the cause of the drug epidemic in the USA when it was demonstrably false, the US drug epidemic and drug war was already full blown before Mexican cartels entered the scene and the reason why Mexican cartels entered the scene was due to Mexico being a natural land route from the places where drugs are grown and into America.

Was it? I'm pretty sure this was my point, and I have mapped out how they achieved this by employing the migrants (not just minors who they ARE grooming) as their traffickers.

Except i already proved that most drugs come through legal entry points or through desert drop-offs.

I demonstrated this both with known and unknown factors. With the known, I cited border agents who tell how cartels exploit immigrant crossings to bring across shipments of drugs. Pertaining to the unseen, I pointed to disproportionate rates of drug trafficking across the border via illegal ports of entry. Per the unknown, I pointed to the astonishingly high rates of violence associated with drug cartels observed in illegal immigrants once they are on this side of the border. You didn't attempt to address any point.

Because your point proved what i was saying? that migrants are not really the main driver of drug trafficking? thats why despite the border being thousands of miles wide, cartels wage massive wars in the cities were most trade and crossings happen.

And violence can be associated with human trafficking not necesarily drugs.

It's certainly more "humane" for migrant Mexicans, Central Americans, and South Americans. Otherwise, I don't need to execute any Americans to stymie demand, but I do appreciate that you are rational enough to acknowledge that the death penalty is an effective deterrent against crime in spite of its morally questionable nature.

Do you need help? I can help you with the strongest counterargument to the wall if you need it. You're playing into my hands by allowing the focus of this debate to be the drug problem.

This a shameless try to change the subject.

You claim that prohibition works and then used China as an example, pathetic, if you guys cant control drugs inside your borders what makes you think you can do it outside your borders?

You are shamelessly blaming the suppliers while claiming the users are harmless victims, yet when it comes to guns and death that you guys are quite eager to export you immediatly blame users and wash your hands on the subject.
 
The original argument was that Mexico is the cause of the drug epidemic in the USA when it was demonstrably false, the US drug epidemic and drug war was already full blown before Mexican cartels entered the scene and the reason why Mexican cartels entered the scene was due to Mexico being a natural land route from the places where drugs are grown and into America.

Except i already proved that most drugs come through legal entry points or through desert drop-offs.

Because your point proved what i was saying? that migrants are not really the main driver of drug trafficking? thats why despite the border being thousands of miles wide, cartels wage massive wars in the cities were most trade and crossings happen.

And violence can be associated with human trafficking not necesarily drugs.

This a shameless try to change the subject.

You claim that prohibition works and then used China as an example, pathetic, if you guys cant control drugs inside your borders what makes you think you can do it outside your borders?

You are shamelessly blaming the suppliers while claiming the users are harmless victims, yet when it comes to guns and death that you guys are quite eager to export you immediatly blame users and wash your hands on the subject.
The debate concerns whether or not the swelling drug epidemic is inextricably linked to the migrant stream, and whether or not building a wall will help to curb this. Perhaps this is why you are so confused, and disjointedly terse.

No, you did NOT prove that most drugs came through legal ports. You cited that most drugs which we successfully capture at the border (two qualifiers) are seized at legal ports, and that argument was already refuted on the grounds that we barely police the rest of the border, so if we scrutinize these figures, we discern that a massively disproportionate ratio of drugs correlate to those trespassing illegally, and the overwhelming majority of them do not cross at legal ports, obviously. Meanwhile, we also know we are failing to capture the majority of drugs based on other indicators of sale and usage here, but we do know that migrants are the lifeblood of drug trafficking infrastructure. That is reflected in the drug crime statistics among illegal migrants on this side of the border. It's also reflected in the disproportionate ratio observed between minors and adult migrants following the disparity in Obama's regulations on deportation of these two groups. You refuse to address these facts, and how clearly they indicate the cartels are co-opting the migrant stream in any way that is most effective. You also refuse to address or acknowledge how they are exploited as distraction for trafficking efforts across illegal ports in which case they are key party to trafficking even if they aren't the ones carrying the shipment.

We cannot attempt to control drugs inside our border if we have no control over their import from outside our borders. Again, one step at a time. I notice mentioning a country that controls its drug trade internally that also enjoys a fantastic wall rustles your jimmies. You were the one who brought up Portugal. Don't open that door if you don't like where it leads.

The flow of guns into your country is your concern, not mine. If they are sold legally, there, then this is part of legal trade. If we are discussing the illegal gun trade, then we are almost certainly discussing guns the cartel buys here, then smuggles back into Mexico. The best way to curb that is to attack their revenue base which they use to purchase the guns. Nevertheless, again, this is your problem, not mine. My problem is the drugs. I'm focusing on solving that, and none of my considerations requiring begging you for help, or demands that you change your laws to more effectively address it. You're quite the imperialist when it comes to propositions of litigation, except like the most pathetic imperialists, you have no leverage, nor any ability to conquer.

Focus.
 
The debate concerns whether or not the swelling drug epidemic is inextricably linked to the migrant stream, and whether or not building a wall will help to curb this. Perhaps this is why you are so confused, and disjointedly terse.

It is certainly not, according the surgeon general of the USA it is inextricably linked to the incredibly lax and for profit healthcare system of the USA.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-overdose-crisis

No, you did NOT prove that most drugs came through legal ports. You cited that most drugs which we successfully capture at the border (two qualifiers) are seized at legal ports, and that argument was already refuted on the grounds that we barely police the rest of the border,

Not according to the DEA intelligence service.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/2...top-drugs-heres-what-a-dea-intel-report-says/

If i stopped replying to you in full is because you are incredibly dishonest and keep repeating the same debunked crap so it gets tiring.
 
It is certainly not, according the surgeon general of the USA it is inextricably linked to the incredibly lax and for profit healthcare system of the USA.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-overdose-crisis
Oh, are you going to pretend you have even the most superficial knowledge of the American opioid epidemic again?

I've already talked about how this specific facet of the drug trade demonstrates a wider availability of drugs in a pseudo-legal market ballooned our demand. So, agreed, legalizing harder drugs is an awful idea here. Of course, now Mexican cartels (and others) are adapting to fill this demand with Fentanyl and more opiates when previously marijuana, cocaine, and ephedrine/meth were the pillars of their profit. As we have clamped down on over-prescription, grey market "pharmacy mills", and misbehaving doctors, your migrant stream and your drug trade has continued to ship these drugs over.

We need to do something about it.
Not according to the DEA intelligence service.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/2...top-drugs-heres-what-a-dea-intel-report-says/

If i stopped replying to you in full is because you are incredibly dishonest and keep repeating the same debunked crap so it gets tiring.
Maybe if you were pulling from acquired knowledge, instead of furiously Googling to access knowledge you don't have, you'd realize the DEA report you just cited is focused on drug import into the Northeastern United States, and specifically the rising prominence of Dominican suppliers in that region. It's not a comprehensive report.

Not that anything is terribly relevant after that, but they also noted that the primary launchpads for distribution after entry via NYC & Newark:
Dominican trafficking groups maintain their strongest influence in areas of the Northeast with a significant Dominican population, generally in cities located along the 1-95 highway corridor. Dominican traffickers conceal their drug trafficking activities among established ethnic Dominican communities in various parts of the Northeast.
This speaks precisely to the issues of people-infrastructure I have raised concerning the illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican border who have settled here in Texas and California who serve, for example, the Kingpin of drug distributors in the USA: the Sinaloa Cartel. It's reminiscent of the immigrant neighborhoods in Belgium which festered into a protective enclave for terrorists who ravaged neighboring France. You're trying to talk about the furthest region from the Mexican border that isn't principally controlled by these Mexican cartels to demonstrate to the Americans in here how the migrant problem with our border hasn't been co-opted by the Mexican cartels. Meanwhile, in spite of that, the Sinaloa cartel as recently as Obama's second term was delivering 80%+ of heroin, coke, marijuana, and meth to the Chicago area. They're just as strong in my state. Past the Midwest their power is greatly diminished, and challenged.

54c8049569beddc05a87fe1e-750-485.png

This map, developed based on the testimony of former Sinaloa operatives, shows the cartel's distribution network as of the late 2000s.
Business Insider/Andy Kiersz


See the above? See the arrow showing the fork of drugs coming across the land border into Los Angeles? That's their dominant Western US channel. Those drugs travel up the I-5 route where shipments are broken and pieced off all the way through the state, heading to Oregon, literally all via a single interstate road-- an artery-- where almost all of these drug shipments are seized by CHP and federal authorities. I know this because I routinely read my local and county drug seizure reports.

If you want to look at maritime corridors the overwhelming majority of drug imports aren't on that side (although it is growing):
https://www.businessinsider.com/her...-smuggled-from-south-america-to-the-us-2017-9
According to US Drug Enforcement Administration report issued this summer, 93% to 94% of the cocaine produced in Colombia and shipped to the US in 2016 transited the Mexico/Central America corridor, which includes the eastern Pacific. (Though there are signs of more trafficking in the Caribbean.)

Much of that traffic eventually makes landfall, and then it's "going pretty easily through Mexico and ... almost entirely crossing the land border" in the US, said Adam Isacson, senior associate for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America.
Jesus Christ, do you know anything? Anything about this topic at all?

Consider lecturing Americans less until you learn more.
 
A more comprehensive report from 2017 that any interested in this problem should read:
United States Department of State > Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs > International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
Concerning opiates and opiate derivatives:
Growing Challenges of Heroin Use, Adulterants, and Opium Poppy Cultivation
According to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the use of heroin and other opium poppy derivatives is the greatest worldwide drug problem today. Heroin is also the greatest drug threat in the United States, according to the 2015 U.S. National Drug Threat Assessment, published by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration . Especially dangerous is the increasing adulteration of heroin with synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl, leading to an increase in the number of deaths as the result of drug overdoses. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control reported that approximately 10,500 Americans died from heroin-related overdoses; the true number is likely higher given inconsistent testing across the States.

Opium poppy cultivation is expanding beyond Afghanistan, Burma and Laos – the traditional primary producing countries in the world. While Afghanistan is still the major supplier of opium derivatives to Europe and Canada, nearly all opium derivatives found in the United States are primarily grown in or trafficked through Mexico or by Mexican-based drug trafficking organizations. In Mexico, for example, international officials estimate that the number of hectares of heroin poppy under cultivation increased from 11,000 hectares in 2013 to as much as 28,000 hectares in 2015. Limited poppy cultivation has also been detected in Colombia and Guatemala.
 
Oh, are you going to pretend you have even the most superficial knowledge of the American opioid epidemic again?

Its not a controvertible point.

Maybe if you were pulling from acquired knowledge, instead of furiously Googling to access knowledge you don't have, you'd realize the DEA report

https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7354412&page=1

Again, not a controvertible point McCarthy.

This speaks precisely to the issues of people-infrastructure I have raised concerning the illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican border who have settled here in Texas and California who serve, for example, the Kingpin of drug distributors in the USA: the Sinaloa Cartel. It's reminiscent of the immigrant neighborhoods in Belgium which festered into a protective enclave for terrorists who ravaged neighboring France.

No, it speaks precisely of the sheer volume of crossings of goods and people across the border.

Virtually all gangs in America work with drug cartels, and gangs are for the most part an American phenomena and made up by citizens, not immigrants.

Jesus Christ, do you know anything? Anything about this topic at all?

Again, you are making my point there. Mexican drug cartels are a byproduct of the US drug war, not the other way around.
 
You just linked an ABC report that demonstrates the majority of cocaine crossing via the land border. I just spent my past post outlining this exact truth when you tried to shift and argue that most drugs are coming in through sea and air ports. Now you're back to land after I pointed out that your DEA sea/air report only focused on the Northeast which is now controlled by Dominicans.
No, it speaks precisely of the sheer volume of crossings of goods and people across the border.

Virtually all gangs in America work with drug cartels, and gangs are for the most part an American phenomena and made up by citizens, not immigrants.
No, it speaks to the fact that these cartels rely on imported communities-- of (im)migrants-- who depend on this infrastructure to disseminate their drugs, and why these communities have such disproportionate rates of those involved in the drug crimes associated with the drug trade.
Again, you are making my point there. Mexican drug cartels are a byproduct of the US drug war, not the other way around.
Not at all. That fact was cited simply to expose how you sophomorically presume to understand larger dynamics of our drug war while you don't possess knowledge of even the basic facts of drug trafficking channels.
 
Back
Top