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

[elfeliz]

It's almost as if having information on people before they move here is beneficial. Some might even call it legal immigration.

Spare me the legal immigration argument, your daddy is going after legal immigrants now too

 

[nostradumbass]

Spare me the legal immigration argument, your daddy is going after legal immigrants now too

My dad's dead, and nobody is "going after" legal immigrants. lol at "spare me the legal immigration argument". This thread is about a child rapist trying to get in with a rape victim.

 

[elfeliz]

My dad's dead, and nobody is "going after" legal immigrants. lol at "spare me the legal immigration argument". This thread is about a child rapist trying to get in with a rape victim.

you replied to me about legal immigration, are you stupid? nevermind you are a trump nut so i already know the answer

 

[nostradumbass]

you replied to me about legal immigration, are you stupid? nevermind you are a trump nut so i already know the answer

Yes, I'm clearly an alt-right Russian Trumpbot nazi. What other explanation could there be for wanting to find out who the fuck somebody is before letting them move here?

 

[Rod1]

Depriving you of $320m could backfire? Whatever will we do? I'm sure it could reach our back lines. Thing is...you and your people are on the front lines. What was your homicide rate, again, last year?
Anti-Cartel Mexican Congressional candidate shot dead while posing for selfie
Yes, Rod, let's play this game of leverage.

That $320m could be very well spent on surveillance (cameras/drones), tunnel discovery/disruption, buying informants, increasing border agents, maintaining detention facilities, and otherwise bolstering border security against drug trafficking. No need to build a wall, though those work, and the moment Republicans figure out how to frame this issue-- as it pertains to the immigrant hordes-- they will get their wall. We need someone more articulate and less divisive than Trump.

This is how-- the other half.

$320 millions is chump change that the US gives Mexico, the estimated cost of drug related violence is on the hundreds of billions.

So yeah, i think we would be better off if we followed another path that wasnt prohibition.

Your senses served you well. I did, in fact, but one step at a time, and now I think we're ready to consider why I am sympathetic to fellow Americans who wish to address this more rigorously and permanently while I simultaneously believe that family separations are a disaster.

America doesnt wants to address the drug trade and the public health crisis associated with it, if it did, it would be solved in less than a decade.

Simply put America is too proud to realize that you lost that war, thats why your head of the DOJ is a reefer madness old fool.

Okay, so why am I talking about all this in the context of the above thread's posts? Because it's how I get your side to forward and commit to the truth that your country is the drug channel, that this drug channel is land-based, and that it has been inextricably married to the stream of migrants itself. If you see my approach you resist it. Better to let it be your approach, and help you along:

Of course its the drug channel, when did i said otherwise? Just like how America is the gun channel to a degree where even your government has been caught giving weapons to drug cartels.

• Land wasn't the original preferred channel for import of Cuban/Mexican migrant interdiction or Columbian marijuana (boats) nor was Escobar's cocaine (planes)

• Involvement of more serious defense measures and bodies like the Navy in 1982 put an end to these channels; if these can be successfully shut down, then why not land channels? Our border with the Caribbean/Atlantic is longer than our border with Mexico; radar is ineffective, here, but that doesn't mean other defense measures will not be

• Cocaine was the most profitable drug Mexican cartels commanded, and it isn't grown in the north; yet that isn't the only way to reach the north, is it? They could be reached by plane/boat, and delivered there, or smuggled south through their border

• Canada is quite suitable to grow marijuana, with photoperiod the greatest challenge, and marijuana was incredibly profitable for Mexican cartels in the 90's and 00's. Additionally, Canada has had more lax ephedra/ephedrine/pseudoephedrine laws, with their porous borders, and yet they are not our source of meth; these two points simply demonstrate the Canadian capacity to exert control over disruptive black markets-- a capacity your government and other Latin American governments clearly lack

• Yes, agreed, once we shut down air/sea, the Mexican land channel became the route of smuggle-- who is doing the smuggling, and how? Here's a refresher on statistics I cited during the election debates:

1.- I know, and during that era Mexican cartels didnt existed like they do today.

2.- Are you seriously comparing land channels with water channels?

3.- Cocaine was the most profitable indeed, that was my point after all.

4.- Mexico is doing the smuggle, was that even up for debate?

I've made my opinion known about who I hold responsible, but knowledge of the cause doesn't treat it. Draconian drug laws won't solve it, but neither does libertarian legality (remember the American Pharma-led grey market for opiates is what ballooned this appetite). Giving your Latin American governments' aid clearly doesn't solve it. Remittances don't solve it. Even asylum solves nothing for the North American continent in the long term.

False dichotomy, you can treat drugs like what they are inherently, which is a public health problem. But considering your leadership, you may as well call that communism,

So what solves it? If we're really going to take this on, we have to be honest with ourselves; the river must be broken.

The river flows both sides, drugs up north and guns and dirty money down south.

If your argument is that the US is the victim, let me tilt back my head and laugh.

Drugs only kill those idiots that consume it, guns on the other hand are made for murder.

 

[Gregolian]

Am I the only one hung up on the bail amount?

$310,000... why not just a flat $300,000? You really think that $10k is going to make a difference?

 

[Hollywood Jack]

U.S. officials have arrested an illegal alien for multiple counts of rape after he tried to gain entry to the United States with a child he claimed was his daughter, a DHS official said in a Tuesday statement.

A DHS official noted that the illegal alien, Ramon Pedro, arrived with a young girl he claimed was his daughter at the Ysleta Port of Entry in Texas in mid-April.

After Pedro and his claimed daughter was hospitalized for tuberculosis testing in July, U.S. authorities discovered she was not only not related to him in any way but was being systematically sexually abused by him.

“In fact, the victim’s mother told her daughter to accompany Pedro to the United States and he would secure her employment,” a DHS official said, adding that “on July 27, 2018, the Huron Police Department arrested him for multiple felony offenses for rape, oral copulation, forcible sexual penetration and endangering/causing injury to a child. He is currently detained in Fresno County Jail on a $310,000 bond.”


Pedro’s arrest highlights a central concern of U.S. authorities as large numbers of Central American migrants arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border with children, which authorities say is a way to flout U.S. law. Current U.S. law requires that authorities eventually release into the interior of the country any non-contiguous country illegal immigrant who claims asylum.


http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/07/i...&utm_campaign=atdailycaller&utm_medium=Social

Looks like he would have got away with it were it not for the subsequent tuberculosis hospitalization. This is one of the downsides of widespread undocumented migration. You're left utterly dependent on the word of potentially untrustworthy people. I have some anecdotal nightmare stories I could tell you, but I think that's all I'll say for now.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

By the way, I'm not surprised that only right-wing fringe media is covering this story. The Washington Times, but not The Washington Post. The mainstream media isn't covering this at all. Obviously, it doesn't fit their narrative.

 

[John Du Pont]

incase people didn't know over half of the females who enter this country from south of the border are raped/sexually abused and that number is me being nice it's actually much higher. So what does that say about their culture? and what do leftist feminists vote for these men to flood this country? As well as Muslim men who force women to cover up?

It seems women these days are full of shit.

 

[Soul Crusher]

small price to pay for economic and cultural enrichment. Who cares about the future!

 

[SBJJ]

The majority do show up to their court date.

I know some outlets have said like 60-70% of Undocumented Aliens show up for court dates but I don’t see anything backing that up. Some also do show up but then do not self deport

This is the most current info I could find

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/need-know-catch-release/

 

[kenetics]

Different culture, hard to judge.

Right? I mean "catch a predator" has alot of Americans trying or doing the same things. SMH at these sickos.

 

[kenetics]

So maybe we shouldn't encourage illegals to bring kids to the border to get in illegally? What does this actually have to do with white people? Is anyone saying its OK when white people fuck kids?

Not only are you racist but you're making excuses for child rapists as well.

To be fair, " catch a predator " for some reason has alot of white men trying to meet under age girls and boys lol.

 

[waiguoren]

I know some outlets have said like 60-70% of Undocumented Aliens show up for court dates but I don’t see anything backing that up. Some also do show up but then do not self deport

This is the most current info I could find

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/need-know-catch-release/

EOIR keeps data on this. Here is their report from 2016: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/fysb15/download

According to the report, the in absentia rate for never-detained aliens was 44% in 2015. 41% for those released on bond or on their own recognizance.

 

[Madmick]

$320 millions is chump change that the US gives Mexico, the estimated cost of drug related violence is on the hundreds of billions.

So yeah, i think we would be better off if we followed another path that wasnt prohibition.

America doesnt wants to address the drug trade and the public health crisis associated with it, if it did, it would be solved in less than a decade.

Simply put America is too proud to realize that you lost that war, thats why your head of the DOJ is a reefer madness old fool.

Of course its the drug channel, when did i said otherwise? Just like how America is the gun channel to a degree where even your government has been caught giving weapons to drug cartels.

1.- I know, and during that era Mexican cartels didnt existed like they do today.

2.- Are you seriously comparing land channels with water channels?

3.- Cocaine was the most profitable indeed, that was my point after all.

4.- Mexico is doing the smuggle, was that even up for debate?

False dichotomy, you can treat drugs like what they are inherently, which is a public health problem. But considering your leadership, you may as well call that communism,

The river flows both sides, drugs up north and guns and dirty money down south.

If your argument is that the US is the victim, let me tilt back my head and laugh.

Drugs only kill those idiots that consume it, guns on the other hand are made for murder.

Because a non-prohibition based approach with the pseudo-gray market for Vicodin and Oxycodone turned out so swell? Liberals will never learn.

I used to the buy the "prohibition exacerbates the problem" nonsense when I was in my youth; when I was still in college. Time tutored me harshly. Drugs like cocaine, meth, and opiates can't be tolerated. They will ravage your poor, and swell your poor. They are not similar to "soft" drugs like marijuana and alcohol (neither of which that has a system of production that can be controlled, at all, ever). Drug liberalization has severe limits on its effectiveness. Spare my your performative cynicism about America not wanting to solve the drug crisis in response to a post where I excoriate the effect of the American pharmaceutical lobby on our biomedical policy, and in creating the opioid epidemic. I was talking about the coming opioid epidemic in the mid-2000's with prognostic analysis of headlines like the Wal-Mart generic price rollback of the 10 most commonly sold drugs-- except Vicodin! As much as it seems to offend the foreign mind, Americans are not stupid, and we do not require your instructions to better understand and control the world.

Sessions was a puppet to appeal to an anti-drug fringe. Trump has him on a leash because he knows how Americans feel about marijuana. You think Sessions is some czar of authoritarian reform? Trump has his lapdog, Giuliani, out there impugning Sessions as an ally to the "deep state". I've seen no material change in my state between Obama and Trump's administrations.

This has nothing to do with pride, and everything to do with your government's astonishing corruption. It's a sieve, and it's why dispensing any foreign aid to you or these other countries is counterproductive-- only Venezuela (and I think Brazil) is more corrupt in this hemisphere. You are spending nearly 10% of your GDP fighting this war, which is half of what we spend on everything for our own budget ratio, and if anyone is "losing" the war on drugs, it's you. Indeed, while you rant about America not wanting to solve the drug crisis, your own people have risen in states like Michoacan to form militias to combat both cartels and government forces they don't trust, and while much of the worst violence is contiguous to our borders, your worst violence includes states nearer to the heart of your capital that are the most violent and unstable, with some of these locales enjoying far more success than your own federales in establishing security; a truth your government isn't keen to broadcast.

I wonder why. Hmm. Maybe my government isn't the only one getting paid.

Am I seriously comparing land channels to water channels? Of course. I'm focused on drugs, after all, aren't I? I thought you possessed the knowledge of the history of the USCG involvement in the drug war, so it's odd that you seem oblivious to the reality that prior to 1975 the marijuana land-based drug trade was the route for most American import, but it could not feed the growing demand, and this changed radically in the mid-70's, especially following the Mexican government's strategy to "poison" illicit fields of opium and marijuana with airplane-delivered chemical sprays, and so Columbian Marimberos seized the opportunity to fill the demand. Your reaction makes no sense in the context of this quite real history. The Coast Guard was also interdicting boats carrying migrants during this period.

You're clearly not reading links to believe I perceive the USA as victims, but it's odd that you wouldn't support more drastic measures that might keep those guns from flowing back into your country. One of the major problems here is that you, and the countries to the south of you, are sovereign countries. It makes more meaningful efforts to address your problems which have been come internalized (as in your corrupt government, military and press bodies) impossible for us.

You can treat guns like what they are which is an abused and perverted right to security; those militias who can effectively fight off the cartels aren't doing it with guitar solos. I don't care to be philosophical. Drugs are a public health problem, but they aren't a crime-free or violence-free one. I'm too old to regurgitate those platitudes of didactic library-dwellers. This isn't a third world drug trade. There is too much money and power at stake to believe compassionate laws can render innocence.

Like it or not, you realize the only solution to ending the flow of drugs decisively is to blockade the river of drugs

 

[Hard To Tell]

Lol over the past year or so I've been perusing the war room, I've noticed this really become a trend.

Anytime a thread pops up the far left don't like, especially when it comes to illegal immigration because it's essentially an argument that's impossible for them to win, they start saying the thread should be dumped. It's funny too because most of the threads are quite valid, and you don't really see posters on the right do it really at all.

You can start threads on terror attacks or mass rapes and these people will try and dismiss it as 'outrage porn'. It's then usually followed by calling people 'snowflakes' for being bothered by these things. For example "Omg lolz, all you right-wingers triggered by those stupid kids getting blown up at a pop concerts. What a bunch of snowflakes" or "So what if hundreds of thousand of kids got raped by Muslims while the authorities turned a blind eye and covered it up. Some white people also do some bad stuff too.You right-wingers and your outrage porn. And besides, it's no big deal, think of all the spicy food we get to enjoy."

 

[Madmick]

You can start threads on terror attacks or mass rapes and these people will try and dismiss it as 'outrage porn'. It's then usually followed by calling people 'snowflakes' for being bothered by these things. For example "Omg lolz, all you right-wingers triggered by those stupid kids getting blown up at a pop concerts. What a bunch of snowflakes" or "So what if hundreds of thousand of kids got raped by Muslims while the authorities turned a blind eye and covered it up. Some white people also do some bad stuff too.You right-wingers and your outrage porn. And besides, it's no big deal, think of all the spicy food we get to enjoy."

Cite an example of this. Don't fabricate one. Show me the thread inundated with responses like that to a mass murder terrorist event.

 

[uppercutbus]

Lol over the past year or so I've been perusing the war room, I've noticed this really become a trend.

Anytime a thread pops up the far left don't like, especially when it comes to illegal immigration because it's essentially an argument that's impossible for them to win, they start saying the thread should be dumped. It's funny too because most of the threads are quite valid, and you don't really see posters on the right do it really at all.

Another one is to thread-whine and backseat mod by downplaying the news event so it should be dumped: "Could we pick a more inane topic to make a WR thread on? What's next, people break ankles on trampolines?"
Some small scale current events might not deserve a thread. If it's directly related to what the forum usually talks about and has an angle then it should be ok.

 

[Rod1]

Because a non-prohibition based approach with the pseudo-gray market for Vicodin and Oxycodone turned out so swell? Liberals will never learn.

Again false dichotomy, these drugs became a problem because your for-profit healthcare industry turned doctors into drug-dealers.

Too many 80s sunday morning cartoon PSAs about not trusting drugdealers forgot to mention that drugdealers also come in white coats.

Market can be regulated, spare me your false dichotomies and nirvana fallacies. People trust doctors to use their knowledge to heal them, not to sell them drugs under false pretenses to get kickbacks.

I used to the buy the "prohibition exacerbates the problem" nonsense when I was in my youth; when I was still in college. Time tutored me harshly. Drugs like cocaine, meth, and opiates can't be tolerated. They will ravage your poor, and swell your poor. They are not similar to "soft" drugs like marijuana and alcohol (neither of which that has a system of production that can be controlled, at all, ever).

"Will" as in its not happening right now?

X + 1 > X

On top of the drug epidemic the poor also have to deal with the consequences of prohibition. Which do far more to ravage the poor than anything else.

Drug liberalization has severe limits on its effectiveness. Spare my your performative cynicism about America not wanting to solve the drug crisis in response to a post where I excoriate the effect of the American pharmaceutical lobby on our biomedical policy, and in creating the opioid epidemic. I was talking about the coming opioid epidemic in the mid-2000's with prognostic analysis of headlines like the Wal-Mart generic price rollback of the 10 most commonly sold drugs-- except Vicodin! As much as it seems to offend the foreign mind, Americans are not stupid, and we do not require your instructions to better understand and control the world.

As opposed to prohibition which is super effective? why are puritans so afraid to try ANYTHING else but prohibition?

Sessions was a puppet to appeal to an anti-drug fringe. Trump has him on a leash because he knows how Americans feel about marijuana. You think Sessions is some czar of authoritarian reform? Trump has his lapdog, Giuliani, out there impugning Sessions as an ally to the "deep state". I've seen no material change in my state between Obama and Trump's administrations.

Trump is an anti-drug fringe.

This has nothing to do with pride, and everything to do with your government's astonishing corruption. It's a sieve, and it's why dispensing any foreign aid to you or these other countries is counterproductive-- only Venezuela (and I think Brazil) is more corrupt in this hemisphere. You are spending nearly 10% of your GDP fighting this war, which is half of what we spend on everything for our own budget ratio, and if anyone is "losing" the war on drugs, it's you. Indeed, while you rant about America not wanting to solve the drug crisis, your own people have risen in states like Michoacan to form militias to combat both cartels and

Of course we are losing the war on drugs, its an unwinnable war.

Its a war on capitalism itself.

government forces they don't trust, and while much of the worst violence is contiguous to our borders, your worst violence includes states nearer to the heart of your capital that are the most violent and unstable, with some of these locales enjoying far more success than your own federales in establishing security; a truth your government isn't keen to broadcast.

Michoacan and Guerrero are poppy growing zones, they also have the main industrial ports when it comes to pacific trade. Most ephedrine in Mexico (used to make meth) comes from Asia.

Am I seriously comparing land channels to water channels? Of course. I'm focused on drugs, after all, aren't I? I thought you possessed the knowledge of the history of the USCG involvement in the drug war, so it's odd that you seem oblivious to the reality that prior to 1975 the marijuana land-based drug trade was the route for most American import,

Yup, crossing a river is the same as crossing the street.

You're clearly not reading links to believe I perceive the USA as victims, but it's odd that you wouldn't support more drastic measures that might keep those guns from flowing back into your country. One of the major problems here is that you, and the countries to the south of you, are sovereign countries. It makes more meaningful efforts to address your problems which have been come internalized (as in your corrupt government, military and press bodies) impossible for us

I do support more drastric measures to combat gun violence, but gun violence itself isnt the crux of the issue, its the money associated with the drug trade.

If you want to stop drug cartels its best to go after the money, but then again thats what got Camarena and Buendia killed.

You can treat guns like what they are which is an abused and perverted right to security; those militias who can effectively fight off the cartels aren't doing it with guitar solos. I don't care to be philosophical. Drugs are a public health problem, but they aren't a crime-free or violence-free one. I'm too old to regurgitate those platitudes of didactic library-dwellers. This isn't a third world drug trade. There is too much money and power at stake to believe compassionate laws can render innocence.

Crime and violence are the byproduct of prohibition, you dont see breweries or tobacco companies murdering each other for the market.

Like it or not, you realize the only solution to ending the flow of drugs decisively is to blockade the river of drugs

Thanks for conceding the point that prohibition doesnt works.

EDIT

Funny how you claim that the end of prohibition is a "hippie liberal thing". The cognifitve dissonance is strong in you.

 

[Pessimystic]

This is the exact thing that separating children from unknown adults jumping the border was supposed to prevent. A bill introduced by Dianne Feinstein, no less. But since the only thing the dems have is to oppose anything and everything Trump (never mind that the policy was put in place during W's tenure, logic and libs are like water and oil), it got shut down.
Good job, libs.