Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Why doesn't Mexico come in for harsher criticism?

Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:31 pm
Posted by Big Scrub TX
Member since Dec 2013
33403 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:31 pm
What % of these "asylum seekers" at the US border are coming from south of Mexico? I thought it was a lot of them. If so, why aren't they applying for asylum in Mexico? Why isn't the world demanding that Mexico provide asylum for them? etc. etc.
Posted by Purple Spoon
Hoth
Member since Feb 2005
17819 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:32 pm to
How shitty is your country that you risk being separated from your kids to get out?
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54209 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:33 pm to
They your neighbors. You tell us.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98775 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:33 pm to
Who are you and what have you done with Big Scrub TX?
Posted by LuckyTiger
Someone's Alter
Member since Dec 2008
45216 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:33 pm to
First, because they’re not Trump.

Second, because their Mexicans.
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51806 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:33 pm to
Because Mexico will promptly tell them to GTFO
Posted by Big Scrub TX
Member since Dec 2013
33403 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:36 pm to
Can I get a real answer? It seems like it would provide an immediate answer to the actual question here: what % of these migrants are for-real asylum-seekers and which just want a better economic deal. I still have sympathy for the latter who want to make a go of it in the US, but I also want them to go through a proper channel - not rely on some Obama "policy" of just de facto letting them in.

The evidence strongly suggests that the majority are merely economic actors posing as asylum-seekers.
Posted by idlewatcher
County Jail
Member since Jan 2012
79111 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:38 pm to
One of the guys on here (forgot who) made a great point.

First country/point of entry for people outside of Mexico trying to come into the US designates them as refugees. If they continue north to the US, their status changed and they become immigrants.

[Trying to find out who said that, but it was solid gold and very well expressed]
Posted by Scoop
RIP Scoop
Member since Sep 2005
44583 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:38 pm to
I don’t know how to sugar coat this so I’ll just say it:

They are brown.

The regressive see all brown skinned people as allies (potential voters) and they get a pass.

Posted by Big Scrub TX
Member since Dec 2013
33403 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:40 pm to
quote:

I don’t know how to sugar coat this so I’ll just say it:

They are brown.

The regressive see all brown skinned people as allies (potential voters) and they get a pass.


You could be right. I was hoping the answer is just that we have a much higher bar of expectation out of the US than Mexico, but we're not willing to just say this out loud.
Posted by brian_wilson
Member since Oct 2016
3581 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 4:54 pm to
quote:

What % of these "asylum seekers" at the US border are coming from south of Mexico? I thought it was a lot of them. If so, why aren't they applying for asylum in Mexico? Why isn't the world demanding that Mexico provide asylum for them? etc. etc.


mexico is just as dangerous as honduras, guatemala, el salvador. The migrants don't want to stay in danger. plus economic opportunity for them in mexico is low. Mexicans hate central americans.

who are your rooting for in the world cup?
Posted by IllegalPete
Front Range
Member since Oct 2017
7182 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 5:20 pm to
quote:

Can I get a real answer? It seems like it would provide an immediate answer to the actual question here: what % of these migrants are for-real asylum-seekers and which just want a better economic deal.


quote:

... owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it ...5


pdf link

Technically, none of these people from Central America would qualify based on the official definition. I don't think "my country is a shithole" qualifies.

Maybe the violence would impact the ruling, but the violence is not from the government, it is from private parties.

Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
26776 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 5:24 pm to
Mexico is around 50 percent caucasian by some estimates, and certainly ruled by majority whites.

They should not be immune to criticism.
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
64341 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 5:27 pm to
That's what I've been posting about.
But msm blah blah blah.
Posted by Dizz
Member since May 2008
14731 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 5:44 pm to
quote:

How shitty is your country that you risk being separated from your kids to get out?



El Salvador is pretty shitty.
Posted by Seldom Seen
Member since Feb 2016
40133 posts
Posted on 6/20/18 at 5:47 pm to
Mexico no hizo nada!
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram