Posted on 11/24/2018 12:01:19 PM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Edited on 11/24/2018 12:35:56 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
They have buses in Mexico
With people carrying chickens and pigs and riding on the roof!
And those buses are painted wonderful colors that will make the whata-malans and Honda-rans feel right at home!!
Really pretty cheap since round trip coach coast to coast in US is about $600, probably less that keeping even one of them here for just a week. Also flying coach is comfortable enough, compared to how they usually travel, that many might voluntarily take the ride.
_________________________________________________
Round trip to Tegucigalpa is twice that, more depending on the flight. But You’re right, it’s cheaper than keeping them in the US, and many may go for the ride if they see it as the “last stage out of Yuma” for getting back home.
They don’t need a round-trip ticket—only one-way.
One way by boat or boxcar.
“The deal, which would overhaul US border policy”
No way! This statement opens up more
push back from the ultra-liberal judges
from the 9th circus. Trump threatened
to shut the border down unless Mexico
is held responsible. This statement is
completely false. Trump can’t overhaul
border policy without approval from
Congress. He’s already tried that, only
to be shot down.
They don’t need a round-trip ticket—only one-way.
__________________________________________________
You are right. But the plane has to come back. Even empty, it costs a lot to fly a plane.
One way by boat or boxcar.
___________________________________________
By boat might be an option, if it left from the Gulf of Mexico. Boxcar? You can’t send someone by boxcar to a country that has no rail system. lol
Cheaper to just let Mexico handle the problem by deporting only them across the border. I admit I don’t know the laws about deportation, but if an illegal alien from Rwanda or Nepal is deported, is it the obligation of the offended country to give them free passage home? I would think it should be the responsibility of the alien’s consulate to determine how their citizens get back.
While there could be problems with this deal, a big plus is that it makes a big disincentive for future “caravaners” to embark on the same type of invasion.
One problem I see is that the “asylum seekers” could gin up more reasons why they are eligible for asylum now that they are in Mexico and could be mistreated by the locals.
“We are giving them a loophole to claim they don’t feel safe in Mexico?”
That won’t work
They have been offered jobs and amnesty in Mexico.
Mexico is a ‘safe’ country for them to emigrate in.
These facts also make it not possible for them to come to the United States
International law says people escaping from a brutal country must ask for and accept amnesty in the first safe country into which they pass.
As we’ve discussed in the past, the incoming far-left President is actually more amenable on immigration than previous administrations.
Partly because he’d rather have the underclass (encouraged to leave by former PAN Presidents) back in Mexico to support his leftist party.
It’s too bad we didn’t retaliate against scum like Vicente Fox by emptying out every prison in America and giving them a free pass to Mexico. He thought it was fine and dandy to dump their criminals on us. Fair’s fair.
Good points. Let’s hope it won’t work.
International law says people escaping from a brutal country must ask for and accept amnesty in the first safe country into which they pass.
_____________________________________________
I’m not sure how you are defining “amnesty”, but the UN Protocol of 1951 and the Revised Protocol of 1967 define international law in this matter, and they don’t say that. The rule you’re citing applies only in cases of those seeking refugee status, not amnesty nor asylum. “Asylum” and “refugee” status are two entirely different things. ANYONE can apply for asylum in ANY COUNTRY he chooses; just get to that country’s consulate and present his case.
These caravan people do not qualify for refugee status, and though they are allowed to apply for asylum it’s very doubtful it will be approved. Poverty and insecurity at home are not normally reasons to grant asylum.
Tony’s describing California today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.