April 10, 2014

Undocumented Unworkers pouring across Rio Grande

All this Obama as Deporter-in-Chief talk doesn't seem to impress actual illegal aliens, who are becoming more blatant about border-crossing:

From the NYT:
Lured by Hope of U.S. Asylum, Migrants Strain Border Security 

HIDALGO, Tex. — Border Patrol agents in olive uniforms stood in broad daylight on the banks of the Rio Grande, while on the Mexican side smugglers pulled up in vans and unloaded illegal migrants. 
The agents were clearly visible on that recent afternoon, but the migrants were undeterred. Mainly women and children, 45 in all, they crossed the narrow river on the smugglers’ rafts, scrambled up the bluff and turned themselves in, signaling a growing challenge for the immigration authorities. 

I know you are supposed to notice differences between men and women and children, and just call them all Undocumented Workers, but when the illegal aliens were mostly men decades ago, they didn't reproduce anchor babies as much. Women illegal aliens are anchor baby generating machines. And then there are their already-born kids who are tax sinks.
After six years of steep declines across the Southwest, illegal crossings have soared in South Texas while remaining low elsewhere. The Border Patrol made more than 90,700 apprehensions in the Rio Grande Valley in the past six months, a 69 percent increase over last year. 
The migrants are no longer primarily Mexican laborers. Instead they are Central Americans, including many families with small children and youngsters without their parents, who risk a danger-filled journey across Mexico. Driven out by deepening poverty

 Is there evidence that poverty is deepening in Central America? Are they fleeing hunger?
Mexico, Venezuela, Guatemala Among 10 Fattest Countries

Back to the NYT:
but also by rampant gang violence

the solution to Central American gang violence is clearly to import Central American lads into the U.S.
, increasing numbers of migrants caught here seek asylum, setting off lengthy legal procedures to determine whether they qualify. 
The new migrant flow, largely from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, is straining resources and confounding Obama administration security strategies that work effectively in other regions. It is further complicating President Obama’s uphill push on immigration, fueling Republican arguments for more border security before any overhaul. 
With detention facilities, asylum offices and immigration courts overwhelmed, enough migrants have been released temporarily in the United States that back home in Central America people have heard that those who make it to American soil have a good chance of staying. 
“Word has gotten out that we’re giving people permission and walking them out the door,” said Chris Cabrera, a Border Patrol agent who is vice president of the local of the National Border Patrol Council, the agents’ union. “So they’re coming across in droves.” 
In Mexican border cities like Reynosa, just across the river, migrants have become easy prey for Mexican drug cartels that have seized control of the human smuggling business, heightening perils for illegal crossers and security risks for the United States. 
At the Rio Grande that afternoon, the smugglers calculatedly sent the migrants across at a point where the water is too shallow for Border Patrol boats that might have turned them back safely at the midriver boundary between the United States and Mexico. 
A Border Patrol chief, Raul Ortiz, watched in frustration from a helicopter overhead. “Somebody probably told them they’re going to get released,” he said. 
As agents booked them, the migrants waited quietly: a Guatemalan mother carrying a toddler with a baby bottle, another with an infant wrapped in blankets.

Undocumented workers each! Soon they'll be productive members of the work force.
A 9-year-old girl said she was traveling by herself, hoping to rejoin her mother and two brothers in Louisiana. But she did not know where in Louisiana they were. After a two-week journey from Honduras, her only connection to them was one telephone number on a scrap of paper. 
A Honduran woman said the group had followed the instructions of the Mexican smugglers. “They just told us to cross and start walking,” she said. 
But whereas Mexicans can be swiftly returned by the Border Patrol, migrants from noncontiguous countries must be formally deported and flown home by other agencies. Even though federal flights are leaving South Texas every day, Central Americans are often detained longer. 
Women with children are detained separately. But because the nearest facility for “family units” is in Pennsylvania, families apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley are likely to be released while their cases proceed, a senior deportations official said. 
Minors without parents are turned over to the Department of Health and Human Services, which holds them in shelters that provide medical care and schooling and tries to send them to relatives in the United States. The authorities here are expecting 35,000 unaccompanied minors this year, triple the number two years ago. 
Under asylum law, border agents are required to ask migrants if they are afraid of returning to their countries. If the answer is yes, migrants must be detained until an immigration officer interviews them to determine if the fear is credible. If the officer concludes it is, the migrant can petition for asylum. An immigration judge will decide whether there is a “well-founded fear of persecution” based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion or “membership in a particular social group.” 
Immigration officials said they had set the bar intentionally low for the initial “credible fear” test, to avoid turning away a foreigner in danger. In 2013, 85 percent of fear claims were found to be credible, according to federal figures.
As more Central Americans have come, fear claims have spiked, more than doubling in 2013 to 36,026 from 13,931 in 2012. 
The chances have not improved much to win asylum in the end, however. In 2012, immigration courts approved 34 percent of asylum petitions from migrants facing deportation — 2,888 cases nationwide. Many Central Americans say they are fleeing extortion or forced recruitment by criminal gangs. But immigration courts have rarely recognized those threats as grounds for asylum. 
Yet because of immense backlogs in the courts — with the average wait for a hearing currently at about 19 months — claiming fear of return has allowed some Central Americans to prolong their time in the United States.
At the big immigration detention center at Port Isabel, which serves much of the Rio Grande Valley, half of about 1,100 detainees at any given time are asylum seekers, officials said. With the asylum system already stretched, the nearest officers are in Houston, doing interviews by video conference. In 2013, the closest immigration court, in Harlingen, was swamped with new cases, becoming even more backlogged. 
Detention beds fill up, and migrants deemed to present no security risk are released under supervision, officials said, with their next court hearing often more than a year away.

Bye-bye! Granted, it would be even nicer to have an Uncle Ruslan married to the daughter of a CIA deep stater to pull strings for you, but it's still pretty easy to get Lost in America and have an anchor baby or three before anybody finds you.


Anonymous said...

Citizenism is over Steve, every undocumented worker is an infantryman available for the other side in Civil War II.


Anonymous said...

Undocumented Democrats. Watch for a fast blanket pardon to allow them to vote this November.

Anonymous said...

It is racist to notice things

Chicago said...

Illegals should be returned to the country from where they entered which in this case is Mexico. The Mexicans would take a different attitude were they forced to support all those migrants on their soil, housing and feeding them. Mexico has police and army forces that they could use but don't. They are passing them right on through. The time has been long overdue to crack down on Mexico. If we're hindered by being signatories to international treaties regarding the handling of supposed refugees then just unilaterally abrogate them. National survival trumps being a member of some suicide pact.

Ed said...

Word is Obama is thinking of acting unilaterally by severely reducing deportations. If an illegal has a kid in the USA or is the parent of a potential DREAMER they won't be deported.

He'd probably let criminals walk too but in this regard he's hamstrung by a strong Clinton Era law.

The funny thing is these measures are being formulated with the hopes of goosing up the Latino vote.

How much the Latino vote can help the likes of Mark Pryor or Landrieu is anyone's guess. However I suspect judging by the tone of the comments on the NY Times of late following immigration stories, the Dems may want to start concerning themselves about defections.

countenance said...

Ed wrote:

Word is Obama is thinking of acting unilaterally by severely reducing deportations.

Oh no, if he "unilaterally acts," the two illegals a year that are actually deported will be reduced to none.

Seriously, he's not going to make any big public action, because he knows how toxic this issue is and he doesn't want to paint big targets on the backs of Senate Democrats running for re-election.

How much the Latino vote can help the likes of Mark Pryor or Landrieu is anyone's guess.

ZOMG GREAT HISPANIC TIDAL WAVE LOL~! "Is anyone's guess." Actually it's my answer, not guess. In those two states, in a midterm election cycle, Hispanics will be virtual non-entities. Both of those states were red states in 2012 in the Presidential election, which is a high minority turnout kind of election cycle.

Bert said...

"How much the Latino vote can help the likes of Mark Pryor or Landrieu is anyone's guess."

Both of them are likely to survive thanks to very pitiful GOP candidates.

Auntie Analogue said...

Let me propose that, in view of our Dear Rulers' deployment of our armed forces to a great many foreign countries, the Department of Defense be renamed the Department of Offense.

Only after our troops are repatriated from the foreign countries they're now deployed in, and the troops are deployed along our southern border where they belong to, you know, DEFEND the United States, shall the Department of Offense revert to the name Department of Defense.

Well, if illegal aliens in their scores of millions can, so too can I dream that our Dear Rulers shall feel duty-bound to shut, fortify, and defend our southern border and to deport all illegal aliens.

Daniel said...

>>How much the Latino vote can help the likes of Mark Pryor or Landrieu is anyone's guess.

"Après moi, le déluge"

Anonymous said...

The "Reader's Picks" and "NYT's Picks" are sometimes hilariously divergent. I'm surprised the times allows the comparison. "What? Even the liberal readers of the NY times aren't praising the nation's apparent suicide?"

Mr. Anon said...

"Chicago said...

Illegals should be returned to the country from where they entered which in this case is Mexico. The Mexicans would take a different attitude were they forced to support all those migrants on their soil, housing and feeding them. Mexico has police and army forces that they could use but don't."

Good idea.

Anonymous said...

This is the Goths and the Alans pouring in over the Rhine in 309. Rome was sacked the next year.

PropagandistHacker said...

why is it so hard for americans to understand? Mass immigration depresses wages because it increases the supply of labor faster than the demand for labor? We want high wages, right?

Mass immigration increases the demand for housing faster than the supply of housing increases, which increases corporate profits. We want cheap housing, right?

Mass immigration diffuses and dilutes the common shared interests of the populace, thus making it harder for the populace to elect politicians that can represent those shared interests. When the populace has less well-defined common, shared interests, as is the case in a "diverse" nations, the politicians can then more easily sell out to the corporations. More diversity equals less democracy. We want more democracy, right?

Are these ideas all that hard to understand? Am I talking quantum physics here?

jody said...

OTMs on the rise, by design.

Anonymous said...


I don't get this.

If Pollard were held by Palestinians or Iranians, I can see how they might release him to get a deal from Israel, their enemy.

But Pollard is held by US, an ally of Israel. US showers Israel with aid and tons of favors year in and year out.
Israel has done whatever it wants, with US objecting to nothing.
So, how does it help matters for US to release Pollard?

Israel has always done whatever it wants with impunity, with US behind it 100%. So, why go 110% in doing favors for Israel?

This 'peace deal' has to just a ruse to have him released. Jews want him released, but without an excuse, it's gonna seem like Israel strong-arming the US. So, there's this fiction of the 'peace deal' to fool us that Pollard's release is linked to hope of peace.

Right, like the hope of no more illegal immigration after Reagan's mnesty in the 80s.

Fool me once fool me twice...

Anonymous said...

The only solution is to turn the clock back and for western nations to unilaterally tear up ALL the post 1945 UN so-called 'refugee accords' and go back to the settlement which existed prior to 1939 in which nation states reserved the absolute and unchallenged right to exclude whomsoever they wished based on whatever reason they wished - in other words a return to freedom.

Not much chance of that happening, I'm afraid, in today's feminized, 'equalities' obsessed world in which the entire political establishment is deeply entrenched , like a bad case of lice, in keeping the present, absurd status quo going.

In this contest, it's interesting to watch UKIP, the rising power in British politics, who advocate this precise return to national freedom and self-determination. Needless to say, the entire British establishment from the political class through to big business are conspiring their damndest to destroy them.

Ed said...

You can't make this stuff up. The top recommended comment for this story is a comment advocating for the end of automatic birthright citizenship.

It appears NY Times readership has been replaced by Fox News viewers. After all only mean racist Republicans object to illegal immigration and the enumerable benefits of diversity these migrants bestow.

Anonymous said...

I like it, across the Rio Grande means most of them are heading for Houston Texas since its growing leap and bounds, lots of construction jobs and restaurant jobs.

Anonymous said...

I told conservatives time and time again, if you don't want illegals just fine the companies that hire them. That means most can only get jobs selling junk or do day labor. i'm tired of the hycratelyy on the right that complains but never fines companies that much. Deportation and boots on the border only works so much. In fact 4 million illegals came under Bush's watch while only 1 million under Obama because the economy sucks.

Anonymous said...

Send them all to Houston Texas and then the Republican Party that has pay lip service would be interested in it instead of the usual lip service by the far right here.