Largest single group of migrants ever tunnels under border wall in Arizona, says Border Protection

[sangha]

[h=1]Largest single group of migrants ever tunnels under border wall in Arizona, says Border Protection[/h]

[h=2]A group of 376, including nearly 200 minors, was arrested.[/h]

[FONT=&quot]The largest single group of asylum seekers ever to cross into the U.S. tunneled beneath the border wall near San Luis, Arizona, on Monday, voluntarily turning themselves into Customs and Border Protection, according to the agency.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Migrants can be seen marching toward Border Patrol agents by the hundreds, according to video obtained by ABC News. Smugglers dug a series of seven holes, only a few feet long beneath the steel border fence, with hundreds going beneath the wall and a smaller number clambering over it, according to CBP.

https://abcnews.go.com/beta-story-c...tunnels-border-wall-arizona/story?id=60462672[/FONT]
​

Maybe Trump should build a wall to protect the wall from being breached

because walls work!!

 

[ajn678]

I love how they call them asylum seekers and then talk about how they are in fact illegally entering the country by going through tunnels. Or maybe they recently changed the legal ways of coming to America and I didn't know about it.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I love how they call them asylum seekers and then talk about how they are in fact illegally entering the country by going through tunnels. Or maybe they recently changed the legal ways of coming to America and I didn't know about it.

They entered illegally but they are not illegal immigrants. They aren’t any kind of immigrant. They are asylum seekers. Immigrants are here to stay. Asylum seekers who are granted asylum can be returned to their homeland once the danger they fled is gone.

 

[Grand Mal]

I love how they call them asylum seekers and then talk about how they are in fact illegally entering the country by going through tunnels. Or maybe they recently changed the legal ways of coming to America and I didn't know about it.

Is 'asylum seeker' a legal term? Or could you seek asylum by tunneling under a wall? Story says they marched into the hands of border agents instead of scattering.
Maybe the word is a trigger. Is that the case? If they say they're seeking asylum it brings an uncomfortable focus onto the stage, makes things less black-and-white.

 

[Nickyjo]

They entered illegally but they are not illegal immigrants. They aren’t any kind of immigrant. They are asylum seekers. Immigrants are here to stay. Asylum seekers who are granted asylum can be returned to their homeland once the danger they fled is gone.

Unless the law has changed since I worked in the field, an asylee is on a track to permanent residence status over a period of years. If one has been granted withholding of deportation, which demands a higher level of proof, that status can be revoked if country conditions change. In general, both designations are made at the same time by immigration judges. Asylum officers can only grant asylum, as best I know.

Anyone know if this is still the case?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Unless the law has changed since I worked in the field, an asylee is on a track to permanent residence status over a period of years. If one has been granted withholding of deportation, which demands a higher level of proof, that status can be revoked if country conditions change. In general, both designations are made at the same time by immigration judges. Asylum officers can only grant asylum, as best I know.

Anyone know if this is still the case?

An asylee can apply for a change of status after 1 year, but it isn’t automatic. And they still have to meet the asylum seeker standard at the time they apply, so if the danger they fled has disputed in that time (not likely in most cases) then they don’t qualify. But at no point is an asylum seeker an illegal immigrant.

https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/asylees

 

[CriticalThought]

So if we spent $5 more billion it would have prevented this from happening?

 

[ajn678]

They entered illegally but they are not illegal immigrants. They aren’t any kind of immigrant. They are asylum seekers. Immigrants are here to stay. Asylum seekers who are granted asylum can be returned to their homeland once the danger they fled is gone.

No, they entered illegally, which makes them illegal immigrants. There are proper ways to enter when seeking asylum. They chose to not follow the process.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

No, they entered illegally, which makes them illegal immigrants. There are proper ways to enter when seeking asylum. They chose to not follow the process.

Asylum seekers aren’t immigrants.

 

[Excon]

They entered illegally but they are not illegal immigrants.

No, they are illegal aliens.

They aren’t any kind of immigrant. They are asylum seekers.

Bs. They are actually illegal aliens coming here as economic immigrants by lying about about seeking asylum.

 

[Nickyjo]

An asylee can apply for a change of status after 1 year, but it isn’t automatic. And they still have to meet the asylum seeker standard at the time they apply, so if the danger they fled has disputed in that time (not likely in most cases) then they don’t qualify. But at no point is an asylum seeker an illegal immigrant.

https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/asylees

Only quarrel with that is a technical one. As I remember it, in immigration court the alien conceded “deportability,” in essence saying s/he was illegal, but used an asylum application as a defense against deportation. Don’t know if that is still the case.

But if one steps back to look at this, doesn’t it in some ways seem strange. Yes, borders have been around for a few hundred years, as have been nations. But aren’t we talking about lines in the sand? — lines that great powers never respected when they wished to invade? The Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Grenada, et al. didn’t have their borders respected when the US decided to invade. And Russia acted much the same. Nowadays capital can cross borders easily, history shows at the point of a gun if necessary, to get a greater return on investment. It pays its own coyote’s, it’s smugglers, officials of other countries to allow its entry, at times in violation of local laws. Why can’t labor? Commie talk, I know, but what is the response to that argument? Why can’t Juan seek a better return on his investment of labor just like a Fortune 500 company that invests in Juan’s country for the same reason?

 

[Barnacle]

Maybe Trump should build a wall to protect the wall from being breached
because walls work!!

Maybe Trump needs to sign a few EO on behalf of the EPA.

"Environmental red tape stalls border agents trying to fill drug-smuggler tunnels"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/en...r-agents-trying-to-fill-drug-smuggler-tunnels