Haitians not Going to Gitmo /or/ Hunter's Laptop

[Milchshake]

Ongoing in not learning from 2016: Online people that "know a lot of politics" got trolled by Politico NBC <again>.

DHS is not sending Haitians to Gitmo. The story was completely false. Ken Dilanian was the chief "No Collusion" cheerleader and helped Rudy launder the Hunter Biden story to Politico.

DHS told NBC News it is not sending "and will not send Haitian nationals being encountered at the southwest border" to the Guantanamo Bay facility.

NBC seems to be spinning it that their reporting changed the administration’s mind which is 100% false. I have yet to see a retraction or apology. No fact checking happened before they released this story.

Democracy dies in darkness, but also in mean tweets and reaction videos.

[JohnBrown1917]

So it does not even deny it exists.


Yeah, good luck with this.

[Biglog]

I think it would require misunderstanding and taking the NBC story completely out of context to be confused by this. The NBC story is very clear that this is a renewal for a contract that has been in place for 20 years already and is simply being renewed, and that it has nothing to do with Haitians at the border. Additionally, it wouldn't even make logical sense because there are 5000 Haitians at the border and the article mentions the facility only holds 120. And lastly, some of them have already been flown back to Haiti. They would be taken back to Haiti, not to a military base in a 3rd country that isn't remotely large enough to hold them. So I'd suggest rereading the article maybe again, because I see nothing inaccurate in it. NBC isn't claiming that Haitians were being sent to Guantanamo Bay. NBC is not saying they planned to and changed the administrations mind at all, not sure where you go that either. There isn't even 1 line in the entire article hinting at that. So I have no idea why you think NBC did anything wrong or would be expected to make a retraction.

All that does exist are some news articles from OTHER media outlets that took this NBC article out of context and used it in false reports, referring to this NBC article as a 'source' for claiming that Biden was planning to send Haitians to Cuba, which the NBC article definitely does not say. The article clearly explains that they are NOT being sent there and why. So those outlets claiming NBC said something they did not say in this article was the lie. Those are the orgs that passed incorrect information and should (but won't) put out a retraction, not NBC. There is nothing for NBC to retract.

This is the issue with getting news from fringe outlets that don't have any investigative journalist staff of their own at all. Many of them are like that today, FOX, OAN, Newsmax, hundreds of Youtube 'news' outlets, etc. Since they are just passing along what news they see in AP, Reuters, and putting a heavy political slant on it, it's easy for them to either intentionally or unintentionally get facts wrong like this. It happens much more often than with credible news orgs that actually do have investigative journalists, like AP, Reuters, ABC, NBC, etc. Any media outlet claiming to be a news organization but that doesn't have investigative journalists is NOT a news org. It is literally by definition not possible for them to be news, since they are not discovering any 'news' at all. They are just using talking heads that pass along news that other outlets have found after putting a thick political bias on it. That's also why they are quick and easy to setup since there is no staff of journalists. A person in their basement with a greenscreen and a decent webcam could duplicate OAN or Newsmax in about an hour.

[Elegiac]

I'd say "that's good news", but considering they're being sent back to Haiti instead of... you know... having their right to request asylum in the US respected, the improvement is fairly marginal.

Congratulations on Biden for not being as big a dick as he could have been, I guess.

[Mihalik]

Congratulations on Biden for not being as big a dick as he could have been, I guess.

When we give praise to someone for not being a complete psychopath.

America 2021. What a time to be alive!

[uuuhname]

this barely approaches acceptable. the only reason we don't let asylum seekers into this country always boils down to racism and xenophobia. the treatment of these people at the border is evidence of that.

[Yadryonych]

right to request asylum in the US

Not sure if such right exists, but there surely is US embassy on Haiti for that

[Edge-]

Not sure if such right exists

Literally yes. Anyone can legally present themselves to request asylum. You don't need to go through an embassy to make the request, and it's just as legal and valid wherever it is made.

[Yadryonych]

Literally yes. Anyone can legally present themselves to request asylum. You don't need to go through an embassy to make the request, and it's just as legal and valid wherever it is made.

So why would they go out of their way so much instead of just going to the embassy?

[Edge-]

So why would they go out of their way so much instead of just going to the embassy?

*sigh*

Are we going to have the same discussion about why desperate asylum seekers risk their lives and safety to travel great distances to get to the US to claim asylum because it's the less dangerous option than trying to pursue an asylum case in their home country?

Are we really gonna be doing this again as if we're new to this discussion that's been a thing for at least one decade just to air debunked talking points again?

[Alopex]

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/r...-united-states

To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States.

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/r...asylum-process

STEP ONE: Arrive in the U.S.

Gee, wonder what gives people the idea that they need to apply for asylum in the United States.

[Yadryonych]

Gee, wonder what gives people the idea that they need to apply for asylum in the United States.

The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad.

The United States government does, however, administer a refugee program for aliens outside the United States. To be eligible for consideration under the U.S. Refugee program, an applicant must meet the definition of a refugee: a person outside of his/her country of nationality or outside his/her habitual residence, who is unwilling or unable to return to that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion. In addition, he or she must be able to establish that he or she is not already firmly resettled in a foreign country and must fall within certain refugee processing priorities.

[Edge-]

The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad.

The United States government does, however, administer a refugee program for aliens outside the United States. To be eligible for consideration under the U.S. Refugee program, an applicant must meet the definition of a refugee: a person outside of his/her country of nationality or outside his/her habitual residence, who is unwilling or unable to return to that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion. In addition, he or she must be able to establish that he or she is not already firmly resettled in a foreign country and must fall within certain refugee processing priorities.

...and? People can still travel to the US and legally apply for asylum. Those who do view it as the less personally dangerous option to doing so at home.

Why are these very basic things that have been established for years/decades still so mysterious to some folks?

[Elegiac]

Not sure if such right exists

Considering you've been a participant in threads where Trump's immigration policies have been discussed and the aforementioned right to request asylum was a major feature of nearly every news article on the subject, you can take your feigned ignorance elsewhere and even more feigned concern for Haitian refugees elsewhere.

[Yadryonych]

People can still travel to the US and legally apply for asylum.

You can also enter a store or a library, but doing so through the front door during the public hours instead of through the window at night makes you a bit less of intruder

[Orange Joe]

You can also enter a store or a library, but doing so through the front door during the public hours instead of through the window at night makes you a bit less of intruder

Yeah cause we don't have a history of racist border patrol just turning people away rather than giving them due process.

[Elegiac]

You can also enter a store or a library

Neither of which are countries, so I'm curious why you're pulling out this crap analogy rather than just admitting you were wrong.

[Edge-]

You can also enter a store or a library, but doing so through the front door during the public hours instead of through the window at night makes you a bit less of intruder

Again: Anyone can present themselves inside the US or at the US border to request asylum, legally.

All you're doing is unironically repeating racist, xenophobic talking points that have long been debunked.

[Lanrefni]

Again: Anyone can present themselves inside the US or at the US border to request asylum, legally.

All you're doing is unironically repeating racist, xenophobic talking points that have long been debunked.

You're expecting better from someone in a country where a company had to apologize for a sushi ad because it had a black guy in it?

[PACOX]

ugh.

The only agency actually being truthful in this story is DHS. Everything else is partisan politics in regards to how US immigration actually works when its not used as a wedge issue on a ballot. Basically the powers of both parties are in cooperation on the issue put will point fingers, twist the truth, when politically advantageous. Kind of like on the other border when Republicans say "Obama put more kids in changes than Trump", a twisted truth in regards to policies that the establishment of both parties agree on.

The US does send Haitans to Guantanamo for 'processing', and those detainees migrants are 'free' to go. And the they aren't Haitans from the Mexican border, those are the dry facts. In practice, the migrants really aren't free to go. Legally, yes, practically, no. They are people with little to no resources picked up by the coast guard with no where to really go to if they decided to leave their holdings. They can't stay on the US said, can't get into the Cuban side, and have no means to get off the island. They have no food, water, or shelter. They are at the mercy of the holding facility. Moreso if you said you wanted to go, you'd probably have certain priviledges and amenties taken away as you were slowly processed out - depending on what adminsitration is in charge at the time.

Trump proposed that the facilities be opened up to migrants at the Mexico border. He didn't come up with that idea on his own, its because its an 'don't ask, don't tell' option on the books. Same reason it came up now. DHS said no then, DHS said no now. Really not because anyone is trying to be nice, but because doing so is a logistical nightmare in an already convuluted system.

NBC actually did its job but investigating and asking questions. They then reported everything they found. Theres no harm in making sure the government is being open and honest even if you agree with what they are doing.