Border Patrol Is Detaining Migrants in ‘a Human Dog Pound’

[Nova Cyberia]

Yes, I know. Just standing down the road from it must truly be heart-wrenching.

Apparently so.

You haven't actually demonstrated that she was "faking" it. You're just being cynical, and cynicism is not proof.

I saw no tears and no real reason for her to be crying at the prospect of being denied access to a facility that she probably knew beforehand that she'd be denied access to.

You really have garbage taste in TV shows.

Thanks for the constructive feedback on my personal tastes in cultural products. Do you actually want to start a dick-waving contest on our preferences or is this just another one of your infantile attempts to piss outside of the jar and derail the discussion?

You replied with a rather pointless jab that contributed nothing to the discussion so I did the same.

Cause and effect, Liri. Most people learn this when they're toddlers. You, on the other hand, haven'f.

And yet here I go.

Yeah, there you go, trying to salvage an argument built on a lie.

And what a terrible lie it was.

"Nitpicking"

I'm sorry, but is there a video?

Why are you asking me? You're the one who started this hilarious tangent, so I assume that you'd be well-informed on it enough to know if there is.

Yes, why would anyone expect you to know anything?

[Liriena]

If you don't want to be stereotyped, stop being a stereotype.

Honk honk ;3

Coming from someone who goes out of their way to be a gay stereotype.

Oh, yeah. Have I mentioned that I've dated drag queens and love Broadway shows? So? What else have you got?

Because you can't embarrass me by calling me stereotypically gay. But it sure looks like me calling argumentation "boomery" and treating it as such does get you a bit aggressive... and personal.

I mean, my comments were about your political argumentation... and your emotional response is to try and make me feel bad for my sexual orientation and personal behavior? That's not very cash money of you.

[Nova Cyberia]

Coming from someone who goes out of their way to be a gay stereotype.

Oh, yeah. Have I mentioned that I've dated drag queens and love Broadway shows? So? What else have you got?

Because you can't embarrass me by calling me stereotypically gay. But it sure looks like me calling argumentation "boomery" and treating it as such does get you a bit aggressive... and personal.

I mean, my comments were about your political argumentation... and your emotional response is to try and make me feel bad for my sexual orientation and personal behavior? That's not very cash money of you.

Well, you accused me of being a stereotype... which is funny considering that you, ya know, do try and be rather stereotypically and flamboyantly gay.

It's not personal. It's a fact. It's not an attempt to make you feel bad for being gay. Plenty of people are gay and don't act stereotypically gay. But you go out of your way to do so.

And it's funny.

[Liriena]

Apparently so.

You haven't actually demonstrated that she was "faking" it. You're just being cynical, and cynicism is not proof.

I saw no tears and no real reason for her to be crying at the prospect of being denied access to a facility that she probably knew beforehand that she'd be denied access to.

It's almost as if different people can have different emotional reactions in different circumstances without any of them being insincere, because people are... different from one another.

And that's without getting into how "I think she's faking her emotional reaction" is a total nothingburger of an argument in a political debate. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to the legitimacy of how ICE and CBP has dealt with refugees, or of her arguments against it. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to whether she is correct on an empirical and logical level.

She's not an actress on a stage and this is not a thread for theatre critics, so whether you personally find her "performance" believable is kind of irrelevant to the overarching issue at hand.

Thanks for the constructive feedback on my personal tastes in cultural products. Do you actually want to start a dick-waving contest on our preferences or is this just another one of your infantile attempts to piss outside of the jar and derail the discussion?

You replied with a rather pointless jab that contributed nothing to the discussion so I did the same.

Cause and effect, Liri. Most people learn this when they're toddlers. You, on the other hand, haven'f.

Imagine being so personally vitriolic over someone making a jokey comment about how your nitpicking of a politician's gestures in a series of photos is reminiscent of a show revolving entirely around that sort of thing.

Yeah, there you go, trying to salvage an argument built on a lie.

And what a terrible lie it was.

I said nothing about the gravity of the lie. But I'd have imagined that a rational debater such as yourself would understand that, big or small, relying on a lie is no way to construct an argument.

Why are you asking me? You're the one who started this hilarious tangent, so I assume that you'd be well-informed on it enough to know if there is.

Yes, why would anyone expect you to know anything?

Geesh, forgive me for expecting you to follow your own curiosity.

[Saphria]

Kinda dumb to treat symptoms instead of going after the disease though. Government should ask "why do people illegally immigrate?" and address that reason instead of putting more resources towards walls and concentration camps.

Your “concentration camp” appeal to emotion through false equivalency BS will not work on me.

We already know why they illegally immigrate.

But most those issues we cannot solve short of outright annexing the places in question.
It is mostly a matter bad governments. But we cannot impose good governance short of annexation.

If you cannot cure the disease, treating the symptoms is the only thing you can do.

It's really not a false equivalency.

A concentration camp is when you confine a group people to a small area against their will with inadequate resources... that's sorta what we're doing at the border.

You can work with other governments to sort out their immigration and deploy resources to tackle drug problems, human trafficking, etc.

[Liriena]

Oh, yeah. Have I mentioned that I've dated drag queens and love Broadway shows? So? What else have you got?

Because you can't embarrass me by calling me stereotypically gay. But it sure looks like me calling argumentation "boomery" and treating it as such does get you a bit aggressive... and personal.

I mean, my comments were about your political argumentation... and your emotional response is to try and make me feel bad for my sexual orientation and personal behavior? That's not very cash money of you.

Well, you accused me of being a stereotype...

Actually, you kinda did that to yourself.

Credit where it's due, though: at least you used a meme spread by some FB grandma rather than an Infowars article.

Yes, Liri, we all fit your low-effort stereotypes.

I just happened to agree with you. :^)

If you don't want to be stereotyped, stop being a stereotype.

Honk honk ;3

which is funny considering that you, ya know, do try and be rather stereotypically and flamboyantly gay.

Funny how? What's the set-up? How does the punchline work?

Clowns are supposed to be talented, dude. Your making Honkler look bad.

[Nova Cyberia]

I saw no tears and no real reason for her to be crying at the prospect of being denied access to a facility that she probably knew beforehand that she'd be denied access to.

It's almost as if different people can have different emotional reactions in different circumstances without any of them being insincere, because people are... different from one another.

And that's without getting into how "I think she's faking her emotional reaction" is a total nothingburger of an argument in a political debate. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to the legitimacy of how ICE and CBP has dealt with refugees, or of her arguments against it. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to whether she is correct on an empirical and logical level.

She's not an actress on a stage and this is not a thread for theatre critics, so whether you personally find her "performance" believable is kind of irrelevant to the overarching issue at hand.

Well, she deliberately staged a photo-op of her """"""""""crying"""""""""" in front of a detainment facility to try and win political points.

I don't know why you find it odd that people consider it worth criticizing.

You replied with a rather pointless jab that contributed nothing to the discussion so I did the same.

Cause and effect, Liri. Most people learn this when they're toddlers. You, on the other hand, haven'f.

Imagine being so personally vitriolic over someone making a jokey comment about how your nitpicking of a politician's gestures in a series of photos is reminiscent of a show revolving entirely around that sort of thing.

Ah, yes, how vitriolic of be to jab someone who jabbed me.

Would you say you're a victim now?

And what a terrible lie it was.

I said nothing about the gravity of the lie. But I'd have imagined that a rational debater such as yourself would understand that, big or small, relying on a lie is no way to construct an argument.

Of course. But I'm not going to grovel and beg for the forgiveness of someone who's incapable of actually debating in good faith. I just march on.

Yes, why would anyone expect you to know anything?

Geesh, forgive me for expecting you to follow your own curiosity.

Well, it was a pretty silly question.

[Nova Cyberia]

Well, you accused me of being a stereotype...

Actually, you kinda did that to yourself.

Credit where it's due, though: at least you used a meme spread by some FB grandma rather than an Infowars article.

Yes, Liri, we all fit your low-effort stereotypes.

I just happened to agree with you. :^)

If you don't want to be stereotyped, stop being a stereotype.

Honk honk ;3

which is funny considering that you, ya know, do try and be rather stereotypically and flamboyantly gay.

Funny how? What's the set-up? How does the punchline work?

Clowns are supposed to be talented, dude. Your making Honkler look bad.

The point of Honkler is to laugh at life. Your tryhard flamboyant gayness is an aspect of life that I laugh at. The idea that someone would deliberately want to be a stereotype yet criticize others for doing the same is pretty hilarious.

[Liriena]

It's almost as if different people can have different emotional reactions in different circumstances without any of them being insincere, because people are... different from one another.

And that's without getting into how "I think she's faking her emotional reaction" is a total nothingburger of an argument in a political debate. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to the legitimacy of how ICE and CBP has dealt with refugees, or of her arguments against it. The sincerity of her emotional reaction is irrelevant to whether she is correct on an empirical and logical level.

She's not an actress on a stage and this is not a thread for theatre critics, so whether you personally find her "performance" believable is kind of irrelevant to the overarching issue at hand.

Well, she deliberately staged a photo-op of her """"""""""crying"""""""""" in front of a detainment facility to try and win political points.

Yes, it's almost as if prominent politicians want to be seen by the public when they are doing their job, specially if it's issues they care about. You know, letting their voters know that they're representing them.

I don't know why you find it odd that people consider it worth criticizing.

I'd imagine that "politician gets pictures taken of them reacting to something" is a common enough phenomenon that you wouldn't find it noteworthy when yet another one does it. Why is it noteworthy that she went to a concentration camp and had her pictures reacting to it taken?

Imagine being so personally vitriolic over someone making a jokey comment about how your nitpicking of a politician's gestures in a series of photos is reminiscent of a show revolving entirely around that sort of thing.

Ah, yes, how vitriolic of be to jab someone who jabbed me.

Would you say you're a victim now?

Of course not. You've made it quite clear that you are the victim here and I respect your preference.

I said nothing about the gravity of the lie. But I'd have imagined that a rational debater such as yourself would understand that, big or small, relying on a lie is no way to construct an argument.

Of course. But I'm not going to grovel and beg for the forgiveness of someone who's incapable of actually debating in good faith. I just march on.

You could have actually admitted that your source was wrong, though. And you didn't. You just deflected, again and again.

Geesh, forgive me for expecting you to follow your own curiosity.

Well, it was a pretty silly question.

Yes, "is there video?" was a pretty silly question to ask on your part.

[Liriena]

Actually, you kinda did that to yourself.

Credit where it's due, though: at least you used a meme spread by some FB grandma rather than an Infowars article.

Yes, Liri, we all fit your low-effort stereotypes.

I just happened to agree with you. :^)

If you don't want to be stereotyped, stop being a stereotype.

Honk honk ;3

Funny how? What's the set-up? How does the punchline work?

Clowns are supposed to be talented, dude. Your making Honkler look bad.

The point of Honkler is to laugh at life.

But you're not laughing. You are whinging and lashing out at people.

Absurdism deserves better.

Your tryhard flamboyant gayness is an aspect of life that I laugh at. The idea that someone would deliberately want to be a stereotype yet criticize others for doing the same is pretty hilarious.

I didn't criticise you for being stereotypical, though. I only offered helpful advise since you seemed to be a bit upset at supposedly being stereotyped (even though, again, I didn't stereotype you, but you did it to yourself instead) :^)

Also, very weird of you to assume that my supposedly "flamboyant gayness" is "tryhard". What makes you think I "try"? You think I force myself to like Broadway shows or something? You're being really odd about this... on top of the oddity of your fixation on my "flamboyant gayness", that is.

[Novus America]

Your “concentration camp” appeal to emotion through false equivalency BS will not work on me.

We already know why they illegally immigrate.

But most those issues we cannot solve short of outright annexing the places in question.
It is mostly a matter bad governments. But we cannot impose good governance short of annexation.

If you cannot cure the disease, treating the symptoms is the only thing you can do.

It's really not a false equivalency.

A concentration camp is when you confine a group people to a small area against their will with inadequate resources... that's sorta what we're doing at the border.

You can work with other governments to sort out their immigration and deploy resources to tackle drug problems, human trafficking, etc.

Inadequate resources are completely irrelevant to whether or not it is a concentration camp.
Providing more resources does not make it less a concentration nor providing fewer make it more of one.

The average length of immigration detention is a mere 30 days. They get a hearing, and they can leave whenever they want if they want to go back to their home country. They are given a hearing and are not being held based on race, religion or ethnicity.

So no, regardless of the legitimate concerns regarding lack of resources (which is irrelevant to the concentration camp argument) they are not concentration camps, you just use the term to attempt to trigger an emotional response.

Now away from the semantics and on to the substantive:
Providing resources to a corrupt government does not make it less corrupt.
We can only “help” to the extent they want to be helped, which is not enough to do much of anything. They will gladly to take money (to steal) but not accept accountability.

We have no enforcement powers, and without enforcement you get nowhere.

We cannot arrest corrupt members of the governments, impose the rule of law, write new laws for them, etc, short of outright annexation.

Their is no other feasible policy to solve the fundamental problems in these places.

[Nova Cyberia]

Well, she deliberately staged a photo-op of her """"""""""crying"""""""""" in front of a detainment facility to try and win political points.

Yes, it's almost as if prominent politicians want to be seen by the public when they are doing their job, specially if it's issues they care about. You know, letting their voters know that they're representing them.

Ah, yes. Going to a facility for the express purpose of virtue-signalling really is the job of a Congresswoman.

I don't know why you find it odd that people consider it worth criticizing.

I'd imagine that "politician gets pictures taken of them reacting to something" is a common enough phenomenon that you wouldn't find it noteworthy when yet another one does it. Why is it noteworthy that she went to a concentration camp and had her pictures reacting to it taken?

Were there groups of starving, skeletal children reaching through the holes in the fence begging for food?

Ah, yes, how vitriolic of be to jab someone who jabbed me.

Would you say you're a victim now?

Of course not. You've made it quite clear that you are the victim here and I respect your preference.

I'm not the one pretending like someone's being rude to me for no justifiable reason.

Of course. But I'm not going to grovel and beg for the forgiveness of someone who's incapable of actually debating in good faith. I just march on.

You could have actually admitted that your source was wrong, though. And you didn't. You just deflected, again and again.

I have no interest in appeasing you.

Well, it was a pretty silly question.

Yes, "is there video?" was a pretty silly question to ask on your part.

I know, I already explained why.

[Nova Cyberia]

The point of Honkler is to laugh at life.

But you're not laughing. You are whinging and lashing out at people.

Absurdism deserves better.

Should I have added the necessary number of lmao's in order to be considered "laughing" on the internet?

Your tryhard flamboyant gayness is an aspect of life that I laugh at. The idea that someone would deliberately want to be a stereotype yet criticize others for doing the same is pretty hilarious.

I didn't criticise you for being stereotypical, though. I only offered helpful advise since you seemed to be a bit upset at supposedly being stereotyped (even though, again, I didn't stereotype you, but you did it to yourself instead) :^)

Because I thought, as a self-respecting leftist, you'd be above stereotypes.

But I expected too much of you.

Also, very weird of you to assume that my supposedly "flamboyant gayness" is "tryhard". What makes you think I "try"? You think I force myself to like Broadway shows or something? You're being really odd about this... on top of the oddity of your fixation on my "flamboyant gayness", that is.

"The Fabulous Pope of NSG"

Yes, you're a tryhard. It's almost like a chemical reaction, you know? Right-wingers are big meanies to you so you act even more flamboyantly gay as if it's some sort of defense mechanism.

[Liriena]

Yes, it's almost as if prominent politicians want to be seen by the public when they are doing their job, specially if it's issues they care about. You know, letting their voters know that they're representing them.

Ah, yes. Going to a facility for the express purpose of virtue-signalling really is the job of a Congresswoman.

Your obsession with the term "virtue signalling" asides... umm... yeah? It's part of their job. If you dislike that, that's valid, but then you'd have to criticise all politicians who ever do photo-ops, not just AOC.

I'd imagine that "politician gets pictures taken of them reacting to something" is a common enough phenomenon that you wouldn't find it noteworthy when yet another one does it. Why is it noteworthy that she went to a concentration camp and had her pictures reacting to it taken?

Were there groups of starving, skeletal children reaching through the holes in the fence begging for food?

You really need to work on your deflections.

Of course not. You've made it quite clear that you are the victim here and I respect your preference.

I'm not the one pretending like someone's being rude to me for no justifiable reason.

You are a victim fighting back. Got it.

You could have actually admitted that your source was wrong, though. And you didn't. You just deflected, again and again.

I have no interest in appeasing you.

Admitting you were wrong is not "appeasement".

Yes, "is there video?" was a pretty silly question to ask on your part.

I know, I already explained why.

"Do it for me otherwise you're stupid" is not an explanation.

[Liriena]

But you're not laughing. You are whinging and lashing out at people.

Absurdism deserves better.

Should I have added the necessary number of lmao's in order to be considered "laughing" on the internet?

It might have helped. Never underestimate the power of a well-placed lmao.

I didn't criticise you for being stereotypical, though. I only offered helpful advise since you seemed to be a bit upset at supposedly being stereotyped (even though, again, I didn't stereotype you, but you did it to yourself instead) :^)

Because I thought, as a self-respecting leftist, you'd be above stereotypes.

But I expected too much of you.

I'm so sorry.

Also, very weird of you to assume that my supposedly "flamboyant gayness" is "tryhard". What makes you think I "try"? You think I force myself to like Broadway shows or something? You're being really odd about this... on top of the oddity of your fixation on my "flamboyant gayness", that is.

"The Fabulous Pope of NSG"

Ah, yeah, that's been there for, like, a while. I like it, but please do keep going off.

Yes, you're a tryhard. It's almost like a chemical reaction, you know? Right-wingers are big meanies to you so you act even more flamboyantly gay as if it's some sort of defense mechanism.

Wow, thanks for the dollar-store psychoanalysis. You saved me a couple grand.

[Nova Cyberia]

Ah, yes. Going to a facility for the express purpose of virtue-signalling really is the job of a Congresswoman.

Your obsession with the term "virtue signalling" asides... umm... yeah? It's part of their job. If you dislike that, that's valid, but then you'd have to criticise all politicians who ever do photo-ops, not just AOC.

Yes, why wouldn't I criticize other politicians when responding to Vass's post which specifically talks about AOC?

Were there groups of starving, skeletal children reaching through the holes in the fence begging for food?

You really need to work on your deflections.

You really need to learn what "deflection" is, because you regurgitate the term so much it's gotten ridiculous.

I'm not the one pretending like someone's being rude to me for no justifiable reason.

You are a victim fighting back. Got it.

Snarkiness in debate isn't really enough to make someone a victim, Liri.

Though I'm sure this is a new concept to you, given how you act like people are rude to you for no justifiable reason lmao

I have no interest in appeasing you.

Admitting you were wrong is not "appeasement".

Certain aspects were incorrect, which I already admitted. But the overall point of her fake crying isn't though. And I can tell it isn't because the best defense you can muster is some pathetic appeal to other politicians doing it.

I know, I already explained why.

"Do it for me otherwise you're stupid" is not an explanation.

It was a rhetorical question. There is no video.

I kept thinking you might realize that.

That was one thing I will certainly admit I was wrong about.

[Nova Cyberia]

Should I have added the necessary number of lmao's in order to be considered "laughing" on the internet?

It might have helped. Never underestimate the power of a well-placed lmao.

Usually no one ever actually laughs when they use it, though.

Because I thought, as a self-respecting leftist, you'd be above stereotypes.

But I expected too much of you.

I'm so sorry.

"The Fabulous Pope of NSG"

Ah, yeah, that's been there for, like, a while. I like it, but please do keep going off.

Yes, you're a tryhard. It's almost like a chemical reaction, you know? Right-wingers are big meanies to you so you act even more flamboyantly gay as if it's some sort of defense mechanism.

Wow, thanks for the dollar-store psychoanalysis. You saved me a couple grand.

Well, I do try and help people when I can.

[Liriena]

Your obsession with the term "virtue signalling" asides... umm... yeah? It's part of their job. If you dislike that, that's valid, but then you'd have to criticise all politicians who ever do photo-ops, not just AOC.

Yes, why wouldn't I criticize other politicians when responding to Vass's post which specifically talks about AOC?

Just to clarify, do you oppose photo-ops for all politicians, including Republicans? Including Trump?

You really need to work on your deflections.

You really need to learn what "deflection" is, because you regurgitate the term so much it's gotten ridiculous.

So what's your actual answer to my questions?

Admitting you were wrong is not "appeasement".

Certain aspects were incorrect, which I already admitted. But the overall point of her fake crying isn't though. And I can tell it isn't because the best defense you can muster is some pathetic appeal to other politicians doing it.

Except for all the other things I said and which you keep glossing over just so you can waste my time with jabs and personal comments and crying "stop stereotyping meeeeee you flamboyant gay!!!"

"Do it for me otherwise you're stupid" is not an explanation.

It was a rhetorical question. There is no video.

So... more filler for the nothingburger?

Man, your snark is doing all of the heavy lifting right now.

[Liriena]

Well, I do try and help people when I can.

Your virtue signalling was much appreciated.

[Nova Cyberia]

Yes, why wouldn't I criticize other politicians when responding to Vass's post which specifically talks about AOC?

Just to clarify, do you oppose photo-ops for all politicians, including Republicans? Including Trump?

Yes. I dislike the idea of them.

And I dislike them even moreso when they're rather blatantly misleading like hers.

But yes, I oppose them all.

There, now could you cease you your deflections? Because this is what actual deflection looks like.

So what's your actual answer to my questions?

See above.

Except for all the other things I said and which you keep glossing over just so you can waste my time with jabs and personal comments and crying "stop stereotyping meeeeee you flamboyant gay!!!"

I don't care about being stereotyped.

I just enjoy watching hypocrisy in action.

So... more filler for the nothingburger?

Man, your snark is doing all of the heavy lifting right now.

You seem lost.

[Nova Cyberia]

Well, I do try and help people when I can.

Your virtue signalling was much appreciated.

Your snark is about as low-effort as one would expect.

[Liriena]

Your virtue signalling was much appreciated.

Your snark is about as low-effort as one would expect.

So you're an acting coach, a psychoanalyst and a comedy critic?

Wow... no wonder you rely on memes to make your points. You're multitasking too much.

[Liriena]

Except for all the other things I said and which you keep glossing over just so you can waste my time with jabs and personal comments and crying "stop stereotyping meeeeee you flamboyant gay!!!"

I don't care about being stereotyped.

I just enjoy watching hypocrisy in action.

What's the hypocrisy, exactly?

[Nova Cyberia]

Your snark is about as low-effort as one would expect.

So you're an acting coach, a psychoanalyst and a comedy critic?

Wow... no wonder you rely on memes to make your points. You're multitasking too much.

Yeah, it can be difficult sometimes.

[Nova Cyberia]

I don't care about being stereotyped.

I just enjoy watching hypocrisy in action.

What's the hypocrisy, exactly?

One who supposedly opposes stereotypes trying to invoke them in a debate lol

But I get it. Anything to own the right-wingers.