Immigration Watch International (2): Venezuelans expelled from US to Mexico vow to re-enter illegally

Sunday, October 16, 2022

Venezuelans expelled from US to Mexico vow to re-enter illegally

A day after Angie Pina was expelled from the U.S. to Mexico under a new rule from President Biden for Venezuelan asylum-seekers, The Post witnessed as she illegally crossed back into America again Saturday.

Pina claims she first stepped foot on US soil on Wednesday morning, before President Biden announced Mexico had agreed to take Venezuelans seeking asylum who had been rejected from the US.

In hopes of discouraging illegal crossings at the border, the Biden Administration announced it will grant 24,000 Venezuelans humanitarian entry if they apply online and arrive via air — rather by crossing the land border as hundreds of thousands have been doing, with El Paso alone recording up to 2,100 migrants in a single day.

Pina was held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in El Paso for a day and a half before she learned she and dozens of other Venezuelan women in the same holding cell would be sent back to Mexico.

“It was a crisis — we were all yelling and sobbing,” she said.

“One lady led us all in prayer, but that’s when reality set in. They never told us why we were being sent back but some Venezuelan men who crossed behind us got to stay.”

Friday, Pina was escorted across one of El Paso’s international bridges and released into Mexico, where a new world of uncertainty awaited.

“I’m a lesbian; I have one month trying to get here and I’m afraid,” the 33-year-old said. “I’ve gone through so much to get here. I’m broke. I try to lift my head up, but I feel like I’m losing strength to go on. I feel like I might as well step in front of a car.”

Pina and other expelled Venezuelans stood outside a Mexican immigration center where they receive basic services — like a place to shower and charge their phones. Early Saturday morning, she told The Post she was considering trying to cross the border again.

“I would like to try again because I can’t go back to Venezuela,” she explained, adding that she is an engineer in her homeland.

“I don’t have money to go back. I left because I have a three-year-old daughter I was unable to provide for because I was constantly discriminated against because of my sexual orientation.”

Other Venezuelans agreed that they too would try to get back into the US, even if that meant turning to dangerous people-smuggling cartels.

https://nypost.com/2022/10/16/venezuelans-expelled-from-the-us-vow-to-re-enter-illegally/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Sunday, October 16, 2022

Venezuelans expelled from US to Mexico vow to re-enter illegally

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors