Dem rep: 'Evidence is clear' that migrant child deaths are 'intentional'

[Jose Garcia]

Source: The Hill

Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.) said at a Wednesday congressional hearing that she believes deaths of migrant children at the U.S.-Mexico border are "intentional."

Her comments, made to Acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan as he testified to the House Committee on Homeland Security, come days after the announcement that a Guatemalan teen was the fifth minor to die at the border since December.

"With five kids that have died ... the evidence is really clear that this is intentional, it's a policy choice being made on purpose by this administration and it's cruel and inhumane," the freshman Democrat, who is a nurse, told McAleenan.

McAleenan argued that an increase in funds to the agency would have prevented the deaths. He said that the influx of immigration at the border is draining resources for the agency to be able to adequately respond, which is why he is asking for more money in the FY2020 budget.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/445027-dem-rep-evidence-is-clear-that-migrant-child-deaths-are-intentional?amp&__twitter_impression=true

[Cal Carpenter]

1. She's not wrong. They are basically concentration camps

in the most general definition of the term.

Of course unnecessary deaths will occur in the conditions under which these children are being locked up.

It's fucking sick.

[Skittles]

2. oh but we have to WAIT on impeachment

you know, in case it HURTS us later!

[RAB910]

3. Can we call Trump a mass murder?

[LiberalLovinLug]

4. Oh dear!

She better watch out....when they go low and all that.


ie...finally! I wish more Democrats would use stronger language, stronger accusations. Even if it "crosses the line". Make Republicans be the ones to huff and puff and stutter out their outrage for once.

[Archae]

5. Negligent? Yes. "Intentional?" Hell no.

Looks like Democrats have a few demagogues in their ranks too.

No, it is not "intentional."
Negligent yes.

"Intentional" hell no.

And right-wing bullshit spreaders like Faux "news" are going to point to this congresswoman and say "All dem lib'ruls iz alike!"

[atreides1]

6. How do you know?

It could be intentional!

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/22/725652420/migrant-processing-center-temporarily-closing-after-flu-related-outbreak


U.S. Customs and Border Protection is temporarily suspending intake at the McAllen Central Processing Center, the largest migrant processing center in South Texas, after the outbreak of what the agency calls "a flu-related illness."


It is the same facility where a 16-year-old Guatemalan boy became ill last week, and died after he was transferred to another Border Patrol station.

[meadowlander]

7. The facts aren't in to say one way or the other.

A year or so most of us would have thought that a deliberate policy in the US to separate young children from their parents at the border with no way of reuniting them to act as a deterrent to legal asylum seeking would have been inconceivable. Now there is plenty of evidence for that.

[SharonClark]

9. Yes, we do.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

8. I can see a case for calling it "intentional neglect"

as we have seen pictures of the disgusting conditions in which these children are housed. We know from Congressional reports (Thank you, Senator Jeff Merkley, D-OR), that these children are malnourished as the quality of food they receive is substandard to the point of being spoiled (or infested) and that alone would diminish their immune system's response to illness. We know further, that these children are not sleeping at night. Sleep deprivation can also impact the immune system. Add to that the daily stress of what these children are enduring and you have another hit on the body's defenses.

These conditions have been well-documented to the point that the WH cannot say they are unaware of the neglect of these children. And they have done NOTHING to correct or even ameliorate the situations.

So, YES. I, too, would call it intentional.

[JudyM]

10. I was just reading someone's post elsewhere about what's condemned in the Bible.

It reads like a list of tRump and rethugs’ predominant activities:

The Bible is unusually lucid on the sins of Sodom:

Pride, lack of concern for the poor and needy (Ezekiel 16:48-49);
Hatred of of strangers and cruelty to guests (Wisdom 19:13);
Arrogance (Sirach/Ecclesiaticus 16:8);
Evildoing, injustice, oppression of the widow and orphan (Isaiah 1:17);
Adultery (in those days, the use of another man’s property), and
Lying (Jeremiah 23:12).

We really need some united nation-wide messaging about this, to publicly call their bluff.