MS-13 gang members murder 14-year-old girl
The alleged killers had been in detention in Maryland, but that state doesn’t have a policy of cooperation with ICE’s requests to turn illegal immigrant offenders over for possible deportation.
Thus we have this:
Last week, police arrested two teenagers, Josue Fuentes-Ponce and Joel Escobar, and charged them with the murder of 14 year-old Ariana Funes-Diaz. She was killed in a tunnel, beaten with a baseball bat and slashed with a machete. She was found naked. Reportedly, the killers, members of MS-13, ordered her to strip before they murdered her.
According to authorities, Fuentes-Ponce and Escobar killed the girl because they were worried she would report them to police. She had lured a man to Northwest Washington, D.C., where he was beaten, robbed, and interrogated about his gang affiliations.
The girl had apparently been an accomplice to a previous crime of the pair, although whether she did this of her own free will or whether she was coerced and/or threatened if she didn’t cooperate is unknown (at least, unknown by me). No matter, because that is no excuse whatsoever for her murder.
Maryland officials admit that holding these two criminal illegal immigrants would have violated state guidelines. In other words, it is Maryland state policy not to cooperate with ICE in keeping the public safe from vicious illegal immigrants like Fuentes-Ponce and Escobar.
And Maryland is hardly alone in its resistance to immigration enforcement.
The two had been arrested and imprisoned for a previous robbery.
This is an excellent example of the principle of the slippery slope. Unless I’m mistaken, even those advocating leniency for illegal immigrants weren’t always advocating that we refrain from deporting criminal illegal aliens. As best I can recall, there was consensus on the idea that at least that particular crowd of offenders who had also come to this country illegally should be deported. I’m not sure when that idea became passe among Democrats, but my sense is that the protection from ICE’s clutches even of criminal illegal aliens became more mainstream during the Obama administration, although Obama himself wasn’t pushing it,
Oh, but Trump was so nasty when he called MS-13 members “animals.”
No,no! He called undocumented asylum seekers and their children trying to reach the safety of the US, animals. Please keep up and keep your talking points straight.
Seattle officials won’t allow ICE to use Boeing Field (nearest to Seattle downtown) to deport illegals. Murder by MS13 – ok, ICE and Orange Man Bad.
“Borders?”
“Borders?”
“We don’t need no stinkin’ borders!”
Mr President…about that wall?
Or maybe someone has a plan to make crossing the southern US border less lucrative and more dangerous?
The existence of Obama as POTUS just emboldened those who already had freak flag agendas for the States.
I’m entirely against deporting illegal alien murderers. They should be tried in a federal court and if found guilty, immediately executed.
Neo writes: “Unless I’m mistaken, even those advocating leniency for illegal immigrants weren’t always advocating that we refrain from deporting criminal illegal aliens.”
I am afraid you are mistaken. The head of the Prince George’s County lockup gave a public statement for the TV cameras where she apologetically stated that was the state policy and they would not change it.
There was a similar case here in Silicon Valley. A many-times deported illegal was released from the Santa Clare county jail after ICE requested that he be released to their custody. He then bludgeoned to death a woman who did not know him. The head of the county Board of Supervisors who instituted the policy, Joe Simitian, gave a statement again saying they had no plans to change the policy.
The Left just thinks these cases are negligible collateral damage for a greater good.
Bob:
I don’t understand your point. The fact that a couple of people may have advocated it at some time in the past doesn’t mean it was mainstream at that time. The point I was trying to make here is that such a position has become rather mainstream and commonplace in the last few years (beginning sometime I believe during the Obama administration), whereas it used to be rare—or at least, rarely taken in public by a public authority.
You also didn’t give the years for those cases you cite.
I’d like to read a meaty article, better a book, on the history of this world-without-borders concept, especially as it applies to the US.
I don’t remember the intermediate steps. It seems to have happened in stealth mode.
When I was a kid, people had great hopes for the UN and world peace, but it wasn’t about people from one country walking into another and saying, here I am, and others saying, great, you’re now a citizen.
Do we blame it all on John Lennon?
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace… You…
huxley,
There are people that think that stupid song is the greatest most profound thing ever. Had a long discussion with someone several years ago where I tried to get it through to her how ridiculous that damn thing is. Didn’t work.
I’m with Griffin, Imagine is as stupid as a co-exist bumper sticker. One has to be devoid of any of the lessons of history and the dark side of human nature to believe Imagine is not idiotic.
There are people that think that stupid song is the greatest most profound thing ever.
Griffin: Guilty as charged! I came out of the sixties a serious utopian. (I’m not the only one!) That’s why I was so involved with communes. So Lennon’s song made sense to me. It seemed the obvious next step in 1971.
IMO the borderless world represents a retreat from the post-WWII Whiggism that the world was progressing inevitably towards enlightened, prosperous, liberal democracy.
However, by the 21st Century that’s a tough sell. It doesn’t seem likely Africa, Latin America and the Middle East are ever going to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and reach that promised land.
The leftist solution is to blame the US and a case can be made, but this late in the day blaming America doesn’t seem as persuasive as it did in the 50s/60s.
So now we don’t expect those countries to take care of themselves. They can turn their backs on their own countries and come here for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Freedom isn’t free.
One has to be devoid of any of the lessons of history and the dark side of human nature to believe Imagine is not idiotic.
parker: Actually I remain something of a Whiggist utopian. I’ve read plenty of history and I’ve seen my share of the dark side of humanity, but I still think we’re heading towards a brighter, more prosperous and unified world with less emphasis on borders, possessions and religion.
I just think it’s a longer, harder song.
Think back to where we were a thousand years ago. Things have changed and much for the better. It ain’t utopia and never will be, but the progress since is indisputable.
huxley,
Yeah, I come at it as someone who was but a wee lad when the song came out so it’s easy for me to look back with disdain I admit.
‘Imagine no possessions’ is the line that gives it all away for me. That’s what I always bring up to people. And Lennon certainly didn’t believe his own BS on that because he loved being rich and having lots of possessions.
The no borders people are truly the dumbest people out there (even over the climate change crowd I think) because if that were to really come to pass then things could only get worse in the places like the US, Canada or Australia. Then where do they go?
Griffin: I haven’t been able to track your g-g-generation, though I sense someone sympatico.
Yeah, “Imagine no possessions” is a pretty rich coming from a mega-millionaire living in the ultra-exclusive Dakota building. I remember Lennon boasting in his Playboy interview about Yoko selling a cow for a $250,000.
My notion is that technology eventually makes us so prosperous that no one must work to survive. That won’t end possessions, war or status games. It won’t make everyone happy. Finding meaning and fulfillment will remain difficult, perhaps even more so.
But that’s the journey of our amazing species, if I may be human-centric.
huxley,
Let me know then human nature is capable of creating utopia. If I live to be 1,000 years old I would still be waiting. Humans are tribal/clannish. Birds of a feather tend to flock together. Nationalism can lead to war, one world utopia has a lot in common with Pol Pot’s utopia known as the killing fields.
As long as humans inhabit the planet there will be enlightenment and evil darkness capable of massive acts of horrible carnage. Its our nature. Nothing wrong with wishing otherwise, but it is futile IMO.
Let me know then human nature is capable of creating utopia.
parker: I suggest reading my comments more closely.
It ain’t utopia and never will be, but the progress since is indisputable.
parker: This ^.
huxley,
I read your comments closely. What I may have done is mistake that what you “call progress” is different than the the utopian language of ‘progressives’. IMO there is no progress in human nature. We are what we are. Yes, technolgy marches forward, human nature, no. We are what we are. But, we each will come to our own conclusions. No harm, no foul.
huxley,
Yes, technology is making life infinitely easier. But as you said this will not make for happier or more productive people. Sure some will use this to do good but for others (maybe most) it will be a negative to bad development. Humans are happier when their lives have purpose and I fear that as life gets easier it will stop getting better at some point. Maybe it already has judging by the trivial things that dominate universities today. Things have gotten so good for young people they have to invent new things to be outraged by.
parker: I see no way to reconcile your request that I let you know when “human nature is capable of creating utopia” with my earlier claim that “It ain’t utopia and never will be.”
Do you claim there has been no progress since 1019?
Aside from the vast improvements in human lifespan and comfort, we are not killing each other in proportional numbers of earlier times.
I don’t know if that’s an improvement in human nature, which I would agree is stubborn. However, I see no reason to believe human nature is immutable because everything changes.
Sixty million-odd years ago we were tree shrews. That said, I ain’t waiting up nights for utopia either.
One of the many misguided notions of the left is that if we had no borders or no religion (Christianity and Judaism only Islam is fine and dandy of course) then we would have world peace. This claim simply ignores human nature.
Things have gotten so good for young people they have to invent new things to be outraged by.
Griffin: I think a huge tell is the invention of the microaggression. You’ve got to be scraping the bottom of the outrage barrel when you’re concerned with aggressions at the millionth level.
If that isn’t utopia, what is?
Griffin:
Imagine.
Huxley,
Just think of what the chief concern of an 18 year old was in 1719, 1819, 1919, compared to 2019. The lack of gratitude for how far humanity has come is so disheartening.
The lack of gratitude for how far humanity has come is so disheartening.
Griffin: Amen.
Well said, Griffin.
The elohim/gods are not amused at continued human shenanigans and games.
I don’t know if that’s an improvement in human nature, which I would agree is stubborn. However, I see no reason to believe human nature is immutable because everything changes.
Sixty million-odd years ago we were tree shrews. That said, I ain’t waiting up nights for utopia either.
Divine evolution would be required to forcibly accelerate the change in human nature. As natural evolution, if such a thing even exists, would take aeons upon aeons to create new viable species, as the recent researchers have been forced to admit against the clamor of the theists. The Earth is not old enough, even by their calendars, for natural evolution to do much.
So 65 million years ago, they don’t know about that.
IMO there is no progress in human nature. We are what we are.
for the 60-80% of the human race that are level 1 and level 2 souls, they perceive no progress because they don’t progress much at all in their own lives or existences. Or rather, it is so slow as it is undetectable.
It only requires half a percent of the human race to Awaken to what else exists, for there to be a quantum cosmic energy state change. What is perceived, creates existence.
The darshan is carried by prophets, seers, teachers, monastic orders, temples, and various other methods as according to the Divine Plan. In this age, it was predicted that the truth would be rejected and that the Divine Message would be corrupted or horribly lost in the process. It will recover itself in due time, but for the past few centuries, humanity has been on its own, using pride, hubris, and their own evolutionary human natures to attempt to surmount the amnesia plus the problems of a biological animal avatar. That hasn’t worked out very well. As the age of the network on Earth changes, so will everything else. Including those stuck in the old ways.
No harm, no foul.
If only that state can be maintained for longer than a few seconds or days. But it comes and goes, depending on the whims of human emotions. People aren’t in control of themselves as they believe. It comes and it goes. As whimsical as the animals and pets of humanity.
As for John Lennon, the reason why many entities decided to incarnate on Earth was precisely because they were in a place that had no war (no wars in heaven, because there is no duality at the Source). It was very boring or at least very stable, to the point where the spirit could not challenge itself nor did it have very much free will.
Free will is not free because of a lack of options. It is availability of options, of failure, that makes it free. They could return back to the love and acceptance of Source, the Most High, but they would have a good existence without having to do anything. Evil has to exist, in order for free will to exist, and vice a versa. For people that do not understand despair, they can’t easily grasp joy either. Hot and cold. Light and shadow. Bitter and sweet. Up and Down. That’s life, but most people seem to think it should be easier. They are used to Easy Mode in the heavens.
Earth is hardcore impossible mode, nearly.
John Lennon is thus trying to go backwards to Source. But that’s easy. Just extinguish your connection to your avatar (you humans call that dying). The rest of the Earth and humanity will need a significant amount of time in the New Age to learn.
Lack of property was something the ancient gurus and teachers, like Yeshua, talked about. But it wasn’t practical. People tried to make it practical, such as the pilgrims and monasteries, but it only worked in a few select cases. Shared ownership, such as at Plymouth Rock, created a famine.
huxley: John Lennon did not invent this creepy ideology of utopian universalism, it was advanced by a large group of the French philosophers in preparation for the bloody Revolution about 250 years ago. Even before, it stemmed from heresy of humanism as advocated by Erasmus, Giordano Bruno, Ulrich von Gutten, propagandized by Voltaire, Rousseau, Humboldt and lots of other creeps lionized by modern leftists, who conveniently omitted that all of them were the sworn enemies of Christianity as such and of Catholic Church in particular, but even more so – of Judaism, up to preaching genocide of Jews.
Neo: See theapj.com/review-of-zeev-maghens-john-lennon-and-the-jews-a-philosophical-rampage-bottom-books-2011-2/. The book is really brilliant and must read.
Sergey,
Thanks for the interesting review. I’m not too sure about the writer’s take on Reason, if that’s what he means by the “rational” (and Reason is not rationalism, but of course he never says it is); but the first part strikes me as pure gold.
Julie: Zeev means under rationalism exactly what it meant in European philosophy of the last 3 centuries, namely anti-supernaturalism and the belief in universal applicability and unrestrained power of the logic and scientific method. And, of course, he fully understands how irrational and even false this belief actually is.