White House calls video of border agents chasing Haitian migrants 'horrific,' DHS promises to investigate
Category: News & Politics
Via: john-russell • 3 years ago • 95 commentsBy: Chelsey Cox and Mabinty Quarshie (MSN)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON - Video of U.S. border agents chasing Haitian migrants on horseback stirred outrage Monday, with White House press secretary Jen Psaki calling the images "horrific" and Democratic lawmakers demanding accountability.
The Department of Homeland Security promised in a statement to investigate the matter.
The images show U.S. border agents on horseback chasing Haitian migrants near the Rio Grande close to Del Rio, Texas. In one photo, a border patrol agent leans over his saddle to grab the shirt of a man trying to get away. In several photos, the migrants are carrying plastic bags and bundles of their possessions in their hands.
As the Haitians tried to climb onto the U.S. side of the river Sunday afternoon, an agent shouted: "Let's go! Get out now! Back to Mexico!"
The agent swung what appeared to be a whip or a cord, charging his horse toward the men in the river.
"I've seen some of the footage, I don't have the full context. I can't imagine what context would make that appropriate, but I don't have additional details, and certainly, ... I don't think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate," Psaki said.
Pressed on whether border patrol agents should be fired or allowed to do it again, she said: "Of course they should never be able to do it again," Psaki said, adding that it was "obviously horrific" footage.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., said the border patrol agents' actions were "human rights abuses, plain and simple. Cruel, inhumane, and a violation of domestic and international law."
"This needs a course correction and the issuance of a clear directive on how to humanely process asylums seekers at our border," Omar wrote on Twitter.
Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, said the border patrol agents' actions were "absolutely unacceptable."
"No matter how challenging the situation in Del Rio is right now, nothing justifies violence against migrants attempting to seek asylum in our country," Escobar tweeted.
A camp of over 10,000 migrants who crossed the Rio Grande at a low point between Ciudad Acuna, Mexico and Del Rio, Texas, have been waiting beneath the international bridge in Del Rio to open an asylum claim. U.S. and Mexican officials warned Sunday that those in the camp would be deported back to Haiti.
Horace Campbell, professor of African American Studies and Political Science at the Maxwell School at Syracuse University called the expulsion of Haitians "inhumane" and "criminal."
"The economic conditions in Haiti since 2010 have been unspeakable," said Campbell, referring to a 2010 earthquake that devastated the island nation.
More recently, the country has seen a presidential assassination and another powerful earthquake just this year, leaving the nation's economy and government in dire conditions.
"What the United States government is doing is unspeakable given the crisis in Haiti …. as one person said, it amounts to something being criminal," Campbell added.
A use of force policy document from CBP dated January 2021 says that, "The use of excessive force by CBP law enforcement personnel is strictly prohibited." But the document also says that agents "may use 'objectively reasonable' force only when it is necessary to carry out their law enforcement duties," adding that the "reasonableness" of any particular situation varies with the conditions.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told reporters that CBP is coordinating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard to move migrants to other processing locations for removal. The agency has moved approximately 3,500 migrants "over the last few days and 3,000 today," he said.
"We are in the midst of a pandemic and a critical migration challenge," Mayorkas said. "We continue to exercise the Centers for Disease Control (and Prevention's) title 42 authority."
Title 42 allows CBP to expel undocumented migrants to prevent the spread of COVID-19. It is "not an immigration authority, but a public health authority," Mayorkas said.
Campbell vehemently disagreed with the deportation of Haitian migrants.
"This is just perpetuating white racist stigma against the people of Haiti. And these people did not come from Haiti," said Campbell.
Tags
Who is online
102 visitors
Gee JR, that was rough to get through. The correlation was palpable. Just like when the movie first appeared! "Get your filthy black 'ape' hands off me!" I think was the money 'shot'!
It was the first comparison that came to mind.
I 'feel' ya! You're a good man, John Russell!
Originally there was a false claim of whips being used. There was no whip and there is no wrongdoing here.
"Hard core" Progressives and their fantasies about whites and "racism." I almost forgot the "hard core!"
I don't know if people mistook the photographic for a whip or were reaching for a metaphor. What I do know is this: Some conservatives do not deal with merit as often as they deal with pretexts and pretenses. If you simply want to bash liberals. Here is the floor: Pick up the 'mic' and let yourself at 'em!
Otherwise, do better. Because some conservative this ain't working for ya!
Watching those horsemen was the best thing that’s happened on that border since Jan 20. They did a great job.
Did you hear the racist Maxine Waters?
MAXINE WATERS: What we witnessed takes us back hundreds of years. What we witnessed was worse than what we witnessed in slavery. Cowboys with their reigns again whipping Black people, Haitians into the water, where they’re scrambling and falling down. When all they’re trying to do is escape from violence in their country.
Imagine.....It was worse than slavery! LOL!
We can always count on her to blather on about some ignorant shit like that. Pair her with the drunkard they call Speaker of the House and the Alzheimer patient in the WH and you have the new 3 stooges.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., said the border patrol agents' actions were "human rights abuses, plain and simple. Cruel, inhumane, and a violation of domestic and international law."
Omar doesn't call homosexuals being caned and beheaded in Muslim countries "human rights abuses"
I think we need to wait for some facts before we assume we’re watching a rerun of Roots.
We don’t know why the agents were chasing these guys. They have bags in their hands, and maybe those bags are filled with food they stole from some family. Or maybe those bags are filled with drugs.
In a crowd like that at the border, there is bound to be criminal types preying on the refugees. We just don’t know the context.
Talk about lop-sided: Of course the men on horseback are the good guys—because they are "lawful" and have guns and have horses. /s A certain instance of might makes right on its face.
Seriously. . . .
I do not know what the real deal is either (yet). However, the problem with 'light,' 'white,' men on horseback 'running down' black men on foot is a throwback to historic symbolism (slave patrols and civil rights protest marches). It can not be ignored or overlooked. It must be treated with sensitivity.
Funny, at first impression when I saw this scene on CNN (with sound down) and while cooking - even second impression on site here no sound either, I come away with this: rounding up wannabe immigrants for deportation. Drugs, corruption personalities, or violence on the parts of the Haitians did not sprang to mind. (Until, I read this comment. Still, don't know if I agree with the 'sentiment.')
If you look at the pics and the video, you can see there are people all around - women, children, families, etc. They do not seem concerned by the agents on horseback.
The news outrage machine is pushing the narrative that agents with whips are chasing down black people like they were capturing escaped slaves. That seems improbable to me. First of all, Border Patrol agents do not have whips. Why would they? The agent is swinging his horse’s rein. I don’t know why.
I think it’s more likely that the guys they are chasing did something to bring attention on themselves. There is no reason to “round up” anybody or capture them. There may, however, be ample reason for agents to be concerned about the safety of all the people there.
Forgive me, I don't me to lecture you I really, really do not. But, that is the point (in bold above) we do not know what the agents intent is right now. In this case, I just now listened to MSNBC REPORTS narrative from the border with footage of this Saturday incident and as yet no rationale is offered to why those officers were backing black male Haitians down in the river/water.
We need more understanding before we can make an informed guess, Tacos! I simply don't know and it is presumptuous to 'steer' the narrative in any direction based on appearances. The appearances is bad symbolism for this country, nevertheless.
BTW, you have video of this incident: How about sharing it with the 'group' discussion. Additionally, any follow-up explanation on the reason. It can help immensely.
Absolutely! Good point. Here’s a short video of some news coverage:
You can see some of this action at 0:22 of the video. A couple things I notice:
1) The agent swinging his rein is swinging it on the side of the horse opposite the guy he is going after. Telephoto photography doesn’t always make that clear.
I have to speculate, of course, but if he is trying to hit someone with it, I don’t see how that would work. He could be using it to keep the horse going to his left by swinging it on his right side. I suppose he could also be trying to intimidate with it, but again, seeing as how it is on the opposite of the horse from anyone who would see it, I wonder how useful that would be.
2) The agents are letting adults with kids go up the hill, and focusing on one or two guys who are alone. That reinforces my thought that these guys were up to no good and the agents were actually protecting families.
At 2:13, a senior BP officer explains that they are are concerned about security and they don’t know who the migrants are and who the smugglers are.
That being the situation, consider the perspective of an agent. If he needs to intimidate someone he thinks is a predator, what is he supposed to do? I’m sure he doesn’t want to leave his horse. He could shoot the guy. He could trample him. Or he could threaten to whip him with his rein. That honestly seem like the least objectionable of all possible options.
I just really don’t think BP agents are out there looking to get their thrills by playing “slave patrol” by whuppin some black people. Is it possible? Sure, anything is possible. I just don’t have a reason to think that about any of them.
Thank you for sharing Tacos! I appreciate your efforts to discuss this evenly.
1 Actually, the officer is right-handed, thus the hand used. Additionally, he did swing the horse around, the Haiitian/smuggler (?) still unclear, fell down into the water as the horse pivoted to the left.
2. I did note the reference to smugglers and migrants. I accept that. At which point, the recipients would be wise to obey the officers' commands (with limited on no protests).
Under that circumstance I can understand some us of authority and separation tactics, nevertheless.
That reporters are not reporting out a crime committed or malicious act or security protocol that I can read and 'interpret' is damaging to the presentation itself!
We are left to wait on something more. We have no choice—other than to remark blindly.
That could well be. Although I think if he were turning into the rein, he’d likely hit the horse. Maybe this is a thing this guy does all the time. Heck, for all we know, they train this.
Here is a link to a more complete video. It looks like they’re trying to keep these guys from coming out of the water onto the land, but oddly, they aren’t chasing everyone down. The rein-swinging seems like a way to reach out to them without getting off the horse or shooting them or something.
A right-handed person will turn a lariat (rapidly) with the right-hand. But at this point, it's minutia. It is a game of 'cat and mouse.' The immigrants are running 'through' the legs and gaps left by the horses. This is patently dangerous and could result in an individual being trampled or blunt-force injured to death.
However, it is law-enforcement on the low-level where the poor and struggling exist and make do.
That is, you won't see any 'well-to-do' individuals or groups immigrate through a river crossing! Not hardly.
Tacos - you can INSTANTLY tell folks who have never had the experiences of horseback riding. The reins are used by the rider to direct the horse to - run, gallop, trot, turn, stop, cut, slide, spin, prance, etc.. The reins are not long enough to beat/whip folks who are not riding the same horse such as the mislead media are trying to depict.
I think at this point, the accusations say more about the people making those accusations than they do about the agents. No one wanted to look into this at all (or assess how much harm was actually done) before calling it “horrific.”
Reminds one of AOC's crying at the fence in the empty parking lot.
It''s all Biden's fault that they are here, and more bad optics of what's occurring on his watch
More partisan hackery from some conservatives. Nevermind the assassination 'back home.' Gangs. Earthquakes. And more unrest. All some conservatives can do is bitch and moan about people coming here. It's inconsistent too.
You want Texas to have more babies from every woman you can impregnate accordingly. But, protest, women and men (who make babies possible by the way) coming here to bring more to Texas!
Go figure!
Border Patrol was much too nice
Please elaborate, Charger. Because I don't know what more could have been done by the video - what about you?
The Border Patrol was not forceful enough to keep illegals out
Is illegals the proper terminology here or are you forcing the word "illegals" on the story? And pray tell, what would be the appropriate action for border patrol to issue forth that would meet with your approval in this case?
For example:
1. Arrest.
2. Guns drawn.
3. Trampling by the horses.
4. Some of the action (list please).
5. No action at all required.
illegals is too nice a term ( but I try to be polite). I approve of whatever action is needed to keep all of them from entering the USA where they will be a problem and burden
But that not putting action into words. That is, you are communicating a lot that can occur poorly. "Whatever" is undetermined and could lead to these people being left without hope or exterminated where they stand.
Surely, you don't mean to leave our understanding of the term, "illegals" to mean you would go too far! Please describe how you wish these Haitian migrants to be managed at the border crossing.
The only thing that can occur poorly is if they cross the border, then they become a problem, burden and take resources from US Citizens and taxpayers.
If you don't like them called illegals then invading enemy in an undeclared war might be a better term.
We have it better than other places in the USA but that does not mean outsiders get to come and take our high standard of living down.
Ah, but you presume too much methinks about firstly about our "standards," and secondly about the people from which standards derive.
Also, you have an undercurrent in your remarks on this matter, as if you want to say something better kept silent. What is it? Whisper it. That is: speak it quickly and maybe not everybody would notice you doing so!
Our standards, traditions, and cultures are a homogenization of many 'blended' peoples out of many into one. Where you suppose a standard from one group is superior to another group - please mark the distinction where you can emphasize the group. Go ahead, try it. Moreover, our national standards have been under-siege of recent by Trumpism which is eating the republican party inside out. Now it's 'buyer' beware' and "anything goes" neglect and manipulate Rule of Law and Justice to the will of a man or woman.
If it was not so, then rule of law would govern the changes people are attempting to bring about externally through imposing shysterism.
Secondly, define for me how a nation built on 'taking in other nations 'discounted' and wretched people can now sit on its laurels exclaiming poor, miserable people entering our gates are the problem.
Lastly, what do you think of the myriad of Afghans who have already landed in country with ease without crossing the southern border?
Finally, a great many of those Haitian immigrants will cast their future with us and bring their talents, skills, and wealth which were clearly undervalue and attack at 'home.' That is, Haitians hold to (high) standards too!
First thing, the USA is overcrowded. Overpopulation is the root cause of climate change and many other problems. Our actions at reducing climate change are undercut by letting them in.
Define in your meaning, "overcrowded." Then, explicitly declare who "them" are. You can be verbose; no need to be curt when you meaning is not coming across, Charger! Seeking clarity. (Smile.)
Now the country is full, years ago when there was wide open spaces out west, immigrants just need to settle the west, not caring about the Indians living there.
overcrowding means to many people in a finite area.
"them" means new people coming here from somewhere else
I agree. Haiti’s a shithole. It’s highly unlikely those haitians violating our laws have any special skills or wealth. More than likely they will be a burden and use resources we should be using on Americans. Amazing some can’t see that.
also we need to preserve and expand our parks, wilderness areas, open spaces and places wildlife live. We need to keep our big farm areas that produce our food and lands that recharge the water supply.
So you're suggesting that the midwest, say, is "full" with a lot of squeezing 'em' in going on? And the mountains and valleys are stuffed with no land to make homesteads and other plots?
(Yet, we have building projects going on from sea to shining sea. Also, I can look out my window (not really) and see rolling hills as far as the eye can see. . . and then I start driving.)
Full, as in to the brim we are definitely not! And I can say this living in California!
That is odd. Sounds suspiciously racist. I don't mind telling you that. Because at one time or other this country would have been classified as a shithole, but then immigrants came by the "butt-loads" and saved this nation from mediocrity. And yes, the Africans do good things in this country and make a name for themselves just like every other migrating people we admit!
Be less full of shit, Gazoo. Because I ain't going to let you shit on Haitians: Not today!
yes I say it is too full and why should we squeeze outsiders in
I would much rather have open spaces, mountains without houses on them like I look out my window and see to the east and West.
I see no reason to give up good, comfortable and not overcrowded middle class American living.
What is so great about Haitians?
We have all the talent we need and can hope for? Really, Charger?! Additionally, what Haiti is and what the United States hopes to continue to be are not the reason for immigration policies. Policies of immigration properly instituted benefit this nation and the migrants who arrive poor, wretched, and in many cases in dire straits.
That makes immigrants grateful. That makes them want more for themselves. That makes them more receptive to getting along. That makes the majority of them willing to 'explore' for opportunities that they could not see straight to having 'back home.'
BTW, it is the people fleeing from their 'sorry' conditions that migrant. The others, the ones happy to see their surrounding stay put because they see whatever bad circumstances as suitable for themselves.
Bad people don't migrate away from hell-if hell is working for them!
Why are they our problem?
What talent are Haitians known for? I don't think Haiti is famous for much that is good
What sounds racist? Calling a shithole a shithole? Playing the race card in such an ambiguous way is sleezy. And i don’t mind telling you that. Be less full of shit, cb. Say what you mean.
So you think haitians coming here will offer skills we need, and not rely on public assistance? Lol, wanna buy a bridge?
Definitely "Archie Bunker" arch-type. What good is any one of us if good people can't manifest themselves ever due to their surroundings?
Okay: I gather from your tenor of commenting you thought about making that come out as brutal. Success! I do thank you for your candor. It helps to speak truth and one's perspective so others can know, understand, how you, we, really feel about issues we come here to address!
What are you willing to give up to accommodate more Haitians?
I hear you. I see the dilemma at the border. I do not know that the 'promise' of this country can be entirely suspended in this prescribed manner, nevertheless. Remember we asked the world to "meet" us at our doorstep. We triumphed in being the world's exceptional nation. We are this world's "super-power." We are the "shining city sitting on hill." And so. . . we built it. . . and so the immigrants come.
Too much of a 'good' thing? Maybe. But, this land is not ours to claim ownership of for all time. This has always been a pluralistic dream of a country-even when it did not, does not, live up to it. We are "inherently" diverse and it can be argued that our constitution will not permit us to be anything less than diverse.
Finally, to 'close down' immigration majorly is to admit we can't live up to our 'billing.' The world will see us as creeping into impotence—finally. That is, the nations would write about our pending demise as the super-power.
many progressive liberals will be happy at the end of American exceptionalism.
Overcrowding, really? India has over 1.4 billion citizens and the U.S. is three times larger a land mass. What's the problem?
"We" do not own this country. Our constitution won't permit any group to own this country.
As to produce; we're too fat. unhealthy. and need to eat better and yes less. /s
So Afghans who fought with us (and their extended families) make "good" immigrants. It's okay. You can not just let in "warrior-class" people as immigrants. It's simply not enough of what is happening in this world and if you wait on a stray war to fulfill immigration policies and "demand" well guess what happens? This nation will have to manufacture wars and subsequently kill more people. Not a good thing!
I can see that. You got yours! Shut the door!!! (Chuckles.)
Haitians are members of humanity. Humanity is good for the Earth. Therefore, Haitians are good for our planet.
Reciprocity works.
Okay, I am not going that deep into the 'box.' Calling a whole class of people, "sub-standard" is indecent and I won't have a part in it!
So you think that Haitians want "public assistance" and aspire to only public assistance. Well Gazoo, you must be some kind of genius to remark on motivations and ambitions of a whole class of Haitians.I am left to wonder if you will or can ever be proven right in such an assertion.
I don't know any Haitians one on one. But let me tell you this: That is a damnable stupid thing for you to write about anybody! If you are speaking for a segment of the U.S. population, I would render that your segment of us is the one that should get lost! We are trained ("home training") to be a loving people, a gracious people for what we have and what has been 'granted' us up to this point and as a home for diversity and 'misfits' departing their own lands and coming to dwell here with us.
That you can sit in judgment of which 'misfits' are a good fit and then deign to write dirty insincere 'patty' about otherwise innocent people is despicable.
Donald Trump once called Haiti and African nations "shitholes" and so as a good old boy in the camp you come here and parrot Trumpism. Well, I see you and I intend to hand a Trump supporter his or her ass for their troubles.
You don't have to be nice to immigrants. It does not matter. We'll simply have to point out the 'shithole' places in our country where hatred and hard-hearts abound and put a mental border around those places to be left to fester in their own hateful stench.
Why should I give up anything to "accommodate" immigrants. We have plenty good 'room.' Sharing comes naturally for some of us.
Thanks, bye.
No Vacancy, the hotel is full
You want to live there?
Nope! It's selfish to suggest so. India has over 1.4 billion citizens and the U.S. is three times larger a land mass. What's the problem?
Now I should "immigrate"?! That is a separate discussion for another day!
Relatively-speaking, rural areas are expansive "wide-open" spaces. However, that is not to be confused with "full spaces" simply because population density increases. There are 'suffering' urban areas here with the influx of citizens who prefer not to live a farmer's or rancher's lifestyle. And yet, our cities are not burgeoning at the seams like say a New York or Los Angeles County (population-wise).
Where are these big cities going to get more water?
Why should rural areas suffer?
Many prefer not to live the crowded city lifestyle
( I will be gone for several hours)
That has little to do with availability, in any case. Suffering is relative. We have a responsibility that must not be shirked. If we want to be one of those isolationist countries; go on and surrender to building a "great wall (of China), "remove this post-modern Statute of Liberty from New York's harbor, and stop this branding of our nation as "immigration friendly."
Reciprocity could mean the world would/could lift its welcome mats to us away as well. (And we certainly would be looked on suspiciously and with a myriad of questions when our war machines appear on the horizons).
Can you name a country in the world that allows more legal immigration in the world, or a country where illegal aliens number nearly as high as the US?
Bye.
I'll take that as a "no" then and leave with my victory.
Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think there is any responsibility to foreigners in our Constitution
I am all for that and I support a great wall to protect our border
even rural areas had water warnings this summer and the big lakes in the west are way down
You do not put forth bold excuses for being cruel to needy people. It is just so very easy to just say no and take a pass. We have people who do so with our own citizenry in the political arena.
I would ask where are some conservatives principles and moral 'mirror' but at this point its appears moot to do so. I will just presume some conservatives are strictly amoral beings. Non-principled; amoral; but select in what should exist in the land. What a poor mixture.
It's not our best 'blend' that's for sure!
gee, just like progressive liberals and people with no interest at all in politics.
Why does the camera crew almost outnumber the refugees?
Timing? (Assuming what you say is true, that is!) And why do you give a hoot about the professional 'eyeballers'? The media/press/journalists go where they individually and collective think they can find or glean an award-winning or newsworthy (sellable) story!
I was looking at this picture:
You've got three white people, who are clearly not refugees. Two have cameras/equipment and one has a nice backpack. Then the person who took this photo makes four (at least) involved in this scene alone. There is a fourth guy (blue shirt in front of microphone lady) who is clearly not Haitian, but I can't tell if he's working or illegally crossing.
Then we have CNBC, MSNBC, Fox and all the other correspondents down there.
I'm not sure there is this much coverage at Dallas Cowboys' media day.
What seems to be occurring is a professional news crew is engaged (intermingled) with the story as it happens. We can determine little or nothing about the ("fourth") person who takes the shot we see (it could have been 'donated' from a phone or other device from one team to another).
Again, be careful with motive, because real-life, agendas, and "workability" play loosey-goosey in these kinds of moments. That is, some thing or happening in a blink can be staged, and in the very next shot be as real as life gets—or all real or all staged. Hard to discern from miles away. We have to wait for what we are told, for the very fact that we are absent observers! It is the most important advantage those on the ground have over us out here in tv and picture land!
I'm not suggesting it's staged.
I'm suggesting it's an awful lot of coverage for something not exceedingly unusual, and we're in an era where almost every news outlet we see has significant levels of confirmed bias one way or another.
You have to understand that media is a 24/7 "engine" turning on reporters doing reporting. New stories. Human Interests. And in modern times, profit margins (to pay retirement packages. So we can be a little lenient when it comes to excessive coverage (that is looking for an angle), albeit justified to call it out!
That said, it seems the NAACP has weighed in negatively on this treatment of the immigrants. I do not agree with this organization's assessment at this point. Unless they have something dire to put forth.
[deleted]
I was wondering why it looked like they got some free lunches.
It's probably cheap, 'charity' meals. Still, being grateful for "sump 'eat' is the thing! God is good to our country! We have waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more and then some than we ever eat ourselves!
The big unforgivable flaw in this news story is that it does not explain what border patrol is trying to accomplish here. Disappointing!
There are dozens of charities down there distributing food and water.
Crossing that river where they are is an unlawful entry into the United States, and therefore a crime. Occam's Razor being what it is, they're most likely trying to stop people engaged in committing the very crime their organization exists to prevent.
As it is being considered, I understand. The officers have their orders to comply and answer to, too!
The closest to cause (context) seems to be these individuals were told not to cross the Rio Grande. And the ensued actions took place. Close as I can get right now. If the immigrants were instructed to not cross, (sigh) then they should not have been caught in the act of crossing.
These officers are in the clear, it seems. The officers can not help how being well-fed and on mounted horseback makes them appear. Appearances have a place, but are not the be all that says it all!
That's certainly the most likely scenario.
Got to say this before I lock it down for the night. Last week, there were 5,000 Haitians - now there are 20,000. Down in Central America, there are 15,000 Haitians getting ready to trek north to the US of A. So, we're looking at 'bout 35,000 Haitians - HAITIANS - advancing to the US of A.
Who organized this? Who is paying for this? 'Member, Haiti is a very, very poor country with annual earnings well below our standards for poverty level -
In addition to being the one of the world's most densely populated countries, Haiti is also one of the poorest. The annual per capita income is about US$450 , and most of the population (60 percent) faces underemployment. In recent decades, working and living conditions have been so poor that emigration, often by any means possible, has become a popular avenue of escape. About one out of every eight Haitians presently lives outside the country's borders.
There are stories of the Haitians paying for their own food, water, liquids, clothing - where did that money come from? Who transported them from Haiti to Central America, and it wasn't cheap?
Oh yeah - 'member the 100K folks from down south who trekked to the US of A during last year - organized? Paid for? Transportation?
Who is paying for this crap?