T1B

IndyFrisco wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote:You don't even live in Mexifornia and know that this is a fact.

But I did live in Mexas my first 28 years....

That's right. I forgot about that. If someone can make BBQ sauce, I'm not thinking someone from Indiana can do it. You've learned it the right way. (Working on my 30% post times).

KC Scott wrote: - it's a hard sell to allocate the massive - and i do mean massive - resources that would be necessary to seal off the borders.

Can the fucking bullshit already, you stupid asshole. It wouldn't take "massive resources." All it would take is aggressive enforcement and immediate detention and deportation. You know....actual no bullshit consequences. More than occasionally fatal consequences. You also attack the supply side. Employer's first offense gets them a MASSIVE fine. Strike two and they're out of business and spending a few years behind bars.

That will dry up illegal immigration real quick. Most of them will self-deport. Those that don't will get rounded up and shipped out to dentention centers where they will be placed on boats and dropped off deep inside Mexico like they did during Operation Wetback.

but I'm not sure anybody here takes into account if we did actually succeed in kicking the wetbacks out - it would cause a big spike in produce prices & construction right off the top.

That's because it will also produce an equally large spike in wages and local employment, you brainless dumbfuck. I'll pay a couple more cents for a head of lettuce, thanks.

Add in what we would spend to process and deport the fuckers on top of the cost of maintaining a virtual army to keep them out and again I'll ask -

We have hundreds of thousands of troops garrisoned in the US and National Guard units do two weeks AT every year. We can easily set up a rotation not that it will be necessary for any great length of time.

I'm not saying I agree with everything in the following statement - but the labor portion is spot on

Every empirical study of illegals' economic impact demonstrates... undocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Moreover, undocumented immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs. "

Francine J. Lipman
Professor of Law, Business and Economics at Chapman University
"Taxing Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation

This is a lie. Not an exaggeration. Not spin. Not a different take on the same figures. Just a bald faced lie.

Illegal immigration depresses wages which drives up demand for social services and they are also enormous consumers of services. Their paltry contribution in sales taxes do not even come close to offsetting their expense. The unrequited contributions to fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers and other programs is equally stupid since so many of them work outside the system.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/02/local/me-cap2

These are low ball figures from a dicklicking liberal douche.

Illegal Immigration Costs California Over Ten Billion Annually
State's "cheap labor" costs average household $1,183 a year

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrati ... legals.htm

This is a study from FAIR put out in 2004. The problem has grown astronomically worse since then.

Keep telling yourselves this is not about keeping Americans in.

KC Scott wrote:I don't have time right now to go point by point through your entire post - but this stands out as easy fodder:

This is from 2006 - When asked about deploying our military or guard to seal the border

We've got 75% of the equipment of national guards all across this country is in Iraq (and Afghanistan). We've got national guard members on their second, third and fourth tours in Iraq. We have stretched our military as thin as we have ever seen it in modern times. And what in the world are we talking about here sending a national guard that we may not have any capacity to send up to - or down to protect borders? That's not their role. I'll listen to the President but I've got a lot of questions about this."
Chuck Hagel
U.S. Senator R-NE

An idiot quoting an idiot. How not very surprising at all.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. You are totally clueless.

You had to have been the cream of the debate club in Jr, High MV.

88 wrote: This is a sovereign nation. We have no obligation to accept any person who feels compelled to come here.

Given the context of the thread, I was thinking of the northern border. The clampdown is a bureaucratic nightmare and it's specifically designed to combat terrorism - when there's nothing coming through other than Indians with cigarettes and alcohol. There are more bridges set for construction just to clear up the logjam, but no one in Michigan has the cash for funding it - so Canadian concerns will build and charge for it.
it's a colossal waste of time and money - you hear what's going on down there and just shake your head in disbelief.

I doubt it - they can't get in. Six months ago the government slapped a mandatory visa requirement on all Mexicans - across the board. Canada was averaging 3,000 claimants a year and it shot up to 9,000, so they locked the doors and it's dropped off to nothing. Same with Czechs to keep out the gypsies. If you show up with just a passport, you can't get in.
Kind of a shitty thing to do - everyone coming for legitimate reasons got screwed, lost their travel fare.
The Mexican government went batshit, but couldn't retaliate as it would cripple their tourist industry, so they slapped a visa requirement on Canadian politicians
We are suffering an influx of Irish escaping austerity measures. Trade?

Bucmonkey wrote:You had to have been the cream of the debate club in Jr, High MV.

There is nothing to debate here, you leg humping fuckwit. The assertion that the border has never been more secure in the last 20 years is a complete fantasy utterly devoid of any factual underpinning.

I cant read 2 pages of pissed-off old man...so all I have to say is that my Mexican neighbor dude says its much harder for his kin to sneak across the border now. Living in Florida suburbs does not give one proper perspective like those of us who live amongst the illegal dirty unwashed huddled masses.

Dinsdale wrote: I think people in the northeastern part of the country don't really understand what's going on in many areas, especially Out West, and especially along the Drug Superhiway (Interstate 5).

you think we're immune, dins?

guess again.

we got it worse. wayyyyyyyyyyyyy fukking worse.

we got our own version of the messican, the puerto rican. and unlike their hispanic bretheren, PRs can walk right in the front motherfukkin' door, yell "HOLA" and walk right up to the welfare line. And it's 100% legal seeing as they are technically citizens. I'll take a wetback who snuck in in the trunk of a monte carlo looking for WORK any day over jose who flew into bradley on one of the many daily flights from san juan with no more paperwork than if he flew from atlanta.

The flood of them started sometime in the 60s. Today they are a majority in most northeastern cities, none of which are any longer inhabitable by humans.

Don't doubt me on this. I grew up in Hartford in the 60-70s. I had front row season fukking tickets for this event.

smackaholic wrote:...and unlike their hispanic bretheren, PRs can walk right in the front motherfukkin' door...

Why not? You walked right through their front door.

Ahhh, imperialism. The Brits could teach you so much.

we pretty much all walked through somebody's door at some point. sooner or later someone may walk through ours. this does not mean we don't have the right to lock the door or shoot some fukk that thinks he can walk through it uninvited.

KC Scott wrote:Your rebuttal is nothing - to date you've offered no facts,

Try again, you braindead shitstain. I have presented numerous facts which blow your lie to pieces.

Tell me how many square miles of US territory along the border were officially denied to US citizens because of the danger represented by drug cartels and human traffickers 20 years ago?

Here's another clue. We didn't go from a handful of illegal aliens to up to 20 million of them 20 years later because the border is more secure. You really are pathetically ignorant tard.

this is getting good.

Scott wrote:You're Googling of a drug gang shootout has as much to do with National Security as any Drug shootout in Watts, East St. Louis or Trenton. The fact it's your kin folk makes not the slightest bit of difference burrito breath.

This is a very bad take.

The difference, of course, is that the mayhem in AZ is caused by ILLEGALS.

Our own citizens go ape-shit daily, and cause big problems, yes.
It's a given.
We know it.

Is there any reason we need to be ADDING to that by allowing ILLEGALS to run amok over parts of our southern states?

The "Our border is more secure today than 20 years ago" rhetoric sounds like a take that a classroom full of 18 yr old college freshman would buy into as it rolls off the tongue of some little twat professor who's operateed his whole life in the cocoon of academia.

It's a statement that may be able to be spun into having some "truth" to it - depending on how you wish to define certain words.

But it certainly isn't true in the REAL world, otherwise Arizona wouldn't be in a position to have to seriously confront the issue they are confronting.

Let's get real and quit fuckin' around.

KC Scott wrote:You're Googling of a drug gang shootout has as much to do with National Security as any Drug shootout in Watts, East St. Louis or Trenton.

Wrong again, shitstain. In addition to forcing the closure of hundreds of square miles of US territory, these cartels and their para-military units are threatening to start killing US law enforcement officers the way they have been doing it in Mexico. These aren't a bunch of crack headed nigggers running around with their pants around their ankles and their glocks held sideways.

This shit was captured at a Los Zetas training camp near the border a couple months ago.



Military small arms


Ammo


3 RPGs, 2 .50 caliber rifles, a Remington 700, 3 M203 40mm grenade launchers, M79 40mm grenade launcher


Hand grenades and 40mm grenades for M203 grenade launcher.




Body armor and side arms


Communications


Uniforms

Once again I bring facts and you bring wishful thinking. Pull your head out of your ass, you stupid douche.

can we get back to mocking wolfman's genitals?

KC Scott wrote:Do you differentiate between crime and terrorism? if so, how?

Armed foreign nationals in control of a corridor of US territory 80 miles wide and 100 miles deep is more than a simple criminal matter. Law enforcement isn't equipped to deal with that threat. They are completely outgunned.

Your assertion that we are better at identifying terrorist threats is just as idiotic as your claim that the border is more secure. Frankly, we absolutely no idea who is pouring into Arizona because we aren't in control of our own fucking border.

88 wrote:I don't think anyone is advocating that the Federal Government should assume the law enforcement duties tasked to state and local governments.

Actually, mvscal is.

Quite unambiguously.

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.

mvscal wrote:Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.

Why don't you shit or get off the pot, Cinderella?

If you think you're being clever by playing a game of semantics to avoid being pinned to a position, you're not.

Marty...

STFU, Upper Mexican.

The roles of the federal governmant are VERY clearly defined in our Big Document, and securing the borders is one of those roles.


It's kind of unfortunate that KC Scott would start a topic like this, when it's readily apparent he's never actually read the Articles.

His complete ignorance of our Country's charter is actually kind of embarrassing, and the mark of a mewling liberal, freedom-hater.


Local/state/county law enforcement enforces LOCAL/STATE laws. The federal guv enforces the borders, and investigates/prosecutes interstate crimes, and illegal immigration...


Ain't rocket science. In fact, that document/charter lays it all out pretty clearly.

Dinsdale wrote: The roles of the federal governmant are VERY clearly defined in our Big Document, and securing the borders is one of those roles.

That's fine. Perhaps mvscal can state a firm position like you did instead of dancing around like some gay pride parade drag queen rather than calling anyone else with an opinion a dumbfuck, regardless of the opinion.

Well, I'm in no position to speak for mvscal, and I'm in no rush to defend him, since there's a slight chance he might have questioned both my intelligence and sexual orientation at some point over the years...


But I'll speak for him, anyway.


This shit -- our basic operating rules, and defined roles of the various levels of governemt, are VERY clearly defined.


Nothing pmsgal has said here has wavered from those basic rules, so I'm guessing... just guessing... that he's :facepalming: at peoples' failure to grasp these ever-so-basic concepts...


as am I.

Dinsdale wrote:Well, I'm in no position to speak for mvscal, and I'm in no rush to defend him, since there's a slight chance he might have questioned both my intelligence and sexual orientation at some point over the years...

Uhh...you think?

You, Wolfie poptard and Senor "I'm not a Mexcal" want to just bounce this a political football to the immigration topic

Scott, I would submit to you that Barry wanted to bounce the illegal immigration issue topic to ... "Our borders are more secure than they were 20 years ago" rhetoric, so that foolish sheep would nod their head up and down as they receive another one of his all-knowing lectures.

In light of AZ's serious problems, I see no reason why our national leader would give that kind of a take.

A correct leader would say that the AZ violence and invasion is entirely unacceptable and that he intends to do all in his power to rectify the situation.

His (and Bush's before him) failure to get with the program makes us very displeased.

Are you pleased with our "secure" borders?

KC Scott wrote:then group the Messican drug gangs on the same level as islamic terrorist threat and they are just fucking not.

Actually, the drug cartels are far more dangerous threats both to our national sovereignty and American lives. Illegal aliens have killed far more citizens than Islamist groups ever have. They have done and will continue to do far more economic damage than Islamists ever will. Drug cartels are in control of far more US territory than Islamists are.

You need to stop backpeddaling, you fucking pussy. The borders aren't secure and, just in case you were wondering, that means that Islamists can cross our border just as easily as any dirt eating Mexican peon.

All your fancy technology to "identify threats from abroad" doesn't mean jackmotherfucking shit because any asshat with a handful of pesos can simply stroll across our border any time any day.

KC Scott wrote:
I didn't see or hear the context (and that's important) in which he made the comment. If he was talking about the fight against terrorism then he's most certainly correct and this is a perfect example of taking something he said and spinning it to something entirely different.

That's what so brilliant about throwing around political vagaries like 'secure borders' and 'war on terror'.
It can mean whatever you want it to, no one knows what anyone else is talking about. An Islamic Boris Badinoff with a suitcase nuke, Mexican cartel militias, day labourers, Indian booze smugglers, the northern border or southern. Whether or not it's a job for intelligence, police, customs, national guardsmen or armoured brigade.

Just one stupidly, blanket legislative approach to a whole basket of nuanced problems and nothing gets solved.

88 wrote: Why are you in denial?

He's not in denial. He's been caught in a lie and now he's trying to spin and backpedal his way out of it.

Typical bitch move.

While you're searching for links, try looking up how many people have been killed by illegals committing DUI while in the US.

Carson wrote:While you're searching for links, try looking up how many people have been killed by illegals committing DUI while in the US.

I can think of one, right off the top of my head... my friend's brother.

Carson wrote:While you're searching for links, try looking up how many people have been killed by illegals committing DUI while in the US.

Dats why I'z runs dem illegals ovah myself.

Sin,

KC Scott wrote:but to try and say they represnt a threat to National Security is absurd.

Go ahead and explain to us how 20 million foreign invaders murdering thousands of Americans and doing trillions in damage to our economy is not a threat to our national security.

Unchecked illegal immigration is, by definition, a national security issue. In fact, there isn't a more fundamental national security issue than keeping people who don't belong here out of the country.

Islamist terrorism is a sideshow distraction. A bunch mouth breathing troglodytes at the TSA make you take your shoes off and throw away your toothpaste before getting on a plane and dimwits like you think that makes you more secure than ever.

You really are a colossal tard.

Yep...doin' a "heckuva job" identifying threats.

OUR VIEW EDITORIAL: Keeping 6-year-old girl on the terrorist ‘no fly’ list is plainly absurd

The placing of a 6-year-old Westlake girl on a government-compiled Terrorist Watchlist is once again troubling.

The incident involving young Alyssa Thomas calls into question the reliability of the “no fly” list that comes under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It’s even more disturbing that the girl’s parents are getting the runaround from Homeland Security officials while trying to get her taken off the list.

The problem arose when Dr. Santhosh Thomas and his family checked into Cleveland Hopkins International Airport earlier this month for a flight to Minneapolis. A ticket agent said Alyssa was on the watch list.

The Thomases were allowed to fly that day, but authorities told them to contact Homeland Security to clear up the matter. The father did so. Homeland Security officials responded with a letter addressed to Alyssa notifying her that nothing in her file will be changed.

http://www.morningjournal.com/articles/ ... 960172.txt

Scott,

Like Dins, MVSCAL has called me names and other ill things over the years but I do respect his opinions and I have to agree with his assessment of this situation and your pussyfooting posturing. He gave you a direct answer but yet, like most Liberaltards, you avoid answering it because liberal thinkers synapses are wired wrong in their brain.

Our piece of shit president has no concept, clue or inkling on what is going on and what he needs to do about the more pressing things. The most pressing things are border control, as with cockroaches and rats, if you let enough in, they will ruin the vicinity and anything else surrounding it and when they breed, horrifying results will follow. The other pressing thing is the oil slick and that has been beaten to death already. He is a colossal failure and he listens to idiots like you instead of the law enforcement agencies and governors of the affected borders.

End this conservation, even though the name calling in here were epic in nature, because clearly, as mvscal said, you have not researched nor understand the most simplest concept on what is National and what is state responsibilities on this matter.

mvscal,

Those pictures, are they from the drug cartel camps? Sheesh, Texas, Arizona or New Mexico state patrols wouldn't last 2 minutes in fire-fight.

I did and came to the same conclusion like others in here.

You have no clue on the situation. Read what others have said, read it again, rinse and repeat until you get it into that noggin of yours.

We have an issue and things AREN'T getting better, but worse and if this breeding infection doesn't stop soon, it will be beyond our control.

"The borders are not secure"
"The borders are not secure"

Now click your heels and say that over and over because you have been Obamalized.

KC Scott wrote:Really? I've worked in the Security industry over 20 years.

Off yourself, you fat retard

The military probably has a shitload of old mines lying around. We could incorporate them into a border security system. Anyone crossing the minefield would become buzzard food. Think of it as helping the local wildlife. A few replacement mines would take care of ones that actually were set off. I doubt if it would take long for the word to get out.
Seriously. Has one Obama Kool-Aid drinker in here actually agreed that the borders are more secure ? I rested my case a couple of pages ago. Now MGOoo can get back to his junior high posting. I'll kick it off. Wolfman is old.

Wolfman wrote:The military probably has a shitload of old mines lying around. We could incorporate them into a border security system.

Once again, you prove yourself a doddering old fool.

Think technology.


Screw the fucking mines, it's all about the Phalanx.


I'll bet a bunch of them are less than $40 billion.


Oh, you mean illegal actions have consequences?

With my plan (that I've spouting for many years), there are environmental/wildlife concerns -- but I'll bet the native fauna learn the deal more quickly than the Beaners.



And BTW -- KC SCott... you've established yourself as quite the fucking idiot here. I mean, not just your garden variety tard... a mondo-maxi-zoom-dweeby tard.


I can't even believe a real American spouted such stupidity... and not just once, you've reinforced it repeatedly.


Just spechless-inducing-amazing-retardation.