Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 204 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 3047
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    88,853
    Seeing as none of the political parties are talking about cracking down on visa overstays, the true cause of our increasing illegal immigration problem, I definitely don’t trust them to solve anything. They will nimble around the edges on the Central American border that is the source of less and less immigration, in fact there are more people going south rather than north. So if you view that as a problem, we’ll its been solving itself for the last two decades.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    14,347
    Deport melania

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    88,853
    Curious what’s wrong with reuniting families. It seems like a good policy from both a humanitarian and policy perspective. Since I don’t think I have to explain the humanitarian side, I’ll focus on the policy side. Family reunification is good because it encourages people to have good behavior and not be criminals. It should be obvious that people will close family ties are less likely to be criminals and more likely to be productive members of society. This is the type of person we want. Right?

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,633
    I think that the solution is building a 25 billion dollar wall that can't be built on Mexico's side and that no one wants built on our side. A wall that no one wants to pay for so much that the only way you can make it seem viable is saying Mexico will pay for it even though Mexico will not pay for it. I think it's the best use of 25 billion dollars.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,633
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    Funny how the media told us for years now that there were "only" 700K illegals in the DACA program, but now that we're moving on a deal they say there are 1.8 million illegals under DACA. I wonder what we'll find out the real number is if they ever give them amnesty.

    It's almost like the media just outright lies for their agenda (cut me some slack I just time-traveled from 1988).
    It seems that you're just substituting "the media told us" in for "I misinterpreted what was being said".
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    21,323
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I read the extract from the report. And I’ve seen the summaries of the other reports that directly contradict what this guy found.
    so the report you read must be right, and this report must be wrong. is that how it works, whatever reports you read and agree with are the reports that are correct.






    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    "It's possible" does not mean Mexico is going to pay for the wall. Heck, Donald Trump is asking for $25 Billion dollars from US taxpayers, that's a pretty good indication they are not going to pay for the wall.
    the sooner the wall is built the better, so the money is needed sooner than being able to get the money by any other way.

    what if a bigger/better wall significantly cuts down on the number of illegals crossing the border and the amount that they cost America?






    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I wonder if anyone within the White House has considered the ramifications on his wall.

    Given that net migration has been flowing towards Mexico since 2007, if he were to build a wall and that trend continues; then he would be trapping more Mexicans in our country than he would be keeping out.
    do you have any facts to back this up?
    what is it that you are saying here? more Mexicans are going from America to Mexico than Mexicans going from Mexico to America? even that has to be explained further because is that legal or illegal?



    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Seeing as none of the political parties are talking about cracking down on visa overstays, the true cause of our increasing illegal immigration problem, I definitely don’t trust them to solve anything. They will nimble around the edges on the Central American border that is the source of less and less immigration, in fact there are more people going south rather than north. So if you view that as a problem, we’ll its been solving itself for the last two decades.
    tens of thousands of illegals crossing the border every month is not having the problem solved itself. the numbers are still way too high.







    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,521
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    It seems that you're just substituting "the media told us" in for "I misinterpreted what was being said".
    'If you don't listen to what the media says then you'll understand they aren't misleading and actually are truthful.'

    Thanks for your insight. If it weren't for people like you and dbroncos I might begin to question Hoffer's theory.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    88,853
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    so the report you read must be right, and this report must be wrong. is that how it works, whatever reports you read and agree with are the reports that are correct.








    the sooner the wall is built the better, so the money is needed sooner than being able to get the money by any other way.

    what if a bigger/better wall significantly cuts down on the number of illegals crossing the border and the amount that they cost America?








    do you have any facts to back this up?
    what is it that you are saying here? more Mexicans are going from America to Mexico than Mexicans going from Mexico to America? even that has to be explained further because is that legal or illegal?





    tens of thousands of illegals crossing the border every month is not having the problem solved itself. the numbers are still way too high.






    No the ones that contain facts and reasonable conclusions based on facts are correct. It's quite simple. If that particular one didn't do that, then blame the writer.

    The wall is a waste of money and as long as we've got people starving and needing for medical treatment, that's a no from me.

    Here is some data from Pew: Since 2007, the number of illegal Mexican immigrants has gone down by 1M. Given population growth, that number should have gone up (by what number, I don't know). The illegal immigrants here from Mexico have been those that have been here since GWB was president and possibly even his dad.

    ICE is doing a good job in reducing those numbers through increased deportations, a trend that has been ongoing since at least Obama was president (each year was a new record for number of deportations under Obama). I suspect it was probably the same under GWB.

    I'm not sure how Trump's base feels about him extending amnesty so widely. That seems like an odd move for him. But again, the wall is a no. The family reunification sounds like a bad change to remove. I don't think that we should remove the visa lottery. That's how we let people in from those "shithole" countries. They are good for our country.
    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!


  9. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,633
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    'If you don't listen to what the media says then you'll understand they aren't misleading and actually are truthful.'

    Thanks for your insight. If it weren't for people like you and dbroncos I might begin to question Hoffer's theory.
    "The media". "The media". "The media".

    No one thinks the general media is good.

    Just seemed like a weird thing to blame the media for. Some specific numbers (that aren't misleading) that I'd venture a guess almost no one knows. I didn't know those numbers. Guess the media is really blowing it!
    Last edited by ManRam; 01-29-2018 at 03:37 PM. Reason: idk
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    46,549
    I love when Fox makes accusations about "the media".....what exactly are you Fox? So open about being fictitious that they don't count themselves as media anymore?

  11. #56
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    21,323
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    No the ones that contain facts and reasonable conclusions based on facts are correct. It's quite simple. If that particular one didn't do that, then blame the writer.

    The wall is a waste of money and as long as we've got people starving and needing for medical treatment, that's a no from me.
    reasonable conclusions based on the opinions that you want to believe.

    there are people in America starving and needing medical treatment, actual American citizens that deserve to be a priority. so then I would think you would be for these people getting what they deserve and to not only stop giving anything to illegal immigrants, just stop all immigration entirely and focus on the American people that are "starving and needing for medical treatment"? or I'm guessing no.
    why use any money on immigration when actual Americans are suffering.


    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Here is some data from Pew: Since 2007, the number of illegal Mexican immigrants has gone down by 1M. Given population growth, that number should have gone up (by what number, I don't know). The illegal immigrants here from Mexico have been those that have been here since GWB was president and possibly even his dad.

    ICE is doing a good job in reducing those numbers through increased deportations, a trend that has been ongoing since at least Obama was president (each year was a new record for number of deportations under Obama). I suspect it was probably the same under GWB.

    I'm not sure how Trump's base feels about him extending amnesty so widely. That seems like an odd move for him. But again, the wall is a no. The family reunification sounds like a bad change to remove. I don't think that we should remove the visa lottery. That's how we let people in from those "shithole" countries. They are good for our country.
    what is the number roughly per month? not compared to any time in the past, just the numbers.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/arrests...-border-surge/

    The U.S. government on Friday announced a seventh straight monthly increase in people being arrested or denied entry along the Mexican border, erasing much of the early gains of President Donald Trump's push to tighten the border. Denials of entry for people at official crossings and border arrests reached 39,006 in November, up 12 percent from 34,855 in October and more than double the 15,766 who were stopped or arrested in April.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,633
    EDIT: Wrong thread. I'll save this rant and calling FNK deserving names for another day!
    Last edited by ManRam; 01-29-2018 at 07:57 PM.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    88,853
    So sad that this perfectly encapsulates by thoughts as a Democrat.


  14. #59
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    21,323
    no counter to this post?
    http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sho...8#post32135218






    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/30...s-testing.html

    Trump’s border wall prototypes virtually impassable, pass rigorous testing
    While Trump critics and editorial writers who’ve spent decades living in New York and Washington refer to the president’s “wall” as silly, stupid and useless, those who actually work on the border say fences are effective.

    “The evidence shows that barriers work,” says Pete Hermansen, a 22-year veteran of the Border Patrol and former director of the agency’s tactical and rescue teams. “In urban areas, a wall makes sense. In more remote areas, sensors and mobile cameras may be the right choice. But you can’t say fences don’t work.”

    Before San Diego built a 46-mile fence in the late 1980s, border agents were overwhelmed by illegal traffic from Mexico. In 1986, the agency arrested 629,656 illegal immigrants, almost the population of Las Vegas.

    Today, the 60-mile sector is almost entirely fenced. Apprehensions last year fell to 26,086, a 95 percent drop, as double fencing in the most populated areas replaced barbed wire and 6-foot-high steel mats.

    “Fences have made a big difference,” said Tucson Sector Chief Rudy Kirsch. “It reduced the traffic flow of immigrants and drugs across the border.”

    Fencing in San Diego pushed migrants east to Yuma, Arizona, where agents made 138,438 arrests in 2006. After erecting 126 miles of fence, illegal traffic fell 90 percent, to 12,847, in 2017.

    “We proved walls work,” said a senior Yuma agent not authorized to speak on the record. “But that doesn’t mean we need a 30-foot wall from sea to shining sea. The wall system the president is talking about includes a physical wall, but also a fiber optic sensor cable, radars, roads, lights.”

    That technology is one component of the president’s border security initiative. What he calls a “wall system” includes a barrier, updated cameras, sensors, roads and lighting.

    “A wall system gives us situational awareness throughout the border and certainty of apprehension of individuals who are crossing the border,” said Hermansen.

    The wall will be based on the eight prototypes recently constructed outside San Diego. The models recently underwent rigorous testing by special operation teams from El Paso and Florida.

    According to those familiar with the tests, the walls withstood cutting torches, jackhammers and concrete saws better than anything currently on the border, and were almost impossible to climb, thanks to anti-climbing and anti-perching features.

    “I can’t talk about it,” said a DHS official in Washington. “But the walls were so high we had to suspend testing. It was unsafe. Out of dozens and attempts, one guy made it to the top but he couldn’t get down. We had to bring him down with cherry picker.”

    The test results are secret and won’t be revealed for another two to three months, sources say. But after multiple interviews with Border Patrol sources, here are a few key takeaways.

    Among the eight designs, agents still prefer the see-through bollard style fence, topped with a flat concrete or steel anti-scaling mat. Agents say a 30-foot-high fence may not be necessary, 24 feet might be acceptable to save a few dollars.

    Several designs had large concrete bases. One agent from New Mexico said, “I don’t think concrete is going to work as a primary fence,” he said. “Check Google and look at exploding grout, and you’ll see why.”

    A “primary” fence is exposed to Mexican smugglers. A “secondary” fence is separated from Mexico by a road and a primary fence. Double fencing is considered the gold standard in border security because it gives border agents time to apprehend illegal immigrants. The New Mexico agent is afraid the smugglers, given enough time, can destroy the concrete base and agents will be unable to see it happen because the wall is opaque.

    Each sector, Fox News has learned, will be free to modify the design based on need, topography and terrain. The fence in San Diego will look different than one in the Yuma desert, the Tucson Mountains or the Rio Grande Valley.

    In interviews, the administration indicated it needed 800 miles of new fencing. Currently, thanks largely to the 2006 Secure Fence Act, the U.S. has 350 miles of pedestrian fence.

    Agents say given the choice, the new fence will replace an old Vietnam-era fence that is old and only eight feet tall, or they’ll add a “secondary” wall, especially in areas adjacent to large cities like Juarez and Tijuana, Mexico, where illegal traffic is most intense.

    “We do have outdated fence in some areas that does need to be upgraded,” said Tucson Sector Chief Rudy Karisch. “But we also need some added tactical infrastructure like access roads, additional lighting and technology. All those things needed.”

    Technology is not consistent among border sectors. Some, like Tucson, have the latest cameras that automatically scan the horizon and stop the moment they see movement. Other sectors do not. San Diego, in places, has paved roads, which make for quick apprehension. Most other areas do not.

    Agents are the first to admit no wall is impassable, but a more robust border will reduce illegal traffic, turning back some while forcing others to attempt passage by means.

    “Will they scale over it and tunnel under it? Yes,” Hermansen said. “But if you discourage people as much as you can at the outset, you are dealing with a much smaller population that you have to push with technology, manpower and other assets.”

    What is not included in the discussions is the third rail in this debate that all agree would make a difference in reducing illegal immigration: E-Verify.

    “If you want people to stop coming, cut off the magnet. If they can’t get a job... and E-Verify virtually guarantees it... people won’t come and some will go home,” said one San Diego agent.

    This provision, however, is a deal killer for Democrats because it cuts off money and jobs for existing illegal immigrant families. It’s also a deal killer for the GOP because agribusiness, meatpackers, restaurants and hotels say they would suffer massive job losses if their illegal workers were forced to have their identities checked through a homeland security database.

    Because of this, agents favor the deal. But without interior and worksite enforcement, the border security remains front-loaded. If an illegal agent beats the border patrol, some believe they are home free to start a family and remain in the U.S. for good.

    “There is a balance here between a symbol that sells, like a ‘wall,’ and substantive security measures,” says Ali Noorani, with the National Immigration Forum. “I don’t think Democrats are saying no to a wall. What they’re saying is lets be smart about it. Congress and the administration need to put together funding and policies that provide a balance between technology, infrastructure and ports of entry.”

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,002
    Why would someone reply to a fake news article? Or the subsequent Fox News fluff piece?

Page 4 of 204 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •