Promising The Great Wall of America.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest

originally posted by: mikell
a reply to: syrinx high priest

How is building a wall racist?? illegal is illegal leave the black people out of it.

lol

because nobody is talking about keeping out the irish, italian english or germans, thats how

How does the illegal immigrant population break down?

I found this:


Where do you think the focus should be?

a reply to: UKTruth

I've already stated this before, you can Thank NAFTA for that.

ROBBINS: That 20-year hump in illegal immigration led to massive militarization along border and to millions living underground in the U.S. In Mexico, manufacturers built new factories for cars, TVs and other goods, replacing some jobs that used to be in the U.S. NAFTA has certainly benefited corporations operating in all three countries. Some economists say it's also benefited workers. Robert Scott disagrees. Scott is a researcher with the progressive Economic Policy Institute. He says NAFTA has led to flat or lower wages for the working classes in all three countries. ROBERT SCOTT: I think it's pretty clear that who lost were workers, ordinary workers without a college degree, production workers in the United States and Canada and Mexico.
Wave of Illegal Immigration after NAFTA

a reply to: yuppa

Oh right. Back in the day there were no laws. Piss off with that logic. How do you know the native Americans killed off people that were here? And what happened to them was not justified. The method of buying them off.was pretty horrendous.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: UKTruth

I've already stated this before, you can Thank NAFTA for that.

Wave of Illegal Immigration after NAFTA

Regardless of the driver of illegal immigration, it seems nonsensical to me to focus on countries like Germany and Ireland, unless its a token effort to appease people so as not to offend Asians and Hispanics.

There's probably only two long-term options.

Build a wall, or the US becomes a Latin American country.

I mean this is the thing with overwhelming migrant crises at the moment.

Osmosis and legal and controlled contact between countries is normal.

But now there are floods of people coming in, and I doubt they come to adapt or integrate.
They bring their baggage with them.
You, as a born native must adapt to them.

But what's the point of that?

It's like fleeing until the place you're fleeing to is eventually just as horrid as the place you fled from.
It's only a matter of time.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Your're honestly going to blame the situation in Iran just on the US?
The Iranians had nothing to do with anything?
en.wikipedia.org...

But yeah, build a wall, and no more interference from either side.
No more US interference anywhere, and conversely, no more interference or illegal immigrants from other countries.

After more than 50 years, every ideology must look after their own.
Sounds fair to me.

a reply to: UKTruth

NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)

I agree, it would be 'nonsensical to focus' on entities superfluous to the issue. The focus should be on Mexico and Latin American countries, NAFTA is a major cause of illegal immigration from those countries, and should be addressed first.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: yuppa

Oh right. Back in the day there were no laws. Piss off with that logic. How do you know the native Americans killed off people that were here? And what happened to them was not justified. The method of buying them off.was pretty horrendous.

There was archalogical evidence of it. look it up sometime. the "natives" were not native as they claim. And Colonization was not Illegal. There was no government back then so there were no laws against moving in. The only law there was was Possesion is 9/10ths the law.

SOrry you dont like to hear the truth though. Also I didnt say Their deaths were justified. I said they got shut down when they tried to renig on their deals.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: UKTruth

NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)

I agree, it would be 'nonsensical to focus' on entities superfluous to the issue. The focus should be on Mexico and Latin American countries, NAFTA is a major cause, and should be addressed first.

You must have missed the fact I was responding to another poster that claimed it was racist because Irish and Germans were not being discussed too. Did you?

We obviously agree that the problem is coming from Hispanic and Asian countries.

a reply to: yuppa

Just because there were no formal governments doesn't mean their weren't laws abided by the people that were living on the land at that time. Those laws were trampled upon and those laws included a deep respect for the land on which they lived and every living creature.

a reply to: UKTruth

Apologies.

The generalization that the immigration issue has a racial component is not inaccurate. There are people in the world who would prefer a policy to keep certain ethnicities out of America. However, the primary engines that drive the immigration issue is Nativism and Nationalism; not something to be despised, unless combined with Socialism of course.

originally posted by: JAY1980
a reply to: GodEmperor

Illegal immigrants cost US tax payers an estimated $113 billion a year. It could be made of polished granite and still not cost as much as the average American has already had to burden.

And that wall wpuld be useless as they climb over it,tunnel under it or sail around it.

So your still spending $113 billion on illegals plus built a useless wall the worlds laughing at.


Better to start just enforcing the laws you already have and putting harsh penalty on those that knowingly employ illegals. That would cut it down more than a stupid wall.

a reply to: crazyewok

But you can't penalize the corporations they are the the ones who make the rules. And it would make things better and that's just not part of the plan.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: yuppa

Just because there were no formal governments doesn't mean their weren't laws abided by the people that were living on the land at that time. Those laws were trampled upon and those laws included a deep respect for the land on which they lived and every living creature.

The Supreme Law, the Law of the Jungle, was never broken. There is no human civilization in the history of mankind that has truly and collectively abided by some moral or spiritual law. We now have the technology available to monitor and control every aspect of human activity, but there is no moral component to it, it is about evolution of man into a more dominant species.

a reply to: Joecanada11

Yeah, nice job wiping out the mega-fauna.

But even so, let indigenous peoples have their rights and reservations.

The indigenous peoples of Europe don't have that privilege, and a community of 300 people may well be swamped with 900 young, Islamist men.
But then again only people in the Amazon matter these days.

It's easy to use the Native Americans for all kinds of views, but I know their position is complex.

Let all nations have their wall.

Sure, allow some strangers and refugees, but it cannot be a free for all.
Because your nation was built with the blood, sweat and tears of your ancestors, and it cannot just be given away.

There's 30 million potential migrants and refugees in the world (conservatively) - be consistent and take them all, and let them leech off your social security, or build a wall, and tell them to sort their own nonsense out.

a reply to: yuppa

a reply to: Metallicus


Obvious agenda driven revisionist tripe is obvious.

Don't waste your breath

I'm off to read about lumps of coal.

a reply to: halfoldman

Sure let them sort their own nonsense while you keep reaping the benefits of your government exploiting their resources and people as if they don't matter. Keep installing puppet governments in the name of freedom while the people of the country have to deal with it. Keep the drug cartels in business with nonsense laws on substances. Sounds like a great plan.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest

because nobody is talking about keeping out the irish, italian english or germans, thats how

Well that's a lame rebuttal.

We don't have a hemorrhaging border with Ireland, Italy, England nor Germany.

Just a question, why's nobody tunneling into North Korea?

Why don't we see South Koreans tunneling en mass into North Korea?

The thing is, Western countries have something that works.

It's called social democracy, accountability and humanity.

But oh no.Those other dirt-holes can't have that!
How dare we even demand such a thing for them?
Our most radical academics and universities think it's a great system, where everybody wants to flee from.

I mean we can't tell people the truth these days, so let's rather build a wall.

a reply to: Joecanada11

Well that's the usual violin.
I don't think it's currently true.

What is more true is that countries may no longer have autonomy.
Those with the strongest cultures are most likely to resist the NWO, and they are especially targeted for dilution and social destruction.

But OK, build a wall then.
They don't come to us; we don't interfere with them.
People using those arguments should be pro-wall, or they might as well just emigrate there.

And don't think it's only Western countries.
We've had had major xenophobic attacks in South Africa, for example, since 2008, especially due to the situation in Zimbabwe.
There are shifting populations everywhere, and all those places need regime change.
Simply shifting people around won't help.
Those places simply have bad governance.