It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thank You Sanctuary Cities for paying for the wall

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Have fun?

Cities can be defunded in many ways such as States and pressure therof.

If it is an issue of National Security.
It can be demanded by the president as it pertains to borders and non-enforcemt of the law of the land.

Mg
edit on 26-1-2017 by missed_gear because: On phone spelling




posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Assuming this were true, it would still be US taxpayers paying for the wall lol.

As if "sanctuary cities" don't also include Americans that are against the "sanctuary" status, American conservatives, American moderates/independents, American liberals that are for legal immigrations. It's funny how quickly people change their tune as long as a new buzzword is used.

So American taxpayer dollars would still be used to pay for the wall, not Mexican funds. In order to decrease any right wing backlash for this, it's being rationalized by targeting American taxpayer funds that were allocated to go to specific American cities. Did I miss anything?

edit on 26-1-2017 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 01:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: underwerks

It Isn't "the Presidents bidding" it's called enforcing existing laws.

The executive branch can absolutely with hold millions from those cities. And dont forget the Republicans also have the house and senate, they can easily pass laws that will enable them to make it very painfull for cities to remain non compliant.

They can also use lawsuits which would bring the matter to the high courts where the courts will undoubtedly side with existing law. Therefore the cities would then be ordered to comply.

Sanctuary cities wont last long, this administration is moving very swiftly and efficiantly.

Doesn't matter. If Trump tries to defund sanctuary cities it'll be tied up in court longer than he'll be in office.

That's the reality. Even if in the end the agree with him. The wall is a farce, plain and simple and what little he does add to the 700 mile wall that's already there will be paid for by the taxpayer.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stevemagegod
www.chicagotribune.com...


The orders Trump signed Wednesday also increase the number of border patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to be hired.


Awesome then that means I can take the Border Patrol exam a lot earlier than expected. After all i got my 60+ college credits. Just waiting on them to host it.


Trump's order to crack down on sanctuary cities — locales that don't cooperate with immigration authorities — could cost individual jurisdictions millions of dollars. But the administration may face legal challenges, given that some federal courts have found that local jurisdictions cannot hold immigrants beyond their jail term or deny them bond based only a request from immigration authorities.


Im hoping that those funds get transferred to the Wall.


Thats fine. Sanctuary cities will just stop paying taxes. Where do you think most tax money comes from?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:51 AM
link   
In my honest opinion a wall would not stop the flow of illegals. Just a huge waste of resources and money. Will it a manned wall throughout? At designation mile checkpoints? How deep will it be? How high? I just dont see how it will stop anything. Im sure itll slow them down though.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stevemagegod
Thank You Sanctuary Cities for paying for the wall

“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: Stevemagegod
Thank You Sanctuary Cities for paying for the wall

“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

While still being most on the fence(hah no fence of wall pun) about this, the above makes for a valid point taking into consideration if there's a full out force to go after them. Everyday citizens rights may also likely have to be set aside to meet criteria for strict immigration enforcement(as noted during the campaigning- a database for everyone if not just suspects innocent or not). How about detention camps?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: namelesss

So I should be upset that they are coming for criminals that are being sheltered by our political class for their own gain?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: namelesss

Spam?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 06:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: Stevemagegod

Yay, a wall! Now we just need to ban travel to the US from elsewhere. Get a passport, go to the border crossing or hop on an airplane for your "vacation" to the US, and just don't go back.

I'm not saying a wall won't help - it will, its just highly unlikely that its worth the investment.


You and 40 million south americans think that.

The WALL is to help mexico stop people going through their country.

They don't seem to have a grip on their own invasion.






posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: namelesss

Does not apply to illegally present non-citizens or criminals.

They come for murderers, shoplifters, and rapists too cause they break the law. Should we start protesting for serial killer rights or larcenist rights too?

I mean seriously, everyone you named are still legal citizens of the country that have broken no laws. The illegal immigrants very presence is breaking our laws, and the impetus is specifically on those who've actually broken even more laws than just being illegal immigrants.

You're misapplying the quote and equating the tyrannical targeting of non criminal legal citizens as equivalent to enforcing the law on non-citizens who've broken actual laws.

The impetus of government should always be to care for it's citizens first above all other peoples be they foreign or domestic. CITIZENS first. Illegal Immigrants are not US citizens, they are the citizens of the nation they've abandoned. If you have a problem with their treatment take it up with the nation actually responsible for them. Hint that's not ours.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: Stevemagegod

Yay, a wall! Now we just need to ban travel to the US from elsewhere. Get a passport, go to the border crossing or hop on an airplane for your "vacation" to the US, and just don't go back.

I'm not saying a wall won't help - it will, its just highly unlikely that its worth the investment.

SHHHH! The wall ends all illegal immigration and there will NEVER be another illegal immigrant in the country again!



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
Assuming this were true, it would still be US taxpayers paying for the wall lol.

As if "sanctuary cities" don't also include Americans that are against the "sanctuary" status, American conservatives, American moderates/independents, American liberals that are for legal immigrations. It's funny how quickly people change their tune as long as a new buzzword is used.

So American taxpayer dollars would still be used to pay for the wall, not Mexican funds. In order to decrease any right wing backlash for this, it's being rationalized by targeting American taxpayer funds that were allocated to go to specific American cities. Did I miss anything?


Apparently the people in those cities aren't Americans.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Puppylove



I mean seriously, everyone you named are still legal citizens of the country that have broken no laws. The illegal immigrants very presence is breaking our laws, and the impetus is specifically on those who've actually broken even more laws than just being illegal immigrants.

So I guess they should also go for all illegal drug users next? And anyone who ever drank alcohol while underaged? And anyone who's gambled illegally, illegally downloaded any digital content, etc? After all, there would be no illegal drug market here if so many Americans weren't illegally using them. There would be no prostitutes here if so many Americans weren't illegally buying their services. In fact, there'd be no undocumented workers here if so many Americans weren't illegally buying their services as well.

So I find this argument completely unrealistic.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I realized a long time ago that they don't care about other Americans. They only care about the Americans that think like they do. They also cheer for a police state & big govt policies as long as they're aimed at other American demographics.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Are you daft, all those people you mentioned are citizens, whether they break the law or not the country is still responsible for them.

The key is citizen or non citizen.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Are you daft, all those people you mentioned are citizens, whether they break the law or not the country is still responsible for them.

The key is citizen or non citizen.

Here's what you said:


I mean seriously, everyone you named are still legal citizens of the country that have broken no laws. The illegal immigrants very presence is breaking our laws, and the impetus is specifically on those who've actually broken even more laws than just being illegal immigrants.

you're the one who emphasized 3 times that it was about breaking laws, not citizenship. You even said it was "specifically on those who've actually broken even more laws than just being illegal immigrants". That's why I only replied to that part.

So no, it wasn't just about citizens. Do you even read the things you post?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I realized a long time ago that they don't care about other Americans. They only care about the Americans that think like they do. They also cheer for a police state & big govt policies as long as they're aimed at other American demographics.


To whom does this apply to?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Come on, now. Just look at the support for any time a mandatory curfew is implemented in minority or "liberal" neighborhoods. And look at the support for "stop and frisk" policies in minority neighborhoods. And look at the support for more domestic surveillance programs of American Muslims; the talk of sending American Muslims to internment camps like what was done to Japanese Americans during WW2; the potential deportation forces within Latina/Latino communities, etc. They even elected a guy who's open to sending American citizens to Gitmo.

They only hate a police state when they think it's aimed at themselves.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Like I said the executive branch can with-hold lots of money right away, not all of the defending would even have to go to the courts. For example they can immediately WITHOUT GOING TO COURT with-hold hundreds of millions from just NYC alone.

The money that the executive branch IS able to immediately with-hold itself would be a VERY effective tool to get MOST of those problem cities to comply. The few cities left could be made to comply with additional methods. And yes this can be done very quickly and very efficiently as hard as that might be for you to hear.

The wall will be built, the illegals will be deported and the liberals will cry, and you will be so disappointed to watch Trump actually fulfill his promises......how sad.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join