National Emergency

[DonS 3,063]

Interesting read on how policies regarding asylum seekers are turning back caravan folks. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/us/border-migrants-asylum-mexico-aclu.html

Note: might need to open in incognito/private mode to get around paywall. 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

ACLU plans protest in front of White House. Curious as to how the civil liberties of Americans are being violated.

[cbfalcon 824]

53 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

ACLU plans protest in front of White House. Curious as to how the civil liberties of Americans are being violated.

No you aren’t 

[wiffleball 4,629]

58 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

ACLU plans protest in front of White House. Curious as to how the civil liberties of Americans are being violated.

I'd guess Eminent Domain?

[TimmySmith 2,782]

26 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

No you aren’t 

The ACLU has taken up a pro-immigrant stance over the last few years.  They have deviated from their mission of "protecting" the civil rights of Americans to a complete leftist agenda. 

FYI, you aren't either.

 

[cbfalcon 824]

1 hour ago, TimmySmith said:

The ACLU has taken up a pro-immigrant stance over the last few years.  They have deviated from their mission of "protecting" the civil rights of Americans to a complete leftist agenda. 

FYI, you aren't either.

 

We are in the midst of the peak Culture War. It’s what you want, I believe. That means if a person or an organization supports a specific cause, they will be perceived as supporting the entire Lefitist Agenda or the entire Righty Agenda. It’s especially obvious when you read the ACLU’s ridiculously biased opinions on fracking. 

 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

5 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

We are in the midst of the peak Culture War. It’s what you want, I believe. That means if a person or an organization supports a specific cause, they will be perceived as supporting the entire Lefitist Agenda or the entire Righty Agenda. It’s especially obvious when you read the ACLU’s ridiculously biased opinions on fracking. 

The ACLU used to brag about defending the Klan, to make their point about being unbiased.  Now the snowflakes that run the ACLU have openly stated they won't do so again.  It's a complete left wing organization whether I believe it is or not. 

I do support your culture war theory, although it has become almost entirely about pro left wing vs anti left wing, IMO.  

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Near the border in Arizona. While I admit this could be a sign entering Philly, there is a National Emergency if we have these signs posted anywhere in America.

[Kanil 519]

I think people are trying to justify something that's not an actual emergency.  If it's an emergency now, why wasn't it an emergency 20 years ago?

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

7 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I think people are trying to justify something that's not an actual emergency.  If it's an emergency now, why wasn't it an emergency 20 years ago?

Conversely if it was a crisis just a few years ago with Obama, why isn't it now?

[Kanil 519]

6 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Conversely if it was a crisis just a few years ago with Obama, why isn't it now?

I don't think it was a crisis a few years ago with Obama.  Now you answer.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

53 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Near the border in Arizona. While I admit this could be a sign entering Philly, there is a National Emergency if we have these signs posted anywhere in America.

Would love to know when those signs first went up. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

18 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I think people are trying to justify something that's not an actual emergency.  If it's an emergency now, why wasn't it an emergency 20 years ago?

Because Bush was in the pocket of the chamber of commerce and the Koch brothers. Cheap labor was all the rage back then. 

[Kanil 519]

6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Because Bush was in the pocket of the chamber of commerce and the Koch brothers. Cheap labor was all the rage back then. 

So are you saying it was an emergency 20 years ago but just wasn't acknowledged?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

1 minute ago, Kanil said:

So are you saying it was an emergency 20 years ago but just wasn't acknowledged?

Eye of the beholder I guess. I certainly did , especially after 9/11, to have a sieve for a border. We went nuts at the airports and docks and left the whole thing down there wide open. 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

9 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I don't think it was a crisis a few years ago with Obama.  Now you answer.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/media-acknowledged-epic-border-crisis-under-obama-what-changed

It was according to Obama.

 

As far as 20 years ago versus now?  How much has changed in the last 20 years? How much more dangerous is an open border both in the potency of drugs and willingness of terror organizations to strike abroad? How many 'caravans' of thousands of immigrants were marching towards our borders 20 years ago?  What about Catch and Release stipulations these days? What was the policy 20 years ago? Why are they handled differently now? Activist judges?

[Kanil 519]

20 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/media-acknowledged-epic-border-crisis-under-obama-what-changed

It was according to Obama.

 

As far as 20 years ago versus now?  How much has changed in the last 20 years? How much more dangerous is an open border both in the potency of drugs and willingness of terror organizations to strike abroad? How many 'caravans' of thousands of immigrants were marching towards our borders 20 years ago?  What about Catch and Release stipulations these days? What was the policy 20 years ago? Why are they handled differently now? Activist judges?

That's a bunch of questions, not an answer.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

1 minute ago, Kanil said:

That's a bunch of questions, not an answer.

The questions are indeed the answer. The prospect of an open border is much more dangerous now than it was 20 years ago. The thousands attempting to overrun the border at the same time is certainly an emergency. 

[Bert 1,087]

46 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I don't think it was a crisis a few years ago with Obama.  Now you answer.

Really?  This has been a crisis since the huge influx of cocaine started in Miami in the '80s.  Miami got all the attention and TV shows but cocaine and weapons coming across our southern board also increase significantly.   

[wiffleball 4,629]

1 hour ago, Bert said:

Really?  This has been a crisis since the huge influx of cocaine started in Miami in the '80s.  Miami got all the attention and TV shows but cocaine and weapons coming across our southern board also increase significantly.   

Not to mention the horrific rise in pink linen suits with no socks.

 

Was the beginning of the end.

[Kanil 519]

2 hours ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

The questions are indeed the answer. The prospect of an open border is much more dangerous now than it was 20 years ago. The thousands attempting to overrun the border at the same time is certainly an emergency. 

You mean the caravans that are going to legal points of entry?  Those are the least dangerous because we know about them 2 months before they get here.  Tell me how a wall helps that?

[Kanil 519]

2 hours ago, Bert said:

Really?  This has been a crisis since the huge influx of cocaine started in Miami in the '80s.  Miami got all the attention and TV shows but cocaine and weapons coming across our southern board also increase significantly.   

Do you honestly think the wall is going to stop drugs/guns getting here from Mexico?  There's a demand here and that demand will be met whether there's a wall or not.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

4 minutes ago, Kanil said:

Do you honestly think the wall is going to stop drugs/guns getting here from Mexico?  There's a demand here and that demand will be met whether there's a wall or not.

Less will get here. 

[Kanil 519]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Less will get here. 

No it wont.  They'll just get here in different ways.  For example, they send X number of packages through the desert that there's currently not a wall setup.  They also send Y number of packages through other means (you decide what X and Y are, doesn't matter).  If you close X, they'll just send X+Y through the Y route.

[wiffleball 4,629]

Yeah, I don't want this plane ready, but best to drop the whole guns issue. If anything, it's a matter of getting guns from America to Mexico to stop. Anybody ever remember project Gunrunner? Fast and Furious? Fox was all over this for quite a while.

True story. The majority of guns used to kill people in Chicago? Come from places like Indiana and Colorado militias. Majority of guns used by Mexican cartels? Check it out, they come from El Norte. True story.

 

Maybe they should build the fucken wall after all.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

10 minutes ago, Kanil said:

No it wont.  They'll just get here in different ways.  For example, they send X number of packages through the desert that there's currently not a wall setup.  They also send Y number of packages through other means (you decide what X and Y are, doesn't matter).  If you close X, they'll just send X+Y through the Y route.

Oh, so if we stop them at the ports of entry, where all the drugs supposedly come in, then we will have less drugs, right ?

[Kanil 519]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Oh, so if we stop them at the ports of entry, where all the drugs supposedly come in, then we will have less drugs, right ?

No.  The war on drugs is stupid and not winnable.  It's cost us an incredible amount of money and lives trying to fight it and the results are a focking joke.  Hell, if we decided a wall was the last step in the war on drugs and that we'd stop wasting money on it if we built it, I'd be rallying like hell for the wall.

[iam90sbaby 2,118]

1 minute ago, Kanil said:

No.  The war on drugs is stupid and not winnable.  It's cost us an incredible amount of money and lives trying to fight it and the results are a focking joke.  Hell, if we decided a wall was the last step in the war on drugs and that we'd stop wasting money on it if we built it, I'd be rallying like hell for the wall.

When people say “the war on drugs” they just mean laws that make drugs illegal right? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

4 minutes ago, Kanil said:

No.  The war on drugs is stupid and not winnable.  It's cost us an incredible amount of money and lives trying to fight it and the results are a focking joke.  Hell, if we decided a wall was the last step in the war on drugs and that we'd stop wasting money on it if we built it, I'd be rallying like hell for the wall.

So, we should just legalize them? 

[Kanil 519]

13 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So, we should just legalize them? 

I think drugs should be legal, yes.  I don't want to do them, but if you do, go for it.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

8 minutes ago, Kanil said:

I think drugs should be legal, yes.  I don't want to do them, but if you do, go for it.

Including heroin and meth?  How about crack? 

[Kanil 519]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Including heroin and meth?  How about crack? 

All of it.

[jerryskids 5,149]

6 minutes ago, Kanil said:

All of it.

Fentanyl too?

Fentanyl

What is it?

Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that is 80-100 times stronger than morphine. Pharmaceutical fentanyl was developed for pain management treatment of cancer patients, applied in a patch on the skin. Because of its powerful opioid properties, Fentanyl is also diverted for abuse. Fentanyl is added to heroin to increase its potency, or be disguised as highly potent heroin. Many users believe that they are purchasing heroin and actually don’t know that they are purchasing fentanyl – which often results in overdose deaths. Clandestinely-produced fentanyl is primarily manufactured in Mexico.

https://www.dea.gov/factsheets/fentanyl

[Kanil 519]

When I say all of it, I mean all of it.

Don't get me wrong, I wish no one would use any of the "bad" drugs out there but if you decide to, who the fock am I to stop you?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

Just now, Kanil said:

When I say all of it, I mean all of it.

Don't get me wrong, I wish no one would use any of the "bad" drugs out there but if you decide to, who the fock am I to stop you?

Well, society pays an awful high price for the drugs that are consumed now. Logic dictates  it would be far worse with legalization. Your idea is impractical and absurd. Thanks for playing. 

[Kanil 519]

6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Well, society pays an awful high price for the drugs that are consumed now. Logic dictates  it would be far worse with legalization. Your idea is impractical and absurd. Thanks for playing. 

Take the money spent on the dumb war on drugs and put it into education and treatment options.  I see that being much more effective than the current situation.  But fock it, I guess we'll just keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result (because the current solution is working so well).

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

2 minutes ago, Kanil said:

Take the money spent on the dumb war on drugs and put it into education and treatment options.  I see that being much more effective than the current situation.  But fock it, I guess we'll just keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result (because the current solution is working so well).

Well, we never had a wall before. That would be a new strategy. 

[Kanil 519]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Well, we never had a wall before. That would be a new strategy. 

You honestly think that's going to do it?

[Strike 3,932]

15 minutes ago, Kanil said:

When I say all of it, I mean all of it.

Don't get me wrong, I wish no one would use any of the "bad" drugs out there but if you decide to, who the fock am I to stop you?

Because then when they get hooked and fock up their brain and become homeless the Libs make society pay for them to exist.  They destroy good neighborhoods and parks by building tent cities and commit more and more crime.  I'd be fine with legalizing it all but only if we hold those people accountable after they've destroyed themselves.  But that won't happen.

[Kanil 519]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Because then when they get hooked and fock up their brain and become homeless the Libs make society pay for them to exist.  They destroy good neighborhoods and parks by building tent cities and commit more and more crime.  I'd be fine with legalizing it all but only if we hold those people accountable after they've destroyed themselves.  But that won't happen.

Oh yea, got to hold them accountable.  You want to fock yourself up, that's fine by me.  You want to fock anyone else up, eat a bag of d!cks.