patrick.net

They would give it to Google and make Nazi Check points at the border. While cheap labor waltzed right over the Rio Grand like they do every day.

marcus says

Several other experts are quoted. On who would do a lot into additional additional fences. Multiple fences in some places (they would have to climb more than one fence). But none of the experts is advocating just one big wall.

Folks... this is what it's come down to, semantics and word games, walls versus fences...

This HUGE display of TDS by the Liberals can't be any clearer!!

Tenpoundbass says

They would give it to Google

Don't ever change TPB.

Marcus, why did you leave this part out of your article?

....."James R. Phelps, co-author "Border Security," a 2014 book on the U.S.-Mexico line.

"There's a lot you could do with $5 billion," Phelps says.

He would pour all of the money into fencing. Not necessarily a wall, he adds, but barriers that are difficult to scale and laid out in rows so trespassers would have to climb several.

"Nothing will ever be 100 percent effective," he says. "But if you want to stop drugs and people, you've got to build a fence … You need to spend a billion dollars on fences in high-traffic areas."

Gil Kerlikowske, former U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner, now a professor at Northeastern University. The remaining $2.5 billion would go toward barriers in high-traffic zones. That would include replacement fencing where old structures are failing or inadequate, plus some new barriers."

So, some of the "Experts" that you want to refer to, state that Barriers are the solution. Imagine that!!

But let's word games of "Walls versus Fences".... yeah, that's the ticket!!

Hey Marcus, look what I found: It's from 2010 and was passed by Congress and signed. Who was President in 2010 and which party controlled Congress??

...."With the aid of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Border Security Supplemental requested by the
Administration and passed by Congress, we are continuing to add technology, manpower, and
infrastructure to the Southwest border, including 1,000 new Border Patrol agents; 250 new CBP
officers at our ports of entry; improving our tactical communications systems; and adding two
new forward operating bases to improve coordination of border security activities.

We’ve also constructed 649 miles of fencing out of nearly 652 miles where Border Patrol field
commanders determined it was operationally required, including 299 miles of vehicle barriers
and 350 miles of pedestrian fence.

Look at that, Congress and Obama in 2010 approved spending for 649 miles of fencing on the Southern border, but NOW, Democrats think fences/walls are "Immoral".

https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=782311

Folks, you can't make this shit up!

Another example from 2015...

...."I just want to ask just one question before I have to run. Ms.Gambler, from the notes that I have, Customs and Border Protection spent about $2.4 billion to complete roughly 670 miles of border fence. The vast majority of it was a single layer of fence, one
line of fence designed to keep pedestrians, vehicles, and such from crossing.

If Congress were to implement the double layer of fence, that would require more land acquisition, more supplies, more labor to
build, and manned by Border Patrol. I am trying to understand the payoff and the cost-benefit analysis in your estimation.

According to the GAO, undocumented entries into the United States during this time of erecting this fence actually fell 69 percent between 2006 and 2011, which is pretty impressive. But the drug and contraband seizures nearly doubled.

https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=805800

Hey Marcus, make sure to tell Nancy and Chuckie fences/walls don't work to stop the flow of illegals and drugs.

The only thing that changed with the Democrats is their perceived ability to turn out the hispanic population at vote time.

"They" ie the tech sector ie Bloomberg, HP, et al and now Facebook etc started donating to Democrats. They even got to Bernie Sanders, who previously argued that illegal immigrants hurt the poorest Americans. The Democrats even had enforcement against illegal immigration as part of its platform as recently as 2008.

In 2005, a left-leaning blogger wrote, “Illegal immigration wreaks havoc economically, socially, and culturally; makes a mockery of the rule of law; and is disgraceful just on basic fairness grounds alone.” In 2006, a liberal columnist wrote that “immigration reduces the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants” and that “the fiscal burden of low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear.” His conclusion: “We’ll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill immigrants.” That same year, a Democratic senator wrote, “When I see Mexican flags waved at proimmigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic resentment. When I’m forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I feel a certain frustration.”

The blogger was Glenn Greenwald. The columnist was Paul Krugman. The senator was Barack Obama.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-democrats-immigration-mistake/528678/

The bottom line is that Democrats are opposed to a border wall for exactly one reason. Votes.

Its as corrupt a position as it can get.

Crap another report from 2011, you know, when Obama was President:

...." Border Patrol sector officials assessed the miles under operational control using factors such as operational statistics, third-party
indicators, intelligence and operational reports, resource deployments, and discussions with senior Border Patrol agents.

Border Patrol officials attributed the increase in operational control to deployment of additional
infrastructure, technology, and personnel along the border.

For example,from fiscal years 2005 through 2010, the number of border miles that had fences increased from about 120 to 649 and the number of Border Patrol agents increased from nearly 10,000 to more than 17,500 along the
southwest border."

https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=10378

Imagine that, border patrol was able to control the border better when the fences were increased from 120 miles to 649 miles. There it is, straight from the "experts"...

CovfefeButDeadly says

The bottom line is that Democrats are opposed to a border wall for exactly one reason. Votes.

I can't fathom how stupid someone has to be to believe that.

You think that's true even now ? Obviously protecting illegal immigrants that are here, and right wing lies about democrats wanting illegal immigration actually cost democrats votes, as evidenced by the election of Trump.

I guess that's why those doing the bidding of the wealthy (the ones that benefit from republicans in government) perpetuate those lies. Either that or.....nevemind.

marcus says

CovfefeButDeadly says

The bottom line is that Democrats are opposed to a border wall for exactly one reason. Votes.

I can't fathom how stupid someone has to be to believe that.

I just gave you multiple examples that when Democrats were in control, they believe in fences.

Now, fences mean #OrangeManBad

Marcus, why is that?

This is just getting embarrasing now...

Obama's Border Patrol chief: 'It's a wall. It works'

Asked whether or not walls help secure a border, he was unequivocal.

Mark Morgan, Chief of Border Patrol under Obama “Yes. They absolutely work,” he said.

“If you look in the past, you don’t have to go too far back in history that bipartisan legislation that was passed … the Secure Fence Act. In 2006 and 2012 bipartisan legislation passed where they built the wall, or fence or physical barrier or whatever you want to call it. It’s a wall. It works.”

Democrats are trying to make a political point, since they themselves endorsed building walls, in 2006 and 2012, before President Trump was elected.

“I cannot think of a legitimate argument why anyone would not support the wall,” he said

https://www.wnd.com/2019/01/obamas-border-patrol-chief-its-a-wall-it-works/

marcus says

CovfefeButDeadly says

The bottom line is that Democrats are opposed to a border wall for exactly one reason. Votes.

I can't fathom how stupid someone has to be to believe that.

You think that's true even now ? Obviously protecting illegal immigrants that are here, and right wing lies about democrats wanting illegal immigration actually cost democrats votes, as evidenced by the election of Trump.

I guess that's why those doing the bidding of the wealthy (the ones that benefit from republicans in government) perpetuate those lies. Either that or.....nevemind.

I'm not talking about votes coming from illegal aliens.

I'm talking about the hispanic citizen population being so large and generally NOT caring about illegal immigration(and many times taking it incorrectly as racist to enforce immigration law) that the Democrats can openly advocate for illegal immigration and open borders without repercusion at the ballot box.

MrMagic says

marcus says

CovfefeButDeadly says

The bottom line is that Democrats are opposed to a border wall for exactly one reason. Votes.

I can't fathom how stupid someone has to be to believe that.

I just gave you multiple examples that when Democrats were in control, they believe in fences.

Now, fences mean #OrangeManBad

Marcus, why is that?

Votes. That is all. Its why the Dems are about to forsake Blacks.

CovfefeButDeadly says

Marcus, why is that?

Believe it or not, I could see this a few minutes ago. That means he worte it,, and then put me on ignore !! Lol.

marcus says

Believe it or not, I could see this a few minutes ago. That means he worte it,, and then put me on ignore !! Lol.

Wrong again, sweetheart. It is YOU that has ME on ignore, as you just can't handle the TRUTH or FACTS.

The reason you could see it is because Patrick has the forum auto-update, so until you refresh or change pages, you'll see new posts, even from people you have on Ignore.

BTW, what's a "worte".

Hey Marcus, if walls/fences don't work to keep the bad people out, why did Obama have an additional fence put around the WhiteHouse when he was there?

By Jack Linshi September 23, 2014 (notice the date?)

The Secret Service erected a temporary extra barrier a few feet in front of the White House’s existing iron fence Tuesday as investigations continue into how a trespasser scaled the fence and entered the executive mansion last week.

The additional fence, about three feet high, will serve as a buffer zone between the general public and the presidential residence, according to Bloomberg.

“This temporary closure is in effect while the Secret Service conducts a comprehensive review of the fence jumping incident which occurred on Friday September 19th,” Secret Service Agent Ed Donovan said in a statement. However, Donovan did not say when the extra barrier would be removed.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday that officials intend to enforce White House security without banning the general public from observing the iconic residence at its perimeter. “The Secret Service has the challenging task of balancing the need to ensure the safety and security of the first family, while also ensuring that the White House continues to be the people’s house,” Earnest said.

http://time.com/3423332/white-house-fence/

So, the Democrats feel protecting the President is worth it, but protecting American citizens from bad people is a waste of money.

Folks, you can't make this shit up from the Communists that live among us.

marcus says

Finally, Selee says, he'd use additional money for fencing — maybe even a wall in strategic locations.

"I'm not allergic to the notion of a wall," he says. "I just don't think it's needed in most places."

True, only needed in places where illegals cross...... Duh...

Would a wall be effective?

Border apprehensions tend to decrease in areas after barriers have been constructed, though other factors likely contribute.

There was a significant drop in apprehensions after fencing was built near San Diego in the early 1990s. The drop there was followed by a spike in apprehensions to the east, near Tucson, Arizona, where the border was less fortified. When fencing was extended across much of the Arizona border, apprehensions fell there, too. Now apprehensions are highest in the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector in southern Texas. Much of Texas lacks fencing, though there is some in the Rio Grande Valley.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-mexico-wall/will-a-wall-be-effective/

marcus says

Tenpoundbass says

They would give it to Google

Don't ever change TPB.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/10/nancy-pelosi-pushes-technological-wall-instead-of-a-fence/

And don't you ever stop being Gullible and Obtuse.

Say you don't suppose some fly by night start up will get that contract do you? Say you don't think Pelosi is suggesting a new Technology Agency capable of writing the facial recognition and AI security our's and China's tax dollars have already paid Google to do, do you?