The Wall

[.ZZ.]

2 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

They're already training to defeat the wall Ella!

 

 

If the real wall actually had cross beams like those they might have a chance.

[Kurzweil]

I say electrify the fence and bill it to Mexico. It would be the worlds largest bug zapper.

[Sweetpumper]

They can graffiti their side too.

[ellapenella]

Our way works best,pretty much so & that's the whole point in being America.Other Nations should be encouraged to do the same not expect for us to take in the world's immigration problems & actually the  Statue of Liberty had nothing to do with illegal immigration  being welcomed in the U.S. It was given to us on loan from France for keeping them & the world free.

[ExpandMyMind]

This thread is funny.

[Space Commander Travis]

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

Our way works best,pretty much so & that's the whole point in being America.Other Nations should be encouraged to do the same not expect for us to take in the world's immigration problems & actually the  Statue of Liberty had nothing to do with illegal immigration  being welcomed in the U.S. It was given to us on loan from France for keeping them & the world free.

I think it was originally conceived as a statement against slavery, the US hadn't done very much to help keep France or the world free by the 1870s, it had been pretty much preoccupied with its own concerns.

[kartikg]

IMO wall is not enough it should be littered with check posts and guard towers and even a dedicated force cut out from military should be assigned the task of defending the border. 

[aquatus1]

20 hours ago, aztek said:

 

Aztek, is this a joke?

[ExpandMyMind]

2 hours ago, kartikg said:

IMO wall is not enough it should be littered with check posts and guard towers and even a dedicated force cut out from military should be assigned the task of defending the border. 

Maybe try relocating the population a few miles under the surface. Problem solved.

[ExpandMyMind]

1 hour ago, aquatus1 said:

Aztek, is this a joke?

Since he's pro wall and that video is over half a year old and was fixed with those subtitles solely to ridicule Trump, I'm going to say no. No, it was not a joke.

[aztek]

3 hours ago, aquatus1 said:

Aztek, is this a joke?

idk, depends on your definition of joke, 

is mr. bean a joke?

this guy's interview is who knows how old, it has been edited at least 4 times for different pranks.  and  you asking if it is a joke?  the question is  a joke in itself, lol

btw, do you speak Spanish?

Edited February 2, 2017 by aztek

[aztek]

2 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Since he's pro wall and that video is over half a year old and was fixed with those subtitles solely to ridicule Trump, I'm going to say no. No, it was not a joke.

lol, you do not have a sense of humor at all, do you?

[Farmer77]

I thought it was hilarious. Out of curiosity anyone know what they were actually talking about though? 

[aztek]

3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I thought it was hilarious. Out of curiosity anyone know what they were actually talking about though? 

have no idea, but anyone who speaks spanish would see, the titles do not match to what they say. btw i have no clue what they say, but i'm sure as hell it's not about trump's wall.

Edited February 2, 2017 by aztek

[+Hammerclaw]

Just let'em all come to the Good ole US of A.                    

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by Hammerclaw

[Golden Duck]

On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 0:52 AM, Myles said:

A better analogy would be if you had been mowing his yard for free for a long time.   In order to get your new car, you may propose that he pay you $20 each time you do it.   That could ruin your relationship though.  

Cutting your mate's grass always ends up in a fight.

[aquatus1]

21 hours ago, aztek said:

idk, depends on your definition of joke, 

is mr. bean a joke?

this guy's interview is who knows how old, it has been edited at least 4 times for different pranks.  and  you asking if it is a joke?  the question is  a joke in itself, lol

btw, do you speak Spanish?

Yeah, it was my first language.  And yeah, the actual convo has nothing at all to do with Trump.  The guy is telling a funny story about how he and a friend of his were trying to make a paella, but ended up half-naked on a beach instead.  I've never seen it before.

The story, in and of itself, is funny in that the guy is cracking up by telling it, but I'm just not getting what the point is in overlaying irrelevant political subtitles over it.  I enjoy watching Mr. Bean, but I would be somewhat confused if someone put these subtitles over a Mr. Bean Skit.  I just don't see the purpose of it.

[aztek]

8 minutes ago, aquatus1 said:

Yeah, it was my first language.  And yeah, the actual convo has nothing at all to do with Trump.  The guy is telling a funny story about how he and a friend of his were trying to make a paella, but ended up half-naked on a beach instead.  I've never seen it before.

The story, in and of itself, is funny in that the guy is cracking up by telling it, but I'm just not getting what the point is in overlaying irrelevant political subtitles over it.

that is why it was used  at least 4 times before, even if you do not understand what he says it is hilarious.  if you want people laugh over your boring message, edit this guy's video. laughter guaranteed, and if your message worded somewhat funny, guaranteed  success 

Edited February 3, 2017 by aztek

[aquatus1]

Huh.  I guess I am more a Mr. Bean Guy.

[+and-then]

On 1/27/2017 at 1:53 AM, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

No mines? This would cause hardship to the Landmine industry. I'd recommend those neat ones that spring out of the ground when you trigger them and spread shrapnel at head height. Sometimes you can get a really nice decapitation if you're lucky. 

 

Bouncing Betty's, ahh a blast from the past.  Those crazy Germans really could build a good terror weapon, couldn't they?  G.I.s were scared spitless over those little purveyors of pain and death.  They didn't worry as much about dying from them as they worried about being neutered by them!  

As to the WALL... it seems to me that it should be created in some form but should be a secondary measure to stop the die-hards that might come for mischief or terror plots.  The flow of illegals could be cut to a trickle with two actions.  My guess is that 90+ % of the uninvited guests from our south come for better lives.  I think the majority of those seek the higher pay and opportunities in the U.S.  That's a perfectly rational instinct for any person.  They aren't some invading horde of evil-doers.  Most of the guys I've seen in my community on the gulf coast of Alabama are really hard-working individuals who are trying to build a life for their families.  My biggest beef with them is that most of them won't take the time to even try to learn the language.  That's annoying, but it isn't something I'd use to deny them a life here.

The two steps to solve or at least scale down the economic and potential security damage is this -  First, create laws that severely penalize (heavy fines or even jail time for repeat offenders) any employer that knowingly hires an illegal and pays them a pittance.  Such employers are the real problem.  They want to game the system and become wealthy at the nation's expense.  I'm not sure what the true economic impact of such a move would be, but I suspect Americans would be shocked at the increased costs of everything from salad vegetables to having their house painted or built.  Nothing is free.  We are either serious about this problem or we aren't, time to man up.  Second, we could, overnight, have bi-partisan agreement on the issue if a law was passed that used current biometric technology to totally stop voting fraud in the 50 states.  It is undeniable that the second main incentive for unhindered flow of illegals is the desire by one political party to create a solid, reliable voter base from their ranks.  If the Federal government required the several states to begin using equivalent, if not identical voting systems that used biometrics, fraud would become so difficult that it would remove that incentive.  The political party that most benefited from such fraud would be the one that screamed NO! the loudest.  Have the voter registration process include a thumbprint.  When an individual shows up to vote they would need no ID.  They would mark a paper ballot to be kept as a record and when the ballot was to be scanned by machine, the thumbprint scan would activate the scanner.  Once that print was used, if it was used again, anywhere else within driving distance of the polling place, BOTH votes would be invalidated and a warning given.  The person could file a provisional paper ballot in case a mistake had been made.  If that print was used a third time, the individual would be arrested for attempting voter fraud.  There is nothing unreasonable in such a proposal.  It would cost the nation a few billions of dollars but it would be an ironclad guarantee of removing major fraud from the vote.

If the folks from the south cannot be used for the financial or electoral gain of Americans, those creating this problem would quickly lose interest.

[Farmer77]

7 minutes ago, and then said:

 Second, we could, overnight, have bi-partisan agreement on the issue if a law was passed that used current biometric technology to totally stop voting fraud in the 50 states.  

Dude you're not even going to get the republicans to agree to that let alone both parties. The feds having a biometric database of every citizen in the US? Hell to the no on that. 

[Myles]

34 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Dude you're not even going to get the republicans to agree to that let alone both parties. The feds having a biometric database of every citizen in the US? Hell to the no on that. 

Photo ID's should be good enough.  

[Farmer77]

Not a good couple of days for the Trumpster 

Hill Republicans revolt over Trump's plans to build border wall 

A growing number of congressional Republicans are objecting to the cost and viability of a proposal that was a rallying cry for the billionaire businessman during his insurgent campaign. Interviews with more than a dozen GOP lawmakers across the ideological spectrum suggest Trump could have a difficult time getting funding for his plan approved by Congress.

Many bluntly told CNN they'd likely vote against any Trump plan that is not fully offset with spending cuts, while others questioned whether Trump's vision would adequately resolve the problems at the border.

"If you're going to spend that kind of money, you're going to have to show me where you're going to get that money," said Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a key swing vote who has already broken with Trump over his nominee for secretary of education.

 

[Gromdor]

So I was reading my Facebook the other day and one of my friends posted a novel idea for the wall.  If we are going to do it we might as well line it with solar panels and make it into a giant greenhouse.  Basically the idea was to turn it into a thousand mile long factory or farm.  That way it produced something with the added side effect of being a "barrier", could even put a high speed train on top to deter people from trying to ladder over it.

[Yamato]

1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

So I was reading my Facebook the other day and one of my friends posted a novel idea for the wall.  If we are going to do it we might as well line it with solar panels and make it into a giant greenhouse.  Basically the idea was to turn it into a thousand mile long factory or farm.  That way it produced something with the added side effect of being a "barrier", could even put a high speed train on top to deter people from trying to ladder over it.

Then on the other side of the super factory farm, a fence!   So basically what we have now but with a big energy project too.   Basically going all out to ruin our relationship with our neighbors and for what?   When the # of Mexican-rapes goes down, then we'll be safe again?

There's plenty of non-Mexican rapes and drugs right here at home already.   Maybe the White House would like to try to administer over those first....here in the interior on the other side of the wall where the Constitution still lives.