O'KEEFE STRIKES AGAIN: Crosses Border Dressed As Bin Laden [VIDEO]...

[paulitician]

It's pretty obvious that you can't get much more specific. So it's apparently just another meaningless rhetorical phrase.

All that really matters is what you perceive it to mean. So what do you think it means? And i'm willing to listen to any solutions you want to offer. That's just one of mine. But i'm willing to listen.

I'm simply asking for you to define your solution in more specific terms. What's so hard about that?

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

 

[paulitician]

The borders aren't 'wide open'.

Unfortunately, they are. And our Government doesn't care. It's criminal negligence.

It's not negligence if it's by design.

Good point. Thanks.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

ROFL no attack in 13years.

Blind you are.

Name a terrorist attack on the US by someone who crossed the border illegally? Go on...

ROFL.. so now instead of saying "no attack in 13 years" it has to be a terrorist attack in 13 years from someone who crossed the border illegally. ROFL talk about moving the goal posts.

By the libtard definition of terrorism only republicans can be guilty of terrorism against the US.

Using the dictionary however, we arrive at terrorism being the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. For example, arming Mexican cartel members and other known terrorists, who then subsequently used these weapons to kill Americans who patrol our borders, this to achieve three political goals. 1) Provide more reasons to restrict second amendment rights, 2) destabilize the border and provide cover for more illegal immigrants to force the signing of legislation that includes amnesty for illegals; and 3) destabilize the war on drugs to further the spending on the war on drugs and provide reasons to militarize the DHS aka Obama's promise to make sure our DHS is armed just as well as our military.

Thus, the acts committed by cartel members in the trafficking of drugs and movement of illegal immigrants is in fact terrorism, because Obama made it political expedient to not only look the other way with regard to these acts by cartel members but to quite literally arm them to the teeth with American tax dollars.

The drug war is terrorism? Now that's moving the goalposts, and I made it more specific because the discussion is about the security risk of an unsecured border, which so far is nothing. If you had anything real, you would have mentioned it...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

All that really matters is what you perceive it to mean. So what do you think it means? And i'm willing to listen to any solutions you want to offer. That's just one of mine. But i'm willing to listen.

I'm simply asking for you to define your solution in more specific terms. What's so hard about that?

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

Little man can't answer, obviously...

 

[G.T.]

I'm simply asking for you to define your solution in more specific terms. What's so hard about that?

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

Little man can't answer, obviously...

he cant answer

post #152 made him feel real dumb

 

[RKMBrown]

Name a terrorist attack on the US by someone who crossed the border illegally? Go on...

ROFL.. so now instead of saying "no attack in 13 years" it has to be a terrorist attack in 13 years from someone who crossed the border illegally. ROFL talk about moving the goal posts.

By the libtard definition of terrorism only republicans can be guilty of terrorism against the US.

Using the dictionary however, we arrive at terrorism being the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. For example, arming Mexican cartel members and other known terrorists, who then subsequently used these weapons to kill Americans who patrol our borders, this to achieve three political goals. 1) Provide more reasons to restrict second amendment rights, 2) destabilize the border and provide cover for more illegal immigrants to force the signing of legislation that includes amnesty for illegals; and 3) destabilize the war on drugs to further the spending on the war on drugs and provide reasons to militarize the DHS aka Obama's promise to make sure our DHS is armed just as well as our military.

Thus, the acts committed by cartel members in the trafficking of drugs and movement of illegal immigrants is in fact terrorism, because Obama made it political expedient to not only look the other way with regard to these acts by cartel members but to quite literally arm them to the teeth with American tax dollars.

The drug war is terrorism? Now that's moving the goalposts, and I made it more specific because the discussion is about the security risk of an unsecured border, which so far is nothing. If you had anything real, you would have mentioned it...

Now your deflecting. I used webster's definition of the term "terrorism." I showed evidence linking what is going on at the border to said acts of terrorism. You may believe this government to be incapable of aiding and abetting terrorist acts, but all that tells me is you have your head buried in the sand.

 

[Discombobulated]

All that really matters is what you perceive it to mean. So what do you think it means? And i'm willing to listen to any solutions you want to offer. That's just one of mine. But i'm willing to listen.

I'm simply asking for you to define your solution in more specific terms. What's so hard about that?

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

I give up, you're too smart for me.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm simply asking for you to define your solution in more specific terms. What's so hard about that?

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

I give up, you're too smart for me.

LOL. He's the little man with all the answers, as long as you don't ask questions and you go first.

Jump off this cliff he says, that's the right thing to do. So jump you say. After you he replies...

 

[Mustang]

Is this really that hilarious? Wide open borders probably isn't something to laugh about. Think about it some more.

The borders aren't 'wide open'.

Unfortunately, they are. And our Government doesn't care. It's criminal negligence.

Nonsense. Saying it is doesn't make it so. It's very difficult to get into this country. But it's certainly not impossible. Considering that our land, sea, and the Great Lakes border area stretches across thousands of wilderness miles as well as populated and heavily trafficked areas, it would be virtually impossible or prohibitively expensive to make the border significantly more secure by placing humans across thousands of miles at wilderness checkpoints only to be present to watch wildlife like racoons and foxes, and armadillos and coyotes chase their next meals. Even then, it wouldn't necessarily be that much better as any reasonable person would realize.

What makes the most sense is to monitor transit points (airports, roads, and ports) that are heavily traveled since it's more likely (and dangerous) that someone who wants to do us harm (and has the means to do so) would try to get in with a falsified ID than it is that someone is going to try to sneak across the border in a remote part of Montana or the Arizona desert unless he had accomplices on this side of the border to aid him by picking him up and hiding him once he got here. That's one of the reasons it's so important to work closely with both Canada and Mexico (as well as other countries) to get a better handle on exactly who's flying into Mexico and Canada from overseas and who's arriving via passenger ships and who's crewing on cargo ships. THAT is why the US needs and fosters international cooperation when it comes to travel.

But the notion that our borders are wide open is utter nonsense because IF our borders were wide open, the weakeness would be routinely exploited by terrorists and we would have routine terrorist attacks if for no other reason than to decimate our economy. Have you seen ANY evidence of that in the last 13 years?

 

[Discombobulated]

It is what it is. Pretty straightforward. But what do you think it means? Because that's all that really matters.

I give up, you're too smart for me.

LOL. He's the little man with all the answers, as long as you don't ask questions and you go first.

Jump off this cliff he says, that's the right thing to do. So jump you say. After you he replies...

His answers all make perfect sense if you just don't think about them.

 

[paulitician]

Wake up America, the 'War on Terror' is designed to be a permanent justification for taking rights away and involving us in endless War. Clearly, our Government doesn't consider Terrorism a real threat to our Nation. Why else would it leave our border wide open?

The 'War' is being used to destroy the Constitution and Liberty. The next attack will be used to destroy our Freedom & Liberty once and for all. A very bleak future lies ahead. Unless big changes happen. But it's hard to be optimistic at this point. It's very sad.