The Southern Border Is Open: Quarantining West Africans Would Illuminate It

[S.Shorland]

This is why you won't ban commercial flights to Liberia and Sierra Leone.If your government was serious about keeping you safe,they would fly all health volunteers/army to West Africa via military bases where on return they could be quarantined for three weeks until all danger of infection was past.If they adopted this measure,however,it would draw attention to your southern border being completely open.Apparently 13,000 people in affected countries have US visas.I wonder how long before they all come home?

[specsaregood]

Who is this "you" and "your" you refer to? I don't have the power to ban commercial flights. I take it you are a foreigner? It is not your southern border nor your govt?

[S.Shorland]

' ...In an abundance of caution...' Seems to be the phrase decreed from above.

[S.Shorland]

Michael Savage agrees with me 9:15-10:20 :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mrU4sFUzYKg#t=555

[erowe1]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

[Origanalist]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

Do we get a lot of people sneaking across the northern border?

[FloralScent]

Do we get a lot of people sneaking across the northern border?

No, and he knows that.

[erowe1]

Do we get a lot of people sneaking across the northern border?

Who knows? Nobody keeps track or cares. I wonder how many people would even call that "sneaking" if some white English-speaking Canadian came to the US without telling the government.

[erowe1]

No, and he knows that.

Source?

[FloralScent]

Source?

Why would a 3rd worlder sneak over the border from one 1st world nation to another especially when our neighbor to the north has even more freebies? I don't need no stinking source to figure that out.

[erowe1]

Why would a 3rd worlder sneak over the border from one 1st world nation to another especially when our neighbor to the north has even more freebies? I don't need no stinking source to figure that out.

Ohhhh. So it's about "3rd worlders."

Do you want us to have laws that label certain people as "3rd worlders" so that we can put special restrictions on them?

[Origanalist]

Who knows? Nobody keeps track or cares. I wonder how many people would even call that "sneaking" if some white English-speaking Canadian came to the US without telling the government.

You know. Quit posting bullshit.

[FloralScent]

Ohhhh. So it's about "3rd worlders."

Do you want us to have laws that label certain people as "3rd worlders" so that we can put special restrictions on them?

Way to avoid the question.

[erowe1]

Way to avoid the question.

The question was irrelevant, unless we're supposed to think that third worlders sneaking over borders for freebies has anything to do with anything.

How many people who cross any border, northern or southern, match that description? And, however many there are, unless you have some way of distinguishing those people from everyone else who crosses a border, why does it matter?

[erowe1]

You know. Quit posting bullshit.

How do you know?

And more importantly, when people do cross that border without telling the government--and they do--is there anything wrong with it?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

Don't be disingenuous; you know full well that the number of people sneaking across the northern U.S. border, or attempting to smuggle drugs and other contraband across it, is not comparable to its southern one. Canada is a well-off country, their people don't have any incentive to come into the U.S. illegally in mass numbers.

I also don't think there is a Canadian equivalent to the violent Mexican gangs working the southern border, such as MS-13.

[Origanalist]

How do you know?

And more importantly, when people do cross that border without telling the government--and they do--is there anything wrong with it?

I'm not going to debate with a crazy person. You're just being idiotic. There is no mass of human traffic jumping the northern border. I'm sure there are a few cases for whatever reason, but why do you persist with this obvious bs?

[erowe1]

Don't be disingenuous; you know full well that the number of people sneaking across the northern U.S. border, or attempting to smuggle drugs and other contraband across it, is not comparable to its southern one. Canada is a well-off country, their people don't have any incentive to come into the U.S. illegally in mass numbers.

I also don't think there is a Canadian equivalent to the violent Mexican gangs working the southern border, such as MS-13.

All those things, and yet the northern border is the more open of the two.

And what does being well-off have to do with somebody not wanting to tell the government every time they cross a border? If you talked to a well-off Canadian who crossed the northern border without telling the government, would you say to them, "Why would you want to do that? You're well off!"?

[erowe1]

I'm not going to debate with a crazy person. You're just being idiotic. There is no mass of human traffic jumping the northern border. I'm sure there are a few cases for whatever reason, but why do you persist with this obvious bs?

How do you know this?

The northern border is huge, and most of it is extremely easy to cross without telling anyone. There are people who live near it on both sides of it who have various incentives to want to travel to the other side of it from time to time. Do you think they all just live in fear of that imaginary line and go through all the hassle of crossing at certain points and dealing with border guards every time they want to go somewhere on the other side? And given the nature of this, how would someone even know how often this happens?

[Brian4Liberty]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

What is your position on travel restrictions from Ebola hot-zones?

[Origanalist]

How do you know this?

The northern border is huge, and most of it is extremely easy to cross without telling anyone. There are people who live near it on both sides of it who have various incentives to want to travel to the other side of it from time to time. Do you think they all just live in fear of that imaginary line and go through all the hassle of crossing at certain points and dealing with border guards every time they want to go somewhere on the other side? And given the nature of this, how would someone even know how often this happens?

I have a friend that went to prison for trying to cross that border with a bunch of buds from a green plant. I think he might disagree on how easy it is to cross.And he didn't go through customs either.

[TheCount]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

White vs brown.

[ZENemy]

Maybe no flights are banned because there is no Ebola outbreak?

[Brian4Liberty]

Sec. Of State John Kerry Responds To Ebola Death: 'We Need Borders To Remain Open'


In response to First US Ebola Patient Dies:

During a press conference at the State Departmemt, today, Secretary of State John Kerry addressed the urgent need to contain the spread of Ebola in the wake of the first Ebola death in in the United States.

Kerry made clear that travel restrictions would not be part of the administration's strategy in fighting the deadly disease.

I wish I were joking.

"We need airlines to continue to operate in West Africa, and we need borders to remain open," said Kerry.

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/10/08/Sec-Of-State-John-Kerry-Responds-To-Ebola-Death-We-Need-Borders-To-Remain-Open

[FloralScent]

What is your position on travel restrictions from Ebola hot-zones?

They should all be quarantined in his basement.

[alucard13mm]

Open borders.. might as well give up our sovereignty and become the north American union. If we let people come in illegally and get citizenship, might as well save time and make us all north American citizens. Get rid of the Constitution and have a new one for the union.

[FloralScent]

Open borders.. might as well give up our sovereignty and become the north American union.

That's the real agenda of open borders crowd. Peoples with unique identities, customs and cultures are harder to control when you're trying to run an empire.

[CaptainAmerica]

This is why you won't ban commercial flights to Liberia and Sierra Leone.If your government was serious about keeping you safe,they would fly all health volunteers/army to West Africa via military bases where on return they could be quarantined for three weeks until all danger of infection was past.If they adopted this measure,however,it would draw attention to your southern border being completely open.Apparently 13,000 people in affected countries have US visas.I wonder how long before they all come home?

Perhaps you over think things... its just simple, the federal government is a bureaucracy and the policies that are in place make it the worst decision maker on a number of things. The u.s. constitution is a failure, national defense should not be in the hands of the federal government. Banning travel is definitely not something the federal government has a rightful authority to do, unless you advocate something super crazy like a declaration of war levied against Liberia (this would be stupid). If the airlines were not subsidized and hiding behind TSA and big government agencies to be the fall guys when things go wrong...the airlines would be faced with law suits. Whats the difference with grounded flights during hurricanes and airlines deciding to fly their planes in and out of a zone that has an epidemic such as ebola? The airlines are the ones who are suppose to provide some sort of safety ,but because the free market has no real leverage in that industry...airlines do whatever they want as a result of subsidies and knowing the big government will be there to step in

[S.Shorland]

Sky News finally gave the official line as to why it is not 'sensible' to ban travel from Liberia etc: If direct flights are stopped to UK (they have been),passengers will travel via other countries,thus spreading the virus more widely. /// Professor Easton of Warwick University just stated screening is more or less useless and although quarantine is a good idea in principle there is great pressure to keep flights open to allow medical personnel and supplies to fly directly.Flying to and from military bases would deal with this problem.Although West Africans could fly via third countries,it seems odd to believe that anyone other than a national of an outbreak country would flee?No other African would visit an infected country (or very few) and nationals from infected countries would have national documents/passports.Refuse to disembark planes that carry nationals from infected countries.

[Brian4Liberty]

Open borders.. might as well give up our sovereignty and become the north American union. If we let people come in illegally and get citizenship, might as well save time and make us all north American citizens. Get rid of the Constitution and have a new one for the union.

New one is ready:

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

That will be followed by 10,000,000 pages of laws that contradict each other, making everyone a criminal at the discretion of the state.

[Zippyjuan]

The northern border is too. Right?

There's just something about that southern border though that some people get all worked up about.

They aren't really concerned about borders in general- just ones Mexicans might use. (But they won't exactly say that because it might sound racist). That is why Canada is not a concern. It isn't about terrorists who will use whatever they can. The 9/11 conspirators entered the country legally- they don't have to sneak up from Mexico.

We are spending twice as much on border security as we did ten years ago. How many more taxes are you willing to pay to add even more?

Not wanting to spend more is not necessarily to be in favor of completely open borders. But that is a tactic to make it the "if you aren't with us, you are for the terrorists! (Mexicans) we heard from Bush after 9/11. That got us the Patriot act so we do need to be cautious about wanting to use fear to ask for more security.

[alucard13mm]

That's the real agenda of open borders crowd. Peoples with unique identities, customs and cultures are harder to control when you're trying to run an empire.

I am all for legal immigration, especially if the immigrants can take care of themselves without relying on government. My family came here LEGALLY from Hong Kong. It took years of money, filing paper work, health exams. My oldest aunt came here first and lived in northern Michigan. She then cosponsored the rest of her family to come legally.

Speaking of health exams..

A 2013 Defense Department study (http://www.virologyj.com/content/10/1/305) conducted in Central and South America on patients with flu-like illness, did identify EV-D68 in some of the test subjects. All 3,375 test subjects were age 25 or under.
The CDC now reports that cases of EV-D68 have been seen in 43 states as well as the District of Columbia. However, unofficially, the virus which has left many children with permanent breathing problems and limb paralysis, has also taken the life of four U.S. children, since mid-August.

There seems to be a reason why people have to pass medical exams. My grandfather is a smoker and he had a blemish on his X-ray of his lung. He had to wait till the blemish went away before he can get released into US.

[alucard13mm]

They aren't really concerned about borders in general- just ones Mexicans might use. (But they won't exactly say that because it might sound racist). That is why Canada is not a concern. It isn't about terrorists who will use whatever they can. The 9/11 conspirators entered the country legally- they don't have to sneak up from Mexico.

We are spending twice as much on border security as we did ten years ago. How many more taxes are you willing to pay to add even more?

Not wanting to spend more is not necessarily to be in favor of completely open borders. But that is a tactic to make it the "if you aren't with us, you are for the terrorists! (Mexicans) we heard from Bush after 9/11. That got us the Patriot act so we do need to be cautious about wanting to use fear to ask for more security.

Canada is a developed country, meaning that they have the same sanitary conditions as USA for the most part.

Have you noticed if you go to a developing country and drink the water, you get diarrhea and the locals are fine? It is because our immune systems are not used to going from a clean environment to a less clean one. Since most of us live in sanitary conditions in USA, when you introduce people who may have been in unsanitary conditions and exposed and may be carriers of diseases (they are immune since they are used to it from constant exposure), it will put the rest of us in danger. We may or may not be able to develop immune response (because of different genes). It is like when white people killed off a lot of native americans with small pox.

I am not saying all of mexico/central/south america is unsanitary. I am saying most immigrants are from poor areas, which is unsanitary.

[staerker]

That's the real agenda of open borders crowd. Peoples with unique identities, customs and cultures are harder to control when you're trying to run an empire.

http://www.popularresistance.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/US-militar-around-the-world-2012.jpg

Is that the empire you're talking about? So you're saying a little diversity could help?

[Brian4Liberty]

They aren't really concerned about borders in general- just ones Mexicans might use. (But they won't exactly say that because it might sound racist).

From our resident cultural Marxist propaganda officer. Demonize anyone who disagrees with you on anything, right? I'll have to let all of my Hispanic friends know that they oppose more immigration right now because they are racist against Hispanics.

[FloralScent]

From our resident cultural Marxist propaganda officer.

Shouting "racist!" every time someone dares protest the agenda of globalization. Trotsky knew what he was doing. We've been conditioned for almost 100 years to cower whenever it is uttered our direction.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Open borders.. might as well give up our sovereignty and become the north American union. If we let people come in illegally and get citizenship, might as well save time and make us all north American citizens. Get rid of the Constitution and have a new one for the union.

Closed borders...might as well call yourself a hypocrite if you claim to value individual liberty and the free market.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

From our resident cultural Marxist propaganda officer. Demonize anyone who disagrees with you on anything, right? I'll have to let all of my Hispanic friends know that they oppose more immigration right now because they are racist against Hispanics.

Yup, you got us. Libertarianism is really a front for a tyrannical communist takeover of American society...

[LibertyEagle]

Who knows? Nobody keeps track or cares. I wonder how many people would even call that "sneaking" if some white English-speaking Canadian came to the US without telling the government.

Yeah, they probably would if 20-40 million of them had illegally entered the country, many of whom hate the U.S. and immediately went on the dole. You betcha.

[LibertyEagle]

Yup, you got us. Libertarianism is really a front for a tyrannical communist takeover of American society...

Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

[LibertyEagle]

That's the real agenda of open borders crowd. Peoples with unique identities, customs and cultures are harder to control when you're trying to run an empire.

Not really. Multiculturalism within a country is a huge fail. Americans don't even know what they stand for anymore. It's so sad to watch.

[Brian4Liberty]

Yup, you got us. Libertarianism is really a front for a tyrannical communist takeover of American society...

Nice strawman. I wasn't addressing you or libertarianism. But if you want to start being a collectivist and calling everyone who disagrees with you on an issue a racist, then it applies to you too.

[FloralScent]

Not really. Multiculturalism within a country is a huge fail. Americans don't even know what they stand for anymore. It's so sad to watch.

I think you misunderstood my post. Multiculturalism is a tool used by the globalist to destroy national identities, thereby eliminating resistance to their rule. In other words, I agree with you.

Does this sound familiar?


The Communist International, abbreviated as Comintern and also known as the Third International (1919–1943), was an international (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_International)communist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism) organization initiated in (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_International)Moscow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow) during March 1919. The International intended to fight "by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_International)bourgeoisie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisie) and for the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the State." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_International)

They meant, complete abolition of the nation state, to be absorbed by the GLOBAL Soviet state...A.K.A., the NWO.

It's sounds a lot like the poison the Red Brigade here on RPF has been pushing.

[Pericles]

Closed borders...might as well call yourself a hypocrite if you claim to value individual liberty and the free market.

I am for the maximum amount for liberty and economic prosperity for my fellow citizens. This in no way diminishes the amount of liberty others may enjoy, as it is not my job to bring liberty to them.

[Origanalist]

From our resident cultural Marxist propaganda officer. Demonize anyone who disagrees with you on anything, right? I'll have to let all of my Hispanic friends know that they oppose more immigration right now because they are racist against Hispanics.

It the same playbook they have been using for years. And still there are fools that let themselves be intimidated by it.

http://radio.foxnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/shout_racist.jpg#racist%20

[Anti Federalist]

Oh, so if I'm opposed to millions and millions of people entering the country from collectivist, sometimes outright Marxist shitholes to the south, then voting en masse to take even more of my freedom and my property from me, that makes me a racist, even though I have devoted years of time and thousands of dollars to helping, mostly minority, victims of police and state abuse.

Fuck off.

[nobody's_hero]

Ohhhh. So it's about "3rd worlders."

Do you want us to have laws that label certain people as "3rd worlders" so that we can put special restrictions on them?

1,000 troll points to you sir.

[juleswin]

I am from the so called 3rd world and I get it. Even Nigerians want to stop all flights from Liberia coming into the country. Nigeria have supposedly been able to contain the ebola and its no longer a threat but the idea that you desire to protect your personal space from potential contact based contagious disease is very normal. It's not about people being racist or anything. I bet people will be calling for the closing of the northern borders if some uncurable disease started showing up in Canada.

I have my theories on how the disease came about but regardless of my conspiracy theories, i know its real and is a potential danger to ones safety. Now stop calling each other a racist and embrace a black person dying of ebola cos you are a hypocrite if you refuse to do it :)

[staerker]

Oh, so if I'm opposed to millions and millions of people entering the country from collectivist, sometimes outright Marxist shitholes to the south, then voting en masse to take even more of my freedom and my property from me, that makes me a racist, even though I have devoted years of time and thousands of dollars to helping, mostly minority, victims of police and state abuse.

Fuck off.

Remember, the smallest minority is the individual. You applied collectivism in the same sentence that you disowned it.

You are not only in favor of the U.S. government denying the natural right to movement, but also recognize that these people are *fleeing* Marxist states. Lol, tell me again how you oppose state abuse.

[kcchiefs6465]

Open borders.. might as well give up our sovereignty and become the north American union. If we let people come in illegally and get citizenship, might as well save time and make us all north American citizens. Get rid of the Constitution and have a new one for the union.
Because it's working out so marvelously now. The Constitution has been being pissed upon since at the least 1798. By the very people who actually knew what it stood for, I might add. Do I really need to list flagrant violation after violation of the BoR?

Why do you want a ruler so bad? Does transactions occurring free from the obstruction of government officials really scare you that badly as to openly call for limits to your freedom? In other words, is freedom that scary as to revere chains placed upon you or are you simply a product of the current system?

[Anti Federalist]

Remember, the smallest minority is the individual. You applied collectivism in the same sentence that you disowned it.

You are not only in favor of the U.S. government denying the natural right to movement, but also recognize that these people are *fleeing* Marxist states. Lol, tell me again how you oppose state abuse.

They are fleeing in same sense Massholes flee their collectivist shithole, then vote to create a new one wherever they end up.

Californicated means the same thing.

Talk me when the state has been dismantled and does not hold nearly so much power over my life.

[kcchiefs6465]

They are fleeing in same sense Massholes flee their collectivist shithole, then vote to create a new one wherever they end up.

Californicated means the same thing.

Talk me when the state has been dismantled and does not hold nearly so much power over my life.
You live in a Constitution Free Zone, you know?

What do you suppose precipitated that?

[Anti Federalist]

You live in a Constitution Free Zone, you know?

What do you suppose precipitated that?

Yup, I know...there are no perfect answers in this mess.

[pessimist]

Who on earth looks around and thinks to themselves: "Gee there just isn't enough people around here, we need more" :)

[AuH20]

Who on earth looks around and thinks to themselves: "Gee there just isn't enough people around here, we need more" :)

Globalists.

[Zippyjuan]

Who on earth looks around and thinks to themselves: "Gee there just isn't enough people around here, we need more" :)

There are actually fewer illegal immigrants in the country than there were in 2008. Exactly what (and who) should we be spending more tax dollars to expand the security state and potentially limit more rights to "protect" ourselves from?

http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2013/09/PH-unauthorized-immigrants-1-01.png
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2013/09/23/population-decline-of-unauthorized-immigrants-stalls-may-have-reversed/

[kcchiefs6465]

Who on earth looks around and thinks to themselves: "Gee there just isn't enough people around here, we need more" :)
Who on Earth looks around and says "Gee, there are just too many people here. We need a million agents of the state armed to the teeth with fully automatic weaponry, autonomous aircraft, and boats and furthermore to ensure that they can accomplish their [futile] goal (of preventing free travel) we need to suspend the Constitution 100 miles around the continental US (and Alaska), and harass people as they conduct themselves in peaceful and civil manners?"

Authoritarians, naive xenophobes, and protectionists, that's who.

I guess one way to make sure no one comes here is to make this country such a shit hole no one wants to. Of course by then you won't be able to leave as much as they won't be able to come (if they wanted to). Yay! for authoritarianism. Solving life's ills one jackboot at a time.

[Lucille]

An Ebola Outbreak Would Be Advantageous For Globalists
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/2354-an-ebola-outbreak-would-be-advantageous-for-globalists


It's sad to say with such finality, but a universal fact of existence is that most of the people you meet in this life are fundamentally and functionally ignorant. Not necessarily stupid, but certainly ignorant. Ignorance comes not from a lack of intelligence, but from a denial of knowledge and truth. That is to say, ignorance takes hold when people decide to act as though they know and understand a thing, even if they do not. Ignorance prevails when a society or nation chooses to value the appearance of expertise, to value the theater of overconfidence, and to cheer for the bluster of morons rather than admit that they have unanswered questions on subjects they do not yet grasp. For nothing is worse for the self absorbed than to acknowledge that they do not know.

Entire nations have fallen throughout history because of this terrible weakness...

By extension, such ignorance is not just an inherent disease but also an easily exploitable disease. When we refuse to think critically and examine our surroundings thoroughly, we become like grazing gazelles oblivious to the predators encircling us in the tall grass. And, just as there are predatory individuals that hide amongst us, there are are also predatory oligarchs that camouflage themselves as benevolent politicos and financial professionals standing above us. Normal predators we fear, establishment predators we invite into our homes as protectors, saviors, and partners.

The disease of ignorance leaves us vulnerable to many other plagues, including literal plagues like the Ebola virus. When we take the establishment at its word concerning the threat of Ebola outbreak, we make ourselves vulnerable. When people assume that the worst could never happen to them, history shows us that it inevitably does.
[...]
First and foremost, the existence of just one Ebola infected person within America's borders indicates a likelihood of others, or the possibility of others in the near future unless policies and procedures are changed. As far as I can tell, the government has no intention of introducing rational fail-safes such as requiring mandatory quarantine for those seeking to reenter the U.S. from known outbreak regions, shutting down unrestricted travel into the country from countries with Ebola, training hospitals properly in the identification of the disease, or committing mass resources to quelling Ebola in hot zones before it reaches our shores, at least not in time to make a difference.

Secondly, the establishment also has no intention of giving the general public accurate information as to the behavior and dangers of Ebola. Those I have spoken with in the medical field including some who work within major city hospitals have related to me that the CDC has not been honest in its assessment of the probability of outbreak. For example, the CDC is consistently reminding the public that Ebola is not an “airborn” disease, and this is technically true as far as the science indicates. However, they forget to mention that it is indeed a “droplet born” disease, meaning, it can travel through the air carried in an infected cough or sneeze. The tight quarters of an airplane make for a perfect petri dish, with droplets and particulates passing back and forth through the same space and oxygen for hours at a time. The spread of Ebola is nowhere near as containable as the CDC claims.
[...]
The one legitimate function of government, any government, is to protect the right of the people to pursue their own life, liberty, and happiness. I think stopping the invasion of mortal viruses would fall into this category. The one job our government is MANDATED to do, and it refuses to do it. Why?

I have made the point many times in the past and I'll make it here again; when a catastrophe takes place, or a crisis is imminent, ask yourself, who ultimately benefits? I believe that the lack of strong prevention response from our government, an inadequacy which is obvious to all of the health care workers I have talked with and to anyone who has the sense to do their own research, could be absolutely deliberate. I believe the spread of Ebola may be desired by certain power brokers, and here is why:

[TheCount]

"Gee, there are just too many people here"

It's not the quantity of people. It's the type that they find to be a problem.

[pessimist]

I'm all for diversity. I was just being lighthearted (not political/ideological), that's why I put the smiley there.

As an introvert though, the idea of expanding the already massive US population is undesirable. Generally speaking, people are 'blah'. :D

[pessimist]

It's not the quantity of people. It's the type that they find to be a problem.

Why can't a person be a sincere misanthrope who believes in the adage "less is more"? Not everything is about 'race' or ethnicity- two things I couldn't give a shit about.

[JustinTime]

IMO our virtually open borders and massive legal immigrants have screwed this country, and its probably too late.

We took in a massive chunk of immigrants over the last few decades and it was too much to assimilate, we could have done it had the numbers been smaller. To make matters worse this all came at a ear when our western ideals of individual liberty, constitutionalism and rule of law were being challenged internally. Now we're just effed.

We're so insane that we cant even restrict travel from areas where a highly deadly virus has become a pandemic. I mean, golly, that would be racist 'n stuff.

[TheCount]

We're so insane that we cant even restrict travel from areas where a highly deadly virus has become a pandemic. I mean, golly, that would be racist 'n stuff.

None of whom are coming over the southern border.

[FloralScent]

None of whom are coming over the southern border.

You're right, tuberculosis is coming over the southern border.

[Origanalist]

Who on Earth looks around and says "Gee, there are just too many people here. We need a million agents of the state armed to the teeth with fully automatic weaponry, autonomous aircraft, and boats and furthermore to ensure that they can accomplish their [futile] goal (of preventing free travel) we need to suspend the Constitution 100 miles around the continental US (and Alaska), and harass people as they conduct themselves in peaceful and civil manners?"

Authoritarians, naive xenophobes, and protectionists, that's who.

I guess one way to make sure no one comes here is to make this country such a shit hole no one wants to. Of course by then you won't be able to leave as much as they won't be able to come (if they wanted to). Yay! for authoritarianism. Solving life's ills one jackboot at a time.

I can remember a time when the police state was not even close to what it is now and we managed to keep our borders much more secure and the amount of illegals was a small fraction of what it is now. It's almost like it was planned....

[FloralScent]

I can remember a time when the police state was not even close to what it is now and we managed to keep our borders much more secure and the amount of illegals was a small fraction of what it is now. It's almost like it was planned....

I don't think it's a coincidence that all Western nations are having this same problem at the same time. The one thing that may save us is that we're still allowed to voice our disapproval without being arrested. The people in many European nations do not have that option.

[kcchiefs6465]

I can remember a time when the police state was not even close to what it is now and we managed to keep our borders much more secure and the amount of illegals was a small fraction of what it is now. It's almost like it was planned....
People say that but I am still aware of the police murdering, beating, and incarcerating innocent men during that period. In fact, since their inception. So a lot of what you refer to I'd suspect would simply be nostalgic memories of then, versus realizing what is today. Prohibition, a defining aspect of a police state, has been alive and well in this country since 1914. Wars always lead to a strangling of liberties at home. That is not to say that various administrations and "do good" busybodies haven't extended their schemes, it is simply to put things in perspective.

If you call being sent off to a far away land against your will to murder people, or protesters being shot, maced, beaten, and bitten by dogs, and people being thrown in a cage for possessing a plant, or for being a particular hue--freedom-- you'd be incredibly mistaken. And to hell with security. Their boogeymen are never ending. It's almost as if it's planned.... or has been studied and realized as an effective propaganda tool.

Regardless of all that though, can you elaborate on how using the government to extract money from me against my will for border patrol (or whatever you envision regarding immigration policy) is different from progressives using the government to extract money from me against my will for bailouts? Or for republicans taking their piece of my pie for what they wish? How is it any different?

This is before we even get into the fundamental aspects of what border "security" is. One, it is hard to secure (what you are talking about as "secure," history shows as a period where tens of thousands of tons of heroin and cocaine were imported .... It was far from [I]secure... people used to drive RVs to Mexico and load up kilograms of cheap brick weed to import back to the states relatively easily, square groupers, etc.). Secondly, you are talking about a system where everyone must be tracked and known of. Where identification standards are argued to be nationalized (it would make sense, from a certain perspective). Where a system is established to track people. Slippery slope is slippery. Not simply that, but it is impossible to have an effective border policy if following the Constitution. The Constitution Free Zones weren't born inside a vacuum, they were necessary to effectuate the checkpoints, the searches (anal, now, I might add) the violations of rights. It could not be done with this government following the Constitution. Therefore, as is often the case, the Constitution is ignored when convenient and propped up when it suits certain fancies. Considering the drastic differences in interpretation of the document, this is not surprising. Two parties, representing millions of interests squabbling over how to spend my stolen money. What could be a better plan? What right does someone have to stop me from hiring who I wish to hire? What right do they have to detain someone absent articulable and evident suspicion of a crime? (infringing on some collective's (who can hardly be named and are represented by no one['s]) property is not a crime.)

I tried to keep the post short.

[Origanalist]

People say that but I am still aware of the police murdering, beating, and incarcerating innocent men during that period. In fact, since their inception. So a lot of what you refer to I'd suspect would simply be nostalgic memories of then, versus realizing what is today. Prohibition, a defining aspect of a police state, has been alive and well in this country since 1914. Wars always lead to a strangling of liberties at home. That is not to say that various administrations and "do good" busybodies haven't extended their schemes, it is simply to put things in perspective.

Yes the police state existed, and no it's not nostalgia to state that is considerably worse now.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png/1280px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png
A graph showing the incarceration rate under state and federal jurisdiction per 100,000 population 1925–2012. Does not include prisoners held in the custody of local jails, inmates out to court, and those in transit.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

And that is just showing the incarceration rate, the rest has grown at least along the same lines.


If you call being sent off to a far away land against your will to murder people, or protesters being shot, maced, beaten, and bitten by dogs, and people being thrown in a cage for possessing a plant, or for being a particular hue--freedom-- you'd be incredibly mistaken. And to hell with security. Their boogeymen are never ending. It's almost as if it's planned.... or has been studied and realized as an effective propaganda tool.

I wasn't old enough to go to Vietnam so I missed that and your point is correct.


Regardless of all that though, can you elaborate on how using the government to extract money from me against my will for border patrol (or whatever you envision regarding immigration policy) is different from progressives using the government to extract money from me against my will for bailouts? Or for republicans taking their piece of my pie for what they wish? How is it any different?


I see your point, but now you are talking open borders, no country. That sounds fine in theory, and I suppose if the whole world agreed and a huge mega one world government didn't spring up I could agree.


This is before we even get into the fundamental aspects of what border "security" is. One, it is hard to secure (what you are talking about as "secure," history shows as a period where tens of thousands of tons of heroin and cocaine were imported [if not millions of tons].... It was far from secure... people used to drive RVs to Mexico and load up kilograms of cheap brick weed to import back to the states relatively easily, square groupers, etc.). Secondly, you are talking about a system where everyone must be tracked and known of. Where identification standards are argued to be nationalized (it would make sense, from a certain perspective). Where a system is established to track people. Slippery slope is slippery. Not simply that, but it is impossible to have an effective border policy if following the Constitution. The Constitution Free Zones weren't born inside a vacuum, they were necessary to effectuate the checkpoints, the searches (anal, now, I might add) the violations of rights. It could not be done with this government following the Constitution. Therefore, as is often the case, the Constitution is ignored when convenient and propped up when it suits certain fancies. Considering the drastic differences in interpretation of the document, this is not surprising. Two parties, representing millions of interests squabbling over how to spend my stolen money. What could be a better plan? What right does someone have to stop me from hiring who I wish to hire? What right do they have to detain someone absent articulable and evident suspicion of a crime? (infringing on some collective's (who can hardly be named and are represented by no one['s]) property is not a crime.)


Yes, this is true and the government didn't have the technology or infrastructure to do that "back in the old days".

"What right does someone have to stop me from hiring who I wish to hire? What right do they have to detain someone absent articulable and evident suspicion of a crime? (infringing on some collective's (who can hardly be named and are represented by no one['s]) property is not a crime.)"

Again you are asking for open borders, to which I would reply that I would agree to assuming the rest of the world would not assert itself upon me. What I fear is our own government and those affiliated with it going planet wide for real not just in attempt. I am not for incorporating the rest of the continent.

[kcchiefs6465]

Yes the police state existed, and no it's not nostalgia to state that is considerably worse now.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png/1280px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png
A graph showing the incarceration rate under state and federal jurisdiction per 100,000 population 1925–2012. Does not include prisoners held in the custody of local jails, inmates out to court, and those in transit.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

And that is just showing the incarceration rate, the rest has grown at least along the same lines.

Nixon, Reagan... those in between, before and after. But particularly those two presidencies are when the modern police state arose to a rather noticeable level (until the internet and various technologies.. phones with cameras, that sort of thing).

The numbers are often fudged, the number of citizens being summarily gunned down never recorded (or of those robbed, imprisoned unjustly etc)... it's not a new phenomena. Give people the authority to act extrajudicially and sure enough they will. It's one of my main gripes with the modern immigration system. They grant certain people extra "rights" (privileges isn't even the word for it) and said "professions" act in manners that should have them put behind a cage. They stop people without warrant (in the loose sense of the word), search who they wish to, and in general violate rights.... up to stealing property and murdering people.

Regardless of what detriment is alleged to be caused, it should not be tolerated by a society claiming to be free.



I see your point, but now you are talking open borders, no country. That sounds fine in theory, and I suppose if the whole world agreed and a huge mega one world government didn't spring up I could agree.
A one world government is more likely under the policy that will lead to nationalized identification, the subsidization of the border states/cities , and the cost burdened on the productive to pay for it all.

When the dollar collapses over over-extension (or rather, debasement) and "the people" go hungry for a few weeks, that is when a more "stable" currency will be introduced. The people, respectively, will probably clamor for it.



Yes, this is true and the government didn't have the technology or infrastructure to do that "back in the old days".
It will be used for reasons outside of the stated reasons. Integration of the various inept and often impeding bureaucracies, innocent and law abiding people being harassed... it's just a slippery slope. I understand your concerns but frankly they are the same, in nature, as seemingly so many that I've been seeing lately. Can't do this until this is done..... That's not the way freedom is supposed to work (and is possibly why it never actually has worked... in the long sense, I mean).


Again you are asking for open borders, to which I would reply that I would agree to assuming the rest of the world would not assert itself upon me. What I fear is our own government and those affiliated with it going planet wide for real not just in attempt. I am not for incorporating the rest of the continent.
I see what you're saying but the strengthening of the federal government is not the way to combat a global government. A deconstruction or destruction of the dollar is not the way to ensure national sovereignty. You'd most certainly cut a bit to pay for it but regardless, they (USG) produce nothing. Who is to fund it, by what means are the "donors" "asked" to fund it, and what individual's rights are ultimately undermined?

[Origanalist]

Regardless of what detriment is alleged to be caused, it should not be tolerated by a society claiming to be free.


This, after all is said and done, is the root of all our problems. There now seems to be no bounds to what we as a country will tolerate from our government. And I would gladly lose the borders to be rid of this pestilence. But that's not happening.

[S.Shorland]

They're starting to come around.Now all we need is efficient blood serum collection,screening and treatment.
http://rt.com/op-edge/196472-ebola-spread-dallas-infrastructure-contamination/

[S.Shorland]

Genius: Refuse to call it quarantine and do it in Italy http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-27/pentagon-quarantine-troops-returning-west-africa-21-days

This is why you won't ban commercial flights to Liberia and Sierra Leone.If your government was serious about keeping you safe,they would fly all health volunteers/army to West Africa via military bases where on return they could be quarantined for three weeks until all danger of infection was past.If they adopted this measure,however,it would draw attention to your southern border being completely open.Apparently 13,000 people in affected countries have US visas.I wonder how long before they all come home?

[S.Shorland]

Ah,they lied again... .Nevermind,once everyone's dead it won't matter anyway http://www.infowars.com/source-u-s-soldiers-not-under-strict-ebola-quarantine-in-italy/

Genius: Refuse to call it quarantine and do it in Italy http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-27/pentagon-quarantine-troops-returning-west-africa-21-days

[TheCount]

Why can't a person be a sincere misanthrope who believes in the adage "less is more"? Not everything is about 'race' or ethnicity- two things I couldn't give a shit about.

Of course they can. I am a bit of a misanthrope myself. I'm referring to the folks who think that the borders should be variably permeable depending on the 'type' of person coming through, or based upon which border.

[S.Shorland]

WHY did the two young nurses recover so quickly? Vinson thanked a benefactor for two units of plasma (no Zmapp used?).NO mention of that in the FOX article.WHY ARE THEY SO AFRAID OF INNOCULATION?
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/10/29/ebola-recovery-how-did-dallas-nurses-get-well-so-quickly/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3VQnbtvTw8

[Zippyjuan]

WHY ARE THEY SO AFRAID OF INNOCULATION?

There isn't an ebola vaccine yet.

[S.Shorland]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-18/brooklyn-woman-ebola-monitoring-list-drops-dead-bleeding-face-mouth-nose

[Zippyjuan]

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Heart-Attack-Death-Brooklyn-Health-Officials-Test-Ebola-283140121.html


NYC Woman Who Died of Apparent Heart Attack Tests Negative for Ebola

Health officials say the hairdresser who died after returning from one of the Ebola-stricken nations in West Africa tested negative for the virus.

Emergency responders were called to a Brownsville hair salon, where the woman suffered an apparent heart attack, according to a source familiar with the response.

The woman had arrived in Brooklyn 18 days ago from West Africa, though officials would not specify which country. She showed no symptoms of Ebola, but because she traveled within the virus' 21-day incubation period, an Ebola test was performed on her remains "out of an abundance of caution," the city health department said.

Test results came back negative.

more at link.

The UK Daily Mail (which loves to exaggerate on stories to sell copies) is the only source which claimed "Bleeding From "Face, Mouth, Nose"" in the Zerohedge attention grabbing fear-mongering headline. Others said she showed no symptoms.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/woman-ebola-monitoring-dies-brooklyn-salon-article-1.2015727


A woman undergoing Ebola monitoring after returning from West Africa died of an apparent heart attack in a Brooklyn hair salon Tuesday, authorities said.

First responders in haz-mat gear descended on African Queen Hair Braiding on Belmont Ave. in Brownsville at about 2:45 p.m., city health and fire department officials said.

The 40-year-old woman, who was not identified, returned from a trip to West Africa 18 days ago.

She had not displayed any Ebola symptoms and the health officials were testing her remains out of an "abundance of caution," a spokeswoman said.

Results are expected early Wednesday.

[Lucille]

LOL Yeah right (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463355-Brooklyn-Woman-On-Ebola-Monitoring-List-Drops-Dead-Bleeding-From-quot-Face-Mouth-Nose-quot).

Ebola 'Fever Travel Incident' Test Gives False Negatives
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/10/ebola-test-gives-false-negatives.html