Should we have border security?

[angus]

I guess we're both repeating ourselves, so I think that I have not much to add to this debate, especially since we're digressing into personal attacks.  Your suggestion that my inability to keep up with whatever terms you deem politically correct and therefore acceptable is somehow evidence of an attempt on my part to mislead is provocative, but I'm not biting. 

I'd only add that it seems hardly sophisticated to recognize that folks come to the US seeking a better life, looking for economical mobility, fleeing oppression or violence, or to escape poverty.  We're a land of immigrants, and the underlying causes of mass migration to the US is something we were all taught from a young age, and there's no reason to think the the Mexicans are different.  If somebody uproots and moves to a strange country that is hostile to his presence, you have to assume that he thought that the alternative of staying put was worse.  This does not require some special degree of sophistication.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I guess we're both repeating ourselves, so I think that I have not much to add to this debate, especially since we're digressing into personal attacks.  Your suggestion that my inability to keep up with whatever terms you deem politically correct and therefore acceptable is somehow evidence of an attempt on my part to mislead is provocative, but I'm not biting. 

I'd only add that it seems hardly sophisticated to recognize that folks come to the US seeking a better life, looking for economical mobility, fleeing oppression or violence, or to escape poverty.  We're a land of immigrants, and the underlying causes of mass migration to the US is something we were all taught from a young age, and there's no reason to think the the Mexicans are different.  If somebody uproots and moves to a strange country that is hostile to his presence, you have to assume that he thought that the alternative of staying put was worse.  This does not require some special degree of sophistication.

Does it require some special degree of sophistication to discern the difference between those who legally enter the United States and those who illegally enter the United States?

Apparently you believe that anyone who can get into the United States (legally or illegally) is an "immigrant" (even if they only intend to stay here long enough to get some loot),

I guess I have to keep up the posts about stolen cares being taken to Mexico (its a major racket driving up insurance rates).  When I make those posts, I will be sure to mention that Angus doesn't believe they are happening (since all illegal entrants are immigrants).

[CARLHAYDEN]

The Obama administration doesn't even want "opertional control" of the border.

The Beanbag Question

High-ranking Border Patrol officials have different ideas about what happened on the night when Agent Brian Terry was killed
by Leo W. Banks

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control"

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/the-beanbag-question/Content?oid=2620653

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Now what's so bad about dropping some nebulous concept that gives people no way to judge how well the Border Patrol is doing and replacing it by actual statistics?  One can argue if those statistics are the ones that should be measured, but hopefully you'll make your arguments without using misleading partial quotes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Obama administration doesn't even want "opertional control" of the border.

Good. As stated before there should be absolutely no type of border control whatsoever. Period. There is no border control between France and Germany or France and Spain or Spain and Portugal or the Netherlands and Belgium, what purpose does it serve here?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Now what's so bad about dropping some nebulous concept that gives people no way to judge how well the Border Patrol is doing and replacing it by actual statistics?  One can argue if those statistics are the ones that should be measured, but hopefully you'll make your arguments without using misleading partial quotes.

Ernest,

Please stop the dishonesty!

The Obama administration has taken a very aggressive stance against border security.

Their position is that if we don't apprehend anybody, there's no problem.

They have told members of the border patrol they their lives are at risk (as well as their jobs) if they apprehend illegals.

I understand you are in favor of illegals crossing the border, but just say so instead of misleading.

Oh, and the definition of "operational security" is given in the previous reports on border security, and is not as "nebulous" as you would suggest.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I love how CARL says "The Obama Administration has taken a stance against border security" like it's a bad thing.

[Brittain33]

They have told members of the border patrol they their lives are at risk (as well as their jobs) if they apprehend illegals.

Really? They told members of the border patrol they are likely to be killed or fired by the U.S. government if they apprehend illegals? Under what circumstances?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Ernest,

Please stop the dishonesty!

Actually, that is what I have to say to you.

I understand you are in favor of illegals crossing the border, but just say so instead of misleading.

No I'm not in favor of illegals crossing the border, but I do realize that we do have pesky things like budgets and the Constitution to consider as well.  No government ever has the resources to do everything it would like to do.  That our Federal government has forgotten that for the past few decades is precisely why we are in the fiscal mess we are in now.

Oh, and the definition of "operational security" is given in the previous reports on border security, and is not as "nebulous" as you would suggest.

The quote mentioned "operational control" not "operational security" and given the gobbledygook bureaucrats put out, I doubt that even if they have defined them, the bureaucrats mean the same thing.  But since you assert that there is a actual definition being referred to, please go ahead and provide a link to it, or them if you wish to define both.  The fact that you couldn't even keep the terms straight in the same post only goes to show how much both are likely bureaucratic doublespeak signifying nothing.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Ernest,

Please stop the dishonesty!

Actually, that is what I have to say to you.

I understand you are in favor of illegals crossing the border, but just say so instead of misleading.

No I'm not in favor of illegals crossing the border, but I do realize that we do have pesky things like budgets and the Constitution to consider as well.  No government ever has the resources to do everything it would like to do.  That our Federal government has forgotten that for the past few decades is precisely why we are in the fiscal mess we are in now.

Oh, and the definition of "operational security" is given in the previous reports on border security, and is not as "nebulous" as you would suggest.

The quote mentioned "operational control" not "operational security" and given the gobbledygook bureaucrats put out, I doubt that even if they have defined them, the bureaucrats mean the same thing.  But since you assert that there is a actual definition being referred to, please go ahead and provide a link to it, or them if you wish to define both.  The fact that you couldn't even keep the terms straight in the same post only goes to show how much both are likely bureaucratic doublespeak signifying nothing.

Again I request you stop the dishonesty!

Yes, I know you are opposed to border security, but, unlike BRTD are unwilling to be honest about it.

Now, here's some more information about the federal government turning over vast tracts of land to the smugglers.

At present, as GAO noted, Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument is 55 percent closed, and the chief ranger at the Sonoran Desert National Monument proposed closing that entire 480,000-acre preserve, on the Interstate 8 smuggling corridor

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/spilling-over/Content?oid=2634939

Oh, and here's information abouta previous closure.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Closure of Refuge Lands
Adjacent to Border
Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge

(link won't copy)

Oh, and as to your ‘doubts,’:

The 2006 Secure Fence Act defined “operational control” as “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.”

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/jonosborne/february-15-2011/house-homeland-security-subcommittee-tries-create-definition-bo

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The 2006 Secure Fence Act defined “operational control” as “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.”

So it's an imaginary goal that can't ever be attained, even if we closed the border to everything and placed minefields on all our borders and coasts.  No metrics to even judge how close we come to that utopian standard.  So "operational control" is defined exactly as I thought it would be, as meaningless gobbledygook to make people think that those in charge in 2006 were actually interested in doing something about immigration.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

You're worse than Shady Brady, CARL.

[CARLHAYDEN]

The 2006 Secure Fence Act defined “operational control” as “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.”

So it's an imaginary goal that can't ever be attained, even if we closed the border to everything and placed minefields on all our borders and coasts.  No metrics to even judge how close we come to that utopian standard.  So "operational control" is defined exactly as I thought it would be, as meaningless gobbledygook to make people think that those in charge in 2006 were actually interested in doing something about immigration.

Once again I request you simply be honest about your opposition to border security.  To YOU the idea is so hateful you keep making things up. 

[CARLHAYDEN]

You're worse than Shady Brady, CARL.

Considering the source, that's a compliment.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Now what's so bad about dropping some nebulous concept that gives people no way to judge how well the Border Patrol is doing and replacing it by actual statistics?  One can argue if those statistics are the ones that should be measured, but hopefully you'll make your arguments without using misleading partial quotes.

CLUSIVE: Federal Agents Told to Reduce Border Arrests, Arizona Sheriff Says
By Jana Winter

Published April 01, 2011

An Arizona sheriff says U.S. Border Patrol officials have repeatedly told him they have been ordered to reduce -- at times even stop -- arrests of illegal immigrants caught trying to cross the U.S. border.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/01/exclusive-federal-agents-told-reduce-border-arrests-arizona-sheriff-says/

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Here's the full sentence you selectively quoted:

"The government is scuttling the long-used concept of operational control, and replacing it by counting apprehensions and seizures of drugs, weapons and currency."

Now what's so bad about dropping some nebulous concept that gives people no way to judge how well the Border Patrol is doing and replacing it by actual statistics?  One can argue if those statistics are the ones that should be measured, but hopefully you'll make your arguments without using misleading partial quotes.

CLUSIVE: Federal Agents Told to Reduce Border Arrests, Arizona Sheriff Says
By Jana Winter

Published April 01, 2011

An Arizona sheriff says U.S. Border Patrol officials have repeatedly told him they have been ordered to reduce -- at times even stop -- arrests of illegal immigrants caught trying to cross the U.S. border.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/01/exclusive-federal-agents-told-reduce-border-arrests-arizona-sheriff-says/

I presume you linked the story along with a quote of my earlier post because later on in the story, it had someone who did question the choice of statistics used. Reasonable questions, but ones that don't suggest what better statistics should be used instead.

However, since your quote from the story isn't about that, let me instead address that by including what you left out from that same article, since it once again shows your need to use selective quotes to reinforce your myopic point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So it appears that at the most we have an idiot mid-level bureaucrat in the Border Patrol trying to make things look good in the sector he or she is responsible for, not some nefarious scheme of the Obama administration to fudge overall results.  And that's if Dever is telling the whole truth.

Carl it is people like you who make Fox News look like they actually do live up to their slogan of "Fair & Balanced".  They certainly do a better job of it than you ever do.

[CARLHAYDEN]

As will become evident in the coming month, Jeffery Bell LIED!

You believe the most pathetic lies, as long as they come from Obama administration officials.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As will become evident in the coming month, Jeffery Bell LIED!

You believe the most pathetic lies, as long as they come from Obama administration officials.

If you're going to rant, could you at least rant coherently?  I don't know who this Jeffery Bell is, nor did a quick google find anyone relevant.  As for Jeffrey Self (the article you linked to misspelled his name, which I discovered while googling to find out who he is in more detail) who I presume is who you meant to refer to, he's a 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol and while definitely a bureaucrat who had spent six years in Washington before being tapped late last year to head up the newly-formed Joint Field Command, he's not an Obama political appointee, but still in the civil service.

(link - Arizona Daily Star article about him taking command of the JFC which gives some good background info on Jeffrey Self.)

[CARLHAYDEN]

As will become evident in the coming month, Jeffery Bell LIED!

You believe the most pathetic lies, as long as they come from Obama administration officials.

If you're going to rant, could you at least rant coherently?  I don't know who this Jeffery Bell is, nor did a quick google find anyone relevant.  As for Jeffrey Self (the article you linked to misspelled his name, which I discovered while googling to find out who he is in more detail) who I presume is who you meant to refer to, he's a 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol and while definitely a bureaucrat who had spent six years in Washington before being tapped late last year to head up the newly-formed Joint Field Command, he's not an Obama political appointee, but still in the civil service.

(link - Arizona Daily Star article about him taking command of the JFC which gives some good background info on Jeffrey Self.)

I realize that you are unable to disagree with Obama.

I also realize that you will disagree with me on everything simply to be what you are.

[Јas]

As will become evident in the coming month, Jeffery Bell LIED!

You believe the most pathetic lies, as long as they come from Obama administration officials.

If you're going to rant, could you at least rant coherently?  I don't know who this Jeffery Bell is, nor did a quick google find anyone relevant.  As for Jeffrey Self (the article you linked to misspelled his name, which I discovered while googling to find out who he is in more detail) who I presume is who you meant to refer to, he's a 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol and while definitely a bureaucrat who had spent six years in Washington before being tapped late last year to head up the newly-formed Joint Field Command, he's not an Obama political appointee, but still in the civil service.

(link - Arizona Daily Star article about him taking command of the JFC which gives some good background info on Jeffrey Self.)

I realize that you are unable to disagree with Obama.

I also realize that you will disagree with me on everything simply to be what you are.

This could create quite the paradox for TF if you ever agree with Obama on anything.

[CARLHAYDEN]

As will become evident in the coming month, Jeffery Bell LIED!

You believe the most pathetic lies, as long as they come from Obama administration officials.

If you're going to rant, could you at least rant coherently?  I don't know who this Jeffery Bell is, nor did a quick google find anyone relevant.  As for Jeffrey Self (the article you linked to misspelled his name, which I discovered while googling to find out who he is in more detail) who I presume is who you meant to refer to, he's a 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol and while definitely a bureaucrat who had spent six years in Washington before being tapped late last year to head up the newly-formed Joint Field Command, he's not an Obama political appointee, but still in the civil service.

(link - Arizona Daily Star article about him taking command of the JFC which gives some good background info on Jeffrey Self.)

I realize that you are unable to disagree with Obama.

I also realize that you will disagree with me on everything simply to be what you are.

This could create quite the paradox for TF if you ever agree with Obama on anything.

Yeah.

It would probably drive him to TOTAL disfunction.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I realize that you are unable to disagree with Obama.

I also realize that you will disagree with me on everything simply to be what you are.

This could create quite the paradox for TF if you ever agree with Obama on anything.

Yeah.

It would probably drive him to TOTAL dysfunction.

I'm not worried, CARL.  It probably would take something like Obama declaring the suspension of habeas corpus within 25 miles of the Mexican border to get you to agree with something Obama does.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I realize that you are unable to disagree with Obama.

I also realize that you will disagree with me on everything simply to be what you are.

This could create quite the paradox for TF if you ever agree with Obama on anything.

Yeah.

It would probably drive him to TOTAL dysfunction.

I'm not worried, CARL.  It probably would take something like Obama declaring the suspension of habeas corpus within 25 miles of the Mexican border to get you to agree with something Obama does.

Again, you make things up.

Its probably easier for you than dealing with what I actually said.

It would be nice if the Obama administration would enforce the laws on the books rather than granting administrative amnesties.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It would be nice if the Obama administration would enforce the laws on the books rather than granting administrative amnesties.

That will require an increase in funding so as to actually have places to put the people you want locked up until they are deported.  So, CARL, how much more do you want spent, and how do you propose it get paid for?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Could you two please get a room?     Ernest, surrender, CARL is not going to see it your way.....ever, ever, ever, ever.