Yesterday, we had another mass shooting, here in the US... this makes 3 in a very short period of time... a troubling trend of our times..... And then there was the murder of Kashogi, which somehow became an incident of international importance
The MSM was not bashful, giving full attention to all of these events.
But then, I wondered....
Living here in the Los Angeles area, not far from Tijuana ( a border town in Mexico, just south of San Diego ) , news from South of the border is of some importance to us. In my younger years, I used to travel to Tijuana quite often on weekends. But nowadays, it's too rough down there.
Here is some news, the MSM will not touch...
last week there were 36 murders in Tijuana. For the year 2018, they are up to 2120 murders. i believe, next to this little town on the other side of the border, the murder rates in any of our big US cities are far less. Please correct me, if I am wrong.
This is a lot of blood being shed, just a 15-minute walk away from the US border station. And Tijuana is not the worst of the Mexican border towns!
It seems to me, we should make sure we have tight border control to make sure this violence doesn't spill over to our side.
Some idiots in the US want open borders ! You need to get your head examined! Open borders would mean the end of US, as we know it.
Well, I guess, saying this, makes me a "racist"... so be it.
For a party that is sworn to fundamentally changing the US, open borders are a splendid idea.
” At a rally in Minnesota on Wednesday, Trump declared, “The Democrats want open borders.” Sadly, this is not true : no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders. Since Trump’s apparent concession on the issue of separating families, two prominent commentators on the right have argued for fortified border security, and even for the wall itself; some pundits have encouraged Democrats to move further to the right on immigration. No counterargument has emerged from the left. The existence of borders, and the need and right to police them, are among the unquestioned assumptions in the conversation. "
Fake news,” is what the mayor of Tijuana said about the violence in his city. Juan Manuel (el Patas) Gastelúm, denied the reports by Consejo Ciudadano para la Seguridad Pública y la Justicia Penal (citizens' council for public safety and penal justice), in which they claim that Tijuana is the fifth most violent city in the world. The mayor (known popularly by his childhood nickname El Patas - the Feet) previously wore a blue hat that read “Make Tijuana Great Again.”
Even if we ignore the violence we allow to cross our border with Mexico, common sense says that we do not need even more people dependent on government handouts in this country.
I think I've asked before, but I'll again.
How can you support "Sanctuary Cities" and claim to oppose open borders?
Tim, apples and oranges.
I was going to try and make a poem as my answer, but I couldn't find anything to rhyme with oranges.
"There’s no single definition of what is a sanctuary city, but generally speaking, it’s a city (or a county, or a state)
that limits its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agents in order to protect low-priority immigrants from deportation, while still turning over those who have committed serious crimes."
Actually, it's baloney and baloney Carl. You are saying that the people who think that once the border has been crossed, we need to ignore the transgression, but feel that the laws should be enforced at the border.
In what universe can you possibly rationalize that?
I see from your edit that you feel that as long as they have not broken any serious laws, they can receive sanctuary. And serious transgressions do not include illegal immigration. Gotcha...