Congress Ponders A Fence Along The Us-canadian Border

[Pierre the Great]

technically it would do Canada a favor more then the US. It would stop illegal gun shipments. LOL

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...0915?hub=Canada

What a suprise IRA supporter hot head Peter King is for the legislation. This guy said Canada was full of terrorists.

The problem with a fence is that its stupid, and what are you going to do in the great lakes region? Build it in the water? LOL, dumb. Then there's a town in Vermont thats main street in the US Canadian border. Across the street is a town in Quebec and on the other side is Vermont. So when that new passport thing is required the little kids can't play with there friends across the street unless they show a passport.

I love it how one party wants to make the US into one giant prison.

Edit: Misleading title

[shortcat1]

The Germanies had "The Iron Curtain", China has "The Bamboo Curtain" so now we can have "The Chain-Link Curtain"?

Who's going to patrol this wall? That's an awful lot of miles upon miles of emptiness, especially from Lake Superior on to the Pacific.

:king: :hlogo: :king:

[Athlétique.Canadien]

That's no problem. Just as long as the US foots the bill.

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither" - Benjamin Franklin

Bulid your wall :?-

[sakiqc]

Colbert discussed about it with a congressman from the Washington state

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AStu2VLZLiY

(this is a must-see interview)

[huzer]

Bah...misleading headline here. They're endorsing funds for a study. Whoop-d-doo, like they haven't brought this up before.

[Pierre the Great]

A study, means they support the idea

[simonus]

A study, means they support the idea

a study means they want to be able to say they funded a study to people who like it. They might support it, but not necessarily. A study can be a way to stick an idea in bureaucratic quicksand.

[huzer]

A study means lobbyist have been successful in convincing Congress to do something. So congress allocates money to study what the lobbyist giving them millions of dollars to their favorite charity (themselves) want them to "study". Yeah! Sheesh, congress has approved money to prove that exercise and eating well contributes to being healthy and that being obese isn't healthy. There are thousands of examples of useless studies that congress has approved. The study will show (if it ever gets underway, which in itself is highly doubtful....election time poltics!) that a "wall" is potentially feasible on the southern border but unnecessary at the north. Then, another study will get underway to determine if it's really feasible...blah, blah, blah...

You make is sound like the US Congress wants to build a wall along the Canadian border now. Couldn't be further from the truth. I know shocking headlines bring more people to read an item, but at least be truthful and not sensationalist. So really, this topic is "dumb pure dumb".

Edited September 15, 2006 by huzer

[Colin]

Sounds like a Republican initiative to create jobs!

Thousands to build the fence, hundreds more to patrol it. And when they call it an unqualified success, I'm sure there'll be another initiative to create giant sea walls that rise hundreds of feet into the air. Beautiful soaring buttresses securing the States from awful immigrants and cruise ships with demanding Danish tourists from trying to penetrate from the sea. When that becomes successful, they'll work on hovercraft and gargantuan flying ships and, eventually, a huge force field bubble. With that complete, they'll develop the technology to extend that bubble under the country as well - never know when those damned Commies are trying to tunnel under the White House.

But that's only the start. There will be a mass un-education program and propoganda blitz to eradicate the "United States" from the world consciousness. Maps will be redrawn which will contain a "non-habitible zone" south of Canada and north of Mexico. People approaching the "border" will be zapped with special brain lasers which will turn them around and make them forget why they ever thought about approaching that place. When grand parents look at their grand children, there will be a wistful look about the horrible über-demons who live in a giant land that everyone must avoid at all costs.

Finally, the technology will arive which will allow for the literal removal of the US from Earth. On massive anti-gravity lifters, every inch will be lifted first into orbit, and then away from the Earth to a secret location. No longer paranoid and completely isolated, Americans will finally be at peace and away from the miscreants that live on Earth. No longer will their citizens live in fear of terrorism or the crazy Canadian menace. No longer will they have to send soldiers to conquer other countries in the name of peace.

- This message brought to you by the American Isolationism Society; we believe every American has the right to hide in a vaccuum forever!

[KoZed]

How about a big glass dome over the country? At least it'd keep all the pollution in!

[Colin]

Actually, the entire idea greatly saddens me. Whatever happened to, "we won't let them change our way of life"? From what was once a leader in the free word, we now see the first steps in a Big Brother, controlled society where freedom is the illusion.

A fence between the States and Canada? Here's a little test: Everyone lean back and pull up your shirts. Scrape out all the belly button lint and hold it in front of your face. That is the threat Canada poses to the world, you are the States. Now drop the lint on you. THE CANADIANS ARE COMING, THE CANADIENS ARE COM....

You're forgiven if you're giggling.

I know the wall would be there to keep out potentially nasty elements because the American government doesn't trust that Canada can keep undesirables out of our own country. But where does it end? Where does this quest for safety and the ostensible drive to a free world end and the isolation of a fear society controlled by its government begin?

With all respect to Fanpuck, who I believe to be an exceptionally intelligent person, the wool has been pulled over the collective American eye. I urge you to sit back and think a moment on where your country is compared to where it was a decade ago. You aren't free anymore; your government has turned yours into a fear state which it seeks to control by underhanded methods and propoganda campaigns in order to 'secure its safety'. I'm not saying I have all the answers, because I don't. I'm not saying that protection for ones citizens shouldn't be a top priority. But surely there are alternatives to the extreme Bush methods.

How can you square the ideals of a free society, of democracy, with the statement, "If you're not with us, you're against us." Isn't democracy the freedom to make a choice, to be your own people? When Canada jeopardized our own health and safety services by sending down fire, ambulance and medical teams after 9/11, was that not enough to show that we believe and support our friends down south? Did we have to enter into a war in order to prove ourselves? We weren't even thanked by the President when he made his address shortly thereafter - and don't tell me that was an oversight with all the prep work that goes into speaches.

And now the idea has been tabled to stick a fence between our two countries. Have the lessons of World War II America not been learnt? They were isolationists and they all agreed, post-war, that it was a mistake. This time, though, they're going to offend their closest friends (sorry Britain, no amount of ass-kissing will ever replace the kinship the US and Canada have) and largest trading partner. Why? Because they can? Because terrorists *might* come through here to get to there?

Perhaps, as has been said, Canada should be happy because then the proliferation of American guns on our streets will be significantly reduced.

I fear for our American friends. They travel down the most dangerous path led by a fool in King's clothing. If he were not the "leader of the free world" (that sounds more and more wrong each day) and in charge of the more powerful armed forces he would have been indicted by the world court for being a war criminal - he broke international law and attacked Iraq. If any other country had made a similar action and the Americans had opposed it, you can be assured their leader would have been brought to stand trial.

Maybe he had a good reason, maybe he didn't; that's another debate. Howver, he should stand trial for his actions, not be hailed as the leader for democracy. Especially since that same democracy is fast becoming a fairy tale in his own country.

Perhaps, in the end, the wall is a good thing. If he wishes to continue with the plan, maybe it would be better for him to practice his brand of "democracy" behind closed doors. Whatever the case, just the mere idea makes this a truly sad day for Canadian-US relations and democracy as a whole.

[sakiqc]

How about a big glass dome over the country? At least it'd keep all the pollution in!

and it would protect them from nuclear missiles.. perfect idea

[huzer]

My lord, people, quit overreacting. It's a freakin' study for chrissakes. Guess what (here's a shocker...) the same legislation has been put before congress before. Is there a wall/fence/dome/screenhouse/soap bubble over the states? No.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Actually, the entire idea greatly saddens me. Whatever happened to, "we won't let them change our way of life"? From what was once a leader in the free word, we now see the first steps in a Big Brother, controlled society where freedom is the illusion.

A fence between the States and Canada? Here's a little test: Everyone lean back and pull up your shirts. Scrape out all the belly button lint and hold it in front of your face. That is the threat Canada poses to the world, you are the States. Now drop the lint on you. THE CANADIANS ARE COMING, THE CANADIENS ARE COM....

You're forgiven if you're giggling.

I know the wall would be there to keep out potentially nasty elements because the American government doesn't trust that Canada can keep undesirables out of our own country. But where does it end? Where does this quest for safety and the ostensible drive to a free world end and the isolation of a fear society controlled by its government begin?

With all respect to Fanpuck, who I believe to be an exceptionally intelligent person, the wool has been pulled over the collective American eye. I urge you to sit back and think a moment on where your country is compared to where it was a decade ago. You aren't free anymore; your government has turned yours into a fear state which it seeks to control by underhanded methods and propoganda campaigns in order to 'secure its safety'. I'm not saying I have all the answers, because I don't. I'm not saying that protection for ones citizens shouldn't be a top priority. But surely there are alternatives to the extreme Bush methods.

How can you square the ideals of a free society, of democracy, with the statement, "If you're not with us, you're against us." Isn't democracy the freedom to make a choice, to be your own people? When Canada jeopardized our own health and safety services by sending down fire, ambulance and medical teams after 9/11, was that not enough to show that we believe and support our friends down south? Did we have to enter into a war in order to prove ourselves? We weren't even thanked by the President when he made his address shortly thereafter - and don't tell me that was an oversight with all the prep work that goes into speaches.

And now the idea has been tabled to stick a fence between our two countries. Have the lessons of World War II America not been learnt? They were isolationists and they all agreed, post-war, that it was a mistake. This time, though, they're going to offend their closest friends (sorry Britain, no amount of ass-kissing will ever replace the kinship the US and Canada have) and largest trading partner. Why? Because they can? Because terrorists *might* come through here to get to there?

Perhaps, as has been said, Canada should be happy because then the proliferation of American guns on our streets will be significantly reduced.

I fear for our American friends. They travel down the most dangerous path led by a fool in King's clothing. If he were not the "leader of the free world" (that sounds more and more wrong each day) and in charge of the more powerful armed forces he would have been indicted by the world court for being a war criminal - he broke international law and attacked Iraq. If any other country had made a similar action and the Americans had opposed it, you can be assured their leader would have been brought to stand trial.

Maybe he had a good reason, maybe he didn't; that's another debate. Howver, he should stand trial for his actions, not be hailed as the leader for democracy. Especially since that same democracy is fast becoming a fairy tale in his own country.

Perhaps, in the end, the wall is a good thing. If he wishes to continue with the plan, maybe it would be better for him to practice his brand of "democracy" behind closed doors. Whatever the case, just the mere idea makes this a truly sad day for Canadian-US relations and democracy as a whole.

People don't really care. Most don't. I could care less. Just like me the majority of people want beer, cheeseburgers, sex, drugs and rock and roll. Dubya is just a good ol' country cowboy. Sort of like, Dr. McKoy in Star Trek was a good ol' country doctor. We all know George likes beer, roasts, and going down to the ranch.

Then there's John Kerry who is ...boring...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Charisma plays a big part in this. In Canada's last election there was frozen, worried Martin and Turtleneck relaxed cool guy, Harper.

Mulroney or Turner? Mulroney.

Trudeau or Clark/Stanfield? Trudeau.

OR

Reagan or Mondale? Reagan.

Kennedy or Nixon? Kennedy.

The list goes on. Charisma. George has it. Like him or not. Even when he's a disaster he's a joke. Comedians are having a field day. We are watching it and we enjoy it.

Anyway, my point is society doesn't really care about this nonsense. I gotta stop typing, oh how I want beer, cheeseburgers, sex, drugs and rock and roll.

Besides, in 2 months everything will change. Democracy works.

Edited September 16, 2006 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

[KoZed]

My lord, people, quit overreacting. It's a freakin' study for chrissakes. Guess what (here's a shocker...) the same legislation has been put before congress before. Is there a wall/fence/dome/screenhouse/soap bubble over the states? No.

Aaawww come on Huz! A SOAP BUBBLE! Even better than satellite missile defense!

Big missile comes in and BONG! Bounces off the bubble!

Raoùl from Mexico tries to run his way in the country at night and BANG! Runs right in the bubble, knocking himself out!

I tell ya, I almost want one over Canada too!

[Fanpuck33]

Wool? It's so uncomfortable. If anything is over our eyes, its at the very least polyester. I think we'd noticed wool ove rour eyes. I mean, it's so itchy. People would never stop scratching their eyes!

Anyways, let me say this: Do I trust Bush's motives and actions 100%? Of course not. Do I feel like the administration tries to strike fear into my heart? Not at all. Do I live in fear of terrorism? Certainly not. Do I feel my rights are violated by the Patriot Act? Nope. If someone is suspected of having terrorist connections, then I would want my government monitoring their communication. If they end up hearing nothing but a guy asking his buddies to go out for a beer, was anyone really hurt? Do I think airplane laws have gone too far? Perhaps. But does it really take away from my freedom if I have to put my toothpaste in my luggage rather than my carryon? Certainly not.

Do I think Bush is some kind of saint? Of course not. He's had his faults and his poor decisions. Every president has. If the previous administration had taken the Al-Qaeda threat more seriously, the US may never have had to start the war on terror.

As for the Canadian fence, I agree with Huzer, it doesn't really mean anything. My guess, and of course it's only a guess, is that the discussion went something like this: "We went better border control with Mexico, but we don't have the support to do it yet. Let's propose a fence along the Canadian border. We already know that would be insane, given the lengthy border and the inordinate number of people who would be needed to work along the border. But by saying a Canadian fence doesn't make sense, we can conclude the study by saying that if we can't do it along the Canadian border, we'd better at least secure the Mexican border."

[Pierre the Great]

LOL you guys are funny

[shortcat1]

I'd like to be the king of Canada & the US... that'd be fun... I think...

I'd make the fence really pretty.... lots of flowers, you know... flowers mean love & peace (I'm from the 60's with flowers in gun barrels and on military helmets...)

:king: :hlogo: :king:

[InsaneHABSfan]

Now if said wall is built, will the animals respect the wall or will they just tunnel under it?

Also, how many feet do you have to go from the bottom of lakes to the proposed size above water.

And most important, how in the world are US politicians going to pay for it? Taxes! (I am now ducking from the bricks being thrown at me from our good USA friends on the board)

In all seriousnes, I cannot see this actually happening.

[Fanpuck33]

Now if said wall is built, will the animals respect the wall or will they just tunnel under it?

Also, how many feet do you have to go from the bottom of lakes to the proposed size above water.

And most important, how in the world are US politicians going to pay for it? Taxes! (I am now ducking from the bricks being thrown at me from our good USA friends on the board)

Hahahaha! Don't worry about criticism for your post, being the most outspoken American on the board, I take no offense to your statement and will certainly keep my bricks to myself. The idea is just funny. I mean, the border between the US and Canada is what, 2000 miles long? A barrier that big along with people to patrol it is laughable.

Reading the article again, it seems to me like this is a political correctness study, a weak attempt to show Hispanic voters that the US isn't focusing on only keeping illegal Mexicans out of the country.

[Pierre the Great]

Hahahaha! Don't worry about criticism for your post, being the most outspoken American on the board, I take no offense to your statement and will certainly keep my bricks to myself.

What?!!? You more controversial then me NO WAY

[Fanpuck33]

What?!!? You more controversial then me NO WAY

Sounded like he was directing the comment towards Americans who might support the fence, so I figured he kinda meant me.

I think you say things more controversally than I do. For example, when you said the US should have expected 9-11, you meant it in the sense that the US should have expected an attack in general. You weren't really saying that it was about time that US civilians were killed because of the government's foreign policy. However, the way you stated it, that's what it sounded like. But more of the board members agree with your overall politics (liberal) than mine (conservative). I am pretty much always outnumbered in political debates here, but I like it. I probably wouldn't know as much about politics as I do if I didn't have HW members challenging my political beliefs.

[Pierre the Great]

I'm exactly like you Fanpuck in real life. I'm a sheep among wolves in my area of the world. Always on the defensive.

[jetsniper]

I'm exactly like you Fanpuck in real life. I'm a sheep among wolves in my area of the world. Always on the defensive.

I know what you mean. I'm a Liberal living in Calgary.

Think about that for a second.

[Pierre the Great]

LOL

Yeah and I get called a communist for my views. Which is completely assinine. Never thought universal health care, lowering tution fees, creating more social programs, helping the poor, trying to make living life easier and not so much a burden made me a communist. LOL