We’re Going To Need A Wall on the Canadian Border!

(1) 1 irishMaybe most people are too young to remember the days of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. The wall came down for all practical purposes on November 9, 1989, when the doors that separated East Berlin from the west were thrown open. That was almost 28 years ago so assuming some people start paying attention to things at age 12 then you would have to be over 40 to remember that day.

Even less I figure would have been around at the time the Soviets began construction on it back in August 1961. It remained standing for 28 years. Its purpose was to keep people from fleeing from East Berlin to the freedom of the West. Once that fell the imprisoned Eastern Europeans saw their border open up and many felt the taste of freedom for the first time. Who would ever think people would want to flee America? Or, we would try to keep them here.

The West represented freedom; the East the repression of the Soviets. Almost no one went east. Those given the choice flocked to the west. Russia experienced a short-lived democracy which has again disappeared as democracy is wont to do in Russia. It now has a president for life who is duly elected without opposition and has been for 17 years.

We in America were proud that we had no walls keeping people from leaving here. If someone wanted to leave to wherever they wanted to go they were welcome to do so. We were a liberal democracy that believed in individual rights. Sadly, under D.Trump, we are no longer the beacon of freedom in the world and are one crisis away from becoming a totalitarian state.

How can one not be shocked when they read of the people fleeing this country because of their fear of D. Trump? These are not criminals. They are people who have escaped oppression in other parts of the world to come here. They now fear that in this land that used to welcome refugees and which thrived because of them they will be apprehended and sent back to the country from which they fled and enmeshed again in the arms of brutes.

Even more shocking is the idea that we are trying to prevent these people from fleeing. That is why I suggest that we need a wall on the Canadian border under our present regime. We can prevent people who came here seeking freedom from leaving our country and enjoying it in another country while causing them to live in the same sort of fear they did in the country from which they fled.

I hope you have seen the story of the eight people including four children from Sudan who lived in Delaware for two years. The other day they fled to Canada. The U.S. Border agents tried to stop them. They seized their luggage. They wanted to arrest them for being in the U.S. illegally.

These eight are just a drop in the bucket of the numbers of people from Africa and other places who came to America seeking a new life for themselves and their families. Many are now are fleeing or planning to flee our country into Canada. We for some strange reason are trying to stop them. Soon D.Trump and friends will realize we need a wall.

What a shame for the United States to be in this position of making the lives of these people who only seek to have a better life by living and working in America so afraid that they risk life and limb to flee to Canada. This is a great stain on America.

Read this story here and here and tell me how proud you are to be an American who would treat these poor people in such a shoddy manner that they flee across the snow-covered grounds to find safety from the horrors of D.Trump.

In 1895 John Fitzgerald a Congressman from Boston fought in “opposition to a bill that would have required new immigrants to be able to read the Constitution as part of a qualification test. When the bill was quashed, he was confronted by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge: “Impudent young man… Do you think Jews or Italians have any right in this country?” “As much as your father or mine,” Fitzgerald replied. “It’s only a difference of a few ships.”



17 thoughts on “We’re Going To Need A Wall on the Canadian Border!

  1. Khalid

    Mexico refuses to accept Central American deportees from the US. Most Hispanic illegal immigrants are not Mexican. Glorious Leader, and, Dixie Midget, will have to go on a prison building splurge to accommodate all the non-deport-able aliens from Central America. There’s Cubans still in migra custody from the Mariel Boat-lift. Some have never been convicted of anything. Others, who have committed crimes, and, completed their sentences, remain in custody, because, Cuba won’t take them back. They’re doing what amounts to life in migra prisons. US tax-payers foot the bill. It costs better than 30k each, a year, to house illegals in the Federal system.

  2. hutch

    Would NC freeze the waiting list and allow those who are taking the legal path to get here be halted or would he allow those in the process to complete it?

    If Mexico complains, why not highlight their draconian immigration laws?

    Are “progressive” Liberals (the rest of us lefties are just regressive, I guess} responsible for fear-mongering that leads to families freezing in the snows of Idaho?

  3. Khalid

    Private prison companies invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and today they got their reward: the Trump administration reversed the Obama administration’s directive to reduce the Justice Department’s use of private prisons,” Sanders said in a statement. “At a time when we already have more people behind bars than any other country, Trump just opened the floodgates for private prisons to make huge profits by building more prisons and keeping even more Americans in jail.”

    More basic training for the revolution. Thank you Glorious Leader. The git-back will be fearsome.

  4. tadzio

    Self deportation is good. America has no need for a 19th century policy to fill and secure a near empty continent in the 21st century when there is an ample population. The government is for the American people, not the rest of the world.

  5. Bill C.

    The issue is “illegal” immigration. NYT spins the issue as one of Immigration only. Please read the Heritage report cited above.

  6. DanC

    The column in the New York Times cited below does a pretty good job of summarizing the pros and cons of immigration. It relies mainly on a National Academy of Sciences report on the economic impact of immigration. There’s ammunition for both sides, but on balance, immigration does more good than harm, as it has throughout our history.

    Unrelated question for my conservative brothers and sisters: Should right-wing rock star/role model Milo Yiannopoulos be kicked out of the country? I mean, the man is an alien. Being liberal and all, I’m for letting him stay. But maybe you want him gone , pronto? Just curious.


  7. Bill C.

    I strike my “save the sob story” comment. But . . . . for every truly sad story about an illegal immigrant or refugee, there are equally sad stories about American lives being destroyed by illegal drugs from Mexico or the actions of illegal criminal immigrants (ex. the Kate Steinle case).

  8. Khalid

    Marcus Antonius:
    And Caesar’s spirit, raging for revenge,
    With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
    Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice
    Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war,
    That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
    With carrion men, groaning for burial.

    Julius Caesar Act 3, scene 1, 270–275

    Wa-llahi! Why no Richard Engel “eye-witness” report from the eastern front ?!!?!!? Media attention seems largely devoted to Glorious Leader’s domestic hi-jinks. There don’t appear to be any reporters embedded with US units participating in the Mosul attack. Is the public being kept in the dark?
    The butcher’s bill can no longer be satisfied with cheaply bought foreign lives, the devil’s only taking American. Pricey times, ahead.

    In war, truth is the first casualty.
    Greek tragic dramatist (525 BC – 456 BC)

  9. Khalid

    U.S. troops have come “under fire” and have “returned fire” in and around Mosul as allied forces try to retake the city from ISIS, a U.S. military spokesperson said on Wednesday.

    “When someone is shooting at you, that is combat,” said Col. John Dorrian, the Baghdad-based spokesman, to Pentagon reporters.

    While Dorrian said U.S. troops are operating “very close” to the front lines, he also added they do their best to avoid it, although circumstances can change where exactly the front lines are.

    A separate U.S. defense official told Fox News that U.S. troops fighting in Mosul have been wounded in recent fighting, but declined to say how many, or when the incidents occurred.

    The official told Fox News some were airlifted by helicopter for treatment, but declined to describe the wounds in any detail.

    The news comes days after the U.S. commander of American and allied forces in Iraq and Syria told Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin and other traveling press in Baghdad that U.S. troops were operating closer than ever to the front lines.

  10. Bill C.


    Economists, like sociologists, psychologists, lawyers, politicians and ordinary folks disagree about many things, and immigration is one of them.

    Illegal immigrants cost American taxpayers. Some reports say in excess of $100 billion annually or about $1,000 per taxpayer. Low estimates are $50 billion or about $500 per taxpayer. How much more should we pay? (I’ve seen absurd estimates and Politifact says every estimate is “mostly false” without offering any estimate of its own. The “fact-checkers” are politicized and afraid to estimate. )

    In 2013, the Heritage Foundation explored the costs: http://www.heritage.org/immigration/report/the-fiscal-cost-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-the-us-taxpayer

    Obama took in 100,000 refugees. (less than 0.1% of the World’s 20 million-plus refugees; Was he cruel?)Trump realistically reduced that annual number to 50,000 refugees. World Relief wants to increase the U.S. number to 200,000.) All recognize we have limited resources.

    Under Trump we will continue to issue a million annual Green Cards and tens of millions of annual Visas (business, academics, students, tourists) to foreign born. But let’s study the Green Card and Visa programs to see if modifications may be in America’s best interests.

    Most illegal immigrants and refugees come without skills and take jobs from poorer native Americans. Most illegals and refugees drain already strained resources, and as the Heritage Study shows, they do so over the course of a lifetime and over the course of generations.

    2. Want to change the Immigration Laws? Petition Congress! Suggest Amendments.

    3. People say, “Deportations separate parents from children.” Whenever you jail or imprison parents you separate them from their children. That’s no “reason” not to enforce the laws.

    4. Enforce the Immigration Laws: Deport Criminal Illegals; Deport gang members; Deport repeat Immigration offenders; Deport recent arrivals. A policy of No Amnesty will deter future illegal immigration. Those approaches sound reasonable to me.

    5. Today, >13% of U.S. residents are foreign born; we are approaching the historic high of 15% foreign born. How many more immigrants should we admit?

    6. Want to help decrease refugees? Prevent wars! Decrease U.S./NATO military interventionism worldwide. Set up refugee resettlement areas in the Middle East and East Africa.

    7. Save the sob stories for the soap operas. Do you know how many families have been broken up by the free flow of narcotics and other drugs from Mexico? Reason enough for a Wall and stricter border enforcement.

  11. nc

    In 1986 our best president gave an amnesty to three million illegals as part of a deal to stop all non legal immigration. Half of that bargain was fulfilled the other part ignored. In the last thirty years more than 30 million legals and about 12 million illegals have come to America. Is almost 50 million new immigrants too much or too little? Do we need time to assimilate and absorb them? 2. All illegals who are gang members, drug dealers or criminals should be deported. All law abiding illegals should be permitted to stay provided they get a RED social security card. An E Verify system would require all employers to hire only SS card holders. The ones with Red cards would pay $ 100 a month more in payroll taxes each month. This would be the penalty for breaking our laws. There would be no amnesty or citizenship for any illegals. If you fail to register for a Red card you would be subject to deportation. 3. Having taken in fifty million new people a pause in immigration for a few years would be required. A great part of America is it is free and you can vote with your feet. Anyone who desires to is free to go. No exit visas required.

  12. Khalid

    11:30 a.m.
    Iraqi police officials say the country’s militarized federal police forces have entered Mosul International Airport, taking over the runway amid fierce clashes with the Islamic State group.
    Thursday’s advance is part of a major assault that started five days ago to drive IS militants from the western half of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city.
    Two police officers say the airport buildings are now under fire from the Iraqi police forces. They would not provide more details but said troops from the U.S.-led coalition are with the advancing forces, though they didn’t specify the nationalities of the foreign forces.
    The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk to reporters.
    –Qassim Abdul-Zahra in Baghdad.

    “…they didn’t specify the nationalities of the foreign forces.”

  13. Bill Fitzgerald

    Let the “Exit” door swing open easily. Let’s try following established laws rather than ignoring them and never return to this mess that refusing to enforce law has created. That has been what has caused the great stain on America.

    In 1890, John Boyle O’Reilly, editor of The Piiot, wrote about Democrats and limited government, the trust in the wisdom of the people to decide and provide for their own interests (please refer to elections of 2016)…worth considering today:

    The Pilot is a Democratic paper. We say so without
    reservation, exclusion, or exception. The
    principles of Democracy as laid down by Jefferson
    are to us the changeless basis of sound politics
    and^ healthy republicanism. We are not Democratic
    simply as being partisan ; but we are partisan
    because we are Democratic. We would abide by
    Jeffersonian Democracy if there were no Democratic
    party in existence. Democracy means to us the
    least government for the people, instead of more
    or most. It means that every atom of paternal
    power not needed for the safety of the Union and
    the intercourse of the population should be taken
    from the Federal Government and kept and guarded
    by the States and the people. It means the
    spreading and preserving of doubt, distrust, and
    dislike of all sumptuary and impertinent laws.
    It means that law shall only be drawn at disorder,
    and that all affairs that can be managed without
    disorder should be managed without law. It means
    that all laws not called for by public disorder are
    an offense, a nuisance, and a danger. It means
    watchfulness against Federal legislation for such
    State questions as education, temperance,
    irrigation, and all other questions that may arise
    and are sure to arise in the future. It means the
    teaching of absolute trust in the people of the
    States to understand and pi­ovide for their own
    interests. It means home rule in every community
    right through our system, from the township up to
    the State Legislature ; and above that, utter
    loyalty to the Union. It means antagonism to all
    men, classes and parties that throw dis trust and
    discredit on the working or common people, and who
    insinu ate or declare that there is a higher,
    nobler, or safer patriotism among 348 JOHN
    BOYLE O REILLY. the wealthy and more book­learned
    classes than the common people possess or

    appreciate. It means that Democratic principles
    must be followed by individual citizens as well as
    by the aggregated party, that they must oppose the
    petty boss in their own caucuses, and the arrogant
    majority in their own town, when these attempt to
    coerce the rights of the masses or change the
    self­governing principle of the free town.

Comments are closed.