Imagine if RC cars were a relatively new thing.. and people started attaching cameras to them and driving them on the freeway around emergency responders.
There are already laws in place to punish anyone doing such a thing. Just like there already are for flying model airplanes in the way of real aircraft.
A wall built for one purpose will work just as fine for the other. Just like surveillance systems built to catch terrorists will work perfectly fine to keep tabs on you, too.
Really? Have you been hearing a lot about how the areas of the US/Mexican border that are actually fenced off and have been for years are being used to prevent dissident US citizens from fleeing their oppressive country into Mexico? Please, do go on. Can't wait for the links you can't provide because you're being completely disingenuous and you know it.
a list of the worst things that have happened in the recorded history of the world, the USA's enslavement of black people would be right up near the top of the list
But not the European enslavement of black people? Or the enslavement of black people by OTHER black people that predated any European enslavement of black people? Or the still ongoing enslavement of black people by other black people (and Arabs, etc) that's happening right now? Your focus on the "USA's" enslavement (as if that institution wasn't in place for a couple of European-controlled centuries in North America and in Europe before there even was a USA) is pure drivel, and you know it. And then your fake ignorance of the intellectual and eventually physical civil war that erupted over and led to the practice of ending slavery - a cause to which untold thousands of white Americans gave their lives - that's a pretty tall order of disingenuous cherry picking on your part.
I would put helping poor people first
That would be nice. The first thing to do would be to stop voting for the people who have been conducting their "war on poverty" for decades, and who have done nothing but create a multi-generational ocean of people dependent on the vast bureaucracy and spending that that effort has ginned up. You want to see fewer people in poverty? Stop rewarding multiple births in single-parent households where absent fathers and disinterested mothers create rudderless, illiterate, unskilled, and often drug-addicted, violent kids even in areas where their cities spend enough per child on education to put three other kids through top quality private schools in any other place. The problem you're talking about, shy of true mental illness, isn't about resources. It's about local culture. Period. If you really think that you need to fix that, you have to take kids out of that environment and raise them away from it. Are you ready to make that case? Ready to take kids from their toxic neighborhoods and homes so they don't repeat the cycle of ignorance and a criminal world view? No? Then what sort of "help" did you have in mind, specifically? Give them more stuff? Spend more than $10,000 per student per year on school?
Wait. I know. We should rid their neighborhoods of the crime that plagues those places, so they can pursue a more constructive life. How should we do that? Perhaps make sure that the local criminal gangs aren't staffed up with members that cycle repeatedly through the legal system and return to commit the same crimes over and over again? Nope, can't do that, because that involved police, and we all know that police are now officially evil, and locking up violent gang members is officially racist. Looking forward to your specific suggestions, and explanations as to why they've never been tried before or have never worked before, but will now, because of how you're suggesting them.
Talked to a Ukrainian once. The stated reason for the wall was to keep out Western spies.
Yeah, that's why they machine-gunned families trying to climb over it in desperate attempts to escape from East Germany's little slice of Soviet hell on earth.
No, it wasn't about western spies. It was about "brain drain" - the loss of the educated, industrious, Germans who didn't want to live under socialist compulsion and control.
All of the assailants they've identified so far are European nationals. There's plenty of evidence that they're trying to make it _look_ like the attacks were carried out by agents they sneaked in with the refugees, but the evidence so far on the actual attackers is that they didn't come in with the refugees.
So, just to be clear, what you're talking about is the Greek and French governments both lying about fingerprints taken just weeks ago during a border crossing in Greece and then found on the bodies of the attackers in Paris?
"There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases" and "signing up at different places" when asked about signing people up at mosques.
Which is him talking about tracking refugees newly admitted to the country. Just like we're ALREADY DOING, just not very well, because we lose track of people and can't figure out what they're doing. Like, you know, the half a dozen Bosnian Muslim refugees who were let in, and then ended up working directly to finance foreign militants. Those are people who went through what the administration is describing as a completely thorough vetting process. Which it's not. Not even close. More tracking and scrutiny IS appropriate, since we're dealing with groups like IS who are boasting of their long term plans to make use of refugee movement, and just used it to send to mass killers into Paris (were you paying attention?).
Nobody is putting words in his mouth.
Except, you, through deliberate mis-characterization.
talks in thought-terminating cliches but he clearly understood those questions and replied to them in his poorly thought through manner
I'm not a fan of his communication style, his thought process, or his habit of rambling. But I'm much less of a fan of people who deliberate ignore the context in which something is said to score lazy rhetorical points with low-information audiences. You are deliberately ignoring the fact that he was in a loud room talking to two reporters at the same time. He didn't bring up the topic in question, and certainly didn't "endorse" a muslim-tracking database. He was talking about tracking new immigrants, especially those from places that have just a week ago served up phony refugees that just slaughtered 130 people (not to trouble you with the actual context or anything).
How did the rest of Christians answer for this?
Who said they had to "answer for it?" He was promptly dealt with by the legal system, not sheltered and funded by fellow medieval-minded theocratic thugs and their financiers. Are you really so unable to see the distinction?
as a resident of the country that has deliberately targeted two hospitals for bombings in as many months
Oh, NOW I get it. You didn't say that the conversation was supposed to be without any sort of context, and was supposed to not take into account things like local police calling in for air strikes because they're being shot at by people who have taken up positions in the hospital. I didn't realize that the conversation was supposed to be about an alternate universe where militant Islamists don't deliberately set up shop in dense neighborhoods, in the parking lot of hospitals, in mosques, schools, former churches, and the like. Since you're talking about non-real situations, what else can we talk about? Is Jar-Jar Binks a good guy, or a bad guy in your pretend world?
So he's going to skip the whole pinning stars on peoples' chests and go straight to building the Berlin wall, and this somehow makes what he is saying OK?
Really? Please point to a single quote where is he advocating the building of a wall to keep people from fleeing the country. You're confused. That's a leftist thing. The socialists are the ones that, given enough power, do things like wall up Berlin to prevent people from leaving their collectivist paradise, or jail people from attempting to leave the socialist paradise that is Cuba. If you can't muster the energy necessary to understand the difference between keeping people from illegally walking INTO your country, vs. using force to prevent them from fleeing from collectivist tyranny, then please don't do anything reckless like voting.
You are living in denial.
And then you say: "Donald Trump has endorsed setting up a database of Muslims"
there are multiple instances of Trump supporters violently attacking Hispanic Americans
Specific links, please, to show that you aren't also just BSing about that, as well. While you're at it, shall we look for links to coverage of "hispanics" (who are you talking about, exactly?) being violent? No? Would that take the fun out of your rant?
Don't you see where this is all headed?
Yes, it's probably headed to even MORE shrill lefty lying and distortions. It might even result in no immediate reduction in the rampant crime and murder that's ongoing in a some cities that have been run for decades by liberal legislatures and administrations.
Fascism is already here
You're still foggy on the meaning of that word, aren't you?
I have not seen any Democrats proposing anything that even comes close to the things coming out of the Republican party.
Haven't been on a college campus in the last few years? No?
From the Republicans we see religious tests, attempts to deny rights to specific religions, and now a national registry of Muslims of the exact same sort that Hitler used against the Jews.
You mean the "religious test" that current administration routinely applies when considering refugee status, but which the leader of the House explicitly said would be part of no legislation to come from that body? And that "national registry of Muslims" that a reporter conjured up out of thin air, that one? Please cite the language used by "the republicans" as they propose such a thing. Be specific.
it's only one side of the American political spectrum that's pushing for all-out fascism
You don't actually know what word means, do you? The only party that's all about heavy-handed centralized government power and crony corruption is the Democrat party. They love that stuff.
The worst thing that can happen is that the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who are as horrified at the actions of IS as the rest of us, are marginalized and dissuaded from helping in rooting out this menace.
Then maybe they should go back in time to the point where enclaves full of extremist Islamists hadn't yet reached the point where the non-crazies were scared of them. Just like gangs in Baltimore and Chicago, and every other situation just like this throughout history. If the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims really didn't want to put up with the growing armies of their more purist, violent, militant, caliphate-minded brothers, then they'd already have done something about it. But they're generally not. It's tacit approval, not horror.
Make it right before you make it faster.