On 18-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Proof? Refugees come from around the world. Terrorists tend to
be well funded and arrive carrying briefcases.

No, they come looking like refugees,

You're making this up as you go along. You still provide no proof.

Don't blame anyone for your problems.

I'm not blaming anyone,

Then quit whining. You have a problem - fix it and get out of everyone
else's face.

Case in point: the terrorist
with a vehicle full of explosives caught entering the US from Vancouver at
Port Angeles just prior to the Millennium celebration who planned to blow up
the Space Needle in Seattle.

One example vs the twenty plus that came into the US directly from Saudi
Arabia. The problem is still yours.

Mike

A Usenet persona calling itself Michael Daly wrote:

On 18-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Proof? Refugees come from around the world. Terrorists tend to
be well funded and arrive carrying briefcases.

No, they come looking like refugees,

You're making this up as you go along. You still provide no proof.

Don't blame anyone for your problems.

I'm not blaming anyone,

Then quit whining. You have a problem - fix it and get out of everyone
else's face.

But the whole point is that I want to get IN your face and force YOU to fix
it by threatening your economy. It's so much cheaper and more economical to
do it that way than to try to close the border.


Case in point: the terrorist
with a vehicle full of explosives caught entering the US from Vancouver at
Port Angeles just prior to the Millennium celebration who planned to blow up
the Space Needle in Seattle.

One example vs the twenty plus that came into the US directly from Saudi
Arabia. The problem is still yours.

It's your problem too, which you will someday come to find out.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

On 20-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

It's so much cheaper and more economical to
do it that way than to try to close the border.

But the solution you propose is for us to close our border.

Sorry, your problem - you fix it. Stop blaming everyone else.

Mike

A Usenet persona calling itself Michael Daly wrote:

On 20-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

It's so much cheaper and more economical to
do it that way than to try to close the border.

But the solution you propose is for us to close our border.

Indeed.


Sorry, your problem - you fix it. Stop blaming everyone else.

We intend to make it your problem, so that you have to spend your money to
fix it or risk losing a major segment of your economy when we have to do it.

If we close the border with Canada, it will be CLOSED. Nobody in, nobody
out.

It's much cheaper for us to force you to fix it than to do it ourselves.
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Weiser says:
================
If we close the border with Canada, it will be CLOSED. Nobody in,
nobody
out.
It's much cheaper for us to force you to fix it than to do it
ourselves.
=================

But Scott, that's a huge IF. I think someone (perhaps Michael) has
already pointed out that the trade between our two countries is HUGE.
And trade, as I'm sure you know, is a two-way street.

If this 2-way trade were not extremely advantageous to the USA (and, of
course, to Canada as well), you wouldn't be engaging in it. Now in
terms of dollars required to fix whatever problem you perceive there to
be with our mutual border: do you really believe that cutting off trade
with Canada will be cheaper than the USA fixing whatever this problem
is?

I suggest that if that's your position, then you cannot even begin to
fathom how valuable this trade is to your country. Fixing a border
problem would cost a mere pittance in relation to the trade we're
talking about.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Weiser says:
================
If we close the border with Canada, it will be CLOSED. Nobody in,
nobody
out.
It's much cheaper for us to force you to fix it than to do it
ourselves.
=================

But Scott, that's a huge IF.

Indeed. It's a last resort option. We'd much rather you agree to keep your
drug dealers and terrorists up there so we don't have to.

I think someone (perhaps Michael) has
already pointed out that the trade between our two countries is HUGE.
And trade, as I'm sure you know, is a two-way street.

Which can be made a no-way street when the costs exceed the benefits. It
won't take too many terrorist incursions from Canada to make it worth it to
close the border.


If this 2-way trade were not extremely advantageous to the USA (and, of
course, to Canada as well), you wouldn't be engaging in it. Now in
terms of dollars required to fix whatever problem you perceive there to
be with our mutual border: do you really believe that cutting off trade
with Canada will be cheaper than the USA fixing whatever this problem
is?

The mere threat will probably be sufficient to persuade your masters to
clean up their act. If not, the sanctions can be imposed gradually,
increasing the economic pressure until you cave, which you will long before
we do.


I suggest that if that's your position, then you cannot even begin to
fathom how valuable this trade is to your country. Fixing a border
problem would cost a mere pittance in relation to the trade we're
talking about.

That's a good reason for Canada to clean up its act. Mexico too...


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Weiser says (in answer to frtzw906):
=====================
Fixing a border
problem would cost a mere pittance in relation to the trade we're
talking about.

That's a good reason for Canada to clean up its act. Mexico too..
=======================

But, who sees it as a problem? We don't.

If canada thought it were a problem, we'd have done something about it.

frtzw906

Weiser says:
=====================
Which can be made a no-way street when the costs exceed the benefits.
It
won't take too many terrorist incursions from Canada to make it worth
it to
close the border.
================

Again, I think you truly underestimate the magnitude of this trade.
Just the dependency of Michigan GM plants on components made in Ontario
ensures that GM will use its considerable political clout to keep the
trade moving. Now multiply by the clout of Ford, Weyerhaeuser, etc
etc.... This border is not closing anytime soon.

frtzw906

On 24-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

If we close the border with Canada, it will be CLOSED. Nobody in, nobody
out.

You won't be missed.

It's your problem, fix it yourself. There is no reason that we should
respect and defend the US border if the US refuses to respect anyone
elses'.

Good fences make good neighbours. Fix your fence, dickhead.

Mike