Did you actually read the Arizona Star article in its entirety? I just did. It never "decried" anything. It simply described what was going on. Saying it "decried" anything is at best a mischaracterization, at worst a flat out lie. The article you linked was clearly the one doing the editorializing.

I was just going to post the same thing. Here, alloak, is the article you were too lazy to research.

http://m.tucson.com/news/border-fence-jumpers-breaking-bones/article_ed0f14a0-3eee-5877-9166-3397881cc8b5.html?mobile_touch=true

The article was more about the people ending up in hospitals.

[Edited on 7/8/2015 by jkeller]

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

You fail every time and it cracks us up.

The article was more about the people ending up in hospitals.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by jkeller]

Why are they ending up in hospitals? Low fencing, right?

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one. But that aren't doing that so its pretty much moot anyway.

The article you posted is a rather transparent hatchet job on another article and is reporting exactly nothing.

[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I have a novel idea for you to try. Read the article before you comment on it. If you did read it, you didn't understand it. If you didn't read it, it explains why you have made yet another post that was less than intelligent.

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I'm not meaning to weigh in on the "journalistic merits", just trying to point out to you what is actually in an article that you apparently haven't read. The original article doesn't say the height of the fence is an issue. The article you linked says that the original article is doing that, but that doesn't mean it is. Sheesh.

[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I have a novel idea for you to try. Read the article before you comment on it. If you did read it, you didn't understand it. If you didn't read it, it explains why you have made yet another post that was less than intelligent.

Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate your help. I'll put it in the appropriate file location.

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I have a novel idea for you to try. Read the article before you comment on it. If you did read i't, you didn't understand it. If you didn't read it, it explains why you have made yet another post that was less than intelligent.

Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate your help. I'll put it in the appropriate file location.

I guess that would be the same place you pull your information from.

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I wouldn't say it says the fence is to blame, rather it is part of the cause of the injuries.

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I wouldn't say it says the fence is to blame, rather it is part of the cause of the injuries.

Ya think?

I'll ask you then. Should the fences be lowered to make it safer for illegals to jump over a fence they shouldn't be jumping over in the first place? Instead of a deterrent, how about we just let them in and give them a nice pat on the behind.

I think we should send calcium supplements to Mexico. Let them build stronger bones.

The fences surrounding our prisons should also be lowered immediately. An inmate trying to escape my injure himself trying to escape. No more high fences!

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

Yesterday you rejected an article on Salon, apparently on bias. This seems to be an equal type of biased source. Why is this article different?

You say you want to talk about "issues," but you insist on the passive/aggressive drama trolling. Why?

As to the issue, it certainly seems that better fencing or other preventative measures are in order.

Other articles linked to here call the original story propaganda meant to stir up sympathy for illegals. I suppose one could look at it that way. However, person falls on the other side of the fence, injured. Let them die there? Not an easy situation.

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

Yesterday you rejected an article on Salon, apparently on bias. This seems to be an equal type of biased source. Why is this article different?

You say you want to talk about "issues," but you insist on the passive/aggressive drama trolling. Why?

1. That's how she rolls on this site. You know that.

2. Immigration is being discussed practically 24/7 in the news cycle. You don't think this fence matter qualifies as an "issue?"

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I wouldn't say it says the fence is to blame, rather it is part of the cause of the injuries.

Ya think?

I'll ask you then. Should the fences be lowered to make it safer for illegals to jump over a fence they shouldn't be jumping over in the first place? Instead of a deterrent, how about we just let them in and give them a nice pat on the behind.

no I think they should put trampolines at the bottom, placed so that when they land on them it shoots them back to the other side.

how's that for a ridiculous reply to a ridiculous reply?

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

Yesterday you rejected an article on Salon, apparently on bias. This seems to be an equal type of biased source. Why is this article different?

You say you want to talk about "issues," but you insist on the passive/aggressive drama trolling. Why?

1. That's how she rolls on this site. You know that.

2. Immigration is being discussed practically 24/7 in the news cycle. You don't think this fence matter qualifies as an "issue?"

Actually, I don't know that. As you've said many times, we're all responsible for our own posts. I, personally, don't bother much with source bashing as it gets boring very quickly. Lately you've been communicating as if you are after deeper conversations here. If I misconstrued that, my bad.

I didn't mean to come across that it doesn't qualify as an issue, it most certainly does. Was hoping that perhaps a higher quality of repartee was emerging. Guess I was wrong.

About ten years ago in Long Island a crook fell through a skylight (while burglarizing a building) got paralyzed and successfully sued the owner. So be it for the legal climate in the US

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I wouldn't say it says the fence is to blame, rather it is part of the cause of the injuries.

Ya think?

I'll ask you then. Should the fences be lowered to make it safer for illegals to jump over a fence they shouldn't be jumping over in the first place? Instead of a deterrent, how about we just let them in and give them a nice pat on the behind.

no I think they should put trampolines at the bottom, placed so that when they land on them it shoots them back to the other side.

how's that for a ridiculous reply to a ridiculous reply?

'
Best solution yet. Here's another one. Gas them at the border with knockout gas, then transport them to the Canadian border. When they wake up an head north, they'll think they're getting into the US. Maybe you and me should be in charge.

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

I wouldn't say it says the fence is to blame, rather it is part of the cause of the injuries.

Ya think?

I'll ask you then. Should the fences be lowered to make it safer for illegals to jump over a fence they shouldn't be jumping over in the first place? Instead of a deterrent, how about we just let them in and give them a nice pat on the behind.

no I think they should put trampolines at the bottom, placed so that when they land on them it shoots them back to the other side.

how's that for a ridiculous reply to a ridiculous reply?

'
Best solution yet. Here's another one. Gas them at the border with knockout gas, then transport them to the Canadian border. When they wake up an head north, they'll think they're getting into the US. Maybe you and me should be in charge.

LOL 😛

You guys never fail me. You crack me up!

Why? What is the article about? People are getting hurt and costing taxpayers money. Not saying to do one thing or the other to fix it, just that it is happening. That's what the press is supposed to do. Others have to figure out what to do about it.

Even if the article was saying what you somehow seem to be claiming it is saying, who cares? Who exactly would they be speaking for besides their own editors? No one.
[Edited on 7/8/2015 by gondicar]

Thanks for the weighing in on the journalistic merits. Very interesting.

But a story so suitable for 2015. People are getting hurt climbing over a fence they shouldn't be climbing (breaking the law) and the height of the fence is to blame. The height of the fence becomes the issue. Wow!

And people wonder why we need to take this country back.

Yesterday you rejected an article on Salon, apparently on bias. This seems to be an equal type of biased source. Why is this article different?

You say you want to talk about "issues," but you insist on the passive/aggressive drama trolling. Why?

1. That's how she rolls on this site. You know that.

2. Immigration is being discussed practically 24/7 in the news cycle. You don't think this fence matter qualifies as an "issue?"

Actually, I don't know that. As you've said many times, we're all responsible for our own posts. I, personally, don't bother much with source bashing as it gets boring very quickly. Lately you've been communicating as if you are after deeper conversations here. If I misconstrued that, my bad.

I didn't mean to come across that it doesn't qualify as an issue, it most certainly does. Was hoping that perhaps a higher quality of repartee was emerging. Guess I was wrong.

1. You might be the only poster here that doesn't source bash. Admittedly, sometimes I give in....Kudos.

2. I think it depends on the thread. Personally, I viewed the subject content as being at least a little humorous. Not that I think people getting injured is funny. But it reminds me of some plant workers complaining about a new, high fence that prevents them from easily getting out. The old, lower fence made it much easier to jump over and go to the bar across the street.