View Full Version : Border States: Dealing with the Invasion
IMO, and I recognize I am not the sharpest tack on the board, something needs to happen ASAP. This is my suggestion:
1. The situation (invasion) has to gain the attention of the MSM. Right now we read about this in local Border State newspapers and occasional bits on Fox and CNN, but the subject is being used by both liberal and conservative talking heads to snipe at one another, not to inform the public. The problem is going to need the level of attention that is being paid (rightly so) to the oil spill.
2. The situation (invasion) has to become a subject of daily embarrassment for the Chicago gang in the White House and the Limp Weeds in Congress. Until you embarrass a politician into action they are nothing but hood ornaments.
To get there:
1. The Border States need to pass a State Law making it illegal for persons to enter their State with the intention of violating a Federal Law. Bet there's words to that effect on the books already. Will this cause the law breakers to saturate the State and Federal Courts with lawsuits and paperwork? Sure. Let them go ahead. Just take your sweet time processing the paperwork. If they gain an injunction prohibiting the States from doing this then let the Federals come in and enforce the terms of the Court Order.
The Border States have to agree that the situation demands action. One State can't take action on their own or the illegals will just go around the rock in the river.
2. A coordinated mobilization of State National Guard and Air National Guard resources needs to be initiated by each of the Governors with the soul mission of protecting themselves, the public, private property, and securing the borders. The situation is like unto a natural disaster and should be dealt with by the respective State National Guards. Local residents in the affected areas do not have the resources to mount the required resistance. (Neighborhood Watch with Guns? Come on…how long can that be sustained?) The private citizens are outnumbered and out gunned. It would be a blood bath with too many US citizens on the bottom of the tub.
3. Persons entering illegally (seeking jobs, etc) should be detained at State detention camps until the DHS arranges to have them deported or provides them with citizenship.
Painful as it is, State taxes recovered against a wide range of subjects would have to be the resource to pay for the mobilization of State armed forces, the establishment and running of detention camps, and border security (since the Federal Government is incapable or unwilling to provide either). Let the States file suit to recover resources via the Federal Courts. (How long before that went to trial?)
Action is going to have to come from the Governments of the individual Border States. Local County and Township constabularies don't have the resources; not the people and not the armament.
Obviously I'm not a lawyer. This is just my own personal opinion. The situation is desparate and if action is not soon taken by the States very many of their citizens are going to be killed.
Why is there a problem with illegal immigration? The answer is simple, is it not? They expect to get goodies. Those goodies consist of jobs and various social programs.
How do we stop the problem? Again, it is simplicity itself. Eliminate the chance of getting the goodies.
Isn't it interesting that we, as a society, decade in and decade out, refuse to make any effort to pursue such policies? Could it be that the views stated by politicians are mere diversions from the truth? Might that truth be that the actual national policy is to permit (encourage?) illegal immigration in order to keep the cost of labor down?
Sidenote: Cheap labor costs improve business profits and keep prices down. Voters like low prices. Business owners with increased profits are happy (generous?) constituents.
All pure speculation. Probably wrong. MOO. YMMV. ;)
Times have certainly changed since we used to satisfy our need for cheap labor by purchasing it from either the Portugese in Africa or the English seeking to drain their jails of debtors. Ahhhh...progress.
Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be. :rolleyes:
And so it goes...
Richard's jaded $.02 :munchin
Times have certainly changed since we used to satisfy our need for cheap labor by purchasing it from either the Portugese in Africa or the English seeking to drain their jails of debtors. Ahhhh...progress.
Well...in a way...it is progress. Instead of purchasing labor, we now get a short term rental. It frees up capital, and if the units of labor fail, we replace them with new units at no cost to us.
Occassionally, I reflect on the possibility that slavery was eliminated because it was no longer the cheapest model. But that would be cynical, wouldn't it? ;)
I respect both opinions. I believe the "goodies" they seek are things like safety for their kids, health care, and a wage they can use to support their families (among a slew of other things I can't begin to imagine).
If we want immigrant labor because we think that in hiring immigrants we will get cheap labor (never mind the collateral costs of health care and education) then let us reinvent the Bracero Program, only this time lets prosecute the farmers who abuse people by denying them a fair wage, access to education, and regular humanitarian aid.
http://www.farmworkers.org/bracerop.html
I remember this program in CA in the early 50's and went to school with many of the kids from these families. I recall some farmers provided good living conditions and some were ruthless. Corruption was everywhere and the people the program were supposed to help suffered. In the end it dissolved in '64 under the weight of the 60's. Before the program could recover it was over shadowed by the backdrop of the Civil Rights movement, the assassinations of JFK, MLK, and RFK, and the protests against the war in Vietnam.
IMHO, the issue is not immigration. It is the criminal importation of drugs and the exploitation of hungry people by their Coyotes. One is invasion of our country and the other a damned sin.
In the meantime, secure the borders...period.
Isn't it interesting that we, as a society, decade in and decade out, refuse to make any effort to pursue such policies? Could it be that the views stated by politicians are mere diversions from the truth? Might that truth be that the actual national policy is to permit (encourage?) illegal immigration in order to keep the cost of labor down?
<<SNIP>>
All pure speculation. Probably wrong. MOO. YMMV. ;)With respect, this speculation does not serve the discussion of contemporary immigration policy well. Immigration policy (and its antecedents) have always been heatedly debated among civilians and statesmen. Arguing that politicians are acting in diversionary ways suggests that they, rather than American citizens, are the driving force behind this policy or that one.Occasionally, I reflect on the possibility that slavery was eliminated because it was no longer the cheapest model. But that would be cynical, wouldn't it? ;)This topic has been debated heatedly among historians for decades. IMO, scholars focusing on the experiences and political activities of slaves and slaveholders are turning the tide against this interpretation.
If we want immigrant labor because we think that in hiring immigrants we will get cheap labor (never mind the collateral costs of health care and education) then let us reinvent the Bracero Program[.] FWIW, there are still Mexican nationals who participated in this program seeking the pay they earned <<LINK (http://www.kcet.org/shows/voces/bracero-stories.html)>>. IMO, if we're going to reboot this program, we will have to address some of the legacies of its predecessor.In the meantime, secure the borders...period.MOO, it would not be that simple. Regardless of the punctuation, another question will always follow.
Yes, the Bracero Program had problems, but it was a way for immigrant people to come to this country and do the work. Any program to deal with the problem of ilegals working in the US is going to have to require study, and hopefully some integrity. But at some point shouldn't we expect some product or "thing" out of all this talk?
IMO our problem centers around "contemporary immigration policy" being discussed until the cows came home. Well, the critters have come and gone back out and still the air is filled with the smell of "the discussion". In the meantime we have LEOs in fear of their lives and their families lives. Punctuation be damned. The Federals seem to want to "discuss" while the States and the citizens suffer. That's wrong.
Arguing that politicians are acting in diversionary ways suggests that they, rather than American citizens, are the driving force behind this policy or that one.
Indeed it would, Sigaba, indeed it would.
I also think this has something to do with it but that's just my two cents worth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
If we don't secure the borders and stop the wholesale threat against our citizens we won't have to wait 20+ years. I do not see how we can provide for the common defense or promote the general welfare unless we use some form of large scale military presence along our border with Mexico. Anybody think we can continue to ignore this condition and maybe just go on discussing the issue? Maybe if we hope hard enough it will go away?
:munchin
Nightfall
06-28-2010, 09:33
I honestly think there is at least a *nugget* of truth to this in response to the particularly spooky video already mentioned:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH9VwxIPD6k&feature=related
Watching what NAFTA is/has been doing to my father's company and what they did over in Euro-land just emphasizes it. I genuinely think they intend in the very near future to open the borders completely.
I honestly think there is at least a *nugget* of truth to this in response to the particularly spooky video already mentioned:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH9VwxIPD6k&feature=related
Watching what NAFTA is/has been doing to my father's company and what they did over in Euro-land just emphasizes it. I genuinely think they intend in the very near future to open the borders completely.
Please stop.
I genuinely think they intend in the very near future to open the borders completely.
U.S. national policy for decades has emphasized free trade above many other considerations. It seems entirely possible that the concept will expand to free movement of people, as we see in the Euro-zone countries.
Not a good thing, IMO.
Ret10Echo
06-28-2010, 11:29
So should a Eurozone-like requirement for the neighboring nation to meet a certain economic status be a prerequisite for free movement? EU membership has requirements. Illegals are "forcibly" deported. They didn't just fling open the floodgates.
EU plans flights to deport illegal immigrants
The European Union is drawing up plans to charter its own flights to return illegal immigrants to their home countries.
By James Kirkup in Brussels
Published: 7:12PM GMT 29 Oct 2009
Under the plan, individual member states would be able to claim seats on planes for rejected asylum seekers they wish to remove.
The EU flights would then make multiple stops in different countries to collect deportees before flying on to their country of origin.
The plan for a common EU approach to repatriation flights is set to be approved by an EU summit in Brussels on Friday.
A document due to be debated at the summit shows that Frontex, the EU's external border agency, would fund and operate the shared flights.
The agency will be asked to explore the possibility of "regular chartering.... of joint return flights", the document says.
Britain is not a full member of Frontex, but helps fund the Warsaw-based agency and UK borders agency staff have been seconded to work for it.
The proposal, drawn up by Sweden, also calls for more joint naval operations between EU states aimed at intercepting the movement of would-be immigrants by sea.
There will also be greater dialogue with the Libyan authorities to persuade them to do more to prevent Libyans setting sail for Europe.
Some estimates suggest that more than 100,000 illegal immigrants enter the EU every year via the Mediterranean.
Most end up in Mediterranean countries, who are arguing for a "burden sharing" system where each EU state would get a quota of illegal immigrants it had to accommodate. Britain is strongly opposing that plan.
Some EU countries are already co-operating on deportation flights.
Earlier this month, Britain and France combined to charter a flight that returned 27 Afghans to their home country. Twenty-four had claimed asylum in the UK and three had claimed in France.
The flight sparked French political protests, but the government of Nicolas Sarkozy has pledged to push ahead with tougher immigration policies.
On their return to Afghanistan, the deportees were put up in hotels and offered £1,800 to help them resettle.
France last month dismantled "the jungle" at Calais, an impromptu refugee camp for illegal immigrants hoping to enter the UK from France.
The two countries have also agreed to establish a new co-ordination centre monitoring illegal immigration, based in Folkstone, Kent.
EU leaders say that a more co-ordinated approach to border control is starting to pay off.
Frontex this week said that illegal border crossings into the EU declined by 20 per cent in the first half of the year. However, asylum requests also increased 11 per cent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6462052/EU-plans-flights-to-deport-illegal-immigrants.html
http://www.frontex.europa.eu/
I must be dumb as the clay; for I cannot see the problem we are facing in and along the Border States as being one of immigration. It appears to be immigration. It appears to be economic. It appears to be a problem that can be addressed by intelligent minds discussing the history and logic of one point or another. IMO, the reality is that the problem is one of common criminals forcing their way into the US and resisting all legal means which might deter them, in other words, an invasion of criminals into sovereign US territory. That's what's going on. The first response has to come by addressing the porous condition of our borders, and the only way to do that IMO is with an armed military presence. We are otherwise doomed to see a good many US citizens, many of whom will be unarmed and completely innocent, being murdered in the crossfire as is already happening in Mexico. It's just a matter of time.
So should a Eurozone-like requirement for the neighboring nation to meet a certain economic status be a prerequisite for free movement? EU membership has requirements. Illegals are "forcibly" deported. They didn't just fling open the floodgates.
Excellent point - I didn't know that. Thank you.
IMO, the reality is that the problem is one of common criminals forcing their way into the US and resisting all legal means which might deter them, in other words, an invasion of criminals into sovereign US territory.
OK, but this begs the question: Why?
Why are our political, economic, and social elites not interested (or even willing) to address the issue? Notice that a substantial majority want control of the borders: LINK (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/05/04/20100504arizona-immigration-law-gallup-poll.html)
So...the public wants the problem dealt with, if the polls are to be believed. You, LarryW, bring out good points why it should be dealt with. But the problem remains - why, year in and year out, is it not addressed?
(fm nmap) OK, but this begs the question: Why?
Sir, indulge me please with this scenario: Your front door bursts open and a man enters with a knife and demands money. Please, if you have access to a gun, just shoot the bastard. Do not ask him or even take the time to wonder why he's there. At that point in time it really doesn't matter. "The Main Thing is to keep the Main Thing the Main Thing."
Of course the study into the social fiber of the causes of these problems re: immigration need to be explored, and solutions based on such detailed study (with the highest regard for human integrity) have to be implemented, but not at the risk of stopping as soon as possible godless thugs advocating murder in our country. Tolerance of the criminal equates to permission. MOO.
Sir, indulge me please with this scenario: Your front door bursts open and a man enters with a knife and demands money. Please, if you have access to a gun, just shoot the bastard. Do not ask him or even take the time to wonder why he's there. At that point in time it really doesn't matter. "The Main Thing is to keep the Main Thing the Main Thing."
Of course the study into the social fiber of the causes of these problems re: immigration need to be explored, and solutions based on such detailed study (with the highest regard for human integrity) have to be implemented, but not at the risk of stopping as soon as possible godless thugs advocating murder in our country. Tolerance of the criminal equates to permission. MOO.I would like to think that we have the ability (and the political will) to do both simultaneously.
My one preference would be to avoid rhetoric justifying "the main thing" that inhibits our ability to do the other thing.
How do we split this hair? By exhibiting a cold hearted, amoral, determination to protect our citizens, to secure our boarders, and to enforce our laws.
This is to say that we take Clausewitz to heart by controlling the anger that is in our hearts.
LarryW, please understand that you are preaching to the choir.
I am all for shooting the b-----d, reducing the door to splintered wood, and spraying the living room with hot brass and disintegrating links. :lifter
We are in complete agreement - the borders need to be secured. Right now.
Having said that, it seems to me that our policy makers are saying something very different. At a policy level, I am a nobody and my opinions do not matter. Their's do. So it seems like a really good idea to try to figure out why they are letting the bad guys in. I have guessed it is due to economics, but I'd like to hear other theories.
Having said that, it seems to me that our policy makers are saying something very different. At a policy level, I am a nobody and my opinions do not matter. Their's do. So it seems like a really good idea to try to figure out why they are letting the bad guys in. I have guessed it is due to economics, but I'd like to hear other theories.IMO, there are several dynamics in play. First is political self preservation. The country is changing demographically. Policymakers are thinking not just about today's stakeholders and voters, but about tomorrow's.
Second, there's a confusing historiographical terrain. Our understanding of the past presents more questions than answers that may lead to solutions. (Bluntly, we need to find ways to take ownership of the racism exhibited in our previous confrontations with the immigration issue.)
Third, there's ambivalence at the interpersonal level. As I've said before, if you live in an area like L.A. you really do not know who is a citizen and who is an alien who should not be here. Even if you do, that person can be the guy you work with, the folks who serve you lunch, that homeboy you talk to about the Lakers, or that chica you want to conocer (if you follow my meaning). And even if that person is the [string of expletives deleted] with the [expletive deleted] barking chihuahuas at one in the morning whom you want to drop dead, the thought of uprooting millions of people trying to live their lives can be difficult. (That is, until you're stuck on the fucking Pasadena freeway next to some assmonkey playing the latest Marshall Mathers "hit." At that point the earth could open up and take almost everyone of them to Hades for all I care. But I'm not bitter.)
Sure, Sigaba, that's all fine.
I can understand that politicians believe they can gain with one voting block while losing only a little with another. Simple political calculus.
Racism? I don't know. Do the policy makers care, one way or the other? My cynicism compels me to doubt it. Policy makers, as I perceive them, will use race to manipulate and divide, but I'm dubious of their loyalty to any cause other than themselves.
Ambivalence? Seems possible. It does seem counter to the polls, though. Notice that the poll I linked to wants the border controlled, but is unsure about what to do with the existing illegal population.
But I return to that nagging question - other than the desire to avoid annoying some potential voters, why not secure the border? Notice that this is not the same as deporting anyone.
Strange, don't you think? One would think such a fundamental issue would have a clear answer. Yet it doesn't seem to.
ZonieDiver
06-28-2010, 23:19
A former student of mine ran for Congress in the Republican primary for District 6 in 2004. One of the major planks in his race against Jeff Flake was 'secure the border.'. In a debate in Mesa, Flake asked him what else he considered important in the immigration debate. My former student replied that once the border was secured, it became immaterial.
You could grant amnesty, create a 'path to citizenship,' or whatever. It would become a 'generational problem.'. Those born here were citizens, and their parents would eventually die. However, if we didn't secure the border, ANYthing we tried would be doomed to failure.
He was 6 years ahead of his time!
(fm sigaba) I would like to think that we have the ability (and the political will) to do both simultaneously.
My one preference would be to avoid rhetoric justifying "the main thing" that inhibits our ability to do the other thing.
I would celebrate to high heaven if I agreed with this premise, but I do not believe American political will can focus on more than one thing at a time. POTUS has replied to send 1,300 or so troops to the border but thus far has sent none. This after personal visits from the Governor. Albeit she's not a Dem, she nonetheless is the political head of her State. Had there been a flash flood, or forest fire that made thousands homeless you could bet BHO would have been making low passes in his Air Force One pope-mobile dropping I-Love-Arizona leaflets. The Border States are on their own. They cannot depend on Federal support in any form, not from this administration and not from this Congress.
(fm ZonieDiver) A former student of mine ran for Congress in the Republican primary for District 6 in 2004. One of the major planks in his race against Jeff Flake was 'secure the border.'. In a debate in Mesa, Flake asked him what else he considered important in the immigration debate. My former student replied that once the border was secured, it became immaterial.
You could grant amnesty, create a 'path to citizenship,' or whatever. It would become a 'generational problem.'. Those born here were citizens, and their parents would eventually die. However, if we didn't secure the border, ANYthing we tried would be doomed to failure.
He was 6 years ahead of his time!
I wish, I hope, I pray to God that the Federal political resolve to the problem of border security and immigration comes to a conclusion to protect future American generations, but I am not optimistic. I cannot be, given the evidence of action/inaction from both the Executive and Legislative Branches of our Government in addressing border security. IMO, and this feeling pains me like no other, our Federal Government is incapable of making decisions with integrity. Rather, decisions are made based purely on political advantage, money, and self-love of their individual legacy. And, quite frankly, I don't know what to do about it.
IMO, the only hope remaining is in the nobility that exists in our States. I don't know when in history this condition has happened before, if ever. Maybe in 1836. Maybe during Reconstruction. I believe we are plowing new ground.
Ret10Echo
06-29-2010, 04:41
, our Federal Government is incapable of making decisions with integrity. Rather, decisions are made based purely on political advantage, money, and self-love of their individual legacy. And, quite frankly, I don't know what to do about it.
You hit at the heart of the matter here. Inside the Beltway, the standard has been one of collegial bodies coming to some sort of agreement. Give and take, greasing of palms, favors to be repaid at another time. Very little changes with the focus on the next term, or the next deal.
If the American people benefit from anything that comes out of Washington, believe me, it is by accident or an unavoidable circumstance.
Everyone seems to focus on the border - the border with Mexico which is an issue - but remember, the US has borders and all remain as porous to the many issues associated with illegal immigration which continue to plague our nation and its citizenry today.
WARNING: Reading the following may tend to upset you and further erode your faith in the effectiveness of polecatus washingtonium.
Here is how the USBP* (with a budget of $2B) sees it:
Overview - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol90.htm
Immigrant Effects - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol901.htm
Sex Slaves - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol880.htm
al-Quaeda - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol1803.htm
Northern - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol1920.htm
Southern - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol1301.htm
West CA - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol1302.htm
East CA - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol1303.htm
West AZ - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol703.htm
Mid-AZ - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol704.htm
East AZ - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol705.htm
New Mexico - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol746.htm
Texas - http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol900.htm
This is an interesting graphic to give one an overview of the undocumented labor related issue.
And so it goes...:eek:
Richard's $.02 :munchin
* This site is maintained by supporters of the United States Border Patrol and is not an official government site. The contents of this site are privately managed and not subject to the direction of the United States Border Patrol. USBP is at http://www.cbp.gov/
spherojon
06-29-2010, 13:06
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol901.htmIf you are Cuban and reach this magical high water mark then you have made it and no effort will be made to deport you.
Am I missing something here???!??? :mad:
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol880_2.htm
Please remember that “people” in power government know full well about everything in this section. They ignore it. They think they have a higher calling and so a few dozen or a few hundred dead eight year old girls won’t stand in their way.
I'm surprised that the BP is allowed to have this on there web page and "people" in power government haven't changed it yet.
As for the entire article on "Sex Slaves," this was a real eye-opener. I had no idea that there are "ten thousand “undocumented worker” sex slaves in this country."
I had to stop reading after seeing the maps showing all know routes into the Souther CA border...it's frustrating, and something needs to be done, period.
Thank you Richard for that,
I'm surprised that the BP is allowed to have this on there web page and "people" in power government haven't changed it yet. It isn't a .GOV url.
spherojon
06-29-2010, 13:43
It isn't a .GOV url.
You see, it is my fault for misreading the url .gov vs .com. Which happens all to often.
Edit: Enough said.
GratefulCitizen
06-29-2010, 20:17
OK, but this begs the question: Why?
Why are our political, economic, and social elites not interested (or even willing) to address the issue?
But the problem remains - why, year in and year out, is it not addressed?
I'll hazard some speculation.
Just a small part, as there are likely many other factors involved, incompetence and lack of political courage topping the list.
There is the cheap labor part, but here's the double-whammy: remittances back to Mexico.
When the economy is hot, these remittances dampen domestic inflation (and presumably export some inflation to Mexico).
When the economy cools, remittances drop, leaving more money here, softening the recession (and presumably exporting some of the recession to Mexico).
The same thing happens when we import massive amounts of goods and commodities (oil mainly).
Export inflation, export recessions.
The dollar being the world's de facto reserve currency, combined with trade deficits (migrants sending money back to Mexico is effectively a trade deficit) makes our business cycles easier by dumping the extremes onto the rest of the world.
Just a guess...
mojaveman
06-29-2010, 22:50
I was down in Jacumba today on business and got another good look at the fence. In short - it's awesome and impressive. It's even being built up the sides of steep hills. I was really wondering if it could actually extend all of the way to the Gulf of Mexico, something like Hadrain's Wall or the Great Wall of China. I'm glad it's there. When its finished we can have armed motor patrols roving it's length, something like what I witnessed on the border of Jordan and Israel.
Aside from the JT Ready character, I have heard the Arizona Militias and the Minutemen are active in the area. According to the AZ Militia in Pima Co. they have FOB's and run into hostiles which are Mexican Military and Paramilitary.
I am curious what you folks down in that neck of the woods think the effect positive or negative of their presence is.....or are they even present.
Ret10Echo
06-30-2010, 18:44
You see, it is my fault for misreading the url .gov vs .com. Which happens all to often.
Edit: Enough said.
Try this
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/
Also of interest...SBInet (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-651T) from GAO
As far as the politicos are concerned...if you throw money at it, then it is "action complete". Don't trouble them with statistics.
Everything looks fine from Capitol Hill.
Move along
(fm Mohaveman) I was down in Jacumba today on business and got another good look at the fence. In short - it's awesome and impressive. It's even being built up the sides of steep hills. I was really wondering if it could actually extend all of the way to the Gulf of Mexico, something like Hadrain's Wall or the Great Wall of China. I'm glad it's there. When its finished we can have armed motor patrols roving it's length, something like what I witnessed on the border of Jordan and Israel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by mojaveman; Today at 17:25.
"Good fences make good neighbors." ` R. Frost, Mending Wall
Walls and barriers are not (by a long shot) the end of the solution, but the beginning of a demonstration of our resolve to control access. IMO we really need to apply physical regulation systems against those who gain access to our country. Immigration of people looking for work is one problem with its myriad of moral and functional issues. But gaining access to sell drugs or commit murder on American soil is another problem altogether. A problem which calls for a completely different solution. The beginning has to start some place. MOO,
ZonieDiver
06-30-2010, 22:17
I was down in Jacumba today on business and got another good look at the fence. In short - it's awesome and impressive. It's even being built up the sides of steep hills. I was really wondering if it could actually extend all of the way to the Gulf of Mexico, something like Hadrain's Wall or the Great Wall of China. I'm glad it's there. When its finished we can have armed motor patrols roving it's length, something like what I witnessed on the border of Jordan and Israel.
I love driving by Jacumba on my way to San Diego! I love the way the name rolls off your tongue, and the fact that once I pass it, I am getting close to San Diego - and even closer to the rest area at Buckman Springs! :)
I also LOVE looking at the fence as I zip past, since it is so close. You are right. Stretch it to the Gulf!
I am up north from Phoenix right now, and there is little news about border activities, especially re the 'Pima Militia.'
Here is an interesting idea. Cameras monitored by the public :
http://www.blueservo.net/vcw.php
I just wonder why these cameras could not be monitored on a more effectively by a watch officer, recruits, or even criminal justice students as part of an internship. My first thought was this was some kind of scam but no money is being asked for and the site has very few ads. I don't really know what to think.