Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Border security or boondoggle?
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 2/25/6 | Tyche Hendricks

Posted on 02/25/2006 11:21:16 PM PST by SmithL

A plan for 700 miles of Mexican border wall heads for Senate -- its future is not assured.

Clicky Clicky A proposal to build a double set of steel walls with floodlights, surveillance cameras and motion detectors along one-third of the U.S.-Mexican border heads to the Senate next month after winning overwhelming support in the House.

The wall would be intended to prevent illegal immigrants and potential terrorists from hiking across the southern border into the United States. It would run along five segments of the 1,952-mile border that now experience the most illegal crossings.

The plan already has roiled diplomatic relations with Mexico. Leaders in American border communities are saying it will damage local economies and the environment. And immigration experts say that -- at a cost of at least $2.2 billion -- the 700-mile wall would be an expensive boondoggle.

The December House vote of 260-159 is the strongest endorsement yet for building a wall, which Rep. Duncan Hunter, a San Diego County Republican, has been pushing for two decades as a tactic against illegal immigration. Support for the wall was even stronger than for the bill it was attached to -- a larger plan to curb terrorism and illegal immigration sponsored by Wisconsin Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner that passed 239 to 182.

"It is a tangible demonstration of the seriousness of the United States in not permitting illegal migration into the country," said Jack Martin, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., that favors tighter immigration controls.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aliens; bordercontrol; borderfence; illegalimmigration; mexicanborder; mexico


1 posted on 02/25/2006 11:21:17 PM PST by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Could we have a minefield between the double walls, please?


2 posted on 02/25/2006 11:28:21 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
I hope Bush comes to his senses and pulls what could be his most effective move for getting his poll numbers up:

Come out swinging at those senators who criticized the Dubai deal. Have a presser and say "To Senator Clinton, who expressed so much concern for foreign impact on our security, I say, will you support this wall?" And so on.

I know he won't. But he should.

3 posted on 02/25/2006 11:33:24 PM PST by Darkwolf377 (No respect for conservatives? That's free speech. No respect for liberals? That's hate speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: HiJinx; gubamyster
Time for "Border Reality 101."

This is what most of our southern border looks like: there is no government-built fence at all. There is often just whatever is left over from some forgotten cattle fence, built privately to keep U.S. cattle from wandering freely into Mexico. For hundreds of miles there is not even a broken cattle fence, there is nothing at all.

For comparison, below the broken cattle fence photo is a sample of an inexpensive but highly effective double border fence system, with a plowed strip to reveal footprints. This type of system is very cheap and can be built with great speed.

Here is what some of San Diego County has: a wall made of rusty Viet Nam-era runway mats. The corrugations are even horizontal, (to make climbing easier?) The illegals in this photo were spotted by unexpected civilian volunteers, and jumped back over the border.

Here is what the border looks like where the runway mat wall exists. Mexico begins on the other side of the ineffective rusty wall, which actually helps the smugglers, by hiding their movements until the occasional USBP vehicle has driven out of sight.

This is how "the game" is played. Smugglers hide on the other side of the wall with their dope and/or their illegals, out of sight of the USBP. They wait for the highly visible white BP vehicle to drive over the distant hills. Lookouts with cell phones and walkie-talkies report on the current locations of the BP units. They know with certainty that "the coast is clear" for an hour or two, and the smugglers and illegals hop the fence and run into the scrub only 50 yards away. From there, they are out of sight, and they walk 1-2 miles to holding houses. Then they wait for nightfall, and are picked up and driven in vans to LA or San Diego.

Lastly, below is the Duncan Hunter 15' fence, which is already being built along a few "showplace" miles of San Diego, mainly near the ports of entry, where panderng politicians can conveniently show it off to gullible reporters. The House has approved building 700 miles of it, which would be a great start. As you can see, the rusty runway wall is seen at the left side, Mexico begins on the other side. In areas with the 15 foot fence, dope smugglers and illegals will have to cross the open sand ("the government road" as it is called) before starting to try to get over the 15 foot fence. It's extremely tough, and resists cutting. Attacking the fence would have to be done right out in the open, in full view of cameras. This type of fence, on the U.S. side of the government road, will give the USBP a barrier to patrol, instead of forcing them to chase illegals around 100,000 square miles of wide-open frontier land, which is a fool's errand.


5 posted on 02/25/2006 11:43:01 PM PST by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4butnomorethan30characters
If the fence is a boondoggle, we need more of them.
Question: What`s wrong with building a fence? Who will it harm? As for the cost, don`t be ridicules. Just the tax payments from thems that build it will off set most of the costs.
6 posted on 02/25/2006 11:45:46 PM PST by bybybill (If the Rats win, we are doomed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 4butnomorethan30characters

Notice the poll was in the SF paper.


7 posted on 02/25/2006 11:48:29 PM PST by bybybill (If the Rats win, we are doomed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
We should build an Israeli-style wall along the entire length of our southern border. Its a heck of a lot cheaper than the welfare, education and health care costs illegal aliens are imposing on our country. Heck, we should have done this ten years ago!

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

8 posted on 02/25/2006 11:48:35 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bybybill; All
Well, since we think India is the suppository of all wisdom (sophomoric attempt at humor), perhaps we should consider how they are handling their border security.

Cheers!

9 posted on 02/25/2006 11:51:48 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Its a good start.. but the illegal drug lobbyists won't like it..

Making hiring illegal aliens a crime, you know, a real crime..

10 posted on 02/25/2006 11:51:58 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
A wide moat filled with Alligators, Piranhas and those nasty fish that swim up your urethra...
11 posted on 02/25/2006 11:55:35 PM PST by endthematrix (None dare call it ISLAMOFACISM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: GSlob

Could we have a minefield between the double walls, please?




Snipers too please?


13 posted on 02/26/2006 12:07:37 AM PST by trubluolyguy (Freedom of choice? Choose to keep your damned legs closed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

I hope Bush comes to his senses and pulls what could be his most effective move for getting his poll numbers up:



I think we all know that any border bill that is actually tough, stands a great chance of being El Presidente's first veto.


14 posted on 02/26/2006 12:08:41 AM PST by trubluolyguy (Freedom of choice? Choose to keep your damned legs closed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

Could we have a minefield between the double walls, please?

###

A minefield is really what's needed. Then station INS agents at all schools, hospitals, welfare offices, etc and file RICO charges against anyone employing the criminals.

The criminals would stop invading us and the ones already here would head back where they belong.


15 posted on 02/26/2006 12:10:53 AM PST by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Walls , fences and border controls like this are going to become more and more the rule throughout the world as time goes by. There will come a time when we cannot imagine not having such border protections. The world has become too wild and dangerous of a place to leave wide open borders , especially when we now have the technology to do them right.
Let just do and get it over with , and ps: NO GAPS !
16 posted on 02/26/2006 12:11:23 AM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

We should sentence all illegals and border jumper that we catch to 2 years hard labor building this border control device .


17 posted on 02/26/2006 12:14:19 AM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Question: Why two walls? I'd put together the plan at 20' tall with wall with razor wire and gun turrets at 1000 yard increments.

BTW, Mexico is a major exporter of cement and concrete, we could import the concrete from Vicente Fox (read Mexico) to build this wall at a reduced rate.

It is a flippin shame that people in the USA are totally clueless running a practical logistical project.

18 posted on 02/26/2006 12:31:37 AM PST by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
I think we all know that any border bill that is actually tough, stands a great chance of being El Presidente's first veto.

I agree. I'm a staunch ultr Right Wing Conservative since 1964. I DO NOT understand W's stance on this. He is a weak sister on border security. AND, he's a friggin TEXAN! /rant

19 posted on 02/26/2006 12:39:09 AM PST by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SmithL; All

In the mean time:

"Title 32, Section 9, U.S. Code now allows our governors to call out their National Guard for homeland security missions such as this at 100 percent Federal expense."

Pressure your border governor, even if your not in a border state. ; )


20 posted on 02/26/2006 1:13:55 AM PST by Rick_Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4butnomorethan30characters
Please nobody go off on some alien theme crap

Can't help myself. A fence on the border would keep out real, dangerous aliens, not just imaginary green men.

21 posted on 02/26/2006 3:02:18 AM PST by Hardastarboard (HEY - Billy Joe! You ARE an American Idiot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SmithL; All
A few "walls"--


22 posted on 02/26/2006 3:03:44 AM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; goldstategop

As for Israel, you had better stay way from their security fence. You had better not try to mess with it. Twice in the last month Israel has fired missiles at Paleostinians who approached it. Four dead


23 posted on 02/26/2006 3:16:18 AM PST by dennisw (Muhammad is a false prophet and Allah is his sock puppet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

This is great, but it would probably be the first of second bill Bush would veto during his Presidency.


24 posted on 02/26/2006 3:19:25 AM PST by Modok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Agree 101%!

But neither the dems or the Republicans want to insult the Mexicans. I read a good article posted on another thread titled the second Mexican revolution.

Illegals should be trained by the Marines to go out there and fight for OUR Country since they get so much and pay back nothing for the benefits they recieve in this Country. If not why not? Because they are Mexican nationals.....hmmm than why are they treated better than our Citizens?

If a "worker-program" translated to a program where companies large or small had too request foreign workers for a project or a very limited time and were responsible for the care,feeding,transportation to and fro than maybe that would work and it certainly would prove there is no such thing as jobs Americans wouldn't do. Or is it jobs Americans want and DESERVE to get paid a fair wage for??

But this worker program that isn't an amnesty program :::wink, wink:: is outrageous as the Dubai port security for national security problems!!


25 posted on 02/26/2006 6:19:58 AM PST by stopem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Boondoggle? Since when did liberals and RINOs become concerned about government spending?

How much money do illegals cost in social services? Build the wall - enough said.

26 posted on 02/26/2006 9:47:25 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (We're Americans, we can do anything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stopem

I'd be happy if the Marines trained the illegals to fight for their country. Take it back from the drug dealers.


27 posted on 02/26/2006 9:53:19 AM PST by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

"Could we have a minefield between the double walls, please?"

Excellent idea. Wish I'd thought of that one...



28 posted on 02/26/2006 12:30:59 PM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

This wall will more than pay for itself in any number of ways. It is a perfect example of a good investment. Which is why I'm having a truly hard time believing that it could get approved by this Congress, which usually prefers to throw money into ratholes. And if Bush signs it, I may slip into a catatonic state from the shock.


29 posted on 02/26/2006 2:40:58 PM PST by BearArms
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

"Walls , fences and border controls like this are going to become more and more the rule throughout the world as time goes by. There will come a time when we cannot imagine not having such border protections. The world has become too wild and dangerous of a place to leave wide open borders , especially when we now have the technology to do them right.
Let just do and get it over with , and ps: NO GAPS !"

That time seems to be approaching pretty rapidly-especially since the new proposal of cluing the Arabs in, by farming out OUR ports to them. To think that anybody cares about U.S. security except the U.S. is just pure greed and stupidity...


30 posted on 02/27/2006 6:51:39 AM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
the proposal on the ports is not one of farming out the security aspects , but allowing the UAE based company handle day-to-day port running operations , loading & unloading of ships , who is a what pier ,where things are stocked until further shipping ,etc. Former General Tommy Franks went on Fox
and said that not only had he seen the UAE people to be valuable , even indispensable , allies since the WoT kicked off , but that they did a phenomenal job running their own ports and handling all such ops for the US Navy and regional
WoT related supply needs. Personally, I believe the man , and I am willing to take his word for it . But I do not live in a US port in question either .....
31 posted on 02/27/2006 11:59:46 AM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

Well, there is always the possibility that he is right, being that he was a general and all. However, nobody's words are going to convince me that anyone other than loyal U.S. citizens are qualified to have access(in any shape or form)to our ports, or any part of America, most especially after 9-11.


32 posted on 02/27/2006 1:04:52 PM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
"being that he was a general"
Franks was 'the' general , at that time.
He was in the position to have near total oversight on every aspect of our deployed forces. He is also not a political shill these days , so I trust him.
But truly ,with the sneaky Syrians and the other master smugglers in the middle east we need to arrive at the place where EVERY container and every ship gets some kind of going over or complete clearance. We cannot afford even one mistake.
The question is , I guess, would the port masters have the ability to dance 'something' through security ? They would stand everything to lose themselves , but not their lives probably.
33 posted on 02/27/2006 2:09:20 PM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

Well, that's exactly what I don't trust. Blunders are more likely to occur, when such a huge majority of boxes, containers, and crates, are not inspected. And isn't a crazed idiot more likely to ship hazardous items into carefully calculated areas where lame inspection standards exist? This is a totally ridiculous situation. Every single item that comes into the states should be inspected, regardless of the time involved. But it doesn't seem like it will happen because it's, "just too much work for the fat and sassy in the U.S.".


34 posted on 02/27/2006 2:37:56 PM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin

somehow I do not think that the UAE deal is going to affect that much one way or another , that's a DHS deal.
However an efficiently run port operation may facilitate
more thorough and organized inspections?


35 posted on 02/27/2006 3:40:55 PM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

Well, they're gonna do whatever they do, regardless of what I say. However, I am leary of Mr. Chertoff and his ambitions. And I am also leary of UAE, because they will obviously have access to information otherwise unavailable to them did they not have any affiliation with our ports. They will likely behave themselves for a while,(all the time accumulating whatever info. possible) then they may act up at any time and side with any terrorist group of their choosing and it will likely be too late for the U.S. and we'll then be at their mercy. And we all know, terrorists have no mercy.


36 posted on 02/27/2006 6:56:31 PM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
I am 100% for the President publicly stating , just as Rep. Tom Tacredo did , that "If you nuke us you will lose Mecca and Medina without any further warning or notice " Put that right in their faces . They think we have not got the the courage to even say that ,let alone do it. But that's what it will take .
Tell 'them' they will definitely lose something they cannot afford to lose and leave it at that .
37 posted on 02/27/2006 7:31:25 PM PST by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

Well, that does seem to be the only way Bush can pull himself out of this one. And using Mecca and Medina would go right to the heart of of it all. I'd bet they'd have the entire Arab and terrorist population saying, "Oh, no, not Mecca and Medina, we just can't go on without those precious little places of worship." I think, in the past, them folks just had a conniption fit when those places were bothered. Anyway, those terrorists are just ugly little thugs, who respect nothing except a show of force.


38 posted on 02/28/2006 6:55:12 AM PST by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Travis, I have no idea where your top picture of the barb wire fence on the border was taken, mostly because it looks just like most of the border that I have seen across NM and Arizona. I wish we had the number of miles the fence looks like that or worse, it would probably amaze those who don't live near the border to know that there are miles and miles and miles just like that and worse. I really think all the Senators that are going to be asked to vote on the fence need that photo and the number of miles the fence looks like that.

That would have to be a pretty effective statement.

If there is no actual number we can find I bet those of us that live on the border could come up with a pretty close estimate. Hubby and I were just talking about it and he estimates at least 170 miles of border fence through NM is fence like that, maybe worse in some spots, but not any that is better.


39 posted on 02/28/2006 7:21:05 AM PST by Tammy8 (Build a Real Border Fence, and enforce Immigration Laws!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8
Maybe a couple of freepers could do an actual border survey? After all, it's legal and legit for Americans to travel along the "Teddy Roosevelt road". This is the right-of-way along the border that TR "eminent domained" a century ago. With a jeep, a handheld GPS and a digital camera, we could actually get some pretty good answers to your questions, if a few freepers went out on an unofficial survey.

Lord knows, the federal govt doesn't want us to know, and won't do such a survey.
40 posted on 02/28/2006 8:01:07 AM PST by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

The "Teddy Roosevelt" road is really just a federal right of way, and in most of NM there is NO road, and lots of miles of terrain so rough you could not drive along it if you wanted to. Also at least here in NM it is treated as a federal right of way only and the public at large has no right to travel there. The majority of NM border is the perimeter of a very few large ranches that are entirely closed to the public, and they enforce trespass laws against anyone found on the ranch. There are no gates to access only the border fence, and if you were not a government official they would charge you with trespassing for attempting to drive along the border fence.

I don't know how it is in CA, AZ, or Texas, but that is how it is here. We could ask each rancher how many miles of fence are on their ranch, but my hubby has worked on several of these big ranches and he already knows the answer. The whole border here is just pasture fence, it is maintained by the ranchers, just for the purpose of keeping livestock in, and it all is really old.

NM is totally fenced with pasture fence, there are only three ports of entry in NM; Antelope Wells, Columbus, and Santa Theresa. Antelope Wells has pasture fence even at the port, there is not even a Gov't fence on the port property, just pasture fence. There is a fence planned for the port property itself, but there is not one there now. Columbus POE only has a tiny piece of Chain link at that POE, same at the Santa Theresa crossing.

If you figure out the miles of border fence in NM and deduct 1 mile total for Gov't fence at the ports you would be generous in deducting the mile. There is NO part of the border that has any type of fence other than pasture fence in NM other than small pieces at the ST and Columbus POEs.

Hubby estimating 170 miles in NM, but you could get a much closer figure by getting an accurate map and measuring on the map.


41 posted on 02/28/2006 9:45:50 AM PST by Tammy8 (Build a Real Border Fence, and enforce Immigration Laws!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8

This is what most of the Cali border I've seen looks like, and plain folks may hike along the right of way between the runway mat wall and the ranchers' property. As you can see in this photo, the runway mats are no hinderence to illegals crossing. If anything, they help to hide groups of illegals from the BP until they have driven out of sight.

I don't know about NM, but in Cali, there is plenty of evidence that land owners on the US side are involved in smuggling.

42 posted on 02/28/2006 11:05:05 AM PST by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson