Mexico doubts border fence will happen

cnn International ^ | October 4, 2006

[TomGuy]

Mexico warns U.S. of referral to UN over border fencing plan

Posted by TigerLikesRooster On 10/05/2006 4:22:13 AM CDT · 15 replies · 231+ views Xinhua ^ | 10/05/06 Mexico warns U.S. of referral to UN over border fencing plan www.chinaview.cn 2006-10-05 13:17:09 MEXICO CITY, Oct. 4 (Xinhua) -- The Mexican government on Wednesday warned that it may refer Washington's plan to build fences on the U.S.- Mexico border to the United Nations. US President George W. Bush (C) signs a bill to give 1.2 billion dollars to build a fence along the US-Mexico border to stanch the flow of illegal immigrants in Scottsdale, Arizona. Aournd Bush are Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano(L) and Arizona US Representatives. (Xinhua/AFP Photo) Photo Gallery >>> The U.S. plan to build about 1,125 km..

[djf]

Half a fence is mathematically equivalent to no fence at all.

So why build it?


Unless we start getting serious about this stuff, 9/11 is gonna look like a warm summer eve in comparison.

Doesn't matter of you voted Pubbie or Dim IF YOU'RE DEAD!!

[Eye of Unk]

Oh what a change things are going to be when it DOES get built!

[TomGuy]

Too true:






from Pookie's toons

[snowrip]

Wow, no money yet.

If the gov't had half a brain, they'd start hauling away those little illegal ba$tards en masse. That would save us roughly $68 bi;llion a year... more than enough to complete the entire border, with some extra money left over for claymores.

[longtermmemmory]

There is a reason he is saying this.

I had the same concern until it was pointed out that that the fence bill did include funding.

[Republican Babe]

STATE OF EMERGENCY is Pat Buchanan's new book on the subject of immigration. I am half way finished and he is convincing me that our generation is the last to live in this free Republic. America is no longer a melting pot. It is a free-for-all-flop-house for those whose "not so secret" agenda is to overthrow from within. Our politically correct attitude is quickly abolishing our great country......Bye Bye United States of America.

[azhenfud]

No one knows how much the 700-mile (1,125-kilometer) fence will cost, but Congress sent a bill to the White House making a $1.2 billion down payment.

---

It is estimated Mexico and Central/South America account for as much as 70% of the illegal drugs coming into these United States. To add insult to injury, the Mexican government has just recently thumbed its collective noses at America's fight against illegal drugs by its legalization of specific quantities of narcotics banned within the United States. If Mexican migrants ignore our drug laws with the frequency as have ignored our immigration code, America's judicial system is in trouble and with Mexico's threats to tie up American courts with challenges to National Guard assisted apprehensions of border crossers, this is sure to provide substantial future costs to all American taxpayers. Can anyone place an estimate on the burden of attorney fees in defense of migrants for those drug possession infractions taxpayers would then be expected to bear?

In 1999 alone, it was estimated Americans spent some $69 billion on illegal drugs. With certainty, that number has anything but decreased over the past six plus years. With 70% of that flowing in from our southern border, even should a barrier prove 50% effective in the war on drugs, it may be extrapolated that should the US invest as much in a barrier for the remainder of the 2000 mile stretch as we invest in a four-lane highway (approx $13 million/mile), our costs to taxpayers would still only amount to about half of our southern neighbor's contributions to the annual trade in illegal drugs - roughly $20 billion. The effectiveness of such a barrier may also be enhanced by alternating Border Patrol shifts and periodic relocation of personnel so contacts of corruption are difficult to maintain, resulting in an approximated 70% effectiveness to be realized.

A $20 billion expenditure is an investment with exponentially compounded savings to be recognized each year in the illegal drug fight as well from the aid to enforcement of our immigration code. To cut 70% of 70% of a $69 billion annual illegal drug trade (roughly $34 billion annually) is not something to quickly dismiss. What do we currently pay South/Central American administrations annually in illegal drug interdiction? and moreover, what do we have to show for it?

Even should we place $1.2 billion as payment on a barrier only 100 miles in length, strategically placed, the barrier - if made 70% effective - could pay for itself in illegal drug, environmental damage, and criminal border crossings abatement before the barrier is completed.

The question then becomes not how much a linear border barrier will cost taxpayers to erect, but how much will it cost Americans not to make that investment.

[starbase]

Half a fence is mathematically equivalent to no fence at all.

But only if you ignore space and distance. For example, if you were standing at a barrier and knew you had to walk 200 miles to get around it, would you want to?

Conversely, if illegals rush to the unfenced areas, then that automatically concentrates our security forces for increased captures.

One cannot assert that the fence is both there and isn't there, at the same time.

[MaxMax]

Who is we're? The Dem's are blocking every path, not the
Repubs. In fact they would prefer a statue of Stalin
in it's place.

[Ditter]

Like my dad used to say "they can doubt in one hand a pffffft in the other and see which one gets full faster".

[MaxMax]

It's always America's fault with these people.
Why not China?

[jordan8]

The Mexicans are probably right. They, unlike you, have an inside line to our democratically elected leaders.

. . . Indeed, American politicians are overwhelmingly pro-immigration, for a variety of reasons, and they do not always admit this to their constituents. Of those 50 legislators, 45 were unambiguously pro-immigration, even asking us at times to "send more." This was true of both Democrats and Republicans.

One leading Republican senator over a period of months was advising us, through a mutual acquaintance, about which mechanisms to follow and which other legislators to lobby in order to ensure passage of the amnesty proposal. In the meantime, he would speak on television about the need to "militarize" the border. This senator was recently singled out by a taxpayer’s advocacy group as a leader in "pork"-related politics

Some legislators had also mentioned to us (oftentimes laughing) how they had "defanged" or "gutted" anti-immigration bills and measures, by neglecting to fund this program or tabling that provision, or deleting the other measure, etc. "Yes, we passed that law, but it can’t work because we also…" was a usual comment to assuage the Mexican delegations

My feeling is that if the vote on granting amnesty to the illegal migrants was up for a secret vote, then perhaps we would see a 90 percent vote in favor, coinciding with my random sample from six years ago.

[jordan8]

Whoops, messsed up the link - Immigration and Usurpation

[MaxMax]

Thank you for the link Jordon8,
I will follow up after I read it over.

God Bless.

[KittyKares]

I have some concern that the illegal aliens who oppose the Minutemen are getting more violent. The lastest incident is what happened at Columbia University. And they had a banner in both Arabic and English that read "No one is ever illegal." Why in Arabic? They seem to be aligning with Muslims.