Posted on 06/23/2008 9:21:58 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
After a year of border fence protests in Brownsville, a meeting Saturday at a home that will soon be bisected by the barrier might be among the last opposition efforts before construction starts. Approximately 15 people gathered in the Pamela Taylor's front yard in rural Southmost, including several area residents who spoke publicly for the first time about the fence and its impact on their properties.
"It's unfortunate that we even have to have a gathering like this," Diana Lucio said. "Because we're listening to each other, but I don't know if the government is listening to its own citizens."
Lucio and her husband run Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course, which will be left on the south side of the fence.
Saturday's meeting brought together landowners, like Lucio, who stand to lose their homes and livelihoods if the fence is constructed along its proposed path. Last week, Lloyd Easterling, a spokesman for U.S. Border Patrol, told The Brownsville Herald that construction will begin in the "next couple of months."
"The fence, as it is designed, would leave two thirds of my land on the Mexican side," Dorothy Irwin said. "We believe the border fence belongs on the border, not a quarter mile or up to a mile or more away from the border."
Mayor Pat M. Ahumada also spoke, accusing the city commission of capitulating to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's demands, which unfairly target his constituents. "Let's call a spade a spade," Ahumada said. "This agenda is a racist agenda."
(Excerpt) Read more at brownsvilleherald.com ...
Does the mayor have any data to back this claim? I didn't see any in the article.
Second, the owners are correct in that our government is once again acquiescing to Mesico and building the fence way over on the U.S. side. They need to build the darn fence RIGHT ON THE BORDER.
Sorry Diana, but the government is finally listening to its citizens who are demanding a secure border.
Well Pam...I think the reason they are moving it back is because people on the border didn’t want it going thru their property either. On the border is ok with you....thru your property, further North, is ok with them.
It depends on how you look at it. I’m ok with the fence being the last barrier. All of our check points are further in. The land between is still US property. I do think the BP ought to have an access road running by the river though.
While I would agree to that where the border is a land-based border, from what I understand, where the border is river-based (Rio Grande), the border is defined as the middle of the river. If this is true, building a fence on the border would be ill-advised.
Please, someone do correct me if I am wrong.
Are these people being paid (and paid adequately) for the loss of their land? If so, they have no real complaint.
Or, are they people who employ illegal aliens to work for them?
You are correct, the Rio Grande is the border from El Paso to McAllen.
“They need to build the darn fence RIGHT ON THE BORDER.”
The problem is that then they would have NO CONTROL over the land just south of the fence. Thus, someone could set up a digging operation there, or congregate to cut a hole, and the BP wouldn’t be able to do a darn thing about it. If there’s a buffer to the south, then they can patrol to keep the buffer clear and the wall will be much more secure.
While it sounds reasonable to demand that the fence be built “right on the border,” given that the border at this location is a river that is surrounded on both sides by irrigation canals and flood-control levees, I would prefer that they build it where it will be most effective, and least likely to wash away should there be a 100-year flood. Los mejicanos no tienen nada que ver en el asunto. And if you believe the Border Patrol consulted with the Mexican governments to determine where to build the fence, I have a bridge in Matamoros I would like to sell you.
Good comments by everyone above. Forgot about the border being in the river in some places.
sub
There are certain legal and practical benefits to having the fence comfortably within US territory. For once thing remember that “right on the border” is “right in the middle of a river” for some of the length. For another if it’s 100% in US territory then you know anybody messing with it is in the US and therefore if you shoot them you’re not shooting into another country.
to Brownsville
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.