Skip to comments.Debate over massive fence plan is heating up in South Texas
Posted on 07/08/2007 7:13:18 AM PDT by Dysart
click here to read article
I'm not a fan of the "barf alert", preferring to let others reach their own conclusion. As someone already pointed out here, you can expect to see more of these slanted articles. I intend to expose them here.
It won’t stop everyone but it will sure slow them down.
I am not to keen on a wall. I believe this nations armed forces should be protecting our borders. Chances are the National Guard can handle it. Sure some illegals may still get in but the NG will stop 90% of it.
Thanks for the ping list link!
A journalistic attempt to maginify the negatives and minimize the positives in the border fence ...
“Officially, the 700-mile barrier would cost about $3 million a mile, or $2.1 billion. But independent estimates show the cost of building and maintaining the fence could go as high as $49 billion over 25 years.”
I dont believe those numbers, but ... under $2 billion a year to secure the border? It’s a deal!
“I am not to keen on a wall. I believe this nations armed forces should be protecting our borders. Chances are the National Guard can handle it. Sure some illegals may still get in but the NG will stop 90% of it.”
A wall is cheaper than NG, works 24/7, and cannot be so easily taken away later by an aministration intent on not actually enforcing the law.
In truth, we need both a fence and good human watch over the border to catch and deport any unauthorized border crossers.
Itâs an America issue, not a Texas issue. If the people of Dearborn decided that jihadis should be able to cross into Michigan via Toronto, they should have no special say in the matter of border security based on their proximity.
That pesky 13th Amendment!
Southern landowners are still using slave labor.
They’re very very very worried, that they’ll actually have to hire people at competitive wages.
That’s what this is all about.
They picked those two jerks for their opposition to a wall.
I always find it funny when they say "Mr. So-and-So owns this big ranch" or whatever near the border, and it's always some guy with an Anglo name. Why funny? Because if Mr. Magnanimous Anglo gets his way and the guys with the hispanic surnames end up being the majority, they aren't going to "own" anything for much longer.
These people are nothing but traitors. Their property is the result of other Anglos - er, Americans - claiming the land and making it stick by force of arms. Did Mr. Moody get his dirt from General Santa Anna? If his deed isn't in Spanish, who allowed his ancestors or predecessors in ownership to patent the land in the first place?
And O'Brien is just a classic pig who's looking for some cheap help in building his next house on El Rancho.
But all of these guys depend on us to secure their property for them. When the s**t hits the fan, and the hungry people of Mexico are eyeing their dirt, who will they turn to?
Right. The Americans. In desperation, they'll say "save us! stop them from taking our land!". But there will only be brown eyes looking back at them, saying, "What do you mean, Gringo? 'Your land'? Don't think so".
“IF” the fence is ever actually built, the fenced portions will funnel illegal activities to the unfenced portions- it happens now with increased enforcement in certain areas. What I propose is where there is opposition to the fence- leave those sections until the end of the project- by then anyone not profiting from illegal activity will be begging for a fence in their area.
Opponents call it a wall.
Proponents call it a fence.
I call it the United States/Mexico border.
Better fences make better neighbors.
July 2, 2007 | Editorial
Like the United States, India has an immigration problem. India is a developing country with a booming economy. Its neighbor, Bangladesh, is an impoverished mess with 150 million people crammed onto what is mainly a flood plain about the size of upper New England plus Massachusetts. India surrounds Bangladesh on three sides; on the fourth is the Indian Ocean, which frequently stirs up catastrophic typhoons.
India’s per-capita income is about $730 a year, not much by American standards but twice that of Bangladesh, where nearly 60 million of its residents earn less than $1 a day. The result was a growing wave of people crossing from Bangladesh into India, including job-seekers and Islamic terrorists.
In the words of Ajai Sahni, head of the New Delhi-based Institute for Conflict Management, “India has enough nightmares of its own without adding to them.”
Something urgently needed to be done, and India went ahead and did it.
Without fuss, without bother, without much debate, India began building a fence all the way around its 2,050-mile border with Bangladesh. The fence consists of two rows of 10-foot-high barbed wire stretched between posts studded with spikes. Coils of barbed wire fill the space between the two rows. Work began in 2000, and about 1,550 miles of the fence has been completed.
Contrast that with the outcry and anguish in the United States over a plan to build a 700-mile fence across part of its border with Mexico. Contrast that with the inability of Congress to do anything about illegal immigration.
Last week’s failure of the immigration bill in the U.S. Senate means nothing is likely to be done until at least 2009. By then, work on India’s fence should just about be done.
Infiltration down due to fencing
Tribune News Service
Srinagar, Kashmir (INDIA)
January 11, 2005
With about 14 months of ceasefire along the border in Jammu and Kashmir facilitating uninterrupted exercise of border fencing, the infiltration of militants has been curtailed to a great extent during the past six months. Nearly 45 infiltration attempts have been made along the LoC since July last year. The task of fencing the porous LoC along the rugged mountains to check the infiltration of militants was completed in a year by September last.
The fence has added a new dimension in the battle against infiltration and exfiltration of militants, according to Army officials here. With the Army keeping an ever-constant vigil along the fence, crossing the border has become very tough for the militants. Sources here claimed that the security forces have seen groups of militants move up to the fence and then turn back realising that any attempt at crossing will be suicidal.
The fencing that prevented infiltration is also regarded as the main reason behind a decline in the violence in the state during the past year. However, the infiltration is there. It has not stopped, said a senior police officer here, adding that the infiltration attempts by the militants from across the border were calibrated.
With the decline in the violence the past year has witnessed over 2500 incidents and over 700 civilian killings, which has been rated as the lowest level of violence since the eruption of militancy 15 years ago.
Not only the border fencing, various other measures like laying of landmines and possession of modern equipment and weaponry, have helped the Army to check the infiltration and exfiltration along the border. The sources said except for some populated areas, the entire border is laden with landmines. It has, however, been hazardous to many civilians living in the border areas injuring them or rendering them maimed over the years.
The Army is also equipped with world-class night vision devices, detection equipment, surveillance, alarm and communication system. The security forces have sought installation of more sensors made in Israel to effectively check any movement along the border.
The fencing was first attempted in 1994 on the pattern of Punjab and Rajasthan but was suspended due to cross border firing. Later it was restarted along the 198 km-long International Border in the Jammu region in 2001. The fencing along 778 km of the LoC in Kashmir was taken up in 2003 and completed after one year in September last year, according to the sources here.
In order to ensure deterring and detecting the infiltrators or exfiltrators, two systems have been conceived. These are the anti-infiltration obstacle system, which is an integration of an electrified fence incorporated with an anti-intrusion alarm system. Moreover, there is hi-tech surveillance and communication clubbed with the deployment of troops so as to cover the fence with little or no gaps, said the sources.
Probably one of jorge's owners. But 18,000 acres seem the army was looking for a firing range.
I think you’re right...the American memory isn’t very long. In the age of instant gratification, the younger people don’t have a clue. For instance, remember when we paid for Dr./hospital visits? When we saved up to purchase something for money? In a few short months, no, probably more likely weeks, unless the issue is kept in front of them, the general public is off to something else. Sigh.
Moody and the rest of the land owners along the border need to get used to the fence that “we the U.S. are going to make sure is built!
If Bush had devised a reasonable border enforcement policy from the outset, none of this would be happening, and we would not need a fence. It was only because he looked the other way that we are in this mess. And no one trusts him to get us out of it.
The shamnesty bill was an abomination.
$4.4B, $8B, $49B...whatever amount on building a wall.
Suppose we build a 99.99% fence for a fair price and put machine guns on that wall.
What stops a simple Mexican from getting a ‘passport’ in Mexico, a tourist visa from Houston, and walking across the border legally, only to overstay his visa on a construction job in Maryland?
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.