1 posted on
03/05/2008 7:41:17 AM PST by
BGHater
To: BGHater
Unless the virtual fence is made up of Star Trek type technology of force fields, it’s a joke.
Concrete keeps people out...ask the West Berliners.
To: BGHater
We have right now all the fence we will ever get. Amnesty from any of the three contenders will open the floogates and bring us more illegals in a short time than we have now. With Amnesty for even 100% of those here now, removing them from illegal status, we will quickly have more illegals on our soil than before Amnesty.
4 posted on
03/05/2008 7:45:44 AM PST by
arthurus
To: BGHater
I believe the reason and Hillary and Obama both favor an “actual” fence is that they know that cost, property and political issues on the border will prevent one from actually being built.
Also, Indians are now one of the major illegal immigration groups.
Enforcement is the key to this issue.
5 posted on
03/05/2008 7:45:48 AM PST by
Wiseghy
("You want to break this army? Then break your word to it.")
To: BGHater
If McCain wants to motivate his base and if the GOP luminaries who stand to make out big time want him elected, then he should make the physical fence a centerpiece of his campaign. Try drawing THAT policy contrast.
7 posted on
03/05/2008 7:49:24 AM PST by
swain_forkbeard
(Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
To: BGHater
Anyone surprised by this?
8 posted on
03/05/2008 7:50:18 AM PST by
JZelle
To: BGHater
So...what does a "virtual fence" do apart from beeping out the equivalent of "Look! There goes another one!"?
I've got the tar & feathers. Get the scoundrels and show me which way the rail out of town is...
9 posted on
03/05/2008 7:50:18 AM PST by
Digital Sniper
(Hello, "Undocumented Immigrant." I'm an "Undocumented Border Patrol Agent.")
To: BGHater
Arizona has the proper solution: Heavy fines on employers who hire illegals. And please, don’t give me this stuff that employers can’t verify their identity. If the fines are heavy enough, not only will they verify, if there’s even a hint they’re not legal, they won’t hire them. Do that, and the supply will dry up.
If you want to see an excellent presentation of what we can look forward to down the road if Congress doesn’t get serious, take a look here:
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=n7WJeqxuOfQ
It’s a little long, but worth every second.
12 posted on
03/05/2008 7:51:37 AM PST by
econjack
(Some people are as dumb as soup.)
To: BGHater
And still later, it was proven that the technology for the virtual fence didn't work at all.
This makes Chertoff a liar. Again...
Not surprising.
13 posted on
03/05/2008 7:55:07 AM PST by
Dead Corpse
(What would a free man do?)
To: BGHater
Over a year ago, Congress passed a law to spend over $7 billion
Less than two weeks ago, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced at a news conference that a high-tech "virtual fence" project
The secretary was very specific. He said: "I have personally witnessed the value of the system
both Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in last week's debate said they were for the virtual fence-which in their view might obviate the need for a physical fence.
But only five days later, the media reported that the Bush administration has scaled back plans to quickly build a virtual fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, delaying completion of that first 28-mile phase by at least three years
Ya know, somewhere amongst all the announcements, pronouncements, endorsements, capability statements, laws, budgets, and fundings, I wonder when SOMBODY is going to build a DAMN FENCE.
Here is a thought, if our government is incapable of building a simple fence they are incapable of defending we citizens. And if they can't do that what do we actually need them for?
Remove the military from the U.S. Government and what is left can be easily handled by a uniform methodology of procedures that all 50 states could adopt. Kind of like a operators manual. No need for a bunch of thieves perverts and criminals to congregate in DC. We could turn it into a museum - park. And save the taxpayers trillions.
I bet the congress-leaches would squeal on that little proposal...
15 posted on
03/05/2008 7:57:47 AM PST by
TLI
( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
To: BGHater
Once I caught several carp while cat-fishing with night crawlers. They were all 5 lbs or so. Eventually I figured out I was (duh) catching the same fish, over-and-over, so I threw the carp on the shore, started catching pan-size channels and the problem was solved.
A `virtual fence’ allows Chertoff & Co. to jack their apprehension figures, an argument can be made that the border is being regulated, and then it’s: “OK, now we can move on to `comprehensive immigration reform’, a `path to citizenship’ . . . “. Ad nauseuam.
The problem is that once an illegal is released, he tries again until he succeeds. They aren’t estupido—they know there is no real political desire on the parts of our leaders to secure our borders. Their presidente said as much recently. Their government aids them in circumventing our immigration laws.
A real fence—like the concrete walls we installed to keep Sunnis and Shi’tes apart in Baghdad, and as the Israelis built to keep out homicide bombers—would keep out illegal aliens.
Back to the analogy, we could hold the (comparatively) few criminal trespassers who get by a real fence and forward the bills on to Mexico for its citizens.
This is apparent to anyone. It is a real attempt to police our southwestern border. All a virtual fence does is allow more “catch and release”. It’s all just more `smoke and mirrors’.
23 posted on
03/05/2008 8:38:12 AM PST by
tumblindice
("Fight for your country." Hector)
To: BGHater
To: BGHater
"..shifting away from a network of tower-mounted sensors and surveillance gear."At least with that we could get an accurate count of how many new residents we have.
28 posted on
03/05/2008 11:13:38 AM PST by
Designer
(We are SO scrood!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson