← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Gabrielle
Thread ID: 18357 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2005-05-23
2005-05-23 12:36 | User Profile
"Just north of the corroded old metal fence that crosses the white sand Pacific beach where Mexico meets California a green carpet of low-lying shrubs emerges. It stretches up the coast, crossing the Tijuana river estuary, and continues east along the canyon-dotted border.
The area is an internationally recognised wetlands reserve which environmentalists say is home to 370 species of birds, several of them endangered. They also say that this unusually well-preserved habitat could disappear if the US department of homeland security is allowed to build an impenetrable triple-fence security zone along the side of the reserve.
The environmentalists have come together with human rights groups from both sides of the border who argue that the security zone will do little more than rechannel existing migrant flows and increase the risks migrants face. But they are fighting what seems to be a losing battle against the Bush administration's determination to seal the southern frontier. Last year protesters received a boost when the California Coastal Commission blocked the $58m (ã32m) project on the grounds that the impact on the 2,500-acre wetlands reserve was not justifiable. But last week George Bush signed legislation that gives a green light to the security zone, permits or no permits.
"The fence project as designed could destroy the reserve that we have worked so hard to preserve over decades," says Mike McCoy, a veteran conservationist. "It is absolutely asinine to do this."
The new rules give the director of homeland security the right to override environmental laws and regulations which hamper projects that he or she believes are essential. The fence looks set to become the first test case.
"I'm not real happy about going through our parks, but that's reality, this is what is needed," says Mike Hance, the local border patrol special agent with responsibility for infrastructure.
The security zone would link up with the next nine miles of frontier, which have already been partially fortified with two new fences. The new fences would seal off the California city of San Diego and its suburban freeways, strip malls and motels from the chaotic urban sprawl of Tijuana in Mexico.
Environmentalists worry less about the fences themselves than the plans to partially fill in several canyons to flatten out the gradients. They fear that the resulting erosion could silt up the estuary and block the daily tidal flushing mechanism that keeps the reserve's ecosystem alive.
The fence plan has gone down particularly badly south of the border, where Mexicans are angered by a perceived xenophobic undertone.
The project comes in the middle of a series of anti-immigrant actions in the US including a crackdown on illegal workers being given driving licences and the setting up of border vigilante groups.
Mexico's foreign minister, LuÃÂs Ernesto Derbéz, called the fence "unacceptable". He promised a formal diplomatic complaint and said he would explore legal options against the fence on human rights grounds.
Migrants' rights groups also insist that while the fence may succeed in sealing this tiny section of the 2,000-mile border, it will do little to deter well over a million poverty-stricken Mexicans from heading northwards every year.
"People desperate for jobs will always find other routes," said Esmeralda Liu, coordinator of the Mexico-based Coalition for the Defence of Migrants. "They will go to more dangerous places and more will die."
This trend has become clear in the last decade, during which resources have been ploughed into security in San Diego. While the number of people apprehended has plummeted, such figures have risen dramatically elsewhere and annual migrant deaths on the border as a whole have climbed to more than 400.
But none of this dents the determination of Special Agent Hance, who believes the triple fence could be just the beginning. "Our primary mission is to make sure nobody enters illegally and if the government puts enough resources in we can hold it all. It is possible," he said.
"It is just a matter of time."
Dammed if he doesââ¬Â¦ dammed if he doesnââ¬â¢t!!!!!!!
2005-05-23 14:35 | User Profile
He also signed a bill to add 10,000 new BP agents, then submitted a budget that only funded 210. I'll believe it when I see it.
[url]http://www.alipac.us/article205.html[/url]
2005-05-23 15:39 | User Profile
[IMG]http://rense.com/1.imagesG/sheeple.jpg[/IMG]
2005-05-23 16:57 | User Profile
Bush showed just how much he supported this only getting onboard at the last minute when it was obvious that people wanted this. He could have worked on this problem during his first term if he really gave a damn.
Only the deluded could conclude he is serious about cleaning up the mess on the border.
2005-05-23 20:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Only the deluded could conclude he is serious about cleaning up the mess on the border.[/QUOTE] Doesn't this imply his indifference when he really [u]promotes[/u] illegal immigration into the United States?
2005-05-23 20:48 | User Profile
K,
That's a good question. I've been trying to get an answer from Gabrielle for the last year.
2005-05-23 21:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Bush showed just how much he supported this only getting onboard at the last minute when it was obvious that people wanted this. He could have worked on this problem during his first term if he really gave a damn.
Only the deluded could conclude he is serious about cleaning up the mess on the border.[/QUOTE] At the risk of offending any wealthy Texans here, Pres Bush spent some time as a "wealthy Texan." (Yes, his roots are more correctly Northeast.) It seems the habit of some folk in that circle is to hire illegals to keep profit margins up and to do certain work . . . my, what a lovely lawn you have, and how many games out of first place did the Rangers finish? :disgust:
While ignoring the defense of our borders, he seems to be consistent with certain of his past interests. Not a laudatory stance, given that as President, the well being of the entire nation is his concern. :furious:
What was that line? "To provide for the common defense." Yeah. "Support and defend . . . against all enemies foreign and domestic."
Does the oath of office mean anything?
2005-05-24 00:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes]At the risk of offending any wealthy Texans here, Pres Bush spent some time as a "wealthy Texan." (Yes, his roots are more correctly Northeast.) It seems the habit of some folk in that circle is to hire illegals to keep profit margins up and to do certain work . . . my, what a lovely lawn you have, and how many games out of first place did the Rangers finish? :disgust:
While ignoring the defense of our borders, he seems to be consistent with certain of his past interests. Not a laudatory stance, given that as President, the well being of the entire nation is his concern. :furious:
What was that line? "To provide for the common defense." Yeah. "Support and defend . . . against all enemies foreign and domestic."
Does the oath of office mean anything?[/QUOTE] What you write is true, but it is by now means specific to wealthy Texans. It's more a characteristic of bluebloods and plutocrats in general, of which the Bush clan is a good example.
The ruling classes of any nation often cultivate an alliance with a foreign coolie class against the middle and working classes of their own nation. Hence, George W. Bush peddles policies that pander to Mexican migrant workers, Bill Gates wants all H1-B restrictions lifted, and so forth. It's no different from wealthy planters in the antebellum South teaching their slaves songs like "Better a nigger than po' white trash," the "court Jews" of Middle Age nobility, or the coolies serving their British Colonial masters.
The cultivation of a loyal coolie class serves a dual function for the Bushes of the world. On the one hand, there's the obvious financial reward: they work cheaper. On the other hand, there's also a social function - it serves to neutralize any potential opposition among their white countrymen by disenfranchising them politically and economically.
2005-05-24 02:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]What you write is true, but it is by now means specific to wealthy Texans. It's more a characteristic of bluebloods and plutocrats in general, of which the Bush clan is a good example.
The ruling classes of any nation often cultivate an alliance with a foreign coolie class against the middle and working classes of their own nation. Hence, George W. Bush peddles policies that pander to Mexican migrant workers, Bill Gates wants all H1-B restrictions lifted, and so forth. It's no different from wealthy planters in the antebellum South teaching their slaves songs like "Better a nigger than po' white trash," the "court Jews" of Middle Age nobility, or the coolies serving their British Colonial masters.
The cultivation of a loyal coolie class serves a dual function for the Bushes of the world. On the one hand, there's the obvious financial reward: they work cheaper. On the other hand, there's also a social function - it serves to neutralize any potential opposition among their white countrymen by disenfranchising them politically and economically.[/QUOTE] Touché :bag: [size=4]
[/size]
2005-05-24 03:57 | User Profile
Without "lower" class there would be no "upper" class.
And if there was only a "upper" class then you would have "lower upper" class and "upper upper" class and you would be back to square one.
If everything was perfect in this world it would not be the world but heaven for we all would be dead.
I accept it as it is with all the differences because that way I know that the Palestinians are good because the Zionists are bad.
In my life time I have known only one Palestinian family and many Jewish families but I wished that it was the other way around.