Thanks for restarting the fence again. We were hoping you would do it to protect us. This keeps us from having to apply the 2nd amendment as we were preparing to do.
If more enforcement is not offered internally to the US we will then start using the 2nd amendment there. We intend to apply it to the employer and to sanctuary organizations and churches first. We plan on making citizen arrests of deportees in the churches soon.
October 22, 2007 11:08 PM
Anonymous said...
While we will make our best effort to post those comments that do not violate the Comment Policy quickly.
FROM THE RGV (Rio Grande Valley), I live here and THE MAJORITY DOES NOT WANT THE WALL, so we say: NO TO THE WALL
October 23, 2007 2:37 AM
Anonymous said...
We’ve done so when environmental assessments have been exhausted but interest groups still stop or slow down projects by throwing up obstacles or litigation.
FROM THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY: YOU ALL DO NOT LIVE HERE WE DO. YOU ALL ARE RIGHT ABOUT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS (WE THE RGV REALLY CARES ABOUT SABAL PALM, BIRDING SANCTUARIES). MS. MILLER
Ronald Reagan once said to Mr. Gorbachez "Tear down that wall" so why in God's name are we wanting to build one. As a six generation Texan, I have lived in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas all of my life and have never complained when I travel to Corpus Christi or San Antonio and have to be asked if I am an American Citizen inside our own borders by the US Border Patrol. Enough is enough, now you want to build a wall along our RIO GRANDE RIVER. How hypocritical can this country be? Let's spend the funds on resources that will last life times and beautify our river and not on fence wire that will rust and corrode and will be an eye sore to everyone for years to come. I say to everone, stop being so paranoid and let's do what is right for everyone. How many terroists have entered through Mexico to the United States. None that we have been told about. "NO BORDER WALL PERIOD" in South Texas.
In a previous post you state: "Of course, while fencing remains a critical element of our strategy, it isn’t the only element. The reality is that fencing will never provide a total solution. A fence by itself can be tunneled under or climbed over. Fencing is also expensive to build – up to $3 million per mile – and equally expensive to maintain."
Your arguments are contradictions.
The Rio Grande Valley doesn't want the wall for a number of reasons. Like you mention, a fence can be "tunneled under" or "climbed over" so spending monies on it would prove fruitless. The border states rely on the bi-national, bi-cultural, reciprocal relationship for the success of our economy. Building a wall or fence or whatever you want to call it, demonstrates hypocrisy and a lack of appreciation.
Using the "environment" as a excuse for creating this divide is merely a cop-out for reforming illegal immigration laws.
Its funny how the commenters above completely ignore the true parts of his argument, that the illegal immigrants are extremely harmful to the environment the commenters pretend to love. Oh no, a fence! What about the human excrement and trash? Is that something you're willing to ignore as long as you can do whatever you can to disagree with our government?
True, a fence is not the only solution, but it is a start.
October 23, 2007 5:26 PM
Anonymous said...
To whom it may concern;
I wish that people would stop saying we do not want the wall down here. I live in the RGV and I am not one of the WE you are refering to. We need the wall, We may not want it, but We are going to get it. Way to M.C. We thank you.
October 23, 2007 7:16 PM
Anonymous said...
I am extremely disappointed that none of you seem to get it. This is not about immigration, IT'S A MATTER OF THE RULE OF LAW and SOVEREIGNTY OF THE UNITED STATES. Without BORDER SECURITY, complete control of legal and illegal immigration and enforcement of THE LAW, Nothing else will make a difference because WE WILL NOT HAVE A SOVERIEGN UNITED STATES. I don't know what it'll be but it won't be what we have today.
October 23, 2007 10:12 PM
Anonymous said...
THANK YOU FOR GOING AHEAD AND BUILDING THAT SECTION OF FENCE! It was the right and responsible thing to do for our country! I am so sick of "special interest groups" trying to block any real progress. They do not represent the Amercian Citizen! I live in So. California and can see the real damage & trash these illegal aliens leave in our canyons, as they sneak here on foot! They leave tons of "filth". The fence will HELP the ecology; not hinder it in any way!
October 25, 2007 4:13 PM
Anonymous said...
I would like to know when the section called "Smugglers gultch" near San Diego, CA. will be built? The reason I ask is becuase of the trash and eviromental damage the illegal aliens are leaving there as they break our laws sneaking in? I understand that section has some engineering challenges; but I know that can be overcome.
October 25, 2007 4:19 PM
Anonymous said...
Isn't the construction of a border fence a bit contradictory? Isn't the UN's "Charter for Global Democracy" going to help regionalize and join the governments of Mexico, the US, and Canada, under Robert Pastor's and the CFR's plan for a North American Union, starting around 2010?
Why would you want to waste taxpayer money building a fence when we are about to join with Mexico? I don't get it.
October 29, 2007 12:26 AM
Anonymous said...
Most Citizens do want the fence; and do want all of our curret laws agianst illegal immigration enforced. The ONLY people who don't want the DOUBLE FENCE are the illegal aliens themselves! We have a right to protect our borders from invasion, and from illegals invading.
October 29, 2007 8:40 PM
Anonymous said...
History repeats itself...What has happened to those other countries that have built walls? What a waste of money.
November 5, 2007 10:09 PM
Anonymous said...
Do you in the RGV that want a wall think that it won't have an effect on your local economy? As far as the trash goes its is far less harmful than the threat to the various nearly extinct species of the southwest's via blocking their migration. The desert is harsh and if these species are not able to migrate according to the seasons they will burn, freeze or starve to death. This is just one aspect among others. Is that so hard to understand? Plus there are a number of church based and non church based volunteer groups that go out and clean up the desert here in AZ. If you are so worried about trash, get out there and do something about it.
November 10, 2007 2:48 PM
Anonymous said...
WE need the wall because I've seen the trash. The wall will have no environmental effects.
Can that be true, that the wall will have no environmental effects? I have seen the dfiqures on the amount of steel that will go into it and it would really blow my mind that that had NO environmental effects?
September 14, 2008 12:18 AM
[Photo]Today, we informed a federal judge in Washington that I am exercising the authority granted to me by Congress to waive legal restrictions that impede our border security efforts. This means that we’ll soon resume construction of a stretch of fencing near the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area (SPRNCA) in southeastern Arizona.
I want to stress that it’s not our intention to run roughshod over existing laws and regulations. But, Congress recognized the significance that secure borders have on our national security and provided legal authority for me to waive any restrictions that may impede our progress.
Let me explain the context behind my decision.
The SPRNCA has been a high traffic area for smugglers for several years. In fact, last year over 19,000 illegal entrants were apprehended in the area – 11 percent of whom had criminal backgrounds. Unfortunately, among these illegal entries, there were also 14 deaths. So there is a clear need to establish effective control of this part of the border for security, as well as humanitarian reasons.
But there are also environmental reasons to stop illegal crossings in the SPRNCA. Illegal entrants leave trash and high concentrations of human waste, which impact wildlife, vegetation and water quality in the habitat. Wildfires caused by campfires have significantly damaged the soil, vegetation, and cultural sites, not to mention threatened human safety. Indeed, illegal entry in and around the SPRNCA is such a problem that the Bureau of Land Management has had to impose restrictions on public recreation due to high levels of smuggling activity, vehicle thefts, and assaults.
To stem the flow of illegal entrants across the border in and around the SPRNCA, we began installing tactical infrastructure and pedestrian fencing as part of our Secure Border Initiative. Because of the environmentally sensitive nature of the area, we consulted four environmental reviews dating back to the mid-1990s to ensure our construction project would not result in significant impacts to the environment. Two separate federal land management agencies (whose mission includes administering and protecting the SPRNCA) also authorized the department to proceed with construction.
But, now we are enmeshed in a court case which is designed to further delay our construction. That delay will result in more drug and human smuggling through this corridor.
So, I’ve exercised my authority to waive the judge’s order. I think that further delay in securing the border in and around the SPRNCA presents an unacceptable risk to our national security, in addition to the environmental and human problems that will continue to occur if this area of the border is not secured.
To further ensure that our construction minimizes impact on the environment, we’ll be implementing several environmental mitigation measures and best practices. Specifically, we’ll work with the Fish and Wildlife Service to respond to wildlife concerns; we’ll erect temporary river barriers and remove them during flood season; we’ll work to prevent the introduction or spread of invasive weeds and restore temporarily disturbed areas with native plants; and provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
We’ve been mindful about how and when to use our environmental waiver authority. We stand ready to engage the public on the environmental effects of our activities, and to make reasonable accommodations. The process must be sensible and expeditious, however.
We’ve done so when environmental assessments have been exhausted but interest groups still stop or slow down projects by throwing up obstacles or litigation.
National security must take precedence. But, we will continue to carry out these security responsibilities with environmental stewardship. Thanks for reading.
16 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formThanks for restarting the fence again. We were hoping you would do it to protect us. This keeps us from having to apply the 2nd amendment as we were preparing to do.
If more enforcement is not offered internally to the US we will then start using the 2nd amendment there. We intend to apply it to the employer and to sanctuary organizations and churches first. We plan on making citizen arrests of deportees in the churches soon.
October 22, 2007 11:08 PM
While we will make our best effort to post those comments that do not violate the Comment Policy quickly.
FROM THE RGV (Rio Grande Valley),
I live here and THE MAJORITY DOES NOT WANT THE WALL, so we say:
NO TO THE WALL
October 23, 2007 2:37 AM
We’ve done so when environmental assessments have been exhausted but interest groups still stop or slow down projects by throwing up obstacles or litigation.
FROM THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY:
YOU ALL DO NOT LIVE HERE WE DO.
YOU ALL ARE RIGHT ABOUT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS (WE THE RGV REALLY CARES ABOUT SABAL PALM, BIRDING SANCTUARIES). MS. MILLER
October 23, 2007 3:02 AM
My Dearest United States,
Ronald Reagan once said to Mr. Gorbachez "Tear down that wall" so why in God's name are we wanting to build one. As a six generation Texan, I have lived in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas all of my life and have never complained when I travel to Corpus Christi or San Antonio and have to be asked if I am an American Citizen inside our own borders by the US Border Patrol. Enough is enough, now you want to build a wall along our RIO GRANDE RIVER. How hypocritical can this country be? Let's spend the funds on resources that will last life times and beautify our river and not on fence wire that will rust and corrode and will be an eye sore to everyone for years to come. I say to everone, stop being so paranoid and let's do what is right for everyone. How many terroists have entered through Mexico to the United States. None that we have been told about. "NO BORDER WALL PERIOD" in South Texas.
Sincerely,
Richard
October 23, 2007 11:04 AM
In a previous post you state: "Of course, while fencing remains a critical element of our strategy, it isn’t the only element. The reality is that fencing will never provide a total solution. A fence by itself can be tunneled under or climbed over. Fencing is also expensive to build – up to $3 million per mile – and equally expensive to maintain."
Your arguments are contradictions.
The Rio Grande Valley doesn't want the wall for a number of reasons. Like you mention, a fence can be "tunneled under" or "climbed over" so spending monies on it would prove fruitless. The border states rely on the bi-national, bi-cultural, reciprocal relationship for the success of our economy. Building a wall or fence or whatever you want to call it, demonstrates hypocrisy and a lack of appreciation.
Using the "environment" as a excuse for creating this divide is merely a cop-out for reforming illegal immigration laws.
Melissa Zamora
-Brownsville, Texas
October 23, 2007 12:21 PM
Its funny how the commenters above completely ignore the true parts of his argument, that the illegal immigrants are extremely harmful to the environment the commenters pretend to love. Oh no, a fence! What about the human excrement and trash? Is that something you're willing to ignore as long as you can do whatever you can to disagree with our government?
True, a fence is not the only solution, but it is a start.
October 23, 2007 5:26 PM
To whom it may concern;
I wish that people would stop saying we do not want the wall down here. I live in the RGV and I am not one of the WE you are refering to. We need the wall, We may not want it, but We are going to get it. Way to M.C. We thank you.
October 23, 2007 7:16 PM
I am extremely disappointed that none of you seem to get it. This is not about immigration, IT'S A MATTER OF THE RULE OF LAW and SOVEREIGNTY OF THE UNITED STATES. Without BORDER SECURITY, complete control of legal and illegal immigration and enforcement of THE LAW, Nothing else will make a difference because WE WILL NOT HAVE A SOVERIEGN UNITED STATES. I don't know what it'll be but it won't be what we have today.
October 23, 2007 10:12 PM
THANK YOU FOR GOING AHEAD AND BUILDING THAT SECTION OF FENCE! It was the right and responsible thing to do for our country! I am so sick of "special interest groups" trying to block any real progress. They do not represent the Amercian Citizen! I live in So. California and can see the real damage & trash these illegal aliens leave in our canyons, as they sneak here on foot! They leave tons of "filth". The fence will HELP the ecology; not hinder it in any way!
October 25, 2007 4:13 PM
I would like to know when the section called "Smugglers gultch" near San Diego, CA. will be built? The reason I ask is becuase of the trash and eviromental damage the illegal aliens are leaving there as they break our laws sneaking in?
I understand that section has some engineering challenges; but I know that can be overcome.
October 25, 2007 4:19 PM
Isn't the construction of a border fence a bit contradictory? Isn't the UN's "Charter for Global Democracy" going to help regionalize and join the governments of Mexico, the US, and Canada, under Robert Pastor's and the CFR's plan for a North American Union, starting around 2010?
Why would you want to waste taxpayer money building a fence when we are about to join with Mexico? I don't get it.
October 29, 2007 12:26 AM
Most Citizens do want the fence; and do want all of our curret laws agianst illegal immigration enforced. The ONLY people who don't want the DOUBLE FENCE are the illegal aliens themselves!
We have a right to protect our borders from invasion, and from illegals invading.
October 29, 2007 8:40 PM
History repeats itself...What has happened to those other countries that have built walls? What a waste of money.
November 5, 2007 10:09 PM
Do you in the RGV that want a wall think that it won't have an effect on your local economy? As far as the trash goes its is far less harmful than the threat to the various nearly extinct species of the southwest's via blocking their migration. The desert is harsh and if these species are not able to migrate according to the seasons they will burn, freeze or starve to death. This is just one aspect among others. Is that so hard to understand? Plus there are a number of church based and non church based volunteer groups that go out and clean up the desert here in AZ. If you are so worried about trash, get out there and do something about it.
November 10, 2007 2:48 PM
WE need the wall because I've seen the trash. The wall will have no environmental effects.
November 10, 2007 2:49 PM
Can that be true, that the wall will have no environmental effects? I have seen the dfiqures on the amount of steel that will go into it and it would really blow my mind that that had NO environmental effects?
September 14, 2008 12:18 AM