On my recent trip from San Diego to Arizona I was using my GPS unit to navigate (I figured it was worth the expense if it helped me get out of the house and actually start taking my vacation hours) and I got a bit of a shock as I was heading out the I-8 toward Yuma.
I was so shocked that I took a picture of my GPS (left) to record the moment so that I could blog about it later. Sorry for the fuzziness of the photo, but I was driving and didn’t have time to manually focus my camera for such a close object (not that I’d know how to do that anyway).
I’d like to call your attention to three lines that are showing on the GPS screen. The first is the pinkish purple irregular line running from the top to the bottom of the screen. See it? That’s Interstate 8.
Right next to it is a dark line that is perfectly regular and also runs diagonally from top to bottom. Got that one? It’s the Mexican border.
Now look further to the right and observe the irregular yellow/orange line that mirrors Interstate 8. This line represents Mexican highway #2.
I’d also like to call your attention to a dark triangle that is located on the Interstate 8 line and that points toward the top of the screen. That represents the position of my pickup on the highway.
Now that you’ve got the lay of the land (so to speak), notice this: You see how close the pink line gets to the edge of the Mexican border? It seems to run right up to it, doesn’t it? And the tip of the triangle representing my truck seems to be touching the Mexican border as well. A couple of miles later, the tip of the triangle representing my truck was actually IN Mexico. (My truck wasn’t, of course, but the display icon for it was spilling over into Mexico.)
This gives you a sense of just how close a major American highway (a low-number interstate) is to the Mexican border–and how close a parallel Mexican highway (another low-number interstate) is to our interstate.
I mean, it would be very easy (in relative terms) to just drive up the Mexican interstate, cross the border, and have nearly immediate access to a U.S. interstate.
And bear in mind that there is NO FENCE out here. When you’re going east on I-8 and you look to your right, you’re looking DIRECTLY INTO MEXICO, with no barriers in the way (below).
Now, you might complain that the GPS screen doesn’t give you a sense of scale, so I’m prepared to help with that. Here’s a scan from my Southern California DeLorme atlas.
This is the same point that’s pictured on the GPS screen–the close pass of I-8 to the Mexican border just after the town of Jacumba (hah-come-bah).
I spliced the map’s scale into this picture so you can see just how close the interstate comes to the border at this point: It looks like about a mile and a quarter or 6600 feet (that’s about 2 kilometers for metric users).
So there you have it: At this point a major U.S. interstate is just two klicks from the Mexican border and NO FENCE.
But you might object that it’s rather rocky here and so the terrain is at least somewhat inhospitable to crossing naturally.
It’d be a moderate hike, as the mountains at this point are nothing like Everest and are easily climbable. You don’t need oxygen or anything (the elevation is only about 4000 feet above sea level).
But suppose you’re of a mind to think that the hills alone are enough to deter illegal aliens from entering here.
Okay, take a look at this map (click to enlarge):
This is a few miles further down I-8, near the Arizona border. In fact, it’s just a few miles west of Yuma, Arizona, just before you get to the Imperial Sand Dunes.
See how close it is here? (Be sure to look at the scale provided.)
It’s even CLOSER than the point near Jacumba!
Here Interstate 8 runs maybe a bit more than a quarter of a mile from the Mexican border, or 1400 feet. (That’s a bit over 400 meters for metric folks.)
And here there are NO mountains and we are right AT sea level, and once again there is NO FENCE.
You may hear people on the news talking about us having a porous, unsecured border, but the media isn’t telling you the half of it.
When you actually see it with your own eyes–when you look to your right and realize that you are looking right over into Mexico, with mile after mile of unsecured border and not even natural barriers like mountains in the way–you realize just how vulnerable to penetration the United States is.
It’s no wonder that there are over 10,000,000 illegal aliens in this country.
And at least some of those are likely to be terrorists.
Oh . . . and the immigration check points they have on I-8?
They’re closed half the time.
I didn’t get stopped at the checkpoints near Jacumba, either coming or going. They were all closed up.
MAKES YOU WANT TO MAIL A BRICK TO CONGRESS SO THEY CAN GET STARTED ON A WALL, DOESN’T IT?
“It’s no wonder that there are over 10,000,000 illegal aliens in this country.
“And at least some of those are likely to be terrorists.”
Er… why? Why are Mexicans more likely to be terrorists?
Haven’t most or all of the recent terroist acts in the US been committed by legal immigrants? Or indeed American nationals? Or at the very least people who entered the US through standard immigration channels?
Please give some examples of Mexican terrorism in, say, the last ten years in the United States.
I don’t think that the point is, that Mexicans are the terrorists. The point is, if 10 million people come across this border illegally, some terrorists may use this point of entry, also.
And that would seem to kind of make all our extensive (& expensive!)precautions at airports seem to be a little less comforting to think on, say, as you drift off to sleep…..
No, it doesn’t make me want to mail a brick.
This is the natural way of borders, Jimmy. They’re just lines on a map. When you see them, they don’t look like anything.
Since when is it natural and expected that borders be fortified with walls, etc.?
This border has always been open and, God willing, it always will be.
What this ALSO shows you is that lots and lots MORE Mexicans COULD be coming to the US. Most of them want to stay home, of course, and do. For those those fellow Catholics, under the patronage of Our Lady of Guadalupe, who want to come and visit for a while, God bless them and welcome.
In the area you photographed, moreover, migrants can still go BACK to Mexico easily, which they like to do. Walls just make them stay permanently or semi-permanently rather than working a bit and going back a bit, then going back to Mexico to stay when they finish.
If the concern is really terorism, you’ll need a fence along the Canadian border too. And you’ll need to basically close off international travel. Do you have any idea how many people come to the US for tourism purposes each year? Some of them could be terrorists!
Again, the method of entering the country has nothing to do with being or not being a terrorist. Most visiting terrorists will have their paperwork in order.
I was just happy to see that Jimmy didn’t put the toe of his boot in any of these pictures, since he was driving and all.
Thanks for the brilliant blog, Jimmy. It really puts a visual on the border problem.
Reading some of these comments, however, it seems like so many people still don’t get it. How is it ok that we have an open border with an interstate running along it through which any number of people could enter illegally? TM, why would terrorists go through the trouble of getting their paperwork in order when they could drive Mexican Highway 2 up close to the US border and then catch a ride to Anywhere, USA via Interstate 8? That would seem a lot easier than going through the hassle of applying for a visa in Amman or Riyadh, having to wait and hoping his name doesn’t appear on a watchlist.
Jeff, the notion that a border wall would actually keep illegals from returning to Mexico is a new one on me.
I have an idea that would be fair to all on both sides of the border! How about we build a wall along the border and all those who would like to work/visit/live on the opposite side of the wall would apply for legal entry for a specific reason and time period. They would be fingerprinted, photographed and given an identification card by the country in which they will enter, and after passing a criminal background check, they would be free to enter under the conditions given. If the immigrant is convicted of a felony in the host country, he is immediately deported. The plan would work both ways – for any person wanting to enter Mexico across the border, and any person wanting to enter the US across the border. That seems fair, doesn’t it?
No, it makes me want to mail YOU copies of the catechism and the various statements of John Paul II and the American and North and South American bishops on the immigration situation. But wait, you are the Best Blogging Apologist for the faith. It says so right there on your site. So how come we never see any log entries extolling the virtues of the church’s teaching on this subject, and calling for people to welcome the immigrants with open hearts?
Must be a different line in the cafeteria.
You remind me of those gay activists who are happy to quote the church’s teaching all day long if it is anything calling for compassion and understanding, but never say a word about the fact that homosexual relations are a sin. In immigration, as in any other issue, readers deserve the *entire* wealth of the church’s teaching and not just excerpts culled to back one’s political conservatism.
DE, you are right, some people just don’t get it. but then, i never understood immigration issues, both pro and con, till I lived in SD for 10 years, and travelled to MEX many times.
“TM, why would terrorists go through the trouble of getting their paperwork in order when they could drive Mexican Highway 2 up close to the US border and then catch a ride to Anywhere, USA via Interstate 8? That would seem a lot easier than going through the hassle of applying for a visa in Amman or Riyadh, having to wait and hoping his name doesn’t appear on a watchlist.”
We know from history that it isn’t easier. Every modern terrorist act on American soil has been committed by either an American or by a foreign national who did, in fact, get his paperwork in order.
Why didn’t they fly to Mexico and then cross the border on foot? Off the top of my head, probably because they’d be on just as many records coming into Mexico City as Miami, because they’d have to arrange transport to the border, arrange transport the other side (a particularly vulnerable point) and then, once in the US, would be instantly discovered if at any point their ID was demanded.
If you’re a terrorist organisation really determined on getting your guys into America, they wouldn’t be “hoping they weren’t on a watchlist”. You’d send someone who definitely is not on a watchlist. It’s that easy.
Jimmy’s postings on this, and his desire for something very similar to the Berlin Wall, strike me as veering dangerously in the direction of a rather distasteful prejudice.
Support school vouchers and homeschool your children.
TM: you are obviously not stupid. (I mean that sincerely no matter how it comes across in cyberspace.) So, I can only conclude that, if you really think the wall Jimmy is talking about is remotely comparable to the Berlin Wall, then you are either completely ignorant of history, or you are deliberately being insulting to those who do know some history (and other things) and are trying to come up with real answers to real problems.
OK, so what is this brilliant fence idea supposed to do?
Apparently the current guards are inadequate. What is an expensive, unguarded fence going to do other than add a bit of climbing or the purchase of a pair of secateurs to the cross-border journey?
If terrorism is what he is concerned about and not the dreaded poor, then why is Jimmy not arguing for a fence between the US and Canada?
First of all, TM, the lesson that the September 11 attacks teaches us (and the legitimate lesson, not the scapegoat agendas that everyone attach to it) is that you can’t appeal to historical precedence in designing a plan for anti-terrorism. It might work in counter-terrorism systems, but we’re trying to prevent future attacks, which forces us to think outside the box. Is there a potential risk that could be lessoned, without an unnecessary collateral detriment?
The border issue with Mexico represents a risk that might not have been exploited in the past, but could be in the future. Same goes for the border with Canada. It has nothing to do with a prejudice against Canadian or Mexican persons. It has to do with tightening security, and turning to the next logical place after airports and port systems are already thought to be as secure as practically possible.
What hasn’t been mentioned much is that the initial raids in Afghanistan found various training manuals and plans and that infiltration through bordering countries was found to be a plot under consideration by Al Quaeda. So it’s not a completely far-fetched notion.
Now, I agree that consideration must be given to how much potential good can come from building some sort of wall and how much definate good will be caused by the same. But it’s a discussion worth having and will come from people like Mr. Akin freely expressing their opinions and concerns, and having opinions and concerns from opposition sources also being taken into account. That’s how this great nation that we’re trying to protect WORKS, after all…
Don’t accuse someone of bigotry or prejudice because they see the issue a little differently than you. I don’t think Jimmy has expressed any sort of pejorative view towards Mexican people or any fear that they themselves would be the perpetrators of terrorist action. But he has extolled obedience to the law of the nation, and expressed legitimate concern about how easily our security measures can be skirted. Many people share his concern. You don’t have to. But don’t argue a straw-man of prejudice.
If we’re really concerned about the poor, why don’t we want all of these inspiring unfortunates coming to us for our Christian support properly documented so we can be sure we’re attending to all of their needs?
Or is that not an argument that gets the desired political or economic outcome?
PVO
“The border issue with Mexico represents a risk that might not have been exploited in the past, but could be in the future. Same goes for the border with Canada. It has nothing to do with a prejudice against Canadian or Mexican persons.”
OK, so why is he asking for a fence between the US and Mexico, but not between the US and Canada?
And if you can’t see the parallels with the Berlin Wall… well, I don’t know what to say.
“If you’re a terrorist organisation really determined on getting your guys into America, they wouldn’t be “hoping they weren’t on a watchlist”. You’d send someone who definitely is not on a watchlist. It’s that easy.”
TM, You would be amazed at how many names are on the watchlist. Guess what the most popular name in the world is. Smith? Not close. Chang? Wrong. It’s Mohammed. So if one has an Arabic name, chances are he will have to wait while his name is checked against the thousands of similar names on the list. It’s not as easy as you think. Your reference to “modern terrorist acts” is limited being that we have had only OK City, the first WTC bombing, the assassinations outside the CIA (1/25/93), and 9/11/01. I wouldn’t base my preventative strategy on such a short history of terrorist attacks.
By the way, you’re wrong about all the attacks being conducted on legal immigrants. If memory serves, the first attack on the WTC was conducted in part by a terrorist who was on a list, stopped by Customs, but allowed to enter the US on a promise to return for a hearing at a later date.
Yes, I didn’t mean that the paperwork was all AOK but rather that they got in through proper channels.
As to this bit:
“So if one has an Arabic name, chances are he will have to wait while his name is checked against the thousands of similar names on the list. It’s not as easy as you think.”
Yes. His name will be checked. And if he has nothing incriminating on his record (which he won’t), then that’s it. You know how organised crime groups use people with no record? Same thing.
But the thing is – even discounting that possibility, you have to go through immigration in Mexico too. So going to Mexico first is still much harder than going direct, or going to Canada first.
Aside from the terrorist aspect of this debate, there is the criminal aspect, which is being ignored. hundreds of drug-smuggling thugs enter our country every day. these people commit crimes such as rape, theft, and murder and then cross back into Mexico unmolested. we MUST secure the border with properly armed guards and walls that actually keep the bad guys out and keep the bads guys who are here from escaping.
the Church stresses compassion, but not suicide.
It would be suicide to let Mexico’s corrupt government export the result of her corruption, the destitute, to our economy so that the people of Mexico won’t revolt against their self-serving leaders. Don’t twist the Church’s teachings.
“And if you can’t see the parallels with the Berlin Wall… well, I don’t know what to say.”
Um…wasn’t the Berlin Wall to keep people from getting out, not in? That’s a big distinction in my book. A nation has a right to protect itself, not to prevent people from leaving.
I have family on both sides of the border under discussion, in Calexico (US side) and Mexicali (Mexico side), and I have actually walked around in that desert (the Colorado Desert, name changed to Imperial Valley to attract naive farmers from Midwest), including walking across the border in both directions (hey, I’m legal, o.k.?).
There are fences in some parts, like where the border cities are.
People just climb over, or cut holes in, the fences.
During the hot season (February to October), you can die real fast in that desert without a lot of water. Even with a lot of water, you can die real fast from (1) too much sun exposure; (2) nasty poisonous critters like snakes and scorpioins; (3) nasty thorny plants; (4) nasty guys with guns (of many flavors: American criminals; Mexican criminals; drunken Indians; paranoid farmers and ranchers, etc). And if you get spotted by a Border Patrol agent, you can’t say that “Oh, I was just on my way to Circle K and got lost.”
Smart people don’t try to cross illegally in the wilderness. Dead people do that.
Smart cross illegally in the cities, or near the cities, where there is: (1) water; (2) food; (3) shelter; (4) fewer snakes and scorpions; (5) lots of people to blend in, (6) law and order to keep the guns of the bad guys under their shirts. Then you have a chance.
Fence in the wilderness is a big waste of money. Better to just have (well armed) ID checkpoints for everybody at key points along I-8 for vehicles going in and out of the desert.
TM- To go into Mexico or Canada from the US, I answered a few questions and walked or drove (respectively). To get back, there were questions, checking of ID, car-searches, and we had one guy want to keep us from coming back because we didn’t have ID on the two-year-old twins. (He finally let us through when my aunt offered to leave them there for two days while she went home and got copies of their birth certificates, and they started crying.)
I think you’re just far too ready to be insulted or get angry.
You jump to the conclusion that illegal aliens that cross from Mexico MUST be Mexican, get upset without offering any alternative to the proposal of how to fix the leaky border, then get huffy because someone wants to work on securing the border that has the most illegal coming across before they worry about the one with very, very (relative) few.
On a side note, from what I’ve seen of the Canadian border, there is a much lower risk of folks sneaking across because of the nasty-steep mountainous areas, the fact that even in summer you can get hypothermia during the night, and that the places where there are roads or areas that are easy to pass through have a large number of drug control agents patrolling. Perhaps further east it’s a nicer area to cross, but I lived in WA for about six years. That border is NOT easy to cross on foot or by off-road vehicle without being observed.
Distinction or no, I think it’s obvious what the similarities are, and why a wall might just be a bad PR move, if nothing else will motivate you.
I mean, honestly, is it so hard to just operate a normal immigration and customs service including employing investigators to check up on people’s paperwork even after they’ve been in the country for a while? It works for every other Western country.
The other point is this: walls don’t work. The Great Wall of China never worked, and that was actually manned. If Jimmy is to be believed, the US border is near unguarded, so an unmanned wall isn’t going to do a thing.
On the names thing– one of my buddies at my last command was Jon Jones; six-six, blond stick of a guy. His name showed up on the check list because it’s so generic.
TM- From what I recall from History class, the Great Wall *did* work. It limited the areas that could be quickly attacked by the horse-riding threat.
“I think you’re just far too ready to be insulted or get angry.”
I’ve done neither of those things. I merely question Jimmy’s logic and motivation.
See Old Zhou’s post for evidence to back up my assertion that a fence is a waste of money.
The only way to stop people crossing the border illegally will be to stop people crossing the border at all. What’s also needed is a capable agency within the country, something the US apparently can’t be bothered with.
Furthermore, I put it to you that the idea of the illegal immigrant ‘threat’ is nothing more than tabloid-style fearmongering.
“TM- From what I recall from History class, the Great Wall *did* work. It limited the areas that could be quickly attacked by the horse-riding threat.”
From what I recall from my degree in Modern and Classical Chinese Language and History, it didn’t.
As further proof, I give you the Yuan dynasty (Mongol, 1279-136something), which was in power when Marco Polo visited China (Kubla Khan etc.), and the Qing dynasty (Manchu, 1644-1911).
TM, have you ever lived around a large number of illegal immigrants?
Have you ever lived somewhere that has a high number of assaults from folks that legally shouldn’t be in the country? Have you ever had to pay higher insurance because of the large number of uninsured, illegal drivers? Do you know how much the US spends every year to jail folks that aren’t supposed to be here for crimes unrelated to their legal status?
You questioned Mr. Akin’s logic on something he didn’t even say.
There is also a difference between stopping and preventing something. Realistically, there is no way to stop someone from breaking into your house. There are things you can do to prevent it, but anything can be gotten around. Even with a total shutdown of all legal in/out movement in the US and putting armed guards everywhere on the border, with every human-detection technology we can think of, people *could* still get in. This doesn’t translate, to carry the metaphor, into “leave your doors unlocked with a note that tells them where you keep the good silver.”
On the Great Wall– No, it didn’t keep China from being taken down in the long run. I think we’re going from different perspectives: I view the wall as “Wall: keeps guys on horses from riding through where the wall is.” It seems you’re looking at it more broadly, as “Wall: protects China from invasion.” It’s a pile of bricks; all it could do to fail is to let people ride right on through/over.
“TM, have you ever lived around a large number of illegal immigrants?
Have you ever lived somewhere that has a high number of assaults from folks that legally shouldn’t be in the country? Have you ever had to pay higher insurance because of the large number of uninsured, illegal drivers? Do you know how much the US spends every year to jail folks that aren’t supposed to be here for crimes unrelated to their legal status?”
Yes to all. I live in such a place right now. What’s your point?
“You questioned Mr. Akin’s logic on something he didn’t even say.”
He said he wanted to build a fence along the Mexican border. He said that “at least some” of the US’s illegal immigrants are “likely to be terrorists”.
That’s what I questioned.
I keep forgetting I cant edit comments – about the Wall. I also don’t get your point here. The Wall didn’t succeed in its intended function. At all. There’s nothing about “different perspectives” at work.
It neither worked in the ‘protect China’ sense, nor did it work in the local sense, because invaders went through the gaps. And yes, there were gaps, contrary to what you might imagine.
“Yes to all. I live in such a place right now. What’s your point?”
Then it’s hardly fearmongering, even of the tabloid-style.
“He said that “at least some” of the US’s illegal immigrants are “likely to be terrorists”.
That’s what I questioned.”
Your exact quote: “Why are Mexicans more likely to be terrorists?”
It *is* likely that at least some of the terrorists in our country are here illegally. (Although I admit that the word immigrant is arguable– both in the case of those who come here illegally to get work then go home and those who come to destroy.)
It is fearmongering. I live in a place with many illegal immigrants and have no problem with them. They are no different, in general, to legal immigrants or anyone else. Allow me to answer your questions individually.
“Have you ever lived somewhere that has a high number of assaults from folks that legally shouldn’t be in the country?”
Yes, but only in proportion to the number of them in the community.
“Have you ever had to pay higher insurance because of the large number of uninsured, illegal drivers?”
Relatively few of these uninsured drivers would be immigrants, I think you’ll find. Most of them are just antisocial, selfish people, fully homegrown.
“Do you know how much the US spends every year to jail folks that aren’t supposed to be here for crimes unrelated to their legal status?”
Actually, the only answer I can give here is ‘yes’.
Anyway, this is all just anecdotal evidence form me, so it doesn’t really mean anything.
Put simply, this “immigrant threat” is just like the Yellow Peril or the plague of the Irish or whatever. It is fearmongering, pure and simple.
Yeah, the lack of edit is a bit of a pain, no? Too bad it can’t be a bit more like a message board.
Quote:
The wall, running mostly along the southern edge of the Mongolian plain, was erected to protect China from northern nomads.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/G/GreatW1al.asp
The Wall served well. Only when a dynasty had weakened from within were invaders from the north able to advance and conquer. Both the Mongols (Yuan Dynasty, 1271-1368) and the Manchurians (Qing Dynasty,1644-1911) were able take power, not because of weakness in the Wall but because of weakness in the government and the poverty of the people. They took advantage of rebellion from within and stepped into the void of power without extended wars.
http://ce.eng.usf.edu/pharos/wonders/Forgotten/greatwall.html
Also:
It was during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) that the Wall took on its present form.
http://wonderclub.com/WorldWonders/GreatWallHistory.html
I wish I were saavy enough to send a picture from Naco, Arizona which is taken about thirty feet from a five strand barbed wire border fence. You can see the Mexican railroad where the illegals ride the cattle cars and where the train slows down to let them jump off and jump the border.
Or I could send you the picture of the 118 illegals caught in a 1500 sq. ft. house in Rio Rico, Arizona, just this side of Nogales,Arizona.
You really do have to be here. Cruel exploitation of the poor, destruction of the United States and all in the service of corporate greed. And sadly, sometimes in the name of a misguided Christian charity.
The Great Wall of China works just fine, thank you.
You have now idea how many American tourist dollars it brings to China!
You know, on the North border, you do have to be on the lookout for all those illegal Irish immigrants sneaking across from Canada to the Coyote Pub in Buffalo.
There have also been news reports of unsuspecting Canadian professors brining illegal Irish across the border in their cars.
Please do not lecture me on the history of the Great Wall. I am very much familiar with it, so please believe me when I tell you that, as a fortification, it was largely useless.
Your internet quote on the Mongol and Manchu invasions imputes far too much influence to the Wall. Yes, China was defeated when it was weak. But it was also not defeated when it was strong. The Wall may no difference either way. It was really just a showpiece. A series of garrisons (which was all it really was, in the end) would have served just as well.
I am well aware of the Ming reconstruction – this was actually quite a good move, not for military purposes but for economic ones.
“The Great Wall of China works just fine, thank you.
You have now idea how many American tourist dollars it brings to China!”
Yeah, but the Badaling section is so tacky. And they’ve even touristified Simatai! I was very disappointed by that. The previous times I went to Simatai, it was all unrenovated and quiet and, well, nice.
Still, never mind.
Actually, in looking at your fuzzy GPS pic, I’m more disturbed by something else I see. If the dark/straight diagonal line is the border, and the pink line is the US highway, and the yellow line is the Mexican highway…. then look in the upper lefthand area of the GPS screen.
Ummm… is the Mexican highway dog-legging to the left and actually crossing OVER into US territory???
TM
Go to the Pima County jail roster and count the Hispanic surnames and look at the crimes. See if the proportion of inmates is 24% of the jail population, which is the percentage of the Hispanic population in Pima County.
http://www.pimasheriff.org/lookup.htm
I have seen it almost half at times when I worked in the court system.
Most crimes in London are committed by black males, despite them being far from a majority of the population.
What does that mean in practical policing terms? Do you think this is indicative of some great moral failing on the part of black people?
Gee, Ann, it sounds like you are saying people with Hispanic names tend to be criminal.
How many of those Pima County inmates with Hispanic names are US Citizens or legal immigrants?
You might as well say that Latinos and African Americans make up the greater part of inmates in Califonia, and so we should build a wall to keep out anybody with a darker skin.
It is well known that certain ethnicities are “over-represented” among inmate populations.
But I never heard that this was related to immigration issues that might be addressed (or not) by a wall on the Mexican border.
Back to my “Good for the goose, good for the gander” argument: How about if we treated Mexican illegal immigrants the same way Mexico treats those who enter illegally? Would that be fair, TM?
We could adopt Mexican immigration laws:
To immigrate one must be a professional or an investor. No unskilled workers. We would do away with bilingual programs in the schools. Immigrants would not be given welfare or food stamps. Immigrants can invest, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the average daily minimum wage. Immigrants would not have the right to private property. Immigrants would not have the right to protest; no waving of their native countries flag in the streets while demanding lenient immigration laws. And illegal immigrants would be sent to jail immediately upon capture.
If it’s good enough for Mexico, it’s good enough for US.
Preach it, D.!
Following D.’s brilliant logic, why don’t the Jews treat the Germans how the Germans treated the Jews? Unlike David B, I feel to see the brilliance of moral equivalence.
Dear D. Esquivel,
Many interesting points in your comment.
I think it is important to separate four groups of people:
(1) illegal immigrants
(2) legal immigrants not interested in citizenship
(3) legal immigrants who wish to become citizens
(4) naturalized citizens
The current political debate is really about the folks in category (1). Most countries in the world treat the people as criminals, imprison them, deport them, and ban them. Don’t overstay your tourist visa in Japan, for example.
The US has been taking steps, for some time now (at least since the Reagan years), to make category (2) less atractive, except for short term visitors such as students and professionals. Changes in tax code, security requirements, expiration of documents, etc., has made category (2) less attractive. I expect this trend to continue. The days of “just stay a permanent resident forever” are going away.
The folks in category (3) can use a lot of help, and, I think this would be a great place for the Catholic Church to help. Teaching English and Civics, helping people understand what records they need to maintain, what is good moral behavior, etc. Help with the maze of immigration forms and documentation. All important things for becoming a citizen eventually. These people seem to be mostly invisible in the current debates about illegal aliens. For these folks and their kids I also support TRANSITIONAL bilingual education. It should only be, however, while they are rapidly learning English. It is a disservice to keep them in a linguistic ghetto of their “home language.”
I don’t believe that category (4) folks, naturalized citizens, should be unable to function in English. Sorry. I resent the fact that my ballot (in California) is bilingual. Only citizens can vote. Citizens should be able to vote in English. Why should someone who is voting (and hence a citizen) not be able to read an English ballot? That is crazy. They can speak whatever language they want, but as citizens they should be able to function, in civic matters, in English.
M.Z. –
Are you really equating U.S. immigration law vis-a-vis Mexicans to Third Reich laws regarding Jews?
I am not talking about anybody being killed here. Just letting folks know that perhaps Mexican illegals shouldn’t gripe so loudly until Mexico starts treating the Guatemalan illegals crossing Mexico’s southern border the way they want to be treated here.
I’m still not seeing any justifications for building a big useless fence.
Support school vouchers and homeschool your children.
LOL!
Save the Republic, vote the Constitution Party!
Following D.’s brilliant logic, why don’t the Jews treat the Germans how the Germans treated the Jews? Unlike David B, I feel to see the brilliance of moral equivalence.
And MZ Forrest becomes the first to trigger Godwin’s Law.
Irony: Appealing to Godwin’s law against a commentator pointing out the error of moral equivalence.
Irony: Appealing to Godwin’s law against a commentator pointing out the error of moral equivalence.
MZ Forrest… missing the point of Godwin’s Law.
The point is that analogies involving Nazis are so emotionally inflammatory that they generate more heat than light. They polarize the debate and make getting at the truth harder rather than easier.
If all you want to say is “Two wrongs don’t make a right” then say so, but don’t go dragging Nazis into it. That just throws gasoline on the fire.
I’m staying out of the way of this discussion, so I don’t know if anybody’s already posted this or not yet, but the bbc has a story on a web based border patrol.
I see some potential technical flaws in the idea, but I’m sure they’ll be ironed out.
Not that I’m taking a side, but I thought the story was relevant and interesting given Jimmy and his bootless pictures above.
Um… about those terrorist watch lists.
I have seen countless stories about congressmen on the list, toddlers on the list, etc. but how about those names listed in the 9/11 commission report that were blacked out to not embarrass our best friends, the Saud..(oops, that’s national security info).
as for 09/11… wasn’t it Paul Wolfowitz, presenting Don Rumsfeld’s idea of the “new scaled down US military” in 1989, that stated that The US people will never accept this idea unless we have another ‘Pearl Harbor’ type of event.????
it’s ok to have open minds, but let’s make sure the brain doesn’t fall out.
I can’t speak to the Great Wall of China, but the Berlin Wall was very effective at keeping people from getting out of East Berlin, and Israel’s Gaza wall is doing a good job too; nearly all Israel’s terrorist problems come from the West Bank, where there is no wall.
Zhou,
Sorry. I should have made myself more clear. All I am saying is that the jail population in Pima County is composed of many with Hispanic surnames than there are Hispanics in the general population. It is therefore, obvious that those with Hispanic surnames are arrested more than those with names of orther origin. We can also assume there was probable cause to arrest them or there would be ACLU people all over the cops.
I do know from many years of working with that jail population that many of those people are identified illegals with INS holds on them. They are never arrested for illegal presence, but always for a another criminal offense. Although I have no statistics to prove it, it is reasonable to think that the increased numbers are attributable to illegal criminal activity.
the above was by me.
the one signed “bill012”, not Ann”s
You are full of hooey.
I thought it was so ironic when President Ronald Reagan said this wall must come down (the Berlin Wall did come down within three years) and the very next week he stood on the bridge at Del Rio, Texas, and said we must build stronger fences. He was full of hooey too.
It is popular to say build a fence and deport all the illegals. How do we tell who is illegal? Do you want a brand on your forhead stamped “legal?” Put more restrictions on our liberty still by upgrading the Patriot Act? No, there are too many right now.
I think the Army and President Clinton had it right for the gays in service, don’t ask, don’t tell. That’s how it should be for these workers, don’t ask, don’t tell.
What about the terrorists? We have done too much restriction already in the name of worrying about them. We need a plan to seek them out and destroy them. The illegals are a popular subversion in these efforts.
Workers? Our economy needs these illegal workers. They don’t come for welfare or anything like that, they come to work. And they work hard. Harder than you have ever worked in a day.
Our area depends on this worker supply. They are in construction, service industries, food handlers, and a lot of the type work most of us wouldn’t do.
YOU JUST GOT PUT ON THE RACIST LIST OF AMERICA
common that is hateful.
The reason mex. have to come to us because there are great disproportions of money, caused by jew controlled countries like US.
hehe
white people or rather american white people argue for egalitarian equality yet they want hispanics to work their fields.
Kick the latinos out and see where ur mcdonalds is gonna get lettuce!
democracy is realy demonocracy
VIVA LE ROI
really
The Pope isnt a president
He is a King.
Christ is not a president
He is King of Kings.
The devil is probably a president like hugo chavez
He permamemt.
Dont fight over who is next prez or laws.
The forces that be already control that.
God will intervene soon!!!
CRISTUS VINCIT
Albert Einstein was at a party and wanted to have a conversation with people.
He goes to a person.
What is your iq?
200.
So then he talked to the person of God and quantum physics and Handel
Then he went to a man and asked him the same question?
174.
Ah, so you have read the Summa, well isnt it…
A person at the bar caught his attention and asked him the same question.
120.
So what do you do for a living.
I am a historian at University of …
He went through many people…
60.
What do you do sir?
I am the president of…
I imagined so.
He spoke to everyone in the room except one person left.
What is your IQ?
Huh.
What is your IQ?
2.
He was wondering what to speak with such a stupid man……Should I ask him about his hat?
FINALLY!!!
What part of the U.S. are you from?
LOL!!!
Well … all I can say is what our beloved John Paul II said in a similar circumstance, when another “wall” was being built: LET US BUILD BRIDGES IF WE WANT PEACE, NOT WALLS! I must think that he took some pride in having had a say in bringing down the Berlin wall too.
It’s interesting that you point out how close the border is to I-8. Last year as I drove east approaching the Migra checkpoint, my passenger noticed someone run across the freeway in the dark. I did not, but was not surprised. The problem isn’t merely crossing the invisible line going north or south, the problem is (1) not getting run over by the high-speed traffic, and (2) once across, how to continue safely without being caught.
In Texas, I noticed that the green vehicles with the red lights were actually patrolling on private property near the border.
Immigration is a problem that won’t go away, and vigilantism isn’t the answer. A few years ago there was great jubilation when the not very effective Berlin Wall came down. Now there is talk about spending billions of dollars to replicate it along our southern border.
The earth is the LORD’s and all that therein is: the compass of the world, and they that dwell therein. (Psalm 24)
To whom does the earth belong? To whom do the people on earth belong?
Stop being so frightened of those whom God has created, redeemed, loves. And God has that same relation to you! AND me! Wonderful, isn’t it?
“Stop being so frightened of those whom God has created, redeemed, loves.”
(eyes rolling sarcastically)…
Yeah! It’s not as if anybody is going to try and hurt us… like, try to fly planes into our high rise office buildings or seats of government. Why this irrational fear of millions of undocumented people flooding over our border?
Why don’t we just place our military on permanent stand-down, too? After all, we’re all God’s children!
Walls are bad… unlock your doors at night (someone may need shelter)! Empty the prisons!
(End sarcasm)
I have taught my children to be very cautious with strangers, not because I fear all strangers, but because I fear that one-in-a-hundred who may wish them harm. It’s called prudence. I am responsible for their safety. The President is responsible for OUR safety.
Our border should function the same way my house functions… you don’t come in except through the front door, and then you knock first, let me check you out and ask my permission to enter. On my part, I should welcome all who come in good will, and as many as I can reasonably be expected to accomodate. The number that I wish to entertain at one time is totally up to me. People who come to me in genuine need should obviously be given much greater consideration.
Try and sneak in through a window, though, and I am not going to ask what your intentions are, I am going to introduce you to the business end of a basball bat. Those who come here illegally can not reasonably expect us to assume they have good intentions.
Trust, but verify.
Jim,
The Berlin wall was built to keep people IN. A fence on the U.S./Mexican border would be built to keep people OUT. there is a difference between a country oppressing the people and a country defending it’s people from it’s enemies. Also, friends of mine lost their jobs because illegals work for dirt wages, not because the illegals work harder. the rest of your post is just mindless venting.
Tim J: Just remember to hold the bat with the label up so you don’t break it on the bad guy’s head.
On a side note, from what I’ve seen of the Canadian border, there is a much lower risk of folks sneaking across because of the nasty-steep mountainous areas, the fact that even in summer you can get hypothermia during the night, and that the places where there are roads or areas that are easy to pass through have a large number of drug control agents patrolling.
That’d only be along the BC border, there are all sorts of nice places to cross in the prairies with none of those risks.
I’ve always figured that if I ever had to sneak across the border – which I won’t – I’d cross near the Sweet Grass Hills, on the Montana-Alberta border. Very few people around, lovely scenery, a nice hike.
Personally, I am all for the wetbacks. We, the Church, should be there handing out towels. It’s sweaty work out there crossing the desert.
They are mostly fellow Catholics, and all of them are our fellow human beings. They need work, need to live. We need their work, and should pay them far more than we do for it. More for cleaning our hotel rooms & toilets, more for landscaping our lawns and more for picking our produce. Hard, nasty work most of it.
The U.S. is too rich & materialistic, too selfish and too self absorbed. Those people are our people- all people are ours. Time we started embracing them, and bearing resoponsibilty for them. As the poem on the statue goes: “give me your.. wretched masses yearning to breathe free.” Christ could have said that.
Remember the Beatitudes, the fate of Dives, and the
Good Samaritain.
To hell with the fence. Benvenidos mis compadres, mis amigos, venga.
Charles,
we don’t have a responsibility to open wide the gates to everybody and his uncle. We have every right to regulate entry into the U.S. so that undesirables (criminals, free-loaders, etc.) are kept from entering the country. If we continue to allow the illegals to swarm across our border, a permanent second class will continue to develop. That is what is uncharitable.
If Californians are serious about illegal immigration, the first thing they need to do is get rid of liberal US Senator Diane Feinstein.
California voters, vote for Richard “Dick” MOUNTJOY for US Senate on November 7, 2006!!!
http://www.mountjoyforsenate.com/about.htm