Minutemen To Bush..Build a Fence or we Will!!

[Bonnie]

By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN, Associated Press Writer
Wed Apr 19, 10:46 PM ET

TUCSON, Ariz. - Minuteman border watch leader Chris Simcox has a message for President Bush: Build new security fencing along the border with Mexico or private citizens will.

Simcox said Wednesday that he's sending an ultimatum to the president, through the media, of course — "You can't get through to the president any other way" — to deploy military reserves and the National Guard to the Arizona border by May 25.

Or, Simcox said, by the Memorial Day weekend Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers and supporters will break ground to start erecting fencing privately.

"We have had landowners approach," Simcox said in an interview. "We've been working on this idea for a while. We're going to show the federal government how easy it is to build these security fences, how inexpensively they can be built when built by private people and free enterprise."

Simcox said a half-dozen landowners along the Arizona-Mexico border have said they will allow fencing to be placed on their borderlands, and others in California, Texas and New Mexico have agreed to do so as well.

"Certainly, as with everything else, we're only able to cover a small portion of the border," Simcox said. "The state and federal government have bought up most of the land around the border. I suspect that's why we'll never get control of the border."

But he said the plan is to put up secure fencing that truly will be an effective deterrent, and to show how easily it can be accomplished.

Simcox gave this description of the envisioned barrier-and-fencing complex:

Start with a 6-foot deep trench so a vehicle can't crash through; behind it, roll of concertina (coiled, razor-edged barbed wire), in front of a 15-foot high heavy-gauge steel mesh fence angled outward at the top.

Behind the fence will be a 60- to 70-foot wide unpaved but graded dirt road, along with inexpensive, mounted video cameras that can be monitored from home computers. On the other side of the road will be a second, 15-foot fence, with more concertina wire on its outside.

"It's a very simple, effective design based on feedback we've had from Border Patrol and the military," Simcox said. "It's a fence that can be built on the cheap, effective and secure."

Simcox said supporters will try to build the fencing with volunteer labor. Surveyors and contractors have offered to help with the design and survey work, he said, and some have said they will provide heavy equipment.

Simcox said those involved in the planning hope to keep costs to between $125 and $150 a foot.

Access to land literally on the border is an issue because so much is state-leased trust property or federally owned, he said.

"You may have to deal with a situation where private property owners erect their own fences and may be faced with the president sending the National Guard to prevent them from protecting their private property," Simcox said.

He said the Minuteman plan is "to keep turning up the heat" until President Bush has to respond somehow.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060420/ap_on_re_us/border_fence_minuteman_1

 

[007]

Well... I know what I'm going to be doing in May.

I'm listening to this story right now on Fox.

 

[jillian]

You are aware, aren't you, that the people who attacked us were here legally and didn't come over the border, right? :scratch:

But then again, Bush thought that the vigilantes were okay when it suited his purpose, so kinda pigeons coming home to roost.

 

[Bonnie]

You are aware, aren't you, that the people who attacked us were here legally and didn't come over the border, right? :scratch:

But then again, Bush thought that the vigilantes were okay when it suited his purpose, so kinda pigeons coming home to roost.

That really is two seperate issues though. The fence is meant to keep out one kind of menace, while other measures need to be taken on those here legally that may pose a terrorist threat.

This might actually be a good idea to have private enterprise do something that government doesn't want to acknowledge or pay for.

 

[jillian]

That really is two seperate issues though. The fence is meant to keep out one kind of menace, while other measures need to be taken on those here legally that may pose a terrorist threat.

This might actually be a good idea to have private enterprise do something that government doesn't want to acknowledge or pay for.

I think the issues are interrelated. They were encouraged to be vigilantes when they were given the nod for the border "patrols". That empowered them.

I also don't believe in privatizing government functions, especially those which are really military in nature. We've seen how badly that can go wrong. And it's not appropriate, in my view, for a vigilante group to determine national policy as they would be doing here.

And there are so many issues that are of greater importance when it comes to our security than a fence along the southern border... our ports, water and food sources, nuclear power plants, chemical plants....

 

[nosarcasm]

No its paramount to the interest of most Americans to limit illegal immigration in order to establish a legal system for guestworkers.

The minutemen are a symptom from the fact that both parties compete for the Latino votes. They sold out for power. Thats why against the wishes of a majority they were setting up the become legal for 2000$ program.

The consequence would be a rush of 12 million more illegals.

Your secure the port argument is hogwash. Sure they need to be secured more but do not excuse inaction on the Mexican border.

I believe in privatizing some government function, not the army and police but pretty much the rest of it. People that can't be fired tend to be more ineffective. e.g. Germany.

The government does not encourage vigilantes. They arrested a few idiots that overdid their patrol duty. But the minutemen adapted fast and keep it legal.

 

[Bonnie]

I think the issues are interrelated. They were encouraged to be vigilantes when they were given the nod for the border "patrols". That empowered them.

Im not following how vigilanteism relates the two? And to my knowledge there have been very sparse incidents of vigilante behavior on the part of any of the the minutemen, most have conducted themselves accordingly in conjunction with the acting border patrol.

I also don't believe in privatizing government functions, especially those which are really military in nature. We've seen how badly that can go wrong. And it's not appropriate, in my view, for a vigilante group to determine national policy as they would be doing here.

And we have seen how badly government beuracracy has screwed up on most issues. Regarding military issues, I would be happy to see the military get involved in border policing, hasn't happened yet hence the frustration of those who own land in all those border states, so I don't see this as vigilantes making national policy but rather getting the governments attention on something that needs to be addressed today not next year. If the government is not willing to spend the money on building a fence, why not let private money fund it?

And there are so many issues that are of greater importance when it comes to our security than a fence
along the southern border... our ports, water and food sources, nuclear power plants, chemical plants....[/

And here you just made my point for me.

 

[007]

I think the issues are interrelated. They were encouraged to be vigilantes when they were given the nod for the border "patrols". That empowered them.

They're interrelated in that with the mexican border beign an "open door", anyone can simply stroll in, including someone of other than mexican descent.

I also don't believe in privatizing government functions, especially those which are really military in nature. We've seen how badly that can go wrong. And it's not appropriate, in my view, for a vigilante group to determine national policy as they would be doing here.

I think you may be a little confused here. The wall that's being proposed built by this group is "on private land" with "privage money". Not only is that legal, but it's needed. The government is turning a blind eye to the border disaster, so the border land owners have decided to take care of themselves. Fact of the matter is, both parties, repubs and dems are close to acting treasonous on this matter. They're both WHORING themselves out to the latino vote. I expect some rather surprizing upsets in upcoming elections.

And there are so many issues that are of greater importance when it comes to our security than a fence along the southern border... our ports, water and food sources, nuclear power plants, chemical plants....

No there isn't. The massive flood of illegal aliens from mexico is the single most important issue this country faces today. And among the reasons why that's a fact includes national security.

 

[archangel]

as a protest rather than actually stopping illegal immigration...The East German wall did not stop fleeing East Germans...however the placement of land mines in no mans land did...so the wall would be an expensive protest and not effective...but I can see the anger to do something!

 

[nosarcasm]

as a protest rather than actually stopping illegal immigration...The East German wall did not stop fleeing East Germans...however the placement of land mines in no mans land did...so the wall would be an expensive protest and not effective...but I can see the anger to do something!

eh, the wall and other fortifications stopped thousands. East Germany used landmines and automatic maschinegun boxes too but a wall is the base defense to stop people from leaving.

In this case its to stop illegals from coming in. Sure some might find ways to climb it but instead of thousands of crosings a day it would be only a hundred.
Still you would need personal to guard the wall.