It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Securing the Texas/Mexico border begins

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 08:05 PM

originally posted by: buster2010
It's about time Perry got off his lazy ass and remembered he was Governor and it was in his authority to do this. He should have tried to solve this like he did with the drought gather a bunch of people together and pray for the border to close itself.

Cut him some slack...
If you'd done as poorly as he did in the 2012 election campaign - and gone into the kind of depression he suffered after dropping might take you a while to regain your balance (if that word can actually be applied to this situation), too.

edit on 6/19/2014 by WanDash because: numbers

edit on 6/19/2014 by WanDash because: blunders

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:26 AM

originally posted by: starfoxxx

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: stutteringp0et

That's excellent news, glad to see he's doing this. Maybe he should mobilize the National Guard while he's at it. I believe that's within his power as well.

he'd have to issue a state of emergency of just cause.. which can be overturned by the feds at any time.

Id say its a state of emergency hell osama bin laden could of crossed the border and no one would be of the wiser.

Not up to us and i dont see the dream act loving admin to go with it..

If you are referring to mobilizing Texas guard units unless they are active duty they fall under state command, not federal. The Texas guard's Commander in Chief is the Governor of the State of Texas and the adjutant general. The federal governments only remedy would be to declare Texas in a state of insurrection / rebellion in order to nationalize their guard units.

The governor of Louisiana, during hurricane Katrina, refused to place her units under federal command. 2 separate but coordinated chain of command existed.
edit on 20-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:35 PM
Here is the deal: the border is what it is because of us.

In the 80's there really weren't a lot of cartels and such. Sure, you had folks down further south working the coke industry. But Mexico's powerful cartels came about due to 1 thing: we armed one of the cartels to the teeth. From there all other splits that have happened have resulted in a militarized cartel coming to life.

We pick the one we want to back, and we allow it to happen. Fast/furious was about us arming our favorite cartel: the Sinaloa's. We give them a free pass to bring their product into the US, we provide training and guns to help them murder their fellow Mexicans. Then, when the others like the Zeta's push back, we see it on the news as dozens of beheaded Mexicans show up in the most public of places.

If you don't like the violence in Mexico, then blame your government. This has nothing to do with Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Reagan. I would suspect that you could actually blame Bush, Sr, as he was rather fond of selling guns to Central America. We don't arrest Sinaloa leaders, and we don't touch their inventory.

DC. That is where the worlds worst terrorist live. And it isn't the ones we elected that I am referring to. The elected ones are just the public facing punks for intelligence and finance.

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 07:17 PM
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

When this administration advertises in Mexico in terms of food stamps and what not Obama is partially to blame.
Dems preserve US-Mexico food stamp 'partnership,' while USDA prepares for meat inspector furloughs

Salmonella outbreaks. E. coli outbreaks. Millions of dollars in economic losses.

These are among the scenarios the Obama administration warned about last month as it claimed the sequester would force the U.S. Department of Agriculture to furlough meat inspectors.

But while the administration prepares to take that step, it continues to pursue a "partnership" with the Mexican government to "raise awareness" about food stamps among immigrants from that country. When a top Senate Republican proposed cutting off funds for that program last week -- in the form of an amendment to a budget resolution -- Democrats on the Budget Committee shot it down.
Click link for more...

* - When this administration refuses to enforce immigration laws, resulting in a massive influx, he is partially to blame.

* - When we can send our military all over the world yet refuse to use them on the Southern border to curb illegal immigration Obama is partially to blame.

* - When Obamacare sets a different standard between citizens and illegal immigrants Obama is partially to blame.

* - When a former Marine made a wrong turn and ended up crossing into Mexico with a firearm he was arrested while at the same time we have incident after incident of Mexican police and military, armed, accidentally crossing into the US and get sent back Obama is partially to blame.

* - When illegal immigrants get better benefits / access to federal programs than what is available for US citizens Obama is partially to blame.

* - When this administration secretly changes the way deportations are tracked, using administrative deportations (people caught at the border and immediately turned back over) in an effort to inflate deportation numbers, Obama is partially to blame.

* - When this administration uses border patrol to act as au pairs Obama is partially to blame.

* - When Obama changes border patrol deportation criteria, telling those who have not broken the law that they can stay for up to 2 years, he is partially to blame for the influx.

Everything this administration has done with regards to Mexico has in fact created the disaster we have now.

So with all due respect Obama is partially to blame. No fear though since Democrats will blame Bush / Republicans.

edit on 20-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 08:42 PM
a reply to: Xcathdra

If Canada was advertising in the US, how many children would show up with only a note pinned to their shirt?

Our government made Mexico a living hell. I know a former medic that was doing operations in Mexico and Costa Rica back in the 90's, guarding crops for the cartel. Fire fights happened occasionally with a rival cartel.

It all started with the militarization of the drug trade. We can blame the sitting president for the handling of the problem du jour....but the entire issue starts with the US making drugs illegal, then picking which cartel they would back after instigating the bloody war we see going on now.

We won't even talk about the prison profits, and the impetus for the rising police state we see, that the drug war is responsible for. Obviously, "playing both sides" is a common cash raising tactic.

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 08:56 PM
we have people who are absolutely desperate to get away from the mess we created in their country. and our reponse as a nation is "Good." when this is announced.

These people aren't "illegal immigrants". They are "refugees".
edit on 6/20/2014 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 10:53 PM
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree with what you just stated however my point was directed solely at the comment about this having nothing to do with Obama.

What irks me like no other is the excuse of which President or Party was in control when this or that happened. People very much hated Bush when he was in office and the end result was the election of Obama. I know what Bush did and the results and I don't need Obama or the Democrats to constantly blame him for the situation. The purpose of electing people to replace those who did not cut it is to have new blood so they can tackle the problems and find resolutions to them.

When a CEO runs a company into the ground the board fires the CEO and hires a new one. How long will that new CEO be around if all he says is his predecessor is responsible for the mess. We know this because they fired the predecessor and hired a new one to fix the problems.

In the case of Democrats not only did they hire a new CEO, and not only are they allowing him to constantly blame everyone else, the "board" itself is actively undermining their mandate by pointing out the problem while doing nothing to fix it.

For example border security -
In an effort to force a change in immigration issues Obama and his administration are doing everything they can to avoid enforcing laws while actively recruiting illegal immigrants with the promises of government handout to come into the US.

Maybe you can answer this question -
If a person takes an active role in order to bring illegal immigrants into the United states they are labeled a coyote and are arrested / charged.

How is what Obama / Democrats are doing not the same as a coyote?

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 10:56 PM

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
we have people who are absolutely desperate to get away from the mess we created in their country. and our reponse as a nation is "Good." when this is announced.

The United States is not completely responsible for the situation in Mexico.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
These people aren't "illegal immigrants". They are "refugees".

Illegal Immigrants = Undocumented immigrants = undocumented Democrats.

No they are all not refugees.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in