It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Bush to Bypass Laws to Build Fence

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Bush to Bypass Laws to Build Fence


www.time.com

Invoking the legal waivers — which Congress authorized — would cut through bureaucratic red tape and sidestep environmental laws that currently stand in the way of the Homeland Security Department building 267 miles of fencing in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, according to officials familiar with the plan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the waivers had not yet been announced.

The move would be the biggest use of legal waivers since the administration started building the fence. Previously, the department has used its waiver authority for two portions of fence in Arizona and one portion in San Diego.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread231347/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread212434/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread231509/pg1




posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
IMHO - it's about damn time. Though I find myself agreeing with less and less of our CIC decisions, this has already received congressional approval and is about 8 years plus late in occuring.

Though I feel for the property owners that will be adversly affected, they had to know that owning property on an international border would be tenuous at best.

www.time.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
And for the environmentally concerned - the native fauna will not be the only critters restricted from swimming the border to breed.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Believe it or not, this actually concerns me. I have maintained for quite some time now that the reason for the reluctance on building the border fence was that Mexico (one of our largest oil suppliers) was holding their oil over our head in secret in order to keep the border open. Nothing else has made sense. I wonder what has changed now?

It's also strange that, about the same time as this, there is a pretty good upturn in the market, despite somber news. Could there be a tie here? Something the big guys know that we don't?

I'll be listening to the news very carefully the next few days. Something is bound to show up with at least a partial answer. Great find!

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


What has changed now? Read the article and it explains why the Bush administration did this. Cutting through red tape and overlooking environmental concerns. Not about being blackmailed by Mexico.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Well wouldn't this go against a North American Union? I mean putting up a fence when they want to merge?

[edit on 1-4-2008 by Optix]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Here is a different news source with a different perspective:www.guardian.co.uk...

One of the more absurd impacts of the proposed fence would have divided the campus at the University of Texas Brownsville. A lawsuit brought by the university against the government was settled out of court last month.

The border fence project has run into innumerable problems. The much-vaunted "virtual fence" - a high-tech alternative to the wire and concrete structures being built along the border that promises to alleviate many of the environmental concerns, was recently delayed amid technical problems and rising costs. Officials admitted in February that the first 100-mile stretch of the virtual fence would not be completed until the end of 2011, instead of its original deadline of the end of 2008. Boeing, the contractor chosen to build the virtual fence, has been paid more than $85m.

The DHS initially estimated that it would spend a total of $7.6bn constructing the 670-mile border fence.


I wonder how many single buid contractors are going to be involved and where their ties are?



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Wasn't the Berlin Wall also built to keep people "out?"



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 

Yes, yes it was... now I'm really scared.

Has the US Government given up on 'fixing' the economy? Or is something even worse in the works?

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
It was also a failed attempt to keep people IN.

This will be another cluster fork of federal proportions with enough boondoggle to go around for everyone.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
Wasn't the Berlin Wall also built to keep people "out?"


Uh... not exactly, but it was created as a result of Germany being occupied by four different countries, and having the country splt into East and West. The Soviets built a wall to have people stop fleeing to West Germany since it was depleting the skilled communist labor force and because of the economic implications regarding a dual currency.

The US is building a wall not to because our skilled labor force is fleeing to Mexico, but because Mexico's unskilled and illegal labor force is fleeing to the U.S getting free education, and using our tax dollars like there is no tomorrow.

Using the Berlin wall as a protest in this situation is ludicrous. You may as well say the same thing about your backyard fence being designed to keep people "out" while at the same time keeping your dogs "in."

Now, if it was Mexico who was building the wall to keep people out of the US, then it might be applicable. They'd have to be communist and the US would have to be spinning repressive communist propaganda. Of course, Mexico receives a good amount of remittances that East Germany wasn't able to, so we shouldn't count on a Mexican Wall.



It was also a failed attempt to keep people IN.


It was not a failed attempt. It was actually very successful. Over a period of nearly 30 years after it was created, only a few people were able to get over - something of a few thousand at most - and the rest were shot dead or imprisoned. This is compared to the nearly 3 million that escaped to West Germany before it was built, so it was very successful at keeping people in.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Blatant thread bump: I'll quote myself from a different threadwww.abovetopsecret.com...'


Trying to think outside the box here, an idea that was expressed to me a few years ago:

Dig a 300 meter wide moat along the US/Mexican border.

Put the removed landfill in New Orleans to raise it above sea level.

Relocate @ half the alligator population in Fl and LA to the moat.

Address multiple issues.


If we can complete the Panama Canal, Aswan Dam, et.al.; you'd think we could effectively address making our own borders a little less porous.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr. Ree

Agreed - for the period of time stated.

Then it failed.

A wall is not the whole answer IMHO. We must also address the multiple issues that motivate them to come here illegally by the millions.
 



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 



No. The Berlin Wall was built to keep people from fleeing East Berlin, which they were doing before the wall was built and even with the wall, people still tried to escape.


The wall separated East Berlin and West Berlin for 28 years, from the day construction began on August 13, 1961 until it was dismantled in 1989. During this period at least 133 people were confirmed killed trying to cross the Wall into West Berlin, according to official figures.[1] However, a prominent victims' group claims that more than 200 people had been killed trying to flee from East to West Berlin.[2] The Soviet government gave explicit orders to shoot and kill attempted defectors. The East German government had always denied having such a policy.[3]

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Imho that open border is and was always intended be be an excuse, What I mean is I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if something or somethings have come across it and are now in place ready to go, and mean while the Government comes to the rescue acting as its ifs working hard to close it up and "protect" us...

And thus when what came through that border goes off, they have a nice little excuse for everything including the retaliation that will follow, Thus justifying even more...



[edit on 1-4-2008 by C0le]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by C0le
 
I understand what you are saying.

I was indirectly involved in identifying 53,000 "somethings" that came through that border about 4 years ago.

If retaliation is the goal, that has been justified for about 7 years at least. The damage is more insidious than media sensations.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Im glad there going to start buildimg the wall they promised. There reason behind saying its time to get it done. Read this post I made a few days ago. www.abovetopsecret.com...
Mexico has 2000 troops just across the border from Texas in Juarez fighting drug cartels. And there is a small war going on there. So its time to build a wall befor you get a war crossing our border and americans getting involed.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Sorry double post for some reason.


[edit on 1-4-2008 by JBA2848]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   
whats the "virtual fence"? Is it like lazers? or do you have to wear a vr helmet to see it?
"I can't believe it's not fence"-fabio



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by kerontehe
 


The only thing Bush has done in a long time that I agree with. Though some Mexicans I used to work with laughed at the idea. They told me us Gringos where stupid, for thinking they where stupid.. because they didn't cross the desert. They took a bus.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join