Posted on 10/12/2004 8:42:25 PM PDT by knak
up on drudge:
WASH TIMES: U.S. security officials are investigating a recent intelligence report that a group of 25 Chechen terrorists illegally entered the United States from Mexico... Members of the group, said to be wearing backpacks, secretly traveled to northern Mexico and crossed into a mountainous part of Arizona, Gertz to report in Pgae One Splash, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE...
Take a look at my posts 14, 208 and 306 wherein I state:
"I did not say that I would vote for Kerry, I have only observed the truth of the matter, if true, Bush DESERVES to lose.
No, of course Kerry would do a worse job on this and on virtually all issues.
So, I guess we agree. I admit that Kerry would be worse and you agree that the Bush administration has been negligent, or worse, it has played politics with our national security at a time of war, although to a degree that would be exceeded by a Kerry administration.
Look, I am not new to this party, nor am I coming in late on this issue riding this headline. Months and months ago I posted that should a terrorist strike the homeland who had slipped across the border it would jeopardize Bush's election.
If you can justify this administration's record on the southern border as anything other than pandering to the Hispanic vote, no one would be more relieved in spirit than I would. Lets hear it."
If you can find a declaration anywhere in over 2000 thousand posts that I intend to vote for Kerry you are a wizard. But I will continue to make fair comment when Bush has it coming. He is my guy, and I will vote for him, but he ain't perfect and he has failed conservatism on the issue of immigration and the baleful consquences of this failure will be visited upon us as a political movement for a generation even if we are lucky enough to avoid an attack.
How dare you shower everyone with common sense and logic so early in the A.M.?
I am really tired of listening to open border/illegal alien/invasion advocates.
Their answer is to open them up because there is nothing we can do about it. Well, simply putting it- thats a load of bs.
At war or not, we need to protect our country and that starts at our borders. What we are doing now equates to putting a band aid on a shot gun wound.. its just not enough.
Bush and Kerry are pro- screw Americans as far as immigration is concerned. Bush is the lesser of the two evils... now.
Heck, we are even building hospitals in Mexico and giving 1 million bucks to help them run it (read on American Patrol) while our hospitals are closing up due to the cost of careing for illegals.
If building a wall or putting the military on the border will help protect us and our families freedoms, then do it. Its well worth the cost considering other likley outcomes.
By Bush's own words to O'Reilly he acknowledges his border enforcement is helping a "little". Not enough, Mr. President.
The threat is REAL and at our front and back doors (and inside). Lets fix it now before more folks die needlessly or, we become a 3rd world country.
If things continue as they are, we will be just that and turning back will be an impossibility.
JMO
You just asked the question that the purveyors of this story do not want asked.
When reports are this detailed, but there are zero arrests, it's because the bulls**t-to-fact ratio is well over unity.
1. I keep telling people that. Hell, I even pull Air Force missile officers out of their silos, and decommission every ship in the fleet, and I still don't get enough manpower to seal the Mexican border--but I get a s**tload of people leaving the service at the end of their terms. (Oh, that's right; we can always activate stop-loss!)
2. OK...let's assume that we have a massive draft, and every physically, mentally, and morally qualified individual is on the Mexican border to stop the terrorists and illegal aliens.
WTF do we do when the terrorists fly into Toronto, sponge off Canada's welfare system for a few years, become Canadian citizens, and then cross the Canada-US border?
Don't forget the white civil defense helmets.
I've asked that question around here.
The "close the border" types either ignore it, or make sarcastic remarks about al-Qaeda not having a navy.
Maybe CA, AZ, NM and TX should open deer season a month early. (With an open season on Chechens). Heck, a little help for the Border patrol is better than none. (If this story is true)
Powder is dry and stores are full.
5.56mm
Thanks for the compliment. As you know, in the book series, things like this happen in large numbers once the balloons go up all of the way. I am anxiously waiting for the printed, trade paperback version of Volume V to show up at the retailers. Should be any day now. Those who have read the eBooks have made very positive comments and that is gratifying. If you haven't read the last volume already, I know you will enjoy it.
Thanks again.
I just feel that a lot of Islamic and other terrorist types are getting through and setting up as sleepers that will all come out some day. If and when that day comes, it will indeed be a rough ride.
The entire border is flat? Oh, the things you learn on Free Republic!
By sinking them into the ground, one level is completely protected against almost all man-portable weapons and the second level (ground level) can be bermed on three sides except for the horizontal observation and firing ports along the east, south and west sides.
You've also made it impossible for the border guards to actually see anything more than a couple hundred yards away along most of the border.
the north side would extend out to include a 3 sided, covered bay where the interceptors will sit at the ready.
...and a smart opponent will simply wait for the interceptors to come out, then ambush those.
OK, lets do the numbers.
OK, let's do those numbers. Your numbers are pure Grade-A bulls**t.
1330 miles from Atlantic to Pacific ='s 1330 stations.
First wrong assumption: the actual length of the US-Mexican border is 2,100 miles. (It is not a straight line. I know, that is a complete shock to you.)
1 station initial construction 165,000
Unfortunately, to keep the costs this low, you'd have to use illegal alien labor. The Davis-Bacon Act requires the use of the "prevailing wage," which the courts have determined to be "whatever the union says it is." Announce this big a program, your construction costs will be more along the lines of $2M apiece.
1 electronics and weapons 40,000
$40K would barely cover the per diem for the electronics installation team. Try again.
3 trucks @ 40,000 each 120,000
Trucks are useless without infrastructure to supply fuel...which you have neglected to include in your cost analysis.
15 staff, 5 shifts at 3 per shift 630,000
630,000/15 = 21,000/year. That is a ridiculously low rate for goobermint labor.
Federal labor cost estimates put a lower-grade GS emloyee's loaded rate at $100,000 per year.
utilities (water, electricity) 12,000
Does not include the cost of amortizing the new electrical and water infrastructure required.
Kindly note that water rights are property. Taking water that is already allocated for beneficial use would require a 5th Amendment taking. Since water rights also have a FUTURE value, you're talking about a very large sack of coin that is completely unaccounted for in your cost model.
Total for one station for the first year (including construction)
$967,000
Go back and redo the figures. Yours are BS.
Total for the 1330 stations required
2,100 stations at one per mile.
$1,288,044,000
and that is including construction cost.
Using illegal alien labor, of course...
After the initial construction,
Back out 90% of 165,000 to = 16,500, or annual maintaining
Again, you're using illegal alien labor rates.
apply the same 10% maintaining to the other front end expenses
and the total annual bill is . . . $870,352,000
Case Closed.
Case Re-Opened. There's only one problem with your idea: it does not work. Illegal aliens penentrate your border security line with annoying regularity. You've reduced the number of illegals crossing via land, but not by very much. The Commandant of the Coast Guard just called--he tells you that illegal aliens are being smuggled into California, Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi by boat in large numbers. The Coast Guard couldn't keep up with the minimal amounts of maritime immigrant smuggling before your plan went into effect--they're completely overwhelmed now.
Oh, and your effort to attack this via "money laundering" statutes? Well, those statutes allow for seizures. The IRS grades its agents on how much cash they seize. And the illegals don't have enough money to be worth seizing. Instead, the IRS is using that big manpower plus-up to go after the "underground economy," and they're mostly targeting American citizens. They get a few high-profile illegal immigrants--but that's just for show.
Meanwhile, you just got a phone call from the Canadians. That list of suspected terrorists you sent them? Well, about 20% were in Canada, drawing generous welfare benefits. Key word: were. When the Canadian authorities tried to round them up, the terrorists were gone. Presumably, they crossed the (completely unguarded) US-Canadian border. Lotsa luck, dude.
Bottom line: your proposal costs more than you wish, accomplishes less than you wish, does not accomplish the task by which you sold it to Congress, has lots of unintended negative consequences, and now you're going to go back with another hare-brained, unworkable idea and ask for lots of public money.
In short, you're a liberal Democrat...
A severe attack will make it obvious that those in positions of authority are placing their own welfare over the common good. If there is another severe attack then the citizens must act and do what needs to be done.
Still trying for a extreme liberal government to trigger a revolt that you libertarians can use to fill the vacuum and take over, eh?
Oh yes he can!
Crossing the Mexican border illegally gives you the highest chance of getting caught. One can safely assume that real terrorists will seek to minimize their chances of getting caught during infiltration.
Landing by whaleboat on a deserted beach is much easier. Crossing from Canada is much easier. (And the Canucks will let you mooch off their welfare system for quite a few years--all you have to do is say "I'm (name not in Canadian terrorist database) and I'm a refugee." Hell, they'll put you on the fast track to Canadian citizenship.)
BTW, the last method makes you legal, and allows you unlimited access to the United States. It's not even a matter of overstaying a tourist visa. It is the safest means of infiltrating the US.
If you want to shut off illegal immigration from Mexico, say so honestly, and be prepared to justify the costs based solely on the benefits of shutting off illegal immigration from Mexico. It will not stop one single terrorist from entering this country. Selling it as an "anti-terrorism" measure will last until thwe terrorists outsmart you...and then you will have one hell of a credibility problem.
Time to smell the coffee, folks. Mexico is not our friend. It is a launching point for terrorist attacks. If you have money, you may buy anything in Mexico.
And if Kerry wins the election, things will get so bad here that illegal aliens will start sneaking back across the border into Mexico.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.