Posted on 11/09/2007 3:31:11 AM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner
GRANJENO, Texas (AP) - Founded 240 years ago, this sleepy Texas town along the Rio Grande has outlasted the Spanish, then the Mexicans and then the short-lived independent Republic of Texas. But it may not survive the U.S. government's effort to secure the Mexican border with a steel fence.
A map obtained by The Associated Press shows that the double- or triple-layer fence may be built as much as two miles from the river on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande, leaving parts of Granjeno and other nearby communities in a potential no-man's-land between the barrier and the water's edge.
Based on the map and what the residents have been told, the fence could run straight through houses and backyards. Some fear it could also cut farmers off from prime farmland close to the water.
(snip)
"We want to be safe, but it's just that this is not a good plan," said Cecilia Benavides, whose riverfront land in Roma, about 50 miles upriver from Granjeno, was granted to the family by the Spanish in "It gives Mexico the river and everything that's behind that wall. It doesn't make any sense to me."
(snip)
"Are we going to lose prime farmland because they are going to build a structure that's not going to work?" Salinas asked. "You're moving the border, basically two miles. You're giving it up to Mexico, and the U.S.-Mexico treaties say you are not supposed to do that."
Homeland Security documents on a department Web site say that "in some cases, secure gates will be constructed to allow land owners access to their private property near the Rio Grande." But the documents offer few details.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I like the way you think! However there's always the downside. Mexico will intentionally lose the war and we'll not only have to take care of not only the ones here, but also the few who are still there along with all the Central Americans who won't have so far to travel what with all the new and improved living conditions we'll provide.
Screw ‘em
Keep building
Which side are they on?? Mexico’s?
What I see is a bunch of selfish retards who could care less about US sovereignty. Like I said — screw ‘em. I don’t care how they feel. Save it for Oprah
Outside Big Bend National Park, where do you suggest the government find all this free land to build upon?
Gators piranhas and sharks
Well, we could build the fence to the edge of their property on either side and see how long it takes for the illegals freely roaming their land before they beg for the fence to be finished. Shouldn’t take long.
Eminent domain was intended to take property for public use, not public good. That was the major screwup of our senile Supreme Court in the New London, CT ruling. Failing to catch that defect in the New London case opened the door for more political abuse of eminent domain for public good e.g. increased tax revenues. The court has their feet planted in concrete with the doctrine of stare decisis. I don't see that screwup being fixed any time soon.
Apparently they haven’t heard of (actually appropriate uses of!) eminent domain.
I’m surprised they aren’t putting the fence a yard south of the 49th parallel. That way all the illegals would be south of the fence and in the U.S. A win for border control and a win for the amnesty crowd!
Ping!
If you want on, or off this S. Texas/Mexico ping list, please FReepMail me.
The Supreme court just ruled in favor of a couple in Blaine, WA, who were ordered to tear down a wall that they built around their back yard because it intruded three feet into a no-man’s zone between the US and Canada.
My bet is on the property owners in this argument.
I don’t buy the excuse that the wall would potentially alter the course of the river. Let them make it a chain link fence that the water can flow through and around. As a matter of fact the fence should be right in the river, so that people on the US side can have access to the water for cattle and irrigation.
You aren’t from around here, are you? Get away from the towns and some of the land by the Rio Grande is breathtakingly, beautiful. If the engineers don’t thing the edge is a good idea I’m ok with building it back a little around people that don’t want to sell. It gives the BP running room and keeps things natural looking. Just don’t let anyone move into the area.
Thanks for the ping. This thread really bothers me. We finally get these guys to start doing something and then fight among ourselves regarding where to build it. Just conservatives doing congress’ job I guess.
Crappola.
Secure the borders.\Make it also a crime to employ or rent to illegals.
All welfare should be stopped, not just to illegals. But Especially to illegals.
“Screw ‘em
Keep building”
Duncan Hunter was interviewed on Glenn Beck last night. According to him, he has confirmed that only 5 MILES of the double fencing, as required by law, has been built in the past year!! ONLY 5 MILES!!! He indicated that those 5 miles were completed early on and solely for a Bush PHOTO OP and that only 70 some miles of single fencing has been completed since.
He stated outright that this Administration DOES NOT WANT THE BORDER SECURED!!!
Glenn Beck always delivers on his promises. I heard his radio show when he had Duncan Hunter on for 10 minutes and promised him an hour of TV time
Good on Duncan!
No, Instead of building a fence, we should make it impossible for illegals to get food stamps, or free medical care or educations, and prohibit the children of illegals from getting citizenship just for being born here. If we could do that, it would take much of the incentive away and would cut down on illegal immigrating without costing a cent. Indeed it would save money. Our politicians are responsible for illegal immigration. The illegal emigrants are simply taking the offer that our politicians are giving them. They would be stupid not to.
If you want employers and landlords to enforce the law, then deputize them and pay them. It costs money to screen for illegals, especially since virtually all of them have counterfeit documents. as for the rest see #98.
Used to be. The Rio Grande, could in no way be called “breathtakingly, beautiful” in the Rio Grande Vally. It’s muddy and none too clean. It does get nice around Big Bend country and is quite pretty in parts of New Mexico and Colorado. My point wasn’t that it was ugly however, but that landscaping wouldn’t improve it and would be far more expensive than it’s value since hardly anyone would see it. Just leave it alone and native plants will grow back around it in a year or two.
BTW, I also have an adopted buddy. He’s half Golden Retriever and half yellow Lab, as far as I can tell. His name is Jackson.
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.