16 May 2006

Fortress America

US may crack down next on Canadian border

Yesterday, US President Bush said he would order 6,000 National Guard troops deployed along the US border with Mexico, an unprecedented move he said was required to stop an estimated one million illegal immigrants from entering the country each year. While the extraordinary security measures are focused strictly on America's southern border, the White House left open the possibility the measures could be extended to the US border with Canada if concerns about security increase. "The focus of the entire initiative has been the southwest border, but we remain open, if there are governors interested along the northern border," said Fran Townsend, the White House Director of Homeland Security. "There's no, by necessity, limitation. And we remain open and working with those [northern border] governors." The US$1.9-billion proposal would see the National Guard sent to California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas in a support role to aid a US Border Patrol that has been overwhelmed by the unyielding stream of illegal immigrants. Seeking to ease concerns expressed by the Mexican government, Bush stressed the troops would act only in a support role and not be involved in law enforcement along the 3,200-kilometre border with Mexico. The National Guard will operate surveillance systems, analyze intelligence, install security fences and road barriers for up to two years until 6,000 new Border Patrol agents are trained and hire, Bush said.

Just hours before Bush's announcement, Canada's ambassador to the US warned of a backlash from the tougher US security at the Mexican border, saying Washington may now impose overly strong measures at its northern border in a bid to show the US Hispanic population it is being even-handed. "Sometimes these statements can be interpreted to relate to both the Canadian border and the Mexican border, so we've got to be alert to that and ensure there isn't some unforeseen consequence that could give us some difficulties," Michael Wilson said in New York. Speaking to a largely business audience at the Canadian Association of New York, Wilson said seeking agreement on security levels at the Canada-US border will drag on for years and dominate his work as ambassador. He stopped short of saying he thought the US would post National Guards at the Canadian border, but noted some members of Congress had already called for a wall to be built along some parts of the border. "The Canadian view of effectiveness may be different from the US view, so ... the challenges of making the border as effective as it can be is something we're going to be struggling with for some period of time," he said. Already, US legislation states all travellers entering the US by air must have a passport or other form of secure travel document by Jan. 1, 2007. A year after that, the requirement will be extended to everyone entering by land. But Wilson said the two countries may not be able to meet those deadlines in a way that does not adversely affect trade and the movement of people. Deciding on affordable documents and installing technology that can read them still remain to be done.

(National Post 060516)

Enough of the rhetoric! Either do it or shut up! Why don't you just let your paranoia become pathological and ineffectively spend a couple more billion to build the freaking fences? Get the job done and shut up about your entitlements already. The world is an ugly place and if you need to build a big wall to shelter yourself from reality, then so be it. FYI -- It would be like shooting yourself in the foot. All that indentured labour from across the Mexican border is what makes the American 'non-negotiable' way of life possible. Sorry Sara, I needed to rant. Your government is even more insane than ours.

"Again, there are the profiteers of war. Behind the lines, safe from any possible harm, these vultures ply their trades. Mouthing patriotic phrases, wrapped in the flag, uttering fulsome promises to the boys on the way to the front, the makers of powder and uniforms, the millers of wheat and the jobbers in wool trade take the last possible penny of profit for the things upon which the men at the front depend for their very existence. While soldiers suffer and die these men grow rich, converting the hardships and the agonies of the conflict into private bank accounts."

-Scott Nearing, from "Oil and the Germs of War" (1923)

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/

2 comments:

mrs the experience said...

It's ok. You know my views. And the way things are going... I now have a good reason beyond hating my government to convert to Canadianism.

StratoCade said...

Unfortunately the US government is going about immigration control in the absolute wrong way.

We the politicians have this propensity to criminalize behavior. We do this because "tough on crime" polls REALLY well. So by criminalizing behavior, we can crack down on said criminal behavior and be seen as "tough on crime".

Unfortunately this just fills more jails and leads to more social discontent. What we should really be doing is looking at the root of the problem. Address the demand issue: use our considerable economic power to force Mexico to end the corrupt, state-controlled monopolies that dominate its essential commodities "markets" (Petroleum, Concrete, Steel, Publishing, etc.). Only then will prices come down and wages rise in Mexico, thereby making it a better place to live, thereby reducing the DESIRE of people to come to the US.

Don't think reducing demand is a viable strategy? Look at the "War on Drugs". We tried to reduce supply - it hasn't worked.

Markets are inherently efficient. So long as there is demand, someone will step in to fill that demand (perhaps at higher cost - ex: immigrants have to pay more to be smuggled in). Therefore, the only strategy is to look away from the supply and toward demand...

Just my $.02