|
|
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
In 2006, Congress passed the Secure Fence Act, mandating 700 miles of fencing along the Texas and California border. Chertoff, citing budget shortages, cut the fence to 370 miles. But the fence’s construction is political more than strategic.
The project is being implemented by Secure Border Initiative's SBInet, a private contract of Boeing, Melissa Del Bosque in the Texas Observer reports.
In a 2007 hearing Congressional Henry Waxman said, “virtually every detail is being outsourced from the government to private contractors. The government is relying on private contractors to design the programs, build them, and even conduct oversight over them.”
Claiming eminent domain, the fence’s construction is going through many “landowners of modest means’” property while stopping at property of the wealthy.
The fence is planned to go through the property of Brownsville resident Eloisa Tamez, 72, while stopping at a popular golf course resort then resuming on the other side of the resort.
Another example:
“The fence is going to go through my home and my son’s home, but it’s going to stop right at the edge of my property, and on the other side is 6,000 acres that belongs to a wealthy billionaire from Dallas.”
When the Observer called Homeland Security to see how they are deciding to implement the fence, “a weary voice directed queries to Michael Friel,” following an e-mail: “Got your message. Working on answers…” There was no follow up.
Daniel Garz, 76, is having his house demolished for the fence, but it stops at a neighbor’s property who "has political connections to the White House,” and, again, resumes on the other side.
“I am an old man. I have colon cancer, and I am 76 years old,” Garza told the Observer. “All I do is worry about whether they will take my home. My wife keeps asking me, ‘What are we going to do?’”

Democracy Now! has great coverage of this story. Find it here: Link
The fact that they are cherrypicking whose property gets trespassed and whose doesn't is equally outrageous. What in the world gives them the right to do this?
It’s a hard policy because sometimes things like road expansion are necessary, but you never want to be the one who has to give up their land. This situation is absolutely ridiculous though.
Link
O_o
It sounds to me as though Boeing will be making quite a profit on the backs of the people, (it is our taxes paying for it, isn't it?), and the US government wins the propaganda battle, conditioning the US population to think themselves "secure" from all those illegal aliens. Yet, it causes an economic problem if we don't allow these same illegal aliens we so desperately need every harvest season through. Openings must be left available, so why not let those in the good ol' boys club keep their land and do the economy a favor in the mean time. It's a perfect plan :-)
Maybe the golf course could be turned into a "hunting ground" for the Minute Men. I can envision the $$$ pouring in. (For those of you who have taken the last comment seriously, please, I only used it for comic relief while in a dark mood :-)
Can somebody remind me what fascism is?