The ink was hardly dry on President Bush's signature on an immigration bill before it appeared that Washington's bipartisan effort to foil the 80-90% of Americans who demand border security is still going full-steam ahead.
The president signed a bill authorizing start-up funding for a 700-mile fence along our southern border. Actually, our border with Mexico is 2,000 miles long, but the thinking was — well, this is better than nothing. It's a step in the right direction.
Hold the phone on that. Don't uncork the champagne bottles. The bourgeoisie may have been snookered again.
The fine print in the bill (or so says The Washington Post) gives the government an escape hatch to take the money supposedly earmarked for a border fence and spend it instead on other projects, such as roads, or to allow the Department of Homeland Security the option of its preferred "virtual fence." Also, Indian tribes, members of Congress, governors, and local leaders would have a say as to "exact placement" of the fence.
Moreover, as Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) has noted, "It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it."
Like most legislative weasel words and monkey wrenches that you're not supposed to know about, the contradictory wording of the bill was inserted in the dark of night while you slept. It was hammered out in the final pre-election session of Congress as a concession to the open borders crowd.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), a solid supporter of meaningful border protection, disputes the Post interpretation. He says the bill plainly says that the fence "shall" be built. It is not an option, he adds, regardless of other wording in the document. You can bet the lawyers are licking their chops on that one. The very fact that the legislation's meaning is in doubt reflects strong determination by many politicians that no real border security will ever happen, period.
Why?
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/vernon/061009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wes Vernon is a Washington-based writer and veteran broadcast journalist.
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on October 11, 2006]
Note: http://www.renewamerica...

U.S. author? Thanks.
I don't like having to think like an American to understand what the
story is saying.
---
Diogenes said:
"I am Diogenes the Dog. I nuzzle the kind, bark at the greedy and bite scoundrels."
To nitpick about authorship detracts from the import of the proposed NAU.
The whole idea of presenting articles here is to draw attention to issues that do and will impact Canadians. The authorship is irrelevant.
---
Diogenes said:
"I am Diogenes the Dog. I nuzzle the kind, bark at the greedy and bite scoundrels."
The other purpose of globalization is "specialization", which means the creation of incompetence, which would force people into boxes and total reliance on the system for survival, one of the first and most important steps of "same thinking". This is what the superhighway is supposed to accomplish.
As one of my American rancher friends put it: "In this country all ranchers are suspects, because we're some of the last people even remotely independent".
I wonder what they'd do to the American hero who shouted: "Give me freedom, or give me death!" So now they and, also we, got "free trade" and collectivization under the guise and phoney paradigm of "free enterprise"
Ed Deak.