POLITICS - Border fences and uncontrolled illegal aliens

[45-70-]

As to the welfare/SS disability checks issue, and making our own citizens get a job, I think that this should apply equally to government and civil service retirees, congressional pensions and all other categories of entitlement that allow people who don't work to draw funds from the public treasury, i.e., my wallet.

Fwiedner, you and I have disagreed on this in the past. Instead of fighting about it this time explain to my how you would do it. First off, I agree about the congress stuff. There is no way they should be able to serve one term and draw full salary for life as retirement. That is out right theft! But what about the military people who serve 20 plus years honorably? They shouldnt be entitled to anything? If thats the case, good luck getting an all volunteer force, we'll have to go to a draft. I think its the goal of most people to work towards some form of retirement.

[FWiedner]

As to the welfare/SS disability checks issue, and making our own citizens get a job, I think that this should apply equally to government and civil service retirees, congressional pensions and all other categories of entitlement that allow people who don't work to draw funds from the public treasury, i.e., my wallet.

Fwiedner, you and I have disagreed on this in the past. Instead of fighting about it this time explain to my how you would do it. First off, I agree about the congress stuff. There is no way they should be able to serve one term and draw full salary for life as retirement. That is out right theft! But what about the military people who serve 20 plus years honorably? They shouldnt be entitled to anything? If thats the case, good luck getting an all volunteer force, we'll have to go to a draft. I think its the goal of most people to work towards some form of retirement.

Simply stated, I think that we should work toward preventing anyone from being able to retire and live out their lives on public money.

It's my opinion that anyone who draws money from the public treasury should be required to provide a current service.

Those folks who serve should be required to plan, scrimp, and save for their retirement just like everyone else does.

There are exceptions to my ideal, and those involve persons who through no fault of their own, have incapacitating health issues as a result of their service, and even that should be limited in capacity on a case by case basis.

If military pay were brought up to scale, this could be easily accomplished, and the integrity of the volunteer force would not be compromised. I believe that the elimination of welfare and pension entitlements and a few foreign aid commitments could easily fund this effort.

[Caco]

So what is the actual length of the border? Was under the impression of 800 miles give er take. At 45 billion thats about 5.5 mil per mile
How many miles are out in the range land and how many miles approx of city town or inhabited area.
Think a combination of fence in the inhabited area and electronic survailance in the open would be doable and not be a hassel for most ranchers. A road would have to be built where non exists. Along with this has to be the desire to actually stop the flow and give athorities authority. Some available air survailance and back up would be neccessary-They use air to pick you up for speeding, so not a new Idea. The employment restrictions would be part of it. Ya just have to want to stop the flow and deal with the porblems-thats not the case now. They are literally being invited
Poor old dead horse
Other wise learn spanish so you know what your boss is telling you what to do and your congressman is saying.
The other part is liberals WILL BE GIVING VOTING RIGHTS TO INHABITANTS CITIZEN OR NOT. That should pretty much make the constitution irrelevant
Any ideas what the new flag will look like
Dave

[ScottT]

This burns me up: Think about being a Texas landowner, maybe that ranch has been in your family for generations. Your ranch borders the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo and your cows get their water from the river.

Now, folks who don't understand ranching or care about your rights to the water are going to build a fence across your land that your cows cannot cross.

This is not a good thing.

[Caco]

This burns me up: Think about being a Texas landowner, maybe that ranch has been in your family for generations. Your ranch borders the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo and your cows get their water from the river.

Now, folks who don't understand ranching or care about your rights to the water are going to build a fence across your land that your cows cannot cross.

This is not a good thing.

Read my post again
"Think a combination of fence in the inhabited area and electronic survailance in the open would be doable and not be a hassel for most ranchers"

Understand cattle and water rights, have two creeks and a river with I or neighbors having cattle on one or both sides. Thats were electronic survailance with response both from ground and air if neccessary.
Know of a farm that had livestock where the county condemened land for a route through for a paved road that cut the building sight corner off from the rest. That type of thing happens and is compensated. Don't think that would have to happen with electronic survailance and a two lane wide access road that was not fenced. In communities and inhabited areas aditional measures would have to be incorperated so as to slow the intruder enough to intercept before blending in.
Did read an article about a texas rancher having to build cattle stopping vehicle crossings to facilatate smuglers and crossing illegals so that they wouldn't keep cutting his fence when crossing his land. So there are pluses for land owners.
Poor old dead horse
Dave

[FWiedner]

Halto! Levante las manos! Mueva y muérase!

[ScottT]

This burns me up: Think about being a Texas landowner, maybe that ranch has been in your family for generations. Your ranch borders the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo and your cows get their water from the river.

Now, folks who don't understand ranching or care about your rights to the water are going to build a fence across your land that your cows cannot cross.

This is not a good thing.

Read my post again
"Think a combination of fence in the inhabited area and electronic survailance in the open would be doable and not be a hassel for most ranchers"

Understand cattle and water rights, have two creeks and a river with I or neighbors having cattle on one or both sides. Thats were electronic survailance with response both from ground and air if neccessary.
Know of a farm that had livestock where the county condemened land for a route through for a paved road that cut the building sight corner off from the rest. That type of thing happens and is compensated. Don't think that would have to happen with electronic survailance and a two lane wide access road that was not fenced. In communities and inhabited areas aditional measures would have to be incorperated so as to slow the intruder enough to intercept before blending in.
Did read an article about a texas rancher having to build cattle stopping vehicle crossings to facilatate smuglers and crossing illegals so that they wouldn't keep cutting his fence when crossing his land. So there are pluses for land owners.
Poor old dead horse
Dave

Dave, I frankly was not referring to your post. I was referring to what is going to happen to landowners along the Rio Grande.

[Caco]

Dave, I frankly was not referring to your post. I was referring to what is going to happen to landowners along the Rio Grande.


Scott part of my post dealt with land owners and the point is it doesn't have to be bad and in some instances would be good. Would you like your fences being cut and land crossed?
Dave

[ScottT]

That must be why border ranchers are calling me. They want me to help get the fence up faster?

I don't think so.

[J Miller]

So ................ it looks as if this fence or wall is like gun control laws. It won't solve the problem it's supposed to solve, and the only people who will be inconvenienced will be those who never caused a problem in the first place.


If I ever supported this fence idea I apologize to everyone.

Joe

[engravertom]

I learned some things on this thread, Thanks!

I also learned that I may be somewhat underpaid!!!

I occasionally make more than $300 per day when I work for myself.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....................................


Tom

[Caco]

That must be why border ranchers are calling me. They want me to help get the fence up faster?

I don't think so.

Control would be a better term with tehnology. And am not surprised how any landowner including myself would react with anyone putting fences to mess with my operation. They are not happy with the-is the term cyotte's- cutting fences throwing out trash and all forms of trashing there land and being a security concern. Maybe because they are under the impression of a high security livestock controling fence their rightful sense of self determination is put at risk.
I AM TALKING ABOUT HIGH TECHNOLOGY WATER SONAR,- REGULAR SURVAILANCE TECHNOLOGY AND ANY NIGHTIME SURVALIANCE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE BACKED BY RESPONSE OF SHOOTING TOUGH *** PERSONAL WITH ATHORITY. WHAT COULD BE TERMED A REAL HIGH TECH AND SERIOUS EFFORT
Don't use a getting srewed scare approach to incite landowners that are already in a hassel situation. They need to look at it as it is-keeping trouble out.
Cost? Well--consider the evolution of internet and cell phone survice costs. If it will sell it will be competitivly marketed. 5 an a half mil a mile gives ya starting room
Am amazed but not familiar with the philosopy of no use trying it can't be done, won't due any good, and we all know better even if we never tried attitudes.
Close yer eyes, It'l look better
Dave

[FWiedner]

Screw tech. Boots on the ground. We need live bodies defending the border.

Military bodies.

[mescalero1]

FWiedner,
Being familiar with the area, I think you have hit on the solution.
There are canyons that go right to the river, a quick dash across the river and into another canyon on the other side.
Couple minutes, maximum exposure.
I think you need people to counter that

[Blaine]

Screw tech. Boots on the ground. We need live bodies defending the border.

Military bodies.

Now...since you're a RP fan, you know that's not constitutional

[FWiedner]

Screw tech. Boots on the ground. We need live bodies defending the border.

Military bodies.

Now...since you're a RP fan, you know that's not constitutional

Lost me on that one.

Federal troops, enforcing federal law, and defending the border against foreign invaders. Posse Comitatus has been suspended by the CIC, has it not?

[Peter M. Eick]

Not an expert here, but I am pretty sure it is against federal law to use soldiers to defend the border on state lands.

That is what I have been told several times here in Texas as to why the Army cannot protect the border. The national guard can, but the army, navy and marines cannot.

Someone who knows the law, please let us know if this is just political BS or is it really the truth.


My two cents is working in the oil field I have seen my crews go from completely english speaking to completely spanish speaking in a decade. The contractor's we hire swear they are legal, but who knows. I feel the only way to stop the problem is jail the employers and make a way for guys like me to check the status of our employees and subs directly.

As much as it pains me to say this, I think a national ID card with some basic biometrics and an online query check system is the only way to clean the problem out. The only way to get them to leave is to remove the incentive to stay. That means take away the jobs and cut the bennies.

[ScottT]

That must be why border ranchers are calling me. They want me to help get the fence up faster?

I don't think so.

Control would be a better term with tehnology. And am not surprised how any landowner including myself would react with anyone putting fences to mess with my operation. They are not happy with the-is the term cyotte's- cutting fences throwing out trash and all forms of trashing there land and being a security concern. Maybe because they are under the impression of a high security livestock controling fence their rightful sense of self determination is put at risk.
I AM TALKING ABOUT HIGH TECHNOLOGY WATER SONAR,- REGULAR SURVAILANCE TECHNOLOGY AND ANY NIGHTIME SURVALIANCE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE BACKED BY RESPONSE OF SHOOTING TOUGH *** PERSONAL WITH ATHORITY. WHAT COULD BE TERMED A REAL HIGH TECH AND SERIOUS EFFORT
Don't use a getting srewed scare approach to incite landowners that are already in a hassel situation. They need to look at it as it is-keeping trouble out.
Cost? Well--consider the evolution of internet and cell phone survice costs. If it will sell it will be competitivly marketed. 5 an a half mil a mile gives ya starting room
Am amazed but not familiar with the philosopy of no use trying it can't be done, won't due any good, and we all know better even if we never tried attitudes.
Close yer eyes, It'l look better
Dave

Dave, let's face it. We just are not going to shoot people trying to enter this country illegally. That is just not gonna happen.

[Old Time Hunter]

Scott T why are we not able to defend our borders with mortal force from invaders?

[donw]

i beleive we ought to tell mexico to "pound sand" we have a right, morally and LEGALLY to protect our borders, as do they; as does every country on the face of the planet. after all...they (the mexican border guards) shoot and kill those who try to enter mexico ILLEGALLY, do they not? our congress has failed miserably FOR YEARS in protecting our borders as dictated by law.

since 1996, there has been 263 documented incursions into the united states by ARMED mexican troops that were in support of smugglers.

it's not the "hard working" illegal that's so much the concern, it's the potiential of those coming in that are from trained terrorist orginizations that's alarming (not to mention the criminal element that are caputured with alarming regularity)

statistics are becoming more clear now about the numbers of CRIMINAL illegal immigrants who are entering.

i know of no one (american citizens and resident, that is) who is opposed to LEGAL immigration to our country.

[SFRanger7GP]

FYI:

TITLE 6 CHAPTER 1 SUBCHAPTER VIII Part H Sec. 466. Congress finds the following:

Section 1385 of title 18 (commonly known as the Posse Comitatus Act) prohibits the use of the Armed Forces as a Posse comitatus to execute the laws except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.
Enacted in 1878, the Posse Comitatus Act was expressly intended to prevent United States Marshals, on their own initiative, from calling on the Army for assistance in enforcing federal law.
Some believe the Posse Comitatus Act has served the nation well in limiting the use of the armed forces to enforce the law. Whether this is a good thing or not is subject to debate.
The Posse Comitatus Act was not intended to be a complete barrier to the use of the armed forces for a range of domestic purposes, including law enforcement functions, when the use of the Armed Forces is authorized by Act of Congress or the President determines that the use of the armed forces is required to fulfill the President's obligations under the Constitution provide for the common defense or to respond promptly to insurrection or other serious emergency.
Existing laws, including Title 10, Chapter 15 (commonly known as The Insurrection Act), and The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Title 42, Chapter 68), grant the President broad powers that may be invoked in the event of domestic emergencies, including an attack against the Nation using weapons of mass destruction, and these laws specifically authorize the President to use the Armed Forces to help restore public order.
The Posse Comitatus Act could be replaced, nullified, or modified by a simple act of Congress.
In early 2006, the 109th Congress passed a controversial bill that grants the President the right to commandeer federal or state National Guard Troops and use them inside the United States. This bill, entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), contains a provision (Section 1076) that allows the President to

“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...â€

[Charles]

"after all...they (the mexican border guards) shoot and kill those who try to enter mexico ILLEGALLY, do they not? our congress has failed miserably FOR YEARS in protecting our borders as dictated by law. "

For the record, Mexico does not shoot and kill those who try to enter Mexic illegally? Sheer and utter nonsense!

[Old Time Hunter]

They would not be deployed to enforce domestic/federal law, but to defend our borders from invasion. The Posse Comitatus Act would not come into play. Whereas it should have come into play at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

[Charles]

Huhh! At Ruby Ridge there was the U.S. Marshals Service and the FBI. At Waco it was the BATF and the FBI. No military or National Guard in either of those messes.

The United States Immigration Laws are Federal Laws involved in the issue and not an invasion. What we have is a widespread breaking of the immigation laws. Calling this an invasion does not make it an invasion.

You are free to call a chicken a goose, but it doesn't make it a goose. It is still just a chicken.

Everybody is free to hold what ever opinion they wish on the matter, but jeeze boys, you need to get your facts straight. An intelligent discssion is impossible if folks make up facts as they go. I thought it was only politiclans who did that?

[Old Time Hunter]

Charles, used Waco and Ruby Ridge as examples where the Posse Comatitus Act comes into play. Will disagree with you regarding what is considered an invasion or not though. When those five or six German's infiltrated, I believe in Long Island, way back when, and they were caught, the courts deemed that they "invaded" our sovereign nation. To me I see no difference in what they did, as to what five or six Mexicans sneaking do. I am not against LEGAL immigration, but illegal....mortal defense!

[ScottT]

Scott T why are we not able to defend our borders with mortal force from invaders?

OTH,

Because we have decided that the way to enforce our borders is by using policemen.

Policemen cannot be used to kill folks unless their lives or the lives of third persons are in immenent danger. If they have to kill someone in the line of duty to protect themselves or others, we sanction that killing and provide both criminal and civil protections for them.

That is why we won't kill people who cross our borders illegally.

[donw]

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

[2 dogs]

I have sat back and read this thread for days now. Scott and Charles have been right on. But then again, they are from South Texas and have a pretty good handle on things.

A wall is just wrong. For whatever reason. Smacks of Communism to me. Besides, a pretty good body of water separates Florida from Cuba and we still see illegal entry into the US from Cuba....what makes you think they wont just go over or under or around any wall? Boots on the ground? Maybe so, but are you prepared to pay 29.95 for a quart of orange juice? 6.99 for a tomato? There wont be any winners on the economic issues.

The situation is considerably more involved than what is represented on the nightly news.

[Leverdude]

"after all...they (the mexican border guards) shoot and kill those who try to enter mexico ILLEGALLY, do they not? our congress has failed miserably FOR YEARS in protecting our borders as dictated by law. "

For the record, Mexico does not shoot and kill those who try to enter Mexic illegally? Sheer and utter nonsense!

So, if me an 100 other gringos jumped the border & ran from the Mexican authorities they'd simply let us go?
The Mexicans I'v spoke to say its best to pay their police not run. I'm not saying their murderous, tho some say that. But I'd bet your in greater danger going there than they are coming here.

If a fence wont work maybe cutting all diplomatic ties to Mexico until they do something will.

If prices rise so be it. Things cost what they cost, thats how it is.

Funny to hear how we use police to deal with illegal immigration tho. Cops see a drug deal go down & they stop it, the same cops go by dozens of likely undocumented workers loitering on the corner & look the other way.
There is alot to the issue & many ways to fight it. We just arent doing it.

[Charles]

Hunter.. When the U-Boat put those Nazi ashore, we were in a state of declared war with German and there were here on a mission of sabotage. Not the same thing as all.

Dude...If you and 100 gringos tried to get into mexico in mass, the Policia would round you up, ask for a "mordida" (bribe) . After you payed it, you would be on your way. Mexican cops don't shoot a potential source of income. It would be very bad for business.

BTW... about 1959 Mexican police did try to shoot me. But I was running away from the scene of a crime (murder). I was just a witness, but didn't want to be caught up in the mess, so I beat feet. The policia didn't know if I was a witness or a perp and they did call our "alto" (stop). I heard the snap of several 45 ACP bullets going by and felt the heat from one.

I fled because the Mexican notion of a criminal investigation is to throw everybody they can find into jail..beat the stuff out of them to find out the good guys from he bad guys. The good guys get turned loose after a couple of days and they can go to the dentist to replace the teeth that got knocked out.

I once saw a mexican cop force a suspect to kneel before a commode and place his mouth on the rim. The cop then stomped on the back of his head knocking out several teeth. The suspects accomplice was watching this and decided to talk real quick. The cop said to the second guy.. "Uno no paga por dos" (one doesn't pay for two) and forced him to place his mouth on the pot and did the same to him.

That night I didn't drive back accross the bridge, but swam the river like any other wetback. I figured the Mexican police might be waiting for me at the bridge.

The Border Patrol did stop me as I walked soaking wet from the river toward downtown Brownsville. Being a US citizen with decent ID they let me go on my way. I still have all of my teeth.

[El Mac]

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

Bullshit.

[El Mac]

i beleive we ought to tell mexico to "pound sand" we have a right, morally and LEGALLY to protect our borders, as do they; as does every country on the face of the planet. after all...they (the mexican border guards) shoot and kill those who try to enter mexico ILLEGALLY, do they not? our congress has failed miserably FOR YEARS in protecting our borders as dictated by law.

since 1996, there has been 263 documented incursions into the united states by ARMED mexican troops that were in support of smugglers.

it's not the "hard working" illegal that's so much the concern, it's the potiential of those coming in that are from trained terrorist orginizations that's alarming (not to mention the criminal element that are caputured with alarming regularity)

statistics are becoming more clear now about the numbers of CRIMINAL illegal immigrants who are entering.

i know of no one (american citizens and resident, that is) who is opposed to LEGAL immigration to our country.

However, on this we agree.

[FWiedner]

...Maybe so, but are you prepared to pay 29.95 for a quart of orange juice? 6.99 for a tomato? There wont be any winners on the economic issues.

Ridiculous.

I believe that the impact of running millions of criminals and those that worship and tolerate them them out of this nation would be a tremendous economic boon.

Millions of currently unemployed Americans would have jobs available to them, jobs where they wouldn't be disqualified just because they don't speak spanish. The crushing pressure on our social services and infrastructure would be relieved. Thousands of crimes commited by immigrant criminals would not be commited in a hundred cities across the nation.

I don't see a downside.

[FWiedner]

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

Bullshit.

Nearly a hundred innocent men, women, and children were attacked and murdered in their home, a church, by agents of the federal government for being suspected of cheating the tax man.

Is that the BS part?

[El Mac]

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

Bullshit.

Nearly a hundred innocent men, women, and children were attacked and murdered in their home, a church, by agents of the federal government for being suspected of cheating the tax man.

Is that the BS part?

That is just one of the BS parts of that quoted above, yes.

[FWiedner]

That is just one of the BS parts of that quoted above, yes.

Hmmm... Well, I don't suppose we'll be seeing eye to eye on that point anytime soon.

[El Mac]

That is just one of the BS parts of that quoted above, yes.

Hmmm... Well, I don't suppose we'll be seeing eye to eye on that point anytime soon.

Probably not sir.

[El Mac]

Don't forget to dig deep when you pay your 2007 taxes! 21 million illegals are depending on you! Muchos gracias amigos!!

[Old Time Hunter]

Ridiculous.

I believe that the impact of running millions of criminals and those that worship and tolerate them them out ot this nation would be a tremndous economic boon.

Millions of currently unemployed Americans would have jobs available to them, jobs where they wouldn't be disqualified just because they don't speak spanish. The crushing pressure on our social services and infrastructure would be relieved. Thousands of crimes commited by immigrant criminals would not be commited in a hundred ciries across the nation.

I don't see a downside.

FW, don't always agree with ya, but on this I do.

I still look at illegal immigrants as an invasion. Heck, in Delavan, WI last year there were five people murdered....more than in fifty years, and guess what, illegals did the killing. Worse yet, the people killed were not illegals. Therefore, I conclude there is no difference between those Germans of WWII and illegals, they are here not to benefit this country, but to do it harm. Otherwise, they would take legal channels to make an attempt to permanence. The majority of illegals are here to rape and pillage for their own good, whether it be utilizing the benefits of our society and sending them back to a different country or outward illegal criminal actions within our border.

[Hobie]

Screw tech. Boots on the ground. We need live bodies defending the border.

Military bodies.

Now...since you're a RP fan, you know that's not constitutional

Blaine,

I don't see military defending the border as violating the Posse Comitatus act. How is it that that would be unconstitutional if they aren't forcfully quartered in people's houses?

[Hobie]

Huhh! At Ruby Ridge there was the U.S. Marshals Service and the FBI. At Waco it was the BATF and the FBI. No military or National Guard in either of those messes.

The United States Immigration Laws are Federal Laws involved in the issue and not an invasion. What we have is a widespread breaking of the immigation laws. Calling this an invasion does not make it an invasion.

You are free to call a chicken a goose, but it doesn't make it a goose. It is still just a chicken.

Everybody is free to hold what ever opinion they wish on the matter, but jeeze boys, you need to get your facts straight. An intelligent discssion is impossible if folks make up facts as they go. I thought it was only politiclans who did that?

Charles,

My understanding is that National Guard were involved in the Waco/Branch Davidian incident. I've been told by NG contacts that there was some dodgy stuff centering on Posse Comitatus because the feds misled the NG command as to what certain assets would be doing.

[SFRanger7GP]

Waco FYI: (for more info you can always do a Freedom Of Information Act request)

The GAO (Government Accounting Office) reports that units of the Texas National Guard, US Army, Alabama National Guard and US Air Force provided the following services and equipment:

Surveillance
Reconnaissance
Transport
Maintenance & Repairs
Training & Instruction
Helicopters
Unarmed tactical ground vehicles
What Did it Cost?
GAO investigators estimated the total cost of military involvement at about $1 million, with 90 percent of that being incurred by units of the Texas National Guard and US Army. The FBI and ATF reimbursed the US Army and Texas National Guard about 75 percent of their expenses. Counterdrug programs would have repaid another 14 percent, but the military waived those payments.

Was it Legal?
The GAO concluded that ATF's request for military counterdrug assistance did meet the requirements for authorizing such assistance under the relevant statutes. In addition, GAO found that the military's decision to provide the support was appropriate and authorized under the statutes.

(Note: The use of "elite" special Army units has been reported in the media, but not confirmed by any US Government source at this time.)

The full GAO report (GAO/NSIAD/OSI-99-133) can be downloaded in Adobe .pdf format from:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/99133.pdf

My point is the military is not a police unit and should not be wasting limited funds and training time training to become one. That funding should be given to existing law enforcement agencies. The illegal immigration solution is simple. Americans need to take responsibility and enforce existing laws. However, nobody wants to be the bad guy or get their hands dirty. Start giving fines and property seizures to those that condone it. No exceptions to businesses, landlords or churches; nobody. If voters truly want and need foreign labor we establish a sponsorship program similar to the one DOS already has in place. Because lets be honest, a lot of Americans are "too good to do wetback work" and the average American wouldn't dream of making their precious child get a job. Look around your neighborhood. When's the last time you saw a teenager mowing a yard or raking leaves?

We have created a safe haven for illegal immigrants by making knowledge of the English language totally unnecessary. I know people that have lived in the US 20+ years and don't speak, read or write English. There is no "invasion" when a welcome environment is created and condoned for the "invaders". All our solutions are staring back at us and its not a fence. But a fence is impersonal and we can't be blamed as individuals. Anybody that has lived in a border state long enough to eat a good taco knows that fence is a waste of time and money. We could really improve our law enforcement agencies with that money. Military past and present knows that "an obstacle is not an obstacle unless it is covered by fire".

As Americans we need to set priorities on what is important to us, our country and the country we want our grandchildren to inherit. Vote for the good of the future USA.

[Charles]

What I know about Waco comes from foks who where there.
Several Texas Rangers and Highway Patrol officers. The Texas officials formed a perimiter that sealed off the compound and the BATF and FBI was inside the circle doing the deed. Texas folks had no direct involvement.

After the mess was over the Rangers did do an investigation.

If there was any National Guard, involvement it had not direct contact with the actual conflict. This according to folks who were there, andwhom I believe truthful prople.

These same folks are very critical of Federal law enforcment people. It was a botched deal from the get go and did not need to happen.

All I know comes from folks who were there.

[SFRanger7GP]

Mr Charles:

Your information is correct. The military played a support role. Military regulations were also passed that no longer allowed military advisors to "...export training to non-vetted organizations that do not have a need to know or are not qualified to use....(said training)..."

[donw]

an, obviously, well thought about response. no doubt supported by careful consideration and well supported factual knowledge...

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

Bullshit.

[Leverdude]

I recall seeing tanks & armored vehicles during Waco. Kinda suprised the FBI & ATF have tanks in the motor pool.

Thats immaterial tho, the facts are alot of people died & nobody was held responsible. Its shameful & does nothing to garner trust in the Gov't., police & other LEO or even the US military.

[45-70-]

The military played a bigger role then they want people to know. Dont forget before this happened they forced all the media to move a long ways off making camera shots very hard. Have you forgotten the video of the army tank ramming a hole in the side of the building? There's a tank and the 2 far vehicles are Bradleys. The nearest vehicle is an M88. The FBI and ATF dont own those vihicles. They came from Ft Hood.

[El Mac]

What I know about Waco comes from foks who where there.
Several Texas Rangers and Highway Patrol officers. The Texas officials formed a perimiter that sealed off the compound and the BATF and FBI was inside the circle doing the deed. Texas folks had no direct involvement.

After the mess was over the Rangers did do an investigation.

If there was any National Guard, involvement it had not direct contact with the actual conflict. This according to folks who were there, andwhom I believe truthful prople.

These same folks are very critical of Federal law enforcment people. It was a botched deal from the get go and did not need to happen.

All I know comes from folks who were there.

Now, THIS is true.

[El Mac]

an, obviously, well thought about response. no doubt supported by careful consideration and well supported factual knowledge...

i watched a proceeding on tv that concluded that there were usa sf on the ground directing/advising full auto fire, military explosives and techniques (shape charge) were DEFINITELY used for entry thru the roof of the "bunker", a military helo in observance/support role and a military armored vehicle giving cover/support. (footage was shown on t.v.)

it was later confirmed that one of the so-called "silencers" allegedly being manufactured on the scene by koresh and his follwers was a "flash-bang" grenade used by the FBI in their assault.

i WAS NOT at waco. i saw some pretty convincing evidence and video taken along with eye witness testimony saying there was a military presence there. one witness showed nightvision films of two soldiers laying down full auto supressive fire. it was never confirmed, or denied, that the film/video was authentic, though.

what is really astounding is that, to my recollection, not one person was ever found guilty of any felony at waco yet 80 persons died as a result of the assault. in fact, i don't recall if it was ever determined who actually fired the first shot and it was never really known, or proven, that koresh was manufacturing/modifying/selling fully auto weapons.

was it justified? was it another case of an overzealous agency out to "enforce the law" at any price? was it an all around goof by ALL involved? was it an outright breaking of the law by koresh and his followers? to my knowledge it has never been fully resolved.

at best, it's a tangled mess that killed 80 people and will take many more years to sort out, if at all. IMO, i believe it to be a series of tragic decisions based on unknown factors that began with an improper search warrant.

Bullshit.

You bet!

[El Mac]

The military played a bigger role then they want people to know. Dont forget before this happened they forced all the media to move a long ways off making camera shots very hard. Have you forgotten the video of the army tank ramming a hole in the side of the building? There's a tank and the 2 far vehicles are Bradleys. The nearest vehicle is an M88. The FBI and ATF dont own those vihicles. They came from Ft Hood.

Yes sir. They did come from Ft. Hood as did the UH-1H helicopters. But guess what?! They were driven and flown by FBI agents... NOT military. The sole exception being the OH-58 flown by NG pilots used in surveillance support by ATF (at the beginning of this fiasco) and the CH-47s that were on standby at the nearby TSTI airfield used as medical support aircraft (at the end of the fiasco).

As for moving the press back beyond the outer perimeter, standard practice to keep them from getting lead poisoning. Do you mean to suggest that they should not have prevented the press from roaming around a crime scene?