Bush Immigration Speech

Dirk Gently

I've written down some of the main points here as I watched it live on sky news.

Some of his main points are as follows:

He is expanding the detention centres along the boarder.
Sending in 6000 more national guards.
Installing motion censors,
Unmanned spy planes
Building training centres for the military
Installing the most advanced surveillance systems in the world along the boarder.
Building military roads along the boarder
Biometric ID cards with compulsory finger printing
Every legal worker should learn English
6 million illegals sent home since he came to power.
Insists he is not militarising the boarder and declares Mexico a valued friend of America.

Start of his speech was very scary, reminded me of a certain other leader back in the 1930's with talk of protecting the homeland and a need for increasing security for the protection of the people.

Below are some links to recent American news stories on the growing belief of America becoming a surveillance/ police state. A search back a few years also shows how these recent security and surveillance measures were predicted by some Democrates / republicans and civil liberties groups. Their fears were dismissed as fantasy at the time but now that its happened nobody seems to have noticed what would have been unthinkable a few short years ago.

here

here

and here.

Does this add to the argument of a police state being created or is it simply a reasonable response to illegal immigration? Would we notice a police state in America even if it did exist. Does it exist already / is it on the way to creating a surveillance state. Have Americans been conditioned to accept these measures for the sake of security from an outside threat, real or imaginary?
Discuss.

Manic Moran

As a Guardsman, I'm focused primarily on that side. If I have to go to a desert, at least Iraq was fun. I don't think Mexican Border Patrol would be. I'm not enthralled by the small, six-thousand number. Smacks a lot of 'I want it to look like we're doing something', but especially if they're not actually out there with binoculars or night vision intercepting people, I'm not sure what six thousand men are going to actually achieve. If they wanted to militarise the border, they'd use tanks. I think they still should, actually, they have great night vision systems.

You missed the bits about temporary foreign worker programme and the system for those already in the country for some time to remain legally.
The roads alongside the border aren't military, they're just being built by the military for the Border Patrol. I had no problem with the start of his speech, sounded like a typical politician to me.

The comments about the police state don't seem to be applicable to the border. The one is internal within the US, the other is an issue of affecting what becomes intenal to the US. The Border Patrol are expected to have surveillance equipment to help them, and to use them. That for the next year the green uniforms say 'US Army' on them and not 'US Border Patrol' doesn't make any practical difference.

NTM

Ruu_Old

Eh I wish Bush would have mentioned where the heck the money to pay for all this is going to come from with the deficit continuing to rise :rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Ruu wrote:

Eh I wish Bush would have mentioned where the heck the money to pay for all this is going to come from with the deficit continuing to rise :rolleyes:

I think the theory is that the expenses related to illegal immigration will be reduced, and will compensate for the increases in border expenses.

NTM

bonkey

Surely this is a completely unnecessary waste of resources, time and money.

Bush has already improved border security, through Homeland Security, to keep the weevil nukular tourists* out.

How can it possibly be that penniless immigrants are smarter and more devious than the afore-menioned weevil tourists, thus necessitating even tighter border security?

It makes no sense to me.

<edit>
* == evil nuclear terrorists, if you didn't get it
</edit>

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote:

As a Guardsman, I'm focused primarily on that side. If I have to go to a desert, at least Iraq was fun. I don't think Mexican Border Patrol would be.

Or you could be put on Canada patrol. They are a special threat because they look just like us, and they have 4 stomachs and a gizzard! :eek:

http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=68863

johnthesavage

Manic Moran wrote:

If I have to go to a desert, at least Iraq was fun.

That's nice, I'd hate to think of those poor soldiers going all the way to Iraq and not having fun. I hope the fun made up for inhaling all that depleted uranium...

w66w66

The whole speech sounded like a con to me. From what I've Read about the immigration reform bill and the "temporary" worker program, I'm quite confident in saying that the numbers of unskilled labour entering America will remain the same if not be it higher, only now a higher porportion will be considered legal.

ISAW

clown bag wrote:

I've written down some of the main points here as I watched it live on sky news.

Some of his main points are as follows:

He is expanding the detention centres along the boarder.
Sending in 6000 more national guards.
Installing motion censors,
Unmanned spy planes
Building training centres for the military
Installing the most advanced surveillance systems in the world along the boarder.
Building military roads along the boarder
Biometric ID cards with compulsory finger printing
Every legal worker should learn English
6 million illegals sent home since he came to power.
Insists he is not militarising the boarder and declares Mexico a valued friend of America.

Of course Mexico is a valued friend. US business people can relocate to Mexico where the health and safety of workers is not such a concern and where they can pay them less than their Us counterparts. If US corporations could not relocate then Bush would be all for immigrant workers.

I am reminded of "Much Apu about Nothing". what does the following remind you of?

A single Bear was seen in Springfield. The media generated hysteria led to Mayor Quimby introducing a Bear Tax and institutions airborne Bear Patrols etc.
Quimby: All right, I promise to take swift and decisive action against
these hibernating hucksters.
[crowd cheers and leaves]
[Quimby pulls out a picnic basket]
Heh heh heh... [eats a sandwich]
Then the citizens of Springfield saw how much this Bear Tax was costing. Lisa couls see through the twisted loigic of it:
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a
charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
[Lisa refuses at first, then takes the exchange]

then when the cost of the war (i mean "Bear") tax comes up quimby quickly shifts to blaming the immigrants.

"They want the bear patrol but they won't pay taxes for it." Quimby
thinks of a novel solution. He announces that taxes are high because
of illegal immigrants and that they should be disposed of.

Immigants! I knew it was them! Even when it was the bears, I knew it
was them.
-- Moe Szyslak

http://www.snpp.com/episodes/3F20

Isn't it odd that the Canadian Border doesn't seem so threatening? Or how about the people fleeing communist Cuba? Or the Whole Atlantic seaboard. Or the fact that in Oregon State there are single troopers who patrol 100 , miles of border

"Budget cuts that laid off 129 Oregon State Police officers earlier this year have left a single trooper to cover the 1,400-square-mile territory and 100 miles of state roads around this city on Oregon's central coast." "Layoffs Leave Oregon Trooper Alone in Big Coastal Territory," Seattle Times, October 6, 2003.

does this not all seem a little strange and reminiscent?

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote:

Or you could be put on Canada patrol. They are a special threat because they look just like us, and they have 4 stomachs and a gizzard!

I think the focus is on the Mexican border simply because there are so many more people crossing that border than that with Canada. Not that they're totally ignoring it; if you missed the news, they just shut down this week an Irish-run people-smuggling operation racket that operated over that border.

The Oregon thing is a bit of a red herring on this particular issue. It's not as if people will be swimming ashore from either Canada or Mexico given that Washington and California are in between the two, and coming ashore from ships is the purview of the Coast Guard. And on the shores themselves, you also have county and city/town police forces. The Oregon cuts are certainly not a good thing, but they don't particularly affect the border situation. Similarly, the Cuba problem isn't quite the same either, the Coast Guard has a much easier time of spotting people in boats/cars on the open water, and it takes a lot longer for Cubans to cross.

I'm quite confident in saying that the numbers of unskilled labour entering America will remain the same if not be it higher, only now a higher porportion will be considered legal.

That bit I don't have much of a problem with, actually. There is a large movement in the US to allow the cheap Mexican labour to continue to cross. It seems a reasonable compromise to allow the situation to continue, in a more controlled and less damaging manner. Nobody's attempting to seal the border, just make it more controllable. The question is if this current plan will do so.

NTM

Hobbes

Well the canada bit was a joke (especially if you watched the link).

However it was pre-911 insanely easy to pass over the canadian border. All they asked then was nationality. Didn't ask to see any ID or anything unless you don't sound/look American. At that time I was there it was the border of choice to hop for Europeans. I'm sure its closed up a lot since then.

These sealed up borders will help when you have the draft implimented too for Iran.

Manic Moran

Well, after browsing some of the American boards I'm on, the speech seems to have gone over like a ton of bricks.

A lot of the Republicans are annoyed that the border security measures are only half-hearted, and at the effective amnesty (Despite what Bush said) of those in the country for some time.

The Democrats.. well, they automatically take a view contrary to the President, regardless of if the President is correct or not. Though in this case, it seems that many Republican posters are finding themselves in astonishment that they're agreeing with some Democrat politicians on the issue. (One post said something akin to "I can't believe I'm agreeing with Durbin (D-IL), how can I be agreeing with a man so wrong on so many issues?" to which another responded "Because the correct solution is blindingly obvious")

NTM