|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
If these nightmare conclusions ever came to pass, I would urge non-violence and civil disobediance as opposed to outright violence against the facist regime. My hope would be for a peaceful resolution.
I'm getting ahead of myself. The sermon was right to point out some things that are less than apparent on the surface. The Lawrence Britt essay on the 14 identifying characteristics of fascism was striking in it's resembelance to current events (if you so choose to see them in that way). Everything from nationalism to fraudulent elections are right here for all to see. Some people will see it, some people won't. When and if the time comes to pick sides, either apathetic slave or insurgent liberator, I know which side I'll be on.
|
willravel.....WTF are you and Manx talking about......????
Quote:
<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,66521,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3">Fence Fight: Estuary or Security? 10:04 AM Feb. 06, 2005 PT</a>
WASHINGTON -- A ragged fence and a canyon called Smugglers Gulch mark the westernmost stretch of the California-Mexico border, a crossing point for illegal immigrants and drug runners.
The federal government and a powerful local Republican congressman have been pushing for years to fortify the 3 1/2-mile stretch of border just north of Tijuana, Mexico. Their plan is opposed by California coastal regulators and environmentalists who say it could harm a fragile Pacific estuary.
Now supporters may be getting closer to victory. A provision in an immigration bill expected to pass the House next week <h2>would give the homeland security secretary authority to move forward with the project regardless of any laws that stand in the way, and would bar courts from hearing lawsuits against it.</h2>
"We need to get this thing done, and we need to do it for security reasons, and at some point we just need to do it," said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-California, whose district is just north of the border.
But environmentalists and the California Coastal Commission, the independent state agency that regulates the state's coastline, say the plan promoted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection is too extreme.
Among other provisions, it would level the peaks lining Smugglers Gulch and fill part of the deep canyon with 2 million cubic yards of dirt in order to build a road across it. The Coastal Commission voted down the proposal a year ago, saying it would erode soil near the federally protected Tijuana Estuary that's home to marshes, California brown pelicans and rare plants and birds.
"We're going to destroy our environment in the name of fear," said Peter Douglas, the commission's executive director. "Frankly, there are ways that we can do both, protecting the environment and meeting the concerns of border control and homeland security."
Coastal Commission officials contended Customs and Border Protection didn't meet them halfway when they proposed alternatives, including switchback roads through the gulch.
A spokesman for Customs and Border Protection did not immediately respond to calls for comment Friday. But Hunter said environmentalists' demands were unreasonable.
"You could run a thousand plans past some of these people. I don't think they understand the issues and I don't think they care," he said.
Rep. Bob Filner, D-California, whose district encompasses the border, disagreed. "The waiving of all environmental rules for this is just criminal," Filner said. "It's just too extensive a trade-off for the limited security advantage."
More than 10 miles of the border between the Pacific Ocean and inland hills have already been fortified with fences, lights, motion sensors and beefed-up patrols. The border agency's apprehensions of illegal immigrants declined 88 percent from 1994 to 2003.
The provision to finish off the border barriers is part of immigration legislation introduced last week by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, that would also prevent illegal immigrants from getting driver's licenses and make it harder for them to get political asylum.
The measures passed the House last year as part of the intelligence bill, but were struck from the final package. The bill is set for a House vote next week and is expected to pass. How the fence provision would fare in the Senate is unclear. California's two Democratic senators have not announced their positions.
|
Quote:
<a href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050210-2000-cnsimmig.html">House passes controversial immigration bill</a>
Law would deny driver licenses to illegal aliens, provide anti-terror measures
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
February 10, 2005
WASHINGTON – Dividing largely along party lines, the House passed a controversial bill Thursday designed to curtail illegal immigration as a way to achieve greater homeland security.
The bill, which passed 261-161, would pressure states to deny driver licenses to illegal aliens, make it easier to turn away some political asylum seekers and ease the deportation of suspected terrorists.
The measure would empower bounty hunters to go after immigrants who have defied orders of deportation and <h2>remove environmental barriers blocking completion of a triple fence along the U.S.-Mexico border near Imperial Beach.
</h2>
The bill's author, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said the measure would help "prevent another 9/11-type attack by disrupting terrorist travel" and by making it more difficult for terrorists to take advantage of the asylum system or penetrate the border near San Diego.
"We must ensure that terrorists no longer can exploit these weaknesses," he said.
Passage in the House completes the first step in Sensenbrenner's strategy to ensure that the measure is considered in the Senate, where it faces longer odds.
As part of a deal last year with House leaders who wanted to strip the immigration bill from intelligence overhaul legislation, Sensenbrenner got a commitment that his bill would be included in the first essential legislation Congress considers this year.
Next week, Sensenbrenner plans to attach his bill to legislation that would provide funding for troops in Iraq, which almost certainly will be approved by the House. Then the combined measure will go to the Senate.
"That way, the Senate can't ignore it," said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors greater restrictions on immigration.
Even if the Senate jettisons the immigration provisions, as some consider likely, a House-Senate conference could reinstate them.
Called the "Real ID ACT," the bill was recently endorsed by President Bush, who is pushing a sweeping overhaul of immigration laws, including a guest-worker program.
Before passing the Sensenbrenner bill, the House defeated an amendment sponsored by Sam Farr, D-Carmel. His proposal would have stripped out a provision granting authority to the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to waive any laws impeding completion of the border fence near San Diego.
"My amendment was not about preventing the remaining three miles of border fence in San Diego from being built," Farr said, adding that he was trying to protect environmental laws and the review process they created..........
|
|