Time to send the National Guard to the US/Mexican border!

[wa3zrm]

Neb. Governor: Feds ‘Conducting Secret Operation’ Placing Immigrants In States Without Officials'...

LINCOLN, Neb. (CBSDC/AP) — Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman believes federal authorities are conducting secret operations by sending immigrant children into states without the knowledge of state officials.
Heineman told Fox News he learned from Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., that 200 unaccompanied immigrant children were placed with relatives or sponsors in the state. Heineman says no federal officials notified them that would be happening.
“We want to know the names of those individuals, who their sponsor is. Is their sponsor legal? What communities did you send them to? Why are they conducting a secret operation, essentially, transporting them all over the country … and the federal government won’t tell us what’s going on.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washington.cbslocal.com ...

[wa3zrm]

Endless Wave of Illegal Immigrants Floods Rio Grande Valley (Admin covers-up dead kids)

The life jackets helped many make it across the Rio Grande from Reynosa, the Mexican city across the water from Mission, just west of McAllen. Sources say they come over on rafts ferried by the so-called “coyotes,” the human smugglers whose means of transport are rendered useless whenever discovered by the Border Patrol. Many don’t make it across the river; multiple sources became emotional when recounting their discoveries of small, lifeless bodies washed up along the riverbank.
FOX EXCLUSIVE: McALLEN, Texas — Life jackets of all sizes and the occasional punctured raft are strewn along the banks of the Rio Grande, just south of Mission, Texas, where a relentless onslaught of illegal immigrants eagerly surrender to beleaguered Border Patrol agents around the clock.
It’s a cycle for which there is no end in sight.
“You're going to be out here a long time,” Fernando, an El Salvadoran child, told FoxNews.com shortly after surrendering to Border Patrol authorities after midnight Saturday. “There are thousands of us."
SNIP
FoxNews.com accompanied Texas lawmaker Louie Gohmert, a former judge and current Republican Congressman, to the site in the pre-dawn hours of Saturday. Gohmert, whose district lies some 550 miles northeast of what has become the most heavily-trafficked people-smuggling route in the world, has been to the location many times, but has never seen it so understaffed and overwhelmed.
“I’m more concerned than ever [that the border is] so seriously undermanned and I’ll be raising hell in Washington,” Gohmert, who invited FoxNews.com to see the situation first-hand, would later tell Border Patrol officials.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[crullers]

You're a real gem wa3zrm. Good luck with that bible stuff.

[wa3zrm]

Source: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3180714/posts

I am re-posting this map everywhere...on every thread. I’ve been checking it every day, and while viewing it this morning, SIX more (red) locations appeared!
https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=...bed&dg=feature

[wa3zrm]

Well ya wonder why I keep posting to this thread? Read the story below. Emsworth is less than 10 miles from where I live in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania! I wonder when they will be coming to your community?

Emsworth's Holy Family Institute proposes to take in children crossing border

Holy Family Institute in Emsworth wants to provide temporary shelter to children who have entered the United States illegally without parents or guardians, generating concerns among some residents.
“We believe this is the right thing to do for our ministry and for children who are in need,” said Sister Linda Yankoski, Holy Family CEO.
Emsworth Mayor Dee Quinn said she was “stunned” to learn of Holy Family's plans.
“I feel like we should have been notified, and we could've had a public meeting on it,” she said. “I think it's very important for everyone to know what's going on.”
Robert Keller, who owns the Eclectic Art and Objects Gallery across the street from Holy Family's sprawling campus, said he is concerned about the immigrants' potential impact on the community.
“This has been kept totally under wraps by (Holy Family). I don't know why they didn't try to talk to the neighbors. When you're making a decision like this for Holy Family, you're making a decision for the whole community,” Keller said.

(Excerpt) Read more at triblive.com ...

[Burnsey]

"........Holy Family initially plans to take in as many as 20 children (12 boys, 8 girls) up to age 12 who have passed through government-mandated health examinations and necessary immunizations. It could expand the program by October to accept as many as 36 children. Their stays at the state-licensed facility on Route 65 would be limited to about a month....."

Read more: http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/6...#ixzz37dMBS8XA

[wa3zrm]

"........Holy Family initially plans to take in as many as 20 children (12 boys, 8 girls) up to age 12 who have passed through government-mandated health examinations and necessary immunizations. It could expand the program by October to accept as many as 36 children. Their stays at the state-licensed facility on Route 65 would be limited to about a month....."

Read more: http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/6...#ixzz37dMBS8XA

I'm familiar with their facilities. They can hold many more than the number listed. Additionally, without knowing what their contract with HHS says, we don't know the full extent of just how many HHS can place there. My biggest concern though is why the Feds are not deporting these kids. There is a legal way to enter the US... that's the route that should be taken. If their families can afford to pay thousands of dollars to human traffickers to bring them here, something just does not add up.

[wa3zrm]

Feds to pay for $50 million resort for illegal alien teens: Nothing but the best for our new guests

Do you wish you were able to afford to go to a resort with pool, sauna, tennis courts, exercise room, sauna, steam room, racketball courts, and all the trimmings? Too bad you aren’t an illegal alien teenager, maybe a member of MS 13. Because your tax dollars (pay up, sucker!) are going to pay for a $50 million magnet resort for them. Kristinn Taylor writes at Gateway Pundit:

The Obama administration has awarded a $50 million contract to a charitable group to buy a Texas resort hotel and transform it in to a 600 bed facility for juvenile illegal aliens.

The beautiful Palm Aire resort and hotel has an indoor Olympic sized pool and an outdoor pool. Free Wi-Fi and cable TV are included in the simply decorated guest rooms.
The Palm Aire Hotel and Suites is set to be sold to Baptist Child & Family Services (BCFS) operating under a federal contract, pending local government approval, according to reports from Weslaco, Texas where the hotel is located. Weslaco is a few miles north of the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County.

The resort hotel for illegal alien children is reportedly the ‘first in the nation’.

The pictures of the facilities for our new guests are stunning:







The resort will be ready for guests on October 1, just in time for the peak season as the weather turns cool up north, and the warm climate of South Texas sounds really good. Too bad for you, if you’d like a little R&R. You get to pay for it, but you don’t get to go.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

UPDATE:
Fed-backed group drops plan to buy fancy hotel to house illegals

A plan to house hundreds of illegal immigrant children at a multimillion-dollar hotel complex in Texas was scuttled after the prospect of taxpayers footing the bill for luxury lodging proved too much of a public relations obstacle.
BCFS, previously known as Baptist Child and Family Services, which has a contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to run camps at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio and Fort Sill in Oklahoma, had a deal to buy the Palm Aire Hotel in Weslaco, Texas, for $3.8 million. The hotel was built in the 1980s and includes three swimming pools, tennis courts and an exercise room.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[joserra]

I understand your point. I also wouldn't like if millions of illegal inmigrants came to my country, taking jobs, pulling down salaries, increasing crime rates, etc. In fact, México is a very racist country, racist toward Central American or even certain South American countries. If inmigrants from Central American countries where coming into Mexico each day by thousands, I can imagine we as mexicans would have a radical reaction such as yours against it.

The thing is it is a complex problem and therefore it requires a complex solution, shutting down the border and putting more walls isn't going to solve anything. I agree that stopping inmigration into the US is mainly responsability of Mexico, but here comes a conflict of interest. Mexico actually benefits from migration to the US. Wages rise with migration (lower labor force) and the money that inmigrants send to our country from the US is a huge source of income for the poorest families, but I agree that it is not fair for US citizens to have that labor and tax burden upon themselves.

My point is, you can't reduce the problem to simply shutting down the border, remember that the US factor market equilibrium relies heavily on those inmigrants (at least in the border states). A migratory reform is much needed, but not in the "giving free money to inmigrants" way, the US taxpayer doesn't have to pay for that. A migratory reform in the labor market sense, so that the US gets the most benefits from inmigration (because the US indeed gets benefits from it) and minimizes the costs of it (affecting americans). It is complex, giving more budget to the Border Patrol so they can buy more guns and radars to catch inmigrants is truly not the best way. In the end, inmigration has to stop and it's mostly Mexico's responsability through economic development of our own country.

It is a bilateral problem and it should be solved that way (I sometimes feel like Mexico thinks it is only up to the US to solve it, which is wrong) but in a smart way, using public policies and legal resources that in the short run get the best out of inmigration and in the long run, stop it. More guns is not the solution.

P.S: It's stupid to say "US in in war against Mexico". By saying "against Mexico" you are also including me and I'm not an inmigrant. Why generalize the statement against all mexicans?

P.P.S: Don't forget that what is now California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas was once part of Mexico (in the XIX century) and that US inmigrants took it for themselves. I am not using the argument "Oh, it was once ours so it's rightfully still ours" because it's a stupid argument, but don't condemn the fact that inmigrant mexicans go to the US to find a better life when americans did the same when those US States were part of Mexico.

[blotgode]

I understand your point. I also wouldn't like if millions of illegal inmigrants came to my country, taking jobs, pulling down salaries, increasing crime rates, etc. In fact, México is a very racist country, racist toward Central American or even certain South American countries. If inmigrants from Central American countries where coming into Mexico each day by thousands, I can imagine we as mexicans would have a radical reaction such as yours against it.

The thing is it is a complex problem and therefore it requires a complex solution, shutting down the border and putting more walls isn't going to solve anything. I agree that stopping inmigration into the US is mainly responsability of Mexico, but here comes a conflict of interest. Mexico actually benefits from migration to the US. Wages rise with migration (lower labor force) and the money that inmigrants send to our country from the US is a huge source of income for the poorest families, but I agree that it is not fair for US citizens to have that labor and tax burden upon themselves.

My point is, you can't reduce the problem to simply shutting down the border, remember that the US factor market equilibrium relies heavily on those inmigrants (at least in the border states). A migratory reform is much needed, but not in the "giving free money to inmigrants" way, the US taxpayer doesn't have to pay for that. A migratory reform in the labor market sense, so that the US gets the most benefits from inmigration (because the US indeed gets benefits from it) and minimizes the costs of it (affecting americans). It is complex, giving more budget to the Border Patrol to that the can buy more guns and radars to catch inmigrants is truly not the best way. In the end, inmigration has to stop and it's mostly Mexico's responsability through economic development of our own country.

It is a bilateral problem and it should be solved the same way (I sometimes feel like Mexico thinks it is only up to the US to solve it, which is wrong) but in a smart way, using public policies and legal resources that in the short run get the best out of inmigration and in the long run, stop it. More guns is not the solution.

P.S: It's stupid to say "US in in war against Mexico". By saying "against Mexico" you are also including me and I'm not an inmigrant. Why generalize the statement against all mexicans?

P.P.S: Don't forget that what is now California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas was once part of Mexico (in the XIX century) and that US inmigrants took it for themselves. I am not using the argument "Oh, it was once ours so it's rightfully still ours" because it's a stupid argument, but don't condemn the fact that inmigrant mexicans go to the US to find a better life when americans did the same when those US States were part of Mexico.

Well said

[joserra]

Well said

Thanks man.

Another thing. The inmigration problem is very similar to the drug trafficking problem in an economic sense. Americans often say that drug trade is a problem that originates in México and therefore, México is the one who has to solve it, as if the supplier is the only one to blame for this market. Don't forget that USA's demand for drugs is huge and, contrary to what Say would have said, I think that as long as there's demand for a certain product (drugs) there will always someone willing to offer that product. Demand creates it's own supply.

The same happens with inmigration. You can't deny that a lot of people benefit from inmigration, mainly markets that are intensive in low skilled labor (agricultural and manufacturing), so we can say that there are a lot of american citizens that demand the inmigrant low skilled (therefore, low paid) labor force. Inmigration is the result of a demand for low skilled labor by americans and that poor mexicans are willing to supply it, they just have to pay a fixed cost for entering that low skilled labor market (this fixed cost is the action of inmigrating to the US, with the monetary and social costs it implies).

As with any economic problem (or social, which is equivalent), the right way to deal with it is with the right incentives in the institutional enviroment and in labor markets. not enforcing by guns. In a purely speculative and theoretical exercise, imagine that tomorrow all the inmigrants in the US dissapeared, as it is what you wish for based on the things you say and post. Yes, wages would rise but without a doubt, production in low skilled labor intensive industries in border states would plunge. This would create, for example, a supply shortage in agricultural products in the US (as border states produce a huge amount of agricultural products, such as California), that along with the huge rise in wages, would have a severe impact on inflation and in shortages in certain industries. In conclusion, a whole divergence from the equilibrium that the labor market is now in (and I'm only talking about the supply side, of course there would be also implications from the side of demand).

This is a simplistic scenario but I think makes my point. That the inmigration problem is a very complex one and can't be addressed with those simplistic arguments as "war with Mexico", "send them all back down there", "more budget for the border patrol".

And as I said before, don't forget that americans are the one that are demanding an inmigrant labor force, so don't go blaming just the "invaders"

[wa3zrm]

Immigrant children aren't the only ones in crisis

It is hard not to wonder what kind of impact $3.7 billion, the amount President Barack Obama has requested to deal with the child immigrant border crisis, might have on the traumatized children of Chicago's South Side.
In certain corners of this town — indeed, often in or very near Obama's own neighborhood — public school education is a joke, there are no jobs, there are no opportunities and there sure isn't much hope.
The same can be said about areas in St. Louis, Detroit, Oakland and in many high-poverty communities populated almost exclusively by Hispanics and African-Americans.
Putting aside the question of whether we should or shouldn't take in needy children at the border, we might ask ourselves: If President Obama manages to get almost $4 billion to give Central America's kids succor, might he endeavor to come up with roughly the same amount to help the Hispanic and black children in crisis in his own backyard?

(Excerpt) Read more at my.chicagotribune.com ...

[wa3zrm]

Most Voters Want to Send Latest Illegal Immigrants Home ASAP
Rasmussen Reports ^ |

Most voters don’t want any of the young illegal immigrants who’ve recently arrived here housed in their state and say any legislation passed by Congress to deal with the problem should focus on sending them home as soon as possible.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible. Just 27% say it should focus instead on making it easier for these illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Advocates for the illegal immigrants argue that they are flooding into the country to escape violent situations in their home countries, but just 31% of U.S. voters think they are coming here now for their own safety. Most voters (52%) believe they are coming here for economic reasons. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

[wa3zrm]

Two-thirds of illegal immigrant children approved for asylum: report

Nearly two-thirds of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children requesting asylum this year have had their initial applications approved, the House Judiciary Committee reported Friday in data that suggests those kids surging across the border who ask to stay will likely be able to gain admission to the U.S.
The numbers show both that the U.S. government generally believes the children are fleeing dangerous conditions that they cannot return to, and signals that it will be far tougher to deport most of the children.
According to the Judiciary Committee’s numbers, 65 percent of unaccompanied children’s asylum applications are approved by the initial asylum officer so far in 2014. Even those who are refused can ask for an appeal, which means the total number who end up staying, with government permission, is likely to be higher.
That figure doesn’t include the others who never apply for asylum and try to disappear into the shadows, or who spend years in the country awaiting court dates.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

[wa3zrm]

The Monitor ^ |

Gov. Rick Perry to deploy 1,000 National Guard troops to RGV

Texas Gov. Rick Perry plans to announce he will activate the Texas National Guard at a news conference Monday in Austin, said state Sen. Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, D-McAllen.

Hinojosa did not have details of the effort, but an internal memo from another state official’s office said the governor planned to call about 1,000 Texas National Guard troops to the Rio Grande Valley — at a cost of about $12 million per month.

The memo was provided to The Monitor on the condition of anonymity because the information is not yet public.

Troops are expected to enter the area gradually, building up to 1,000 after about a month, the memo said.

The troops will join the Texas Department of Public Safety in its recent surge to combat human smuggling and drug trafficking amid the influx of mostly Central Americans illegally crossing the Rio Grande. Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, and Texas House Speaker Joe Straus announced the $1.3 million per week effort last month.

State leaders approved funding for extra DPS troopers to fill in gaps in Border Patrol coverage in the Valley as the federal authorities were overwhelmed with an influx of children and families from Central America. The state officials feared Mexican drug cartels might exploit the situation to move their own drugs and human contraband while Border Patrol attention was turned elsewhere.

Hinojosa said Perry's move smacked of political gamesmanship.

“All these politicians coming down to border, they don't care about solving the problem, they just want to make a political point,” he said.

State officials denied the move amounted to a militarization of the border.

“This is not a militarization of the border,” the memo states. “The DPS and the National Guard are working to keep any drug and human trafficking south of (U.S. Highway) 83 and with the goal of keeping any smuggling from entering major highways to transport East/West/and North.”

DPS officials want to send National Guard troops into western areas of the Valley and the ranch lands further north, according to the memo.

“Smuggling has supposedly according to DPS moved West on the border with an increase in Jim Hogg County," the memo states. "DPS especially wants to apply the Guard in the rural areas to patrol.”

The National Guard deployment — added to the DPS surge — will bring the price tag of troopers on the border to about $5 million per week, the memo said. And the funding source for the effort remains unclear.

“It is not clear where the money will come from in the budget,” the memo states, adding that Perry's office has said the money will come from “non critical” areas, such as health care or transportation.

Hinojosa said the National Guard was not equipped to aid immigrants crossing the Rio Grande.

“They (cartels) are taking advantage of the situation,” he said. “But our local law enforcement from the sheriff’s offices of the different counties to the different police departments are taking care of the situation. This is a civil matter, not a military matter. What we need is more resources to hire more deputies, hire more Border Patrol.

“These are young people, just families coming across. They're not armed. They're not carrying weapons.”