RANGER AGAINST WAR: Borderlines <

Monday, November 01, 2010

Borderlines


Everything, everything, everything
In its right place

--Everything in Its Right Place,

Radiohead


An asylum for the sane

would be empty in America

--George Bernard Shaw


--Bloody paperwork. Huh!

--I suppose one has to expect a certain amount.

--Why? I came into this game for the action,

the excitement. Go anywhere, travel light,

get in, get out, wherever there's trouble,

a man alone.

Now they got the whole country sectioned off,

you can't make a move without a form

--Brazil
(1985)
____________________

If the U.S. were serious about the immigration problem and terrorism counteraction, here a few suggestions to help kill two birds with one stone. The suggestions would require beefing up Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) and eliminating the useless bureaucratic behemoth, Homeland Security Administration (HSA). Ranger is not advocating these measures, but merely suggesting them to serious-minded people.

Using some old-fashioned horse sense, something in short supply today, both efforts should be decentralized since our system was designed to work from the bottom up, an idea we seem to have lost along the way.

There's no hiding the situation: Each of us sits on the Mexican border when we sit in a McDonald's or Burger king anywhere in America. This is the natural line of drift for illegals, and if one were setting an ambush, these would be the places.


On the State Level:

  • Require documentation to buy a vehicle. This includes any motorized transport, including lawn mowers, since many illegals enter the lawn care business.
  • Require documentation to buy car insurance.
  • Check bus stops: No i.d., no tickets.
  • Require documents to see a doctor, especially gynecologists. Deport pregnant illegals before they give drop their gift on the U.S. system.
  • Require documents to purchase fast food, especially on a Sunday morning before Catholic Mass. Localize efforts to regions of Catholic churches.
  • Require documents at emergency rooms, liqour stores and Walmart.
  • Require documents to register for school
  • Require documents to obtain a U.S.-issued credit card.

Homeland Security may be relieved of their burden by requiring documents to buy airline tickets -- if one is not legal, one does not fly (unless a Mexican, South- or Central American desires to leave the country.) This is aimed at neutralizing the terror threat.

Do not allow more than one individual from a foreign threat area per flight. Ditto persons with legal Visas from threat areas. Disallow them to congregate to complete a hijacking. If terrorism originating in the Middle East is the threat, then focus on that reality -- don't single out one-legged nuns. Don't check shoes (a "safety measure" Great Britain has recently decided to ditch.)

Reinstate profiling (which was briefly enacted.) El Al has great success with this approach. These countermeasures clearly come under the rubric "racially profiling", but that seems fair and just since it is Mexicans and Middle Eastern radical Islamists that are the threat and/or problem. Intelligence agencies can continue to focus on the new insider convert threat that would bypass the above system.

If one is searching for elephants (the real sort) in Cleveland, it is wise to restrict your searches to zoos or circuses; if you're looking to kill deer, stay in the woods. Present immigration policy is looking for elephants in the woods and trying to kill deer in the zoos.

Simply put, place your ambushes on the traveled trails, for that is where you'll make the kills. Illegal immigrants do not usually visit zoos, the Kennedy Center, the opera or Broadway, so don't look there (unless you're checking the hired hands.) If illegal Mexican and Guatemalans are the target, then legal, patriotic Mexicans and Guatemalans should gladly support our "Be alert -Not afraid" program.

Former President Bush hired Boeing et. al. to build a virtual fence at a cost of $5+ Billion. But four years on and $1 billion in, barely 50 miles of the border has been covered.The New York Times recently suggested Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano call a halt to the effort, the SBInet:


The “virtual fence” was a misbegotten idea from the start, based on the faulty premise that controlling immigration is as simple as closing the border — and that closing the border is a simple matter of more sensors, more fencing and more boots on the ground. So long as there is a demand for cheap labor, a hunger for better jobs here, and almost no legal way to get in, people will keep finding ways around any fence, virtual or not.

Border security cannot work unless it is accompanied by a real effort at comprehensive immigration reform. There is no getting back the $1 billion already wasted. We can avoid squandering billions more
(Virtual Failure on the Border).


For some reason we are not technologically-advanced enough to create this system. If not a virtual fence, how about a real one, with razor wire and lights, and then activate the entire National Guard for their patrol?

Ranger's ideas could be simply employed, but there would be no wiggle-room. If the U.S. is seriously concerned about illegal immigration and just as seriously wishes to call a halt to it, the procedure for netting them and returning them is pretty straight-forward. But you can say hasta la vista to your cheap drywalling and lawn work. Are we committed in more than word to ending this State burden? The lure of cheap strawberries and household help is seductive.

If these efforts did not work, then arm the drones and shoot a few 15-year-olds on the border. While that won't stop the problem, but it will sure relieve some of our roiling angst. Ranger is bunkering up in anticipation of reactionary attacks, so hit me with your best shot.

Labels: , , ,

27 Comments:

Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim,

I sometimes have trouble understanding your humor. Was this a reductio ad absurdum? Highly effective, if so.

Dave

Monday, November 1, 2010 at 8:08:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Ghost Dansing said...

on the border

Monday, November 1, 2010 at 8:10:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

U.C. (Dave),

You're not alone in that, but, "Yes".


G.D.,

And why couldn't I have thought of Mr. Stewart. Ah, Time Passages ...

Monday, November 1, 2010 at 10:59:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
I have damn little humor left.
jim

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 8:20:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
I'm gonna vent.
We talk, talk, talk and it never ends.
It's all bullshit and politics. Both parties want the Latino vote, and neither have any policy other than getting re-elected.
This affects my humor which wasn't the greatest to begin with.
Let's get back to my Homeland , which is Quincy Fl. and 63% minority, and the second poorest in Fl.
Let's start with the concept that the immigration question through out US history was that of the lowest economic groups FIGHTING to maintain their niche. Now the problem is that the lowest skill groups WON'T ACCEPT WORK THAT IS HARD.
If we accept this , then we are lost as a nation.
What's the next step- mercenary immigrant soldiers? Rome tried that, as did the SS, and it didn't work out so well.
I stray-come sit in a fast food restaurant on Sunday near the Catholic church. A blind INS agent could fill a monthly quota before Communion.
Just sayin.
We are ignoring racial profiling in the immigration and pwot. We'd rather be politically correct than rational.
MY point as always is-EITHER YOU ARE OR YOU AIN'T-you cain't be both.
If a nation can't control it's borders or internal population then it has become the late Roman Empire. That didn't work out too well for them.
Dave,
I will not succumb to knee jerk, feel good guilt. I've got enuf of that from my Catholic up bringing.
jim

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 8:58:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 4:51:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim,

Try to hang on to that last little bit of humor. Take it for a walk every day and exercise it.

I stand squarely on the side of free migration. I think a man oughta be able to move anywhere he thinks he can have a better life--and to hell with having to jump through flaming government hoops to do so. That goes for me, too. I should be able to move to Cozumel and get a job, if I thought that my life would be improved. The fact that Mexico's government is corrupt and restrictive is no reason for the US guvmint to be.

A long time ago, the US welcomed immigrants. Nobody cared if they were dirt poor and didn't speak English, and nobody complained that they huddled in ethnic communities. Their kids were the ones that learned English and "integrated", because they saw the advantages therein.

A government that controls its borders will also come to control its citizens, and I have a serious problem with that. Homeland Security has nothing to do with the safety of citizens, and everything to do with the safety of government functionaries. Only an oppressive government needs to worry about its safety.

I'm surprised that Grant hasn't weighed in on this one.

Dave

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 8:58:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

Dave,

HSA seems a joke, but border control seems a reasonable concern. Like that good old socialist Emma Lazarus said, give us your tired and poor, but, we need to make sure that our rather tenuous systems won't be swamped. We owe that much to our citizens.

The U.S. requires, as most countries do, proof of sponsorship and/or income or skills in order to apply for citizenship. We make exceptions for refugees seeking political asylum, which is as it should be. But show me the country that'll take me in and happily put me on the dole just for signing my John Hancock.

No ... I think a country has a right to require workers visas, entrance quotas, etc. Our initial waves of immigrants also had to pass the same strictures.

We are already, by virtue of being citizens, "controlled" by various laws, etc. The key is in maintaining our civil liberties as guaranteed to us in the Constitution.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010 at 11:20:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
A long time ago we genocided an entire race to the point of virtual extinction, while importing slaves.Then we welcomed immigrants. So what is good and what bad.White man, red, black,who defines what is good?
I contend that the past is not the template for today.
For every thing gained something is lost- a line from a song.
If you think about it , i say again,if you go all weak kneed and favor saving everybody to include every immigrant that is hungry then we MUST ACCEPT the philosophy of the wars , which rest solidly on nation building which is weak kneed liberalism .
The supreme irony is that this is imposed on us and them by neo-conservatives.
The history of man has been that of migration and moving on after destroying the eco-system or to escape changing environments. IE the ice age.
I can't think of any major migration for political purpose, unless the Old Testament is a historical document.
So if we view the migration from south to north and from the ME and Africa and other 3rd world places then it's kinda obvious to me that this is a mass movement trying to escape poverty, hunger etc...The cause of which is overbreeding and destruction of the earth to a point that human life is no longer easily supported.
We as a race have done from day one.It says so in the Bible. God said it and i believe it.That's humor Dave!
WE can't just continue stone age thinking. What will happen when and if the US and the western world is over populated and fails to remain a bread basket?
Todays immigration is a failure of the human race and not of the US immigration policy. Same for European policy.
Did Rome do well integrating the Goths or Visigoths?
Simply put, it's all about survival as a species. Didn't a guy like Darwin discuss this stuff?
Look at Zimbabwe and what they did.They took the western productivity and ran it into the ground. Now food is scarce and people are fleeing into South Africa hoping for any chance of a life. I say this b/c -is South Africa responsible to feed and accept Zim immigrants without exception? Does SA have a responsibility to protect their indig pop?
Bottom line is that i see this as an existential struggle and evolution and capitalism are based upon the fact that there are winners and losers.
The winners have a responsibility but not to be suicidal. Man shits in his mess kit and then wants to move on and do it again.
That time is short until none of us will survive.
Sorry Dave but that's how i see it.
Additionally blogs can't really do justice to this topic.
jim

Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 7:47:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim and Lisa,

Carpenter does not, nor has he ever, favored saving hungry immigrants. If they want to live here, they'll have to make it on their own steam. Tough love. As a personal aside, I have very strong knees. I lean neither right nor left, but at my own rakish angle.

Lisa, as for the requirement of cash or skills, who can predict human potential, which flourishes only in freedom? As for welfare-seeking immigrants, Tam said it best--if you leave a pile of sugar on the kitchen floor, you get ants.

Jim, I'm glad you mentioned the overbreeding thing. Have you noticed that most overbreeding happens where freedom is least? How can such oppressed people bring a child into the starvation and misery that government oppression guarantees? Ayn Rand once said that what the have nots have not is freedom.

All a man needs to do well in this world is freedom, including freedom of movement. And then he can't blame anyone for the difficulty of the path he chose. Freedom is only possible with frontier, which is sadly lacking in the world today.

"It says so in the Bible. God said it and i believe it."

I'm happy to see you have some remnants of humor left, Jim.

For my views, I mostly get kicks and cuffs. Thanks for the polite, rational discourse.


Dave

Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 9:22:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

UC,

I love that you lean at "your own rakish angle" -- you're o.k. by me, friend :) More later, it's late,

adios

Wednesday, November 3, 2010 at 10:31:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
We don't all have to believe the same things , but at least we're thinkin'.
One goal of RAW is to remain detached and as polite as possible.
And rational , per my directive.
jim

Thursday, November 4, 2010 at 7:38:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim and Lisa,

Yours is the only blog I dare broach the subject of immigration. Thanks for treating me gently.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

Declaration of Independence



The burgeoning laws of this country require more and more enforcement officials. (Swarms of officers.) And who among us should judge whether an immigrant should be allowed into the country?

To paraphrase Jesus, Let he who is in compliance with all zoning laws and current on his license plates, deport the first illegal.

Dave

Thursday, November 4, 2010 at 9:34:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger FDChief said...

Meh.

I don't see these people as the disease - meaning, I don't see too much point in spending a ton of time and money trying to "cure" them - but a symptom.

I've said this before, but the US and the Latin American countries are in a nearly unprecedented situation in the modern world. The last time we saw a modern, wealthy First World country across a nearly indefensible land border from the poor "barbarian" peoples was Ming China or perhaps Imperial Rome. And those were open wars, with the outsiders fighting to get in and the insiders fighting to keep them out.

To completely prevent the migration from the south we would, in effect, have to put our nation in a similar state of war with the latin countries.

And the "invading hordes" don't want to loot the capitol now; they want to get hired by a landscaper or buy a taco truck. I don't see them somehow toppling the imperial centers; more likely they'll be cleaning the floors and replacing the towels.

Instead, what I see as the threat to our nation seems to come more more from the rapacious elite that sees nothing wrong with manipulating the tax codes, labor laws, safety and environmental regulations, and tariff levels to benefit their own selfish desires at the cost of the soundness of the social contract. These people see no difference between the poor alien with the leaf blower and the poor native with the 40-ouncer and the shopping cart full of plastic trash bags. They are both the prey of the ruling classes, and these rulers will play one against the other to gain advantage. It is in their interest to keep the barriers to immigration low because it keeps the wages low, and to keep the borders open so that they can move the jobs the other way, too.

Thursday, November 4, 2010 at 10:01:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

FDC,
The invading hordes elected Rubio.
They vote after cleaning the floors.
Dave,
I've been thinking about your cmt concerning breeding and freedom. You claim a obverse relationship=less freedom then more kids.
How do you explain the 14 yo mothers 30 yo grandmothers and 50 yo greats in my county, which is not different from the rest of the country?

I am not anti immigration. I just think it must be reasonable and to the benefit of our country.
Also the d of i says we can pursue happiness. i guess i'll do that today.
jim

Friday, November 5, 2010 at 8:15:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
I did a essay on the D of I several years ago on 4 jul.
This pointed out what George the 3rd did, and what George 43 was doing.
I look fwd to discussing these matters in person, so i can thump you.Really, we all need to talk more, or maybe i should say that we should listen more , and try to understand more.
IE, today in conversation i talked to a smart, well to do man , and he actually believes that tax cuts are a solution to our economic problems. We talked, and i still don't get it, and i really try.
Really.
jim

Friday, November 5, 2010 at 9:56:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim and Lisa,

The distance from Arizona to Florida separates us far more than any differences in ideas. I'm getting the itch to see America, so one of these days we'll meet up for a beverage and pleasant conversation. Charlie, our director of security here, gets carsick. That's the major impediment to travel right now. That and the fact that I'm employed for the time being.

Jim, I'm a listener, too, and always try to see the other viewpoint. I heavily admire Socrates' style--a mind, quietly asking and answering in turn.

As for the 14 yo moms, I'll bet there's a lot more of those in say, India or Haiti. Without hope of a better life, why would anyone bring a child into a world of need and suffering?

No person should have to prove benefit to the country as justification for their existence. In such countries, people scramble to get the hell out. What happens when there's no more America to move to?

I'm with Emma Lazarus. All the tired and poor need is a little freedom to exercise their potential. Come on in, the door's open.

Dave

Friday, November 5, 2010 at 9:04:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ask the Amer. indian how well multiculturism/ unrestricted immigration has worked out for them. (not the slam dunk i thought).

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 1:11:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

UC,

There's much to consider on the matter. Theoretically, if borders be damned and everyone and everyone who wishes it goes for the same lifestyle to which we are accustomed, that lifestyle disappears due to the limiting factor of resource depletion. (The U.S. consumes far out of proportion to its numbers.)

That puts the U.S. in an enviable position, but it is chimerical to imagine that everyone may share in that lifestyle. So, we will have to prepare for a rude comedown, which will come anyway, whether sooner or later. Whether it comes through some Federal jiggering that somehow dissolves our national borders, or by dint of sheer determination of those in India and China and everywhere and anywhere else people decide to throw off the yoke of oppression.

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 1:14:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger FDChief said...

jim: I thought Rubio's win was a combination of a vote split and his support with the Cuban-American community, a group that is all perfectly legal an' stuff...am I mistaken?

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 6:11:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger FDChief said...

The other thing I'd be willing to bet some cash on is the few actual number of illegals that vote. Now THERE's a good way to get caught and deported.

I'll agree that a nation that can't control its borders controls nothing. That is a fudamental requirement for all polities.

But I'm not sure if even the methods you suggest will do more than plug a few holes in the sieve. The long-term solution needs to be in the countries of origin. When places like Mexico and Guatemala become worth staying in rather than fleeing from the problem of illegal immigration will pretty much stop.

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 6:16:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Lisa,

Damn, girl, how you talk! I had to look up "chimerical".

"Unchecked imagination". Yep, that's me. Reality never keeps up with my vision.

You make a good point. As government becomes more oppressive, which it does at the same time it promises to "help" more people, wealth either evaporates or goes into hiding. Neither wealth nor progress should be static, but since freedom doesn't look like the wave of the future, "resource depletion" is probably a bankable forecast. Sad.


Dave

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 7:46:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

Dear UC,

[Now, if you want to see someone wring out every morsel out of the English language, try FDChief (@GraphicFiringTable). I learn something there almost every day.]

I will be a gadfly:

You say "freedom doesn't look like the wave of the future", but what if is, at least in those countries where individuals are beginning to accrue some personal profit? What if the natural progressions occurs into capitalism? Then you have greed and one-upmanship, and all of the other nasty bits that come along with individual wealth.

I mean, there's no reason to imagine any other groups of people or new nation which enters into the brotherhood of freedom + capitalism is going to do it any better than we did. And that's where there will be trouble on the resource end. We already know some of the rapacious results of Communism, which places reins on its citizenry.

Imagine what unbridled universal profiteering might look like, as the newly-free pass through to the stage of enlightenment (?), where all acknowledge the fragility of the environment and the need for universal controls. We can't even do Kyoto.

Long before that moment, we will have reached an environmental crisis moment, IMHO.

Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 9:50:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
I ruminate over your cmts.
Per your D of I selection about immigration.
- The King did that w/o colonial approval.
-The immigration policy of the US is a collection of laws correctly passed thru legislation. The will of the people.
What's your point?
As for the 14 yo Babymom's , i don't care about those in other countries. I'm only concerned about the ones that i have to pay for.
I have an upcoming article on that topic.
You get the right of first comment.
jim

Sunday, November 7, 2010 at 1:35:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Chief,
My cmt on Rubio was tongue in cheek.
You NEVER let me slide.
jim

Sunday, November 7, 2010 at 1:37:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Dave,
When 3 Mexican carpenters replace you for the same wages for all 3 , then you can travel.
If Lisa is with us , we'll both be forced to listen. That's why i write, i can't get a word in edgewise.
She calls that dialogue, and she's dedicated to brutal honesty which i call honest brutality.
Between her, yourself and Chief , i'm a whipped puppy.
jim

Sunday, November 7, 2010 at 1:40:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Underground Carpenter said...

Hi Jim,

My point of the D of I quote was that it sounded like the founders' goal was filling the new land with immigrants and the crown was interfering with that migration.

Jim, how many babymamas are you paying for, and why? Are they kin folk? Where are the grandbabymamas and grandbabypapas?

As for my replacements in the world of carpentry, most of the Mexicans I know are staunch union members who won't work for a nickel less than scale. For the time being I can hold my own, but the young bucks are starting to kick my butt. Most likely, the robust Obama economy will soon ensure that I'll have lots of free time.

I'm glad Lisa is chatty. I'm on the quiet side myself, but only because I'm not a quick wit.

Dave

Sunday, November 7, 2010 at 4:15:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home