Williston, ND Active Issues

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Williston, ND Active Issues -> Williston, ND Active Issues -> Pomery and the border shame on him
Post Info TOPIC: Pomery and the border shame on him
dakotadj


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 51
Date:
RE: Pomery and the border shame on him
Permalink  

It may have been in the  bill, but it was and is as vague as anythiing our government does.. We need some meat in our bills (for what ever that is worth). to ensure some homeland security goon doesnt take the law into their own hands and do what they think is right instead of what is Amercians want. The "Property" issue was and is a Glossy way to defend allowing illegals to continue to stream into MY country...... Your correct  read both sides of all issues and then watch the "actions"..  of the elected officials..  We have "comprehensive" all right. a bounch of comprehensive Politicians who focus on everyone BUT THE unemployed tax paying LEGAL citizen..   DJ

The issue with H.R.324 is that the Border Patrol is increasingly being limited in its enforcement on various park lands. Promoters of illegal immigration inside the federal government seem to be on a trend of turning parks into sanctuaries for illegal alien traffic. The designation of this land could prevent the Border Patrol from setting up communication towers, cameras, sensors and so on, on the massive land included under the bill.

The land covers some of the primary smuggling corridors in Arizona. It also covers Highway 19, where the Border Patrol has a temporary checkpoint that is scheduled to become a permanent checkpoint--at which the BP seizes huge amounts of drugs and apprehends large numbers of illegal aliens each year--within the next year. It is entirely possible that the designation could be used to reverse that decision, especially since Rep. Grijalva is a vocal opponent of checkpoints (or any other activities that deter illegal immigration).

For the most part, Rep. Grijalva has opposed efforts to stop illegal traffic across the southern border and is a huge supporter of amnesties and other rewards for illegal immigration.



__________________
cantac


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 26
Date:
Permalink  

False.  I just got done reading the bill, the amendment, and the dictation from the house floor.

The original bill already was set up to keep border enforcement in the area UNTOUCHED, see below.  The amendment also added clauses regarding personal property ownership of owners who'd be included in the Heritage area.  The NO votes were AGAINST the property ownership issue (which I won't go into in this thread), and NOT against border enforcement because border enforcement was already included in the bill.

Below is the original bill, sans Amendment 449.

Section 8c-4)

EC. 8. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.
(c) Other Federal Agencies.--Nothing in this Act--

(4) modifies, alters, or amends any border enforcement authority.


Now, below is the part of the Amendment that they added regarding border enforcement. It's the same damn thing as what's in the original bill.

SEC. 13. BORDER SECURITY.

Nothing in this Act may impede, prohibit, or restrict activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security to achieve operational control (as defined under Public Law 109-367) within the National Heritage Area.



In today's world of a 24 hour news cycle and an endless number of media outlets, all which consider themselves fair and balanced, yet none are, it is imperative that Americans do their own fact checking, truth finding, and back story gathering instead of reading 1 headline posted by the Drudge Report.



Next.


-- Edited by cantac on Friday 2nd of October 2009 02:38:53 PM

__________________
dakotadj


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 51
Date:
Permalink  

H.R. 324 Before a final vote was taken on Rep. Raul Grijalva's (D-Ariz.) bill, H.R.324, that would create a National Heritage Area in Southern Arizona, the House voted, 259-to-167, to include an amendment that would allow the Border Patrol to continue its normal enforcement operations in the area   A "No" vote against the motion weakens border enforcement in Southern Arizona
POMERY VOTED NO ..shame on him !! ask him an the IDIOT DAVIS from california why they would vote against something that would ENSURE our border partrol would not be chastized or ridiculed or not allowed to go on the federal land to capture illegals coming into our country..  Pretty soon, we will have to be waiving them through san ysidro border check point instead of firing on them when they put the lives of our federal agents in harms way ..  Come on FOLKS, pour another cup of tea an raise hell with these guys. But then again..if you want them to allow all the illegals and unchecked immigration, go ahead an call an raise hell about that too.. 

Attachments
__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Williston, ND Active Issues -> Williston, ND Active Issues -> Pomery and the border shame on him
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard