Say Anything Blog

The Republican side of the blogosphere is in danger of descending into the same morass that is bogging down the Democrats.  Namely, too many bloggers and pundits are simply more interested in setting the agenda, than in making their agenda make any sense.

I’m afraid that’s what is going on with respect to the border fence advocates.  If it’s not exactly what they are demanding, then they aren’t controlling the agenda anymore and of course they’re going to raise holy hell.

As you point out, it is just obvious that a strategy that includes cameras and other monitoring equipment is a much more sensible approach than a simple chain-linked fence.  Opponents of monitoring seem to be arguing that ... well if they don’t actively stop people from crossing then it won’t be effective.

That’s true, but then again neither would a simple barrier.  You need a “defense in depth,” the rapid interdiction of violators, and an aggressive law enforcement policy.  A “deeper wall” makes the interdiction easier.  That’s just obvious.

Carrick: I guess some of us don’t want the dependence on increased numbers of enforcement personnel that will be required to man the monitoring equipment.  We would rather have them in the field.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

I couldn’t agree more, Robert.  Extra monitoring technology will make our border more effective, not less effective.

That’s just obvious.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I think you need SOME kind of fence or barrier.  Just to make it clear that this is the line not to cross. 

The Canadian border is only marked by some posts every so often.  We’re lucky we’re not being overrun with Canadians.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Rob: I guess I wasn’t clear; I don’t think we need monitoring technology, just more enforcement agents in the field, combined with a good fence.  Good fences make good neighbors, and all that. The Minutemen have already proved the effectiveness of increased personnel.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Rob, they were never going to build any fence, and a “virtual fence” will only stop “virtual” illegal aliens. Bait&switch, all for election campaign sloganeering. And nothing for securing America’s borders.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

I saw Tamcrado been interviewd about this and his real pissed about it. ..even contemplating a third party.

I say we use that money to train a division of canines and any auxiliary ..

...something of this 2 sort.

..a nice articl via google, ..

Robert108:

Rob: I guess I wasn’t clear; I don’t think we need monitoring technology, just more enforcement agents in the field, combined with a good fence

The experts (the military) insist on combined physical barriers with physical surveillance and a rapid response team.

Why do you think you know more than the people who do this for a living?

TW:

I think you need SOME kind of fence or barrier.  Just to make it clear that this is the line not to cross.

Absolutely agree.  If there is a camera on it, it acts as a much better obstacle than a barrier plus people on the ground.

Carrick: I believe that is what I wrote; twice now.  I object to spending money on electronic surveillance, when more boots on the ground are more needed, plus the fence.  I thought I was clear on that.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Robert108, nobody’s missed your point.  We obviously don’t agree with you, and neither, for that matter, do the security experts.

Step1:
Maybe a nice high wall, like Israel has, between US and Mexico. Not even very tall foreigners can get over it (without very big ladders).

Step2:
Maybe the Mexicans are smart and will take a flight to Canada and come through that border, so build this wall there too.

Step3:
These, now desperate, Mexicans might then try to swim ashore, so wall up every coast as well.

Step4:
The only way in now is under or over, say make the wall go far underground and put a (very thick glass) roof ontop.

Step5:
Now fill the interior of this walled in area with water, not even the stupidest Mexican will want to come and steal jobs anymore, that’ll learn ‘em.

Or, instead of the wall:
Maybe the Mexicans that manage to evade the authorities are hard working and smart enough to make a useful contribution to the economy. Sort of like survival of the fittest.

Carrick: I think a fence with a camera isn’t as good as a fence with sufficient patrols.  The Minutemen have proved this already.  All three would be even better, but I think the money should be used for more agents before gadgets, not after.  Cameras can’t arrest and turn back illegals; they require personnel to make them meaningful.  Otherwise, we have a lot of videos of illegals streaming over the border.  Nice for TV, I guess.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

AV: Yes, let’s reward them for being successful criminals.  Very smart.  After that, we can let bank robbers escape if they manage to steal enough money; we’ll just arrest the incompetent ones that can’t steal very much.  Also, if a murderer manages to kill lots of people, let’s let him off because he is really good at it.  Good thinking.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Robert108, somehow I don’t think you’re grasping the concept.

Carrick: I think a fence with a camera isn’t as good as a fence with sufficient patrols.  The Minutemen have proved this already.  All three would be even better, but I think the money should be used for more agents before gadgets, not after.

Personally, I want the fence and the gadgets.  We already have patrols, and although it’s clear that the patrols alone aren’t enough patrols enhanced by a fence with effective monitoring gadgets can enhance those patrols and make them much more effective.

The only additional step I’d suggest at this point is a major effort to empower local law enforcement to detain illegals as they come across them.  That would put us on a good track toward getting a hold of this situation.

I think the people ticked off about the gadgets on the fence are just looking for something to be ticked off about.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Carrick/Rob:  Here’s my point.  In the real world, the money spent on gadgets will not be spent on personnel that will actually be patrolling the border.  They will be observers, and there is only so much money.  If there were unlimited money, bring it all on, but we are not in that situation.  Gadgets are only effective if they can direct the personnel to where the illegals are, but that requires personnel, so it comes down to where to put the limited available money, and I favor putting it into more agents, not more cameras.  The fence plus beefed up patrols are basic, and cameras are a great addition, but not a substitute.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Well, I see it differently robert.  I see the cameras and sensors as enhancing the effectiveness of the personnel we already have.

We all want the same goal here, I think we’re just of different minds on the details.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob: In my part of the country, it has been demonstrated over and over again that the govt wants to replace agents on the ground with cameras, because cameras don’t collect salaries.  Govts tend to be budget-oriented, and it saves them money.  One of the reasons for the illegal invasion is insufficient border agents in the first place.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Obviously we need to beef up the border patrol.  In fact I agree with Robert, let’s do that first. 

Obviously though the BP can’t be everywhere at all times.

A sensor system is also in order.

Let’s also figure out a way to turn up the heat on Mexico to help.  For example, every illegal we turn back means one less legal from Mexico (and one more from somewhere else.)

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

I think the fence and sensors are adequate, and the way to address personnel needs is to empower domestic law enforcement to arrest illegals and turn them over to the feds.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob, that’s one thing we have to do, but! I don’t think the ~6,000 agents we have now can do the job on the border.

We should be stopping most of them there.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

We should be stopping most of them there.

Right, but I think the fence/gadgets will make those 6,000 border guards much more effective.

I say let’s start with the fence/gadgets and move on to the additional expense of guards as needed.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Actually if you think about it, once we start stopping a large percentage of the illegals, not that many will try.

So it would be something to temporarily call up the National Guard rather than put on permanent Border Patrollers right away.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Unless you equip the cameras with a death ray, they stop no illegals by themselves; they require personnel to complete the job.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Ooo, death ray.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

they require personnel to complete the job.

Yeah, but the allow fewer personnel to cover more area.

So it would be something to temporarily call up the National Guard rather than put on permanent Border Patrollers right away.

I’d be in favor of that.  Make it a two year mission to build the fence, install the surveillance/monitoring equipment and backup the Border Patrol in enforcement.  Once that’s up, send the NG home and re-evaluate.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

HG: They do if you show them some results.  The way it works inside an govt agency is that the more you spend on gadgets, the fewer employees you say you need, and then you can spend more of your budget on administration.  Screenwatchers are cheaper than border agents, and they don’t require vehicle expense, nor do they require the training that agents do.  Until we demand actual performance from a govt agency, they will continue to demand more money and do less for us.  I rate border cameras right up there with intersection cameras as a govt boondoggle.  If you have enough guys on patrol, though, cameras are a worthwhile addition.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Lets be realistic, as it stands now neither Republicans or Democrats are going to spend any money to do either fence and monitors or added BP agents. This bill was passed and sent to the President, he signed it, every one got their campaign slogans and photo-ops and then they stripped what little funding was in it out.

Politicians in both parties have decided that we will become the North American Union, or as Glenn calls it, MexiAmeriCanada. And they do not care what the citizens of America want, they have decided and that is it. Dems and Repubs have been angling towards this since the late ‘50s, altering immigration standards, relaxing requirements for border crossing, lowering the standards of education and health for legal immigrants, and turning a blind eye to illegals.
Hell, look at how the RNC has behaved towards candidates who are running tough on border security and illegal immigration. These issue poll very well with voters, and the RNC runs like hell from candidates whose platforms are strong on these issues. If the Republicans are the “border security” party, why are the not supporting candidates who are strong on the issue? Everything the Republicans do in Congress puts the lie to them saying they are for securing our borders and stopping illegal immigration. So this whole debate about fence and monitor or fence and troops is moot.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2H9, I beg to differ.  Money is already being spent:  The contract has already been let to Boeing to build the “virtual fence.  Note that the contract covers both borders.  I’m afraid that gives a lie to the “bait and switch” meme you being pushed around.

A mere 1-dimensional physical barrier, as I’ve pointed before, is easily compromised by a variety of tactics, including building tunnels. By adding cameras at strategic viewing locations, you can extend the distance that the tunnels would have to be dug to prevent detection to an impracticably large value.

Also, as I’ve pointed out above, the military is extremely interested in remote sensing technologies, including cameras and microphones.  They understand the technology, its importance, and how to integrate it into their battlefield environment.

Another aspect of the plan is the the incorporation of National Guards troops to train border patrol in tactics that leverage on the additional surveillance information.

Robert108:

Screenwatchers are cheaper than border agents, and they don’t require vehicle expense, nor do they require the training that agents do. 

As I said, I don’t think you understand what is being done (not just proposed).

The cameras & other sensors have automatic motion detection capability.  The video cameras use a special mirror (shaped a bit like a horn) that maps a 360-view onto a single camera, which is then processed for motion detection automatically using a computer located in each tower.  Alert information is telemetered back to a dispatcher, who verifies the threat on-screen then dispatches the border patrol to interdict.  A sensor network represents a one-time large-sum capital outlay, border guards require much larger continuing financial ommitment.

$1.2 billion would pay for roughly 12,000 additional border patrol personal for one year.  You would need closer to 200,000 to guard all 6,000 miles of border, which works out to a per year $20 billion (our costs are about $100k per border guard, including benefits and overhead).  Good luck selling that to Congress!  Even if you get it sold to the current Congress, what is the chance that future congresses would continue funding it long-term?  Your proposal is the most expensive, and has the most risks politically both short and long term.

Nearly any solution will work if you throw enough money at it.  The trick is to pick the most intelligent solution, not the most brute-force one.

Carrick, “virtual fence” will not stop shit. We are already using passive monitor systems, including cameras, and they are only as good as the enforcement used in conjunction with them. Pouring money into this Boeing program is not going to alter the fact that our government, both Repubs and Dems, REFUSE to enforce our immigration laws. Border Patrol can catch wetbacks till hell freezes over, INS turns them loose. What good is that? New technology? Now we get 3D computer images of thousands of illegals crossing the border. Our government still REFUSES to enforce the law. Money down a rathole. An actual, physical barrier has been proven to work. Wall along the entire border? No. You place barriers so as to force movement into areas where monitoring can vector BP agents to apprehend the wetbacks. All of this is pissing in the wind when the INS cuts them loose faster than you can arrest them. And even better, the INS teams up with ACLU and “immigrants rights” groups and sue Border Patrol Agents for arrestting illegals. BP is violating their constitutional rights by stopping them from entering our country illegally.
Long story short, our government is REFUSING to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws. The RNC pulls support and funding from any candidate that says they will enforce the law and close our borders. The majority of voters keep telling them that they want the borders secured and illegals deported. Why are they refusing to do those things?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2H9, you are right:  Improved barriers (physical or otherwise) in the absence of more aggressive law enforcement will accomplish nothing.

An actual, physical barrier has been proven to work. Wall along the entire border? No. You place barriers so as to force movement into areas where monitoring can vector BP agents to apprehend the wetbacks.

In the absence of aggressive enforcement, they will accomplish nothing, and (see the links above) they are routinely circumvented by tunnels.  Simply putting up barriers, then concentrating your forces in the gaps will do nothing for a 1-dimensional barrier (a ten-foot barrier, or a break in the fence completely renders it impotent).

One thing that cameras will do, that you perhaps haven’t thought of, is… suppose the video were all available real-time on the web?  (One of the proposals.)

Then even in the absence of proper enforcement, we have direct, substantive proof of the lack of resolve on the part of Homeland Security.

Does this not hold the toes of these bureaucrats up to the fire?

Why are they refusing to do those things?

Because the country itself is still divided on the right approach to take.  And even when they do something proactive, like in this case, they catch hell for it.  You guys have it figured out (each one individually, with no consensus among you), and unless they do exactly what each of you individually demand, it’s the wrong approach.

Story cut short,

Pouring money into this Boeing program is not going to alter the fact that our government, both Repubs and Dems, REFUSE to enforce our immigration laws.

exposes that a major part of the problem has (historically) been with enforcement.  Barriers of any sort won’t solve that.

I have barriers on the brain. I meant to say “(a ten-foot tunnel, or a break in the fence completely renders it impotent).”

That’s a good point, TW. I hadn’t thought about the issue of what we do once we interdict.

I think 2H9 is referring to the “catch and release” policy (release inside US borders), which as far as I understand it has been put to an end.

Carrick:

$1.2 billion would pay for roughly 12,000 additional border patrol personal for one year.  You would need closer to 200,000 to guard all 6,000 miles of border, which works out to a per year $20 billion (our costs are about $100k per border guard, including benefits and overhead).  Good luck selling that to Congress!

You make my point quite well; this gadget approach is more about money than enforcement.  It will cost more money to actually shut down illegal immigration, so whatever is spent on gadgets is wasted, flushed down a rathole, as Two would put it.  The present approach is to sell the public on shiny new gadgets, and to say that this will solve the problem which is really just kicking the can down the road until such time that things have gotten so bad that the public has to pay anyway, and pay a lot more than if we did the right thing today.  The truth is, the present politicians want to hand it off to some future administration to deliver the bad news, and we all suffer for it.  The only way to put the $20 billion into the right context is to give the figure of what it is costing us if we don’t do the proper level of enforcement, and I am willing to bet that it is many times what it would cost to do the job right.
So, you see, I do understand this matter quite well; well enough to know that gadgets alone will not do the job, and that “saving money” with them is really horrendously more expensive, in terms of the cost of the present level of illegal immigration, than doing the right thing with increased enforcement.  It is really a political problem, not a financial one.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Carrick, Toot, I hate to take a fireax to the bottom of the boat but here it is, catch and release is still in effect. INS gives them a piece of paper, tells them to show up for an Immigration Hearing, and out on the street they go. Curently 1% of apprehended illegals are physically deported, all the rest walk after being IDed, fed, washed, and given a medical once over. This ain’t me saying this, this is the word from Border Patrol in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Cali. The press releases stating that catch&release has been suspended are bald faced lies.
As for fence/wall/barrier being used to force wetbacks into narrower more easily interdicted lines of egress, it works. Border Patrol says it is one of the more effective methods of interdicting bordercrossing. Instead of watching 150 miles at once you fence 25-30 mile sections and concentrate surrveilence on the access corridors.
And before some busybody hops into this thread and gets all upset, wetback is the term for anyone crossing any border illegally, not just Mexicans.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

robert:

I think a fence with a camera isn’t as good as a fence with sufficient patrols.  The Minutemen have proved this already.  All three would be even better, but I think the money should be used for more agents before gadgets, not after.  Cameras can’t arrest and turn back illegals; they require personnel to make them meaningful.  Otherwise, we have a lot of videos of illegals streaming over the border.  Nice for TV, I guess

I know how we can do all three and still save money from the one we’ve already appropriated:  Hire Mexicans to build it, on the condition they stay im Mexico while the fence is built.  If they build us a great under-budget and on time fence we then allow them to come to the United States.  .....pay-for-performance at its best!!

2H9, everybody agrees that the first step is enforcing existing law.  This is basically free.

Secondly we can argue about the effectiveness of video cameras + a fence versus just a fence (though the smart money is on video+fence being more effective!), but once you accept the premise that the contract has been let to Boeing… it’s then pretty hard to argue that they aren’t actually going to spend the money, don’t you think?

The bottom line is the “bait and switch” meme is provably wrong.  Virtual fences may or may not be the way to go (but the Decider has decided already), but that’s another argument, from nothing is being done.

Finally.... any references to your claim that catch and release is still in effect?  I’ve seen statistics to the contrary.

Statistics are a liar’s best tool. United States Border Patrol supervisors and feild agents have stated that the INS is continuing the practice of releasing illegals. As for cameras and fence, you are beating a dead horse. We have had video monitoring, siesmic monitoring, infrared monitoring for years. The Boeing contract you are speaking of is for the UAV program, which they are already financing through Dept. of Defense. And Homeland Security. And Border Patrol. And DEA. And it is all the same program, funded through 4 government agencies. A program whose main development has already been done by MIT and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Advanced Unmanned Exploration Sciences Division. Remeber? That thingy on Mars? The remote sensor drops on Titan, and Enceladus, and Dione, and Iapetus? The USMC Remote Battlefeild Photo Recon system? We do not need to pay Boeing to develop and manufacture what we already have. Can you say double dipping? Can you say contract fraud? We have all of this already. We do not need to buy it all over again. In point of fact, this is an excerise in futility. Because our government refuses to enforce the laws already on the books. Why spend more money for what we already have when we will not use it?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2H9, this is not part of the UAV program, it is a new RFP for the installation of a remote surveillance system.  So I’m not beating a dead horse, I’m describing something different than what you appear to be aware of.

Secondly, it’s not a contract to develop new technology, it’s a contract to install a network of towers with sensors inside There were several responses for UAV, but these where considered higher risk programs.  And I know a bit about the sensor development… a fair percentage of my salary is paid by the DOD for exactly that sort of work. 

What JPL remote sensing technologies are being used in this project? ANS: None.  JPL technologies have to do with rock composition, and high-res photographs for remote low-bandwidth telemetry.  A much different problem.  I’ve seen the actual cameras demonstrated (part of my own work involves sensor development for the military), and it’s pretty cool. Horn-shaped mirror + software transformation gives you a 360-degrees cylindrically projected image, that is then processed for motion detection.

So again, this is not pie-in-the sky, it’s not technology development, or anything like that.  It’s a $1.2 billion contract to install a series of towers with enclosed sensors along both the Canadian and Mexican borders.  It would only be “double dipping” if we were paying for the same thing twice.  But no such large-scale network exists (prior networks proved unreliable due to problems with weather exposure and inadequate climate hardening).

Statistics are a liar’s best tool. United States Border Patrol supervisors and feild agents have stated that the INS is continuing the practice of releasing illegals.

I’m hoping you have more than anecdotal evidence here.  Any links?

No links, just the word of US Border Patrol agents, which INS and DHS are dragging in front of disciplinary reveiw boards to shut up. And cameras mounted on towers? My God. What is easier to circumvent than a fence? A camera on a tower. Just off the top of my head I can come up with 6 ways to nullify static mount cameras, and that without destroying the equipment. $1.2 billion. Mary wept. We already have systems in place and operating that surveil the borders, they show us lovely veiws of thousands of illegals entering our country every day. Why the hell are we pissing away 1.2 BILLION dollars on a camera system that can be defeated with a laserpointer mounted on a $10 tripod? Much less a .50 scoped rifle. Hell, an RC airplane from WalMart, put a balloon full of black paint in the body, fly it into the faceplate of the camera, you are effectively blind. And someone has got to go up and clean it. At which point Mr Coyote puts a .50 hollowpoint through his hip. At which point someone has to go up and recover him. At which point Mr Coyote puts a .50 hollowpoint through his hip, etc,etc,etc. Sweet Bleeding Jesus, please tell me you are joking! $1.2 billion. For cameras on towers.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2H9:

No links, just the word of US Border Patrol agents, which INS and DHS are dragging in front of disciplinary reveiw boards to shut up

That means it may be true, or rumor, or just sour grapes.

The old catch-and-release program involved given the detainee a notice for a court date (where the legality of their presence in the US would be tested), and released with orders to appear at that date.  Most would simply move to other cities and of course never make their court date.  Note this has a complete legal custody chain with full paper trail associated with it (up to the dead end).

Is this the policy you are claiming we are still using, or something different?  Almost any process that I can imagine would have a paper trail associated with it, making it really easy for disgruntled border patrolmen to take their grievances to the press & blow it wide open.

A camera on a tower. Just off the top of my head I can come up with 6 ways to nullify static mount cameras, and that without destroying the equipment.

Your opinion.  Note we are arguing about “what is being done” not “whether something is being done”, and note again the title of Rob’s article, and the nature of most of the initial negative comments (including yours).

Why the hell are we pissing away 1.2 BILLION dollars on a camera system that can be defeated with a laserpointer mounted on a $10 tripod?

The pointer would be much less effective than you are imagining.  It potentially could saturate the CCD for light in the direction of the laser pointer, but so what?  Unless your immigrants have wings and are flying along the beam direction, that wouldn’t provide any cover.  In any case, these cameras continue to work even when you have sun or moonlight, I seriously doubt that a laser pointer at the typical set-back distances for the towers would appear much more than a bright star… I can check the numbers if you really are interested.

Hell, an RC airplane from WalMart, put a balloon full of black paint in the body, fly it into the faceplate of the camera, you are effectively blind. And someone has got to go up and clean it. At which point Mr Coyote puts a .50 hollowpoint through his hip.

So you think it’d be a snap to fly a Walmart RC plane carrying enough paint to blind a camera inside of a surveillance tower approximately 1/2 mile over the border?  I think you need to check some of your facts here, like the payload capacity of the Walmart RC plane, it’s maximum range for control, how you effectively control it at prolonged distances, etc.  Also, one hell of a shot for a Mexican farm worker to hit a target at 2500 feet, though doable for a trained sniper. 

2H9’s scenario, first assume a crack assault team employing Mission Impossible tactics—d@mn… do you really think a chain-link fence (cameras or no cameras) or a few poorly armed border patrol would provide any obstacle for this force level?  Nothing short of a special forces-styled counter strike squad would have a chance against them in any case!

$1.2 billion. For cameras on towers.

For a surveillance system including cameras mounted in weatherproofed/ruggedized surveillance towers + physical barrier + training to integrate into the tactics of the border patrol.  Details here.

We already have systems in place and operating that surveil the borders, they show us lovely veiws of thousands of illegals entering our country every day.

In any case, I am quite well aware of the status of the current surveillance network.  It provides only a very limited coverage, and has proven ( to not be particularly reliable, for reasons I have given above (also covered in my link).

Go to ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, BBC and trawl their video archives for video of illegals crossing our borders. As for disabling a camera with a rifle, you got to be kidding me! Do you really think it is that difficult to hit a stationary target with a scoped rifle? 1.2 billion dollars pissed away. INS is releasing illegals faster than BP can catch them, believe otherwise if you wish. By their own admission they are only deporting 1% of captured illegals, the rest are put in the street.There were 2 stories in different news sources, BBC and Fox, about illegal immigrants sueing American companies for firing them because they are illegal immigrants. And who is helping them? The Immigration and Naturalization Service and the ACLU. Your tax money is being used to sue Americans for firing illegals. And you are happy about PISSING AWAY 1.2 billion on cmaeras on towers. The USMC has feilded an UAV system that costs $1200 per unit and can be operated by anyone that can run an XBox or Playstation. Know how hard it is to compromise a flying surveilence system? One hell of alot harder than it is to compromise a stationary tower mounted camera system. Bottom line, INS and DHS refuse to close our borders or enforce immigration laws that are already on the books.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

So you don’t actually have any support for your claims of “thousands per day” on video.

I don’t know the particulars of the surveillance towers, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the cameras are behind bullet proof glass.  As I mentioned, they are in ruggedized enclosures If there were a problem with cameras being knocked out, then it wouldn’t be that difficult, or expensive, to harden them against sniper fire.

But I suppose you can always counter with “YOU KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO KNOCK ONE OF THESE OUT WITH A TOW MISSILE???” Or a B-52 drop? etc.  There isn’t any technology, including UAVs, that don’t have vulnerabilities.  That’s why you still need boots on the ground.

The UAV route was rejected for very good reasons.  Primarily, it’s not a scalable technology, and it’s reliability is much lower than static observation posts.

Rob is right...I think you guys are just looking for something to complain about here.

2H9:

By their own admission they are only deporting 1% of captured illegals, the rest are put in the street.