De-Fence Of Liberty

More often than not, Digby delivers when a little clarity is badly needed.  His comments on Bush's "immigration distraction" keeps the focus right where it belongs -- on politics.

It's clear that Bush is going to try to change the subject with a big push on the immigration issue.

Having spent a good part of my almost 50 years in California, I have observed that the immigration issue is usually a sign of a weak economy or some other form of discontent. It's been around forever and rears its head every once in a while as people perceive a "crisis" and then it goes underground again.

It is not a partisan issue; many Democrats are very exercised about Mexican immigrants overrunning the borders and allegedly taking away jobs from Americans or at least holding wages below what they would otherwise be. On the other side are liberals who see a subtle and no so subtle racism in the border debate and feel that all this talk of cultural dissonence is a false construct. There are conflicting values of economics and human rights involved and it's confusing.

My feeling is that this time we are dealing with displaced fear and frustrating impotence. The terrorist boogeyman has been fully internalized and people are afraid. But it is an ephemeral and distant enemy. Another brown hoarde is conveniently available. I think my theory is borne out by the right's increasing emphasis on the Mexican border being a national security threat and the sudden seriousness of Pat Buchanan's "fence" concept.

The group advocating the creation of an Israeli-style fence on the U.S.-Mexico border -- and leading the media attack -- is called Let Freedom Ring.  In terms of evoking the boogeyman, these people are true graduates of the Swift Boat school.  The organization has developed a couple of ads which are scheduled to run in Washington.

Both ads create a histrionic connection between illegal immigration and terrorism. Warning of the infiltration of foreign nationals from countries that "sponsor terror," the first ad (top image) runs the green filter with the rectangular window over miles of desert. Although open to interpretation, an obvious association is that of a bombing target. For comparison sake, the bluish image is an actual bombing target. With rumors "flying" that Bush plans to justify troop withdrawals in Iraq by scaling up the air war, the LFR people probably think regular bombing raids along Arizona's border might also be warranted.

The second ad is even more wild eyed. In this case, the premise is established that terrorists are blending in with those crossing the border and leaving us "vulnerable to another attack." In a series of cockeyed associations, the ad cites the number of "special interest aliens" that entered the U.S. in '04 from Axis of Evil members. It then uses a newspaper article about 2 Iraqis apprehended for trying to enter the U.S. to presume the Zharkawi's of the world are on their way. Finally, you have the suggestion that these Middle Eastern/Iraqi bad boys could strike at any time, just like they took out the Trade Center.

If these people had been working with Rove and Cheney to sell the link between Saddam and WMD (or Iraq and al Qaeda), who knows how much more great stuff Colin Powell could have force-fed the United Nations.

We Need A Fence.com website here

(images 1, 3-5 weneedafence.com.  image 2: 2001. BELGRADE, Yugoslavia. via Cable News Network)

Comments

[mugatea]

Who does the construction on "Israeli-style" fences?

Some of the fences around "secured areas" in Iraq have a design/construction to them that is very close to the look of Israel's.

[lemondloulou54]

I think I'm going to throw up.

[readytoblowagasket]

The Let Freedom Ring folks believe in a clobber-'em-in-the-head style of advertising, which elicits a visceral response, whether blind fear in their intended audience, or as lemondloulou54 says, the need to vomit in their unintended audience.

Whenever the "fence" issue comes up in a BnN discussion, I am reminded of Robert Frost's poem "Mending Wall," about two neighbors repairing the stone wall that separates their property. If you don't know the poem, it begins "Something there is that doesn't love a wall," and presents the LFR point of view in the much more subtle line "Good fences make good neighbors," spoken by the narrator's neighbor. But the poem wrestles with this philosophy of setting walls between people. The narrator says:

"Before I built a wall I'd ask to know  
What I was walling in or walling out,  
And to whom I was like to give offense.  
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,  
That wants it down!"

When I saw the LFR fence illustration on their website, my immediate thought was, "Yikes, I'm trapped in America! Let me out!"

[chris thomas]

CBC radio one had an interview this morning with one of the "Let Freedom Ring" guys and the mayor of a Texas border town (btw, he doesn't want the fence). Interesting interview. The Freedom guys came across very well. Not a wingnut at all, but that doesn't mean he isn't. THey also discussed maybe erecting a fence between the U.S. and Canada.

idiots ....

[janinsanfran]

About those fences: can't we assume that Halliburton/Bechtel have a more realistic idea of how long they'll survive in Iraq than their Administration sponsors, so they want a little wall building project on the US border?

[Marysz]

In the early twentieth century, as millions of immigrants from Russia, Italy and Eastern Europe poured into the United States via Ellis Island (including my Hungarian grandparents), there was a strong anti-immigration movement. At that time, Americans were worried about "anarchists" sneaking into the country instead of "terrorists." Today, forty percent of all Americans are descendants of Ellis Island immigrants. Global demographics will change America again in the twenty-first century, even though native-born Americans will grumble about it.

[Rab]

Since it looks like an Israeli-built "fence", what is the chance that the purpose is also to de-sensitize people to the wall being built to ethnically cleanse Palestine? Halliburton makes money and Israel gets some support for their "fence", since if we get one why can't they get one?

[jt from B.C.]

A few Walls; China 3,946/Israel 403/Berlin 96/ Hadrian 73. (in miles)
Canada, 5,000 + Mexico, 1,951=6,951 miles, readytoblowagasket that’s the length it will take to box you in and us out. It would be the greatest wall in history, greater than China and all Walls combined.Isn't that impressive.

[adrian]

I would be though that the Candadians would be eventually happy to have the wall :-)

When stuff like this comes up though, I always have wonder how we think Free trade can be possible when all the people involved aren't free to go where they please.

[readytoblowagasket]

jt from B.C.: Don't forget, this is the country that wanted to rebuild the World Trade Towers to show the terrorists that they didn't "win." In fact, when the plans were first unveiled for the "Freedom Tower" in Lower Manhattan, the NYPD FREAKED OUT because important 9/11 security measures were not incorporated (unbelievably, the architects hadn't consulted with security experts and so had placed the tower's footprint too close to West Street, making the building vulnerable to potential car bombs; they literally had to go back to the drawing board to revise the plans). As a fellow reasonable person, I appreciate and take comfort in the numbers you've provided, but I'm afraid a mere 7,000 miles isn't going to faze Fence Fanatics.

I don't remember GWB ever mentioning a state-of-the-art Fence of Death as part of his "guest worker" proposal (does anyone else?), so I went back to LFR's website to see what they might think about so-called guest workers. Guess what? The LFRers are already on the case! From their website:
"A border fence is entirely compatible with a guest worker program. In fact, a guest worker program would be reduced to irrelevance without such a fence."

[shifty]

I recall that the Southwest was part of Mexico
and try to imagine what it would be like if
e.g. Canada claimed a large of the U.S. through
force, then improved it economically then Americans
tried to get back into it to work.

[jt from B.C.]

adrian, I'm far from being the brightest bulb on this blog, but I don't get your your point ?
readytoblowagasket, yep I guess your right even colour coding 'paranoia' might even become fashionable with the LFR crew, its time for a reprint of 'The Wisdom Of Insecurity' by that rascal Alan Watts.
shifty,(I understand your hypothetical)Canada happily survived 1812 due primarily to the audacity and fighting skills of the Native peoples, not the Red Coats as history emphasizes. Aren't the ggrandchildren of Mexico reclaiming these lost territories in great numbers through immigration legal or otherwise, a benign form of conquest.

[readytoblowagasket]

I rather like shifty's idea that Canada invade the U.S. because I was picturing myself as being one of the Coalition of the Willing to Be Captured. Sure beats a fence. And we certainly need some economic improvement. Actually, right now would be the perfect time to invade the U.S. With Bush's approval rating so low, it's quite possible many Americans wouldn't put up much of a fight. Especially if the invaders came with health care for all.

[mdhatter]

I think we'd better mine the harbors too, you know, just in case Greenpeace invades.

[Mad_nVT]

Several interesting points to consider:

While Europe is doing away with passports for travel between countries, the Bush Administration will force travelers between Canada and the US to show their passports. That is kind of a fence. And no way to treat a good neighbor (or neighbour).

It doesn't seem likely that Canada would want to invade the US, because they wouldn't want to have to assume the American debt, the American war machine and the American tax structure--- the giant sucking sounds in the foreground of our future.

BagMan's source, Digby, hits it on the nose about immigration. Bush will be using it as a distractor.

But immigration is a huge and legitimate concern for people-- the flood of immigrants affects working class wages all the way up here on the Canadian border, as far from Mexico as possible. Immigration is good, the current flood is bad. There should be national discussion about this.

Jeezum, I guess there should be national discussion about lots of things. Too bad it doesn't happen.

[jt from B.C.]

readytoblowagasket, privatizing health care, joining star wars, becoming a military beaver for Uncle Sam are three priorities of the Conservative Party. If the unthinkable happens I may be posting from a former part time residence in the other BC- Baja California.
mdhatter, you may know, the idea of Greenpeace was conceived in the pub of the Cecil hotel in Vancouver, B.C. with the assistance of American activitists, it was the center for many subversive ideas and a great place to share a mug, sadly Robert Hunter one of the 'ORIGNALS' died recently at 64.
Mad n VT, Mexican workers are paid the going wages and receive all benefits including universal health care, while filling jobs which locals prefer to avoid. Changing the 24/7 discussion on terrorism is a great idea. As "good neighbours" how can we help?

[Mad_nVT]

jt_from_B.C. and "filling the jobs which locals prefer to avoid"--- That is exactly the point- if nobody wants to dig ditches for $5 an hour, then it's probably because it is shitty work- but if the wage for digging ditches was raised, then people would do it, and working class wages would rise. But if legal immigrants will do it for less and if there are lots of legal immigrants driving down wages... and then illegal immigrants will do it for even less, well then working class wages become depressed.

With loss of manufacturing and with outsourcing, etc, families don't need to have wages depressed further.

As far as changing the subject on terrorism: perhaps other countries could raise the volume on war crimes and war criminals. The words are starting to circulate in US leadership circles, in the UK media and even the US media.

It's not really changing the subject, so much as changing the focus, putting it right where it belongs. Torturers and war criminals should be held up for universal and vigorous condemnation.

[jt from B.C.]

Mad n VT, I agree a minimum wage of $7.45 per hour in Ontario (Higher or lower in other provinces) does not get you above the poverty level. However Mexican immigrants are not paid less than this rate so they are not responsible for poverty wages in the other industries like Walmart MacDonald's etc who avoid or minimise paying benefits by providing insufficient hours through multiple part time positions etc. As you may know Walmart closed a very profitable store because it became unionised. At least for the farming season the immigrants are guaranteed 40 hours a week, shelter and compensated for overtime. Unions are fighting a losing battle but if Walmart is to be unionised I bet it will be in Canada.
The fight to maintain our universal health care program is the number one battle right now. We know the costs if we lose by observing the consequences faced by millions in the US.
Canadians do not wish to know of their military complicity with the US and France in over throwing the elected government in Haiti and doing a "peace keeping mission" many are aware however that Afghanistan is run by Warlords and that it has regained its position as the number 1 supplier of opium and "as a budding democracy" doesn't fool many here. When you talk of war criminals are you thinking of local folks like Henry Kissinger.

[Mad_nVT]

War criminals: according to basic definitions in dictionaries and encyclopedias, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld meet the criteria.

Torture of prisoners of war and the massacres of civilians are inexcusable. Over thirty thousand civilians have been killed. Counted and substantiated.

Use of chemical weapons (white phosphorus)in the attack on Falluja, used against both Iraqi insurgents and the civilians in the city. Chemical warfare. Indefensible.

There should be much more discussion about war crimes, and I hope that the issue is raised by other nations as well.