Nine illegals died trying to escape the border patrol in Arizona. I place this blame on the Mexican government who makes comic books and other hand outs on how to cross into America.

The Mexican government makes me sick. Mexico's #2 import is Mexicans sending money from America into Mexico. How do you increase revenues? Send as many of your citizens north and the Western Union transfers will increase.

I am glad to see the U.S. is starting to get tough on the border. hopefully, it is just a start.

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

The current administration does not want to get tough on security at either the Mexican or Canadian border. Any moves to get tough will only be conciliatory to make it appear they are getting tough. They want to continue to push for a completely open economic and travel, North American Union zone. The emphasis for border security will be to secure the perimeter of the mergence, which means Mexico's southern border. Free travel and economic trade for all citizens across the continent is the goal. This is not conjecture on my part, this is fact in black and white. The process was put on a fast track in 2005. The drug cartel problems that are causing the violence at border towns will be squashed through legalization of certain drugs in certain zones in Mexico, much like Amsterdam. The laws in Mexico have already been quietly changed to allow the holding and use of small quantities of several drugs. Once again, this is fact.

__________________
Turk Quid Pro Quo

There is a HUGE difference between opening up free trade and commerce across boundaries and giving up sovereignty. I think that the first steps ARE being taken to create this trade agreement by tightening up the borders. I know that may sound like it doesn't make sense, but the whole reason for doing this trade agreement is for the governments to make money. You can't make money if you don't control who comes in and out of your country. So...I'm with Mike on this one, and I hope they continue to tighten security.

__________________
Joeninpo

The tyrant custom, most grave Senators,
Hath made the flinty and steel couch of war
My thrice-driven bed of down

You can't have true free economic freedom in any particular zone unless people are free to travel across the borders as they please, in all directions. The question of sovereignty will gradually be changed to mean that the NAU will have soveriegnty for security and monetary purposes that trumps the sovereignty of the members. Immigration control will have to be developed around the NAU perimeter. This process began in earnest under Clinton/Gore and continues under Bush/Cheny. Its not a republican/democratic issue, its an issue for globalization and how to maintain substantial American power.

__________________
Turk Quid Pro Quo

True...I agree with you almost 100%. I think my big catch is that there's no freakin' way any of the countries are going to let a single piece of anything cross over a border without taxing the crap out of it. Hence, much tighter borders with completely controlled crossing points. You can come and go as you please, but you're gonna pay the piper first. It's how the EU does it, and I can see us going the same way. Other than that, yeah...I'm afraid it's coming and they are being really, really subtle and quite about it. Any thoughts on why?

__________________
Joeninpo

The tyrant custom, most grave Senators,
Hath made the flinty and steel couch of war
My thrice-driven bed of down

It has been very, very quiet until just recently. The web sight that gives some information about the process but also sugar coats it is spp.gov. I believe it has been kept under wraps, more or less, until now, because it can now be justified more readily in the name of national security. I'm not saying I disagree with it at all. The major problem is this, they are side stepping, maybe ignoring, the U.S. Constitution. Citizens have not had any input, except those involved in the process. It is all being done via agreements between leaders and memorandums of understanding. These kinds of moves usually require treaties. They have successfully avoided treaties and congressional openess required to ratify treaties, iaw the constitution. I am for this move because I think it is needed to strengthen our part of the world. I'm against the way they have gone about it because it is the secracy itself that may cause it to fail. Make sense?

__________________
Turk Quid Pro Quo