Mexico May Take Fence Dispute to U.N.

[Madison15]

Linky here

By JENNY BARCHFIELD
The Associated Press
Monday, October 9, 2006; 10:22 PM

PARIS -- Mexico's foreign secretary said Monday the country may take a dispute over U.S. plans to build a fence on the Mexican border to the United Nations.

Luis Ernesto Derbez told reporters in Paris, his first stop on a European tour, that a legal investigation was under way to determine whether Mexico has a case.

The Mexican government last week sent a diplomatic note to Washington criticizing the plan for 700 miles of new fencing along the border. President-elect Felipe Calderon also denounced the plan, but said it was a bilateral issue that should not be put before the international community.

Derbez said Monday after meeting with French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy that it was a "shame" U.S. immigration policy had been used for what he claimed was a short-term political gain in the lead-up to midterm elections in the U.S. in November.

He said he discussed the issue with Douste-Blazy, and planned to bring it up in meetings with his Spanish and Italian counterparts during visits to Madrid and Rome. He vowed to work on the case until the "very last day" of President Vicente Fox's term, which ends Dec. 1.

The U.S. Senate approved the border fence bill last month and President Bush has said he will sign it into law _ despite last-minute pleas from the Mexican government for a veto.

"What should be constructed is a bridge in relations between the two countries," Derbez said.

All I have to say is when did the UN become a Neighborhood Assocation?

[RedImperator]

Regardless of whether or not you think a border fence is a good idea, I can't imagine how you could argue the US doesn't have a legal right to build one if it wants to. This isn't like Israel's fence, which crosses disputed territory. It would be entirely within US borders.

Mexico's whining on this issue is getting a little tiresome. It's one thing to say, "Hey, the US is better served by allowing immigrants in", but the Mexican position seems to be, "You can't enforce your own immigration law!" I'm in favor of immigration reform that would allow more people to legally enter, but reform of American law is going to come on American terms.

[Big Phil]

I was already in favor of a border fence... now this makes me want it built that much faster.

A fence is largely irrelevant, anyway; without more frequent and better patrolling and measures to identify and punish businesses that employ illegals, they'll keep crossing the border and it'll just be a constant headache patching holes and keeping the fence maintained.

[Stravo]

Mexico's bullshit is really getting annoying. They know if we really crack down and shut down the border that country goes right into the shitter. They are absolutely reliant on the money coming in from illegals and legals that send money back home.

And without the pressure release that the immigration north gives them then their people would get really pissed about the horrific state of the country's economy and the state of the poor.

Let us not also forget the olympic hypocrisy of Mexico in yammering about the northern border when their southern border is rife with abuses of illegals coming in that way, tortured, raped or even killed by the border guards down there and I believe their southern border is militarized with mines and everything.

I'm all in favor of something down there, whether it be fences, military patrols or a fucking moat full of burning pitch but godamnit please do something about that situation. Bush, once again, drops the ball on this one claiming to want to secure the homeland yet leaving such a gaping hole in our national security. He essentially had to be shamed by Congress into doing something. Asshole.

[Guardsman Bass]

If the fence is definitely on US territory, the UN would probably tell the Mexicans to piss off, or simply not pass anything.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I doubt International Law prohibits the US from doing what they feel like doing on their side of the lawn...

So it boils down to the fact that the Mexicans are trying to outsource their problems to others.

[Darth Raptor]

This is patently absurd. I have no love for US immigration policy in regards to Mexico, but this is a fundamental sovereignty issue. I just hope the hostility in the international community towards American behavior this decade doesn't translate into a ridiculous demand by the UN. If you want to see the United States go even more cowboy, tell them they can't build a fence on their side of the border. I hope the General Assembly isn't stupid enough to do that.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

This is patently absurd. I have no love for US immigration policy in regards to Mexico, but this is a fundamental sovereignty issue. I just hope the hostility in the international community towards American behavior this decade doesn't translate into a ridiculous demand by the UN. If you want to see the United States go even more cowboy, tell them they can't build a fence on their side of the border. I hope the General Assembly isn't stupid enough to do that.

No it wouldn't. Laws are made to prevent stupid claims from becoming reality. Furthermore, anyone knows full well that if such claims come through they should expect retribution from the Americans because it is patently within International Law.

[Superman]

Mexico's bullshit is really getting annoying. They know if we really crack down and shut down the border that country goes right into the shitter.

I'd say that turd of a country is pretty much in the shitter as it is.

This would be like if your neighbor's kids were to run into your backyard everytime you leave, and leave a big steaming pile of crap for you when you come back. Then when you decide to put a fence up, the kids' parents throw a fit and try to get the city to stop it.

[Stormbringer]

Mexico's whining on this issue is getting a little tiresome. It's one thing to say, "Hey, the US is better served by allowing immigrants in", but the Mexican position seems to be, "You can't enforce your own immigration law!" I'm in favor of immigration reform that would allow more people to legally enter, but reform of American law is going to come on American terms.

Mexico has long held that the US cannot or should not enforce it's own immigration laws when it comes to Mexicans. This wouldn't be the first time that Mexico has tried to put pressure on the US to drop enforcement efforts. They can't really do anything else. Too much money illegally flows into the Mexican economy from across the border whether it be drug trafficking, people smuggling, or simply the wages illegal aliens are sending back. The Mexican government simply has to try and subvert US law otherwise they stand to lose that.

[Molyneux]

Mexico's whining on this issue is getting a little tiresome. It's one thing to say, "Hey, the US is better served by allowing immigrants in", but the Mexican position seems to be, "You can't enforce your own immigration law!" I'm in favor of immigration reform that would allow more people to legally enter, but reform of American law is going to come on American terms.

Mexico has long held that the US cannot or should not enforce it's own immigration laws when it comes to Mexicans. This wouldn't be the first time that Mexico has tried to put pressure on the US to drop enforcement efforts. They can't really do anything else. Too much money illegally flows into the Mexican economy from across the border whether it be drug trafficking, people smuggling, or simply the wages illegal aliens are sending back. The Mexican government simply has to try and subvert US law otherwise they stand to lose that.

Hm...

Wonder what Mexico would say if we decided to solve the immigration problem by annexing the damn country?

[Stormbringer]

Hm...

Wonder what Mexico would say if we decided to solve the immigration problem by annexing the damn country?

Hurray for a legally enforced minimum wage?

[Lord of the Abyss]

Hm...

Wonder what Mexico would say if we decided to solve the immigration problem by annexing the damn country?

"Kill the Americans" most likely; as we see in Iraq, that's the usual response to conquest. With about 4 times the population and a geography much more suited to guerilla war, the occupation would make Iraq look like paradise.

[Superman]

You know, I am a little surprised Mexico hasn't used the oil card. I guess they're too damn dependent on our consumerism.

[CaptainChewbacca]

You know, I am a little surprised Mexico hasn't used the oil card. I guess they're too damn dependent on our consumerism.

If Mexico stops selling oil to the US, it falls apart. There's nobody else it can sell to, and they need to sell more than we need to buy.

[Glocksman]

Mexico's bullshit is really getting annoying. They know if we really crack down and shut down the border that country goes right into the shitter.

I'd say that turd of a country is pretty much in the shitter as it is.

This would be like if your neighbor's kids were to run into your backyard everytime you leave, and leave a big steaming pile of crap for you when you come back. Then when you decide to put a fence up, the kids' parents throw a fit and try to get the city to stop it.

From talking with the Mexicans I know at work, my understanding is that they've got a fucking raw deal from their government for generations and that they'll put up with things that'd have a most Americans throwing a 'spontaneous necktie party' for the officials responsible.

[Molyneux]

Hm...

Wonder what Mexico would say if we decided to solve the immigration problem by annexing the damn country?

"Kill the Americans" most likely; as we see in Iraq, that's the usual response to conquest. With about 4 times the population and a geography much more suited to guerilla war, the occupation would make Iraq look like paradise.

So...they're hell-bent on continuing to send people over here by any means necessary. But any actual attempt to clean up the region and get rid of the fucking corruption would be met with extreme resistance.

Yup, sounds about right. Still, a man can dream.

[TheMuffinKing]

You know, I am a little surprised Mexico hasn't used the oil card. I guess they're too damn dependent on our consumerism.

If Mexico stops selling oil to the US, it falls apart. There's nobody else it can sell to, and they need to sell more than we need to buy.

Can't they sell to China or anyone with the money? I know America is closest, but I'm curious as to why they don't have a more "open" oil market.

[Darth Wong]

The US happily hires illegal aliens in order to keep its costs down and it also happily outsources manufacturing jobs to Mexico. In both cases, this is OK because the parent corporation finds this activity to be very profitable, and what's good for corporations is good for America. But the corporatists have to mollify the unionists and other people who are angry about outsourcing American jobs, either to other countries or to illegals in America, so they have to maintain the appearance of doing something to limit both of these trends.

Meanwhile, the Mexicans are reliant upon this combination of legitimate American investment and illegal cross-border employment activity, so they have no incentive to improve working or living conditions for their working class. Unlike the Americans, they don't have to worry about maintaining pretenses, so they can overtly act as if they have some innate right to wander across the border at will.

What a joke.

[theski]

You know, I am a little surprised Mexico hasn't used the oil card. I guess they're too damn dependent on our consumerism.

If Mexico stops selling oil to the US, it falls apart. There's nobody else it can sell to, and they need to sell more than we need to buy.

Can't they sell to China or anyone with the money? I know America is closest, but I'm curious as to why they don't have a more "open" oil market.

Its all a open market.. and having Better trading relationships with the US benefits Mexico more then selling oil at the same price to China

[CaptainChewbacca]

If Mexico stops selling oil to the US, it falls apart. There's nobody else it can sell to, and they need to sell more than we need to buy.

Can't they sell to China or anyone with the money? I know America is closest, but I'm curious as to why they don't have a more "open" oil market.

Its all a open market.. and having Better trading relationships with the US benefits Mexico more then selling oil at the same price to China

That's true, but right now Mexico can't sell its "america oil" to China without spending a decade retooling its oil infrastructure.

[Glocksman]

As Michelle says, a fence ain't gonna fix this.

Wall Street Journal article via Michelle Malkin

As U.S. leaders craft policies to curb illegal immigration from Mexico, the U.S. Federal Reserve is devising programs to extend banking services to undocumented immigrants. A new remittance program aims to bring Mexican migrants who send money home into the mainstream U.S. financial system, regardless of their immigration status.

Dubbed "Directo a Mexico," the remittance program enables U.S. commercial banks to make money transfers for Mexican workers through the Federal Reserve's own automated clearinghouse, which is linked to Banco de Mexico, the Mexican central bank.

To use the service, a Mexican need only possess a matricula consular, an I.D. issued by the Mexican consulate in most major U.S. cities to those with proof of Mexican birth or citizenship, or a picture I.D. card issued by the U.S. or another foreign government. The idea is to make it cheaper and safer for Mexican workers to send funds to their relatives.

"We offer an extremely competitive exchange rate," says Elizabeth McQuerry, an Atlanta-based assistant vice president for the Federal Reserve Bank's retail payments office. "We cost a third of other providers."

The majority of immigrants currently make transfers, which average $350 each, through companies like Western Union or a hodgepodge of wire-transfer firms, couriers and others that operate out of storefronts in Hispanic enclaves. Family members then collect the wired cash at a shop in their town or village.

The Federal Reserve Bank and Banco de Mexico launched a cross-country road show over the summer to promote the new funds-transfer program to commercial banks. Banks that offer the service hope to attract new customers. Indeed, one of the Federal Reserve Bank's goals is to use the program as a springboard for drawing hundreds of thousands of immigrants into the formal U.S. banking system since commercial banks require that those wanting the service first open a savings account.

"People who didn't have bank accounts establish a relationship with us," says James Maloney, chairman of Mitchell Bank in Milwaukee, one of the first banks to offer the Federal Reserve Bank's remittance plan. "It's great for our business."

Acknowledging that many Mexicans sending money home are illegal immigrants, the Federal Reserve's brochure poses the following frequently asked question: "If I return to Mexico or am deported, will I lose the money in my bank account?" The answer: "No. The money still belongs to you and can be easily accessed at an ATM in Mexico using your debit card."

So on one hand Congress wants to make it harder on illegals, but the Federal Reserve sees them as customers for bank money transfers?

[Glocksman]

Oh yeah, and notice the use of the weasel words 'undocumented immigrant'.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Hm...

Wonder what Mexico would say if we decided to solve the immigration problem by annexing the damn country?

"Kill the Americans" most likely; as we see in Iraq, that's the usual response to conquest. With about 4 times the population and a geography much more suited to guerilla war, the occupation would make Iraq look like paradise.

So...they're hell-bent on continuing to send people over here by any means necessary. But any actual attempt to clean up the region and get rid of the fucking corruption would be met with extreme resistance.

Yup, sounds about right. Still, a man can dream.

I'm not all that familiar with Mexico, but I seriously doubt that it's present problems are anywhere near as bad as what would be caused by a war of conquest and forcible "reform" at gunpoint by America. Just look at Iraq. They wouldn't attack us to resist reform, they'd do so to avenge all the death and destruction and general suffering that are inevitable in a war. Scaled up directly from Iraq, we'd be talking about 2.4 million dead Mexicans; that's a lot of motive for hatred.

[Molyneux]

"Kill the Americans" most likely; as we see in Iraq, that's the usual response to conquest. With about 4 times the population and a geography much more suited to guerilla war, the occupation would make Iraq look like paradise.

So...they're hell-bent on continuing to send people over here by any means necessary. But any actual attempt to clean up the region and get rid of the fucking corruption would be met with extreme resistance.

Yup, sounds about right. Still, a man can dream.

I'm not all that familiar with Mexico, but I seriously doubt that it's present problems are anywhere near as bad as what would be caused by a war of conquest and forcible "reform" at gunpoint by America. Just look at Iraq. They wouldn't attack us to resist reform, they'd do so to avenge all the death and destruction and general suffering that are inevitable in a war. Scaled up directly from Iraq, we'd be talking about 2.4 million dead Mexicans; that's a lot of motive for hatred.

I was not advocting an invasion of Mexico. I can tell that that would be a REALLY bad idea.

However, since they're trying to go to fucking COURT to keep us from actually enforcing our border laws, I'm just a wee bit annoyed at that government.