Immigration Watch International (2): Here's Why Border Crossings Near El Paso Are Reportedly ‘Plummeting’

Sunday, January 1, 2023

Here's Why Border Crossings Near El Paso Are Reportedly ‘Plummeting’

The Texas National Guard has installed two miles of border fencing near El Paso and is expected to add more as migrants in Mexico continue to wait for the end of Title 42.

The barbwire fencing now spans two ports of entry, according to Border Report. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott shared that border crossings in the area have “plummeted” as a result.

A Texas National Guard spokesperson told CNN this week that more fencing will be constructed ahead of the end of Title 42.

Title 42, which was initially scheduled to end last week, will be kept in place due to a recent decision by the Supreme Court. Julio reported that as many as 18,000 border crossings were expected per day once the policy expired. The day before Title 42 was supposed to be lifted, there were reportedly 20,000 migrants near El Paso waiting to cross the border.

Though Title 42 is still in place, El Paso has been overwhelmed with migrants. Before Title 42’s expected expiration date, El Paso Mayor Oscar Leeser said that shelters on the other side of the border were “completely full.” When temperatures dropped last week, El Paso opened up its convention center and closed down school buildings to house migrants.

This week, it was revealed that a massive tent was being constructed near El Paso in preparation for an influx of migrants once Title 42 eventually ends. The facility will operate as an “overflow” processing center for migrants.

El Paso’s Deputy City Manager Mario D’Agostino said on Friday that El Paso’s central processing center has a capacity of 1,400 with a “breaking point” of 5,000, according to the New York Post.

“It’s still going to get worse before it even gets better, and that’s what we’re preparing for,” Leeser told reporters on Friday.

Security guards at the tent city outside El Paso told Daily Mail that the facility could be in place for “a few weeks, six months, we don’t know.”

This month, the Biden administration sued the state of Arizona for constructing a border wall out of shipping containers in an effort to stop the influx of illegal immigrants. The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Arizona, alleges that the shipping containers trespass federal lands that the state is not authorized to use, according to CBS.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2022/12/30/national-guard-putting-up-fencing-at-us-mexico-border-n2617728

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Sunday, January 1, 2023

Here's Why Border Crossings Near El Paso Are Reportedly ‘Plummeting’

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors