"WATER IS A HUMAN RIGHT" Intervention to the 8th Session of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues May 2009

(LOWER RIO GRANDE RIVER)

COLLECTIVE STATEMENT

Intervention to the Eighth Session of the
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 2009
Submitted by the Seventh Generation Fund for Indian Development
Agenda Item 3a: Social and Economic Development
PROTECTION OF WATER – WATER IS A HUMAN RIGHT

Madame Chair, esteemed Members of this Forum, brothers and sisters of the world community, thank you, for the opportunity of addressing the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. The Seventh Generation Fund for Indian Development, an Indigenous Peoples’ non-governmental organization directly engaged with Indigenous communities and Nations to design and implement ecologically and culturally harmonious strategies for sovereignty, human rights, environmental and social justice, sacred sites protection, and the revitalization of traditional economies, submits this intervention on Agenda Item 3a, with the following signatories: Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Indian Reservation, American Indian Law Alliance, Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribal College, International Organization of Indigenous Resources Development, Tonatierra, Dine’ Agriculture, Tatanka Oyate, International Indian Treaty Council, Lipan Apache Band, Maya Vision, Grupo Maya Kusamej Junan, CORE Manipur, and Western Shoshone Defense Project.

For the last four years our organization and co-signatories have addressed the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues on the Protection of Water as a human right, and we are honored to do so again under this agenda item. We call for the recognition of Water as essential to Life; that it is crucial for bio-cultural diversity and for sustaining all aspects of Indigenous Peoples’ survival and well-being, assuring our physical health, nurturing us spiritually and central for the continued vitality of our cultures and traditional livelihoods. We recognize Water is the most vulnerable element of all forms of Life in light of climate change and its impacts, and coupled with the encroachment of invasive development – the terracide – raging across the globe and damaging Indigenous homelands and ecosystems, time is of the essence. We must take action now as some places are flooded and others stricken with drought. We urgently reiterate the critical significance of protecting Water sources and Indigenous Peoples’ full, unencumbered access to clean Water on our lands and territories for physical, cultural, and spiritual survival. With this in mind, we respectfully advance these recommendations.

Recommendations1. We urge that the Permanent Forum advocates for the establishment of a United Nations International Year for Water which can conduct focused research and emphasize critical concerns of Water access, potability, and holistic integrity for all aspects of life, including cultural and spiritual facets in relation to Indigenous Peoples, our Nations and ecosystems.

2. We ask that the Permanent Forum take action this year to establish Water as a theme for the ninth session of the Permanent Forum or to include Water in the self-determination theme.

3. Recognizing Catarina de Albuquerque is the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, we urge the Permanent Forum to call for her mandate to be extended. Further, to work with UNEP for an international study on Water that extends beyond drinking water and sanitation issues alone, and advance this concern in relation to the rights of Indigenous Peoples to access clean water for our spiritual sustenance and cultural livelihoods.

4. We strongly urge that the Permanent Forum recommends to ECOSOC in coordination with UNEP to call for the coordination of an official UN Experts Meeting on Water that specifically initiates a close review and assessment of Water allocation, regulation and access policies that affect the rights of Indigenous Nations, the health of our Peoples and ecosystems, and that of future generations. This high level Experts Meeting on Water can explore and establish indicators of Water Well-being for Indigenous Nations, and the world community.

5. We again implore the Permanent Forum for the immediate appointment of a Special Rapporteur for the Protection of Water and Water Catchment Areas to gather testimony directly from Indigenous Nations of the world targeted for or impacted by Water privatization, diversion, toxic contamination, dams, pollution, commodification, non-sustainable energy development, and other environmental injustices that damage Water sources on which Indigenous Peoples rely. This recommendation was carried forth by the Permanent Forum to the Economic and Social Development Council when we first requested this in 2005, and we ask that this appeal is recognized and advanced by this body to ECOSOC again this year.

6. That any initiatives related to Water must observe and recognize all articles of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including treaty rights to Water.

7. We affirm President Evo Morales’ call in 2008 for a UN Convention on Water, and further, that Indigenous Peoples fully participate in the development of that convention.

8. We commend the UN General Assembly for naming April 22nd the annual Mother Earth Day and ask that Water be highlighted as part of the related activities

9. We condemn the use of national militaries and corporate private armies employed to prevent Indigenous communities’ access to their traditional Water sources for drinking, agriculture, fishing, transport, and ceremonies, we call on the Permanent Forum to take leadership in working with ECOSOC to denounce repressive actions and call for a halt to such abuse by security forces and any legislation that inappropriately justifies this.

10. We affirm and support the Permanent Forum advancing the call for a World Conference on Water and Peace with full and effective participation by Indigenous Peoples and Nations and ask that steps are taken to make this a reality.

Narrative Justification
We call it K’yawe, Pa’a, Mni, Ishing, Mahpe’ and Nipi; Water – The Lifegiver. The significance of Water is expressed in a rainbow of songs, stories, and ceremonies, holding a potent place in our cultures, linking us together in a continuous, Life-affirming cycle. And yet, increasingly, our territories are either parched or flooded – being destroyed by the unquenchable greed of industrialization, a feature of colonization. Springs that our ancestors emerged from within the womb of Mother Earth, the precious watersheds that feed our lakes and fields and sustain our bodies, and rivers that carry our prayers to the forever after, are being contaminated, dammed, diverted, and siphoned. Ancient glaciers are fast melting into the sea, displacing our peoples, threatening our coastal zones with submersion and endangering the continuity of all Life.

Human rights violations, including the ongoing invasions onto Indigenous territories, and the attendant wrongful taking of our natural resources, particularly the nearly unhindered exploitation, diversion and commodification of Water, obstruct critically needed access to our Waterways and threaten the survival of Indigenous Peoples and of our distinct cultures. These assaults have direct and tremendously destructive impacts and further impoverish our already vulnerable, besieged Peoples, and threaten our spiritual and physical survival as Peoples.

Air poisons us and now the sun and the rain burn. The land, our Mother Earth, bleeds toxins. Water is undrinkable, or further unreachable. Our ancestors and leaders have prophecies that foretell of these changes now occurring across the globe. And, we must be proactive in finding ways to survive because the Natural Law – the spiritual justice that is unfolding in response to assaults against the Earth - will have no mercy. The accelerating impacts of Climate Change on Indigenous Peoples’ Water systems and accessibility, exacerbated by the continuing privatization and exploitation of Water on our territories by ever-thirsty multi/trans-national corporations, shortsighted governmental development policies, mega-development, and other encroachment by non-indigenous settlements, pose new challenges with which our Nations are faced. This forces us into poverty and pushes us further to the edge of existence, where many are already barely holding on by their fingertips for survival.

As different strategies are created to respond to the loss, contamination or diversion of Water resources, Indigenous Peoples’ retain our right to free, prior, and informed consent before any development takes place on our territories, by any outside entities, including the World Bank and States, whose actions may impact or abrogate our aboriginal and/or treaty rights including the human right of access to clean Water for all aspects of our life. We maintain that Indigenous Peoples have a right to say “no” to halt any development on our territories because we know that what some may consider sustainable solutions does in fact, displace our Peoples, exploit our territories, subvert our cultures, and further oppress the accessibility of our water systems and health of our homelands.

Esteemed members of this Forum, according to UN Water research, “884 million people in the world lack access to safe drinking water, and 2.5 billion do not have access to basic sanitation. ‘Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, those who suffer the most from lack of access to water and sanitation, are the poorest, the most marginalized and the most vulnerable,’ asserts Ms. de Albuquerque, noting in particular the situation of women, children, and persons with disabilities. Globally, 1.6 million people, mostly children, die each year from water and sanitation related causes.” Indigenous women throughout the world who often have the primary responsibility of locating and carrying Water for the survival of their families, and may risk their lives to do so, now find only dust instead of Water.

In the high desert, arid southwestern region of the United States, the Zuni River is critical to the physical and spiritual sustenance of the A:shiwi/Zuni people. During the fourth and fifth Permanent Forum Sessions (2005-2006), we shared with the Forum the unique characteristics of the River as a sacred waterway, an umbilical cord linking the A:shiwi with a spiritual destiny, carrying prayers and offerings to Zuni Heaven, a final everlasting place. When it flowed freely, the River fed streams and springs that nurtured thousands of cultivated acres of corn, beans, squash, and alfalfa fields that sustained the people, and supported an abundance of wildlife necessary to nourish A:shiwi cultural sustenance and a rich ceremonial life. In the 1890’s the River was dammed and diverted by the Ramah Cattle Company empowering Mormon missionaries upstream, altering the natural flow and life of the waterway. Today, what was once a vibrant, moving waterway that sustained thousands of people, animals, plant and water-dependent species has been drained, leaving only a dry riverbed. 1982 was the last time the Zuni River freely flowed through the village since the Ramah Dam was built. Now sadness lays hard on our land – now our land is always thirsty.

And on the same Indigenous territory, a sacred site known as Zuni Salt Lake, has been targeted for coal and methane gas development. Salt in an arid environment is critical to the Peoples’ survival. For the A:shiwi, this is also the dwelling place of a spiritual mother. It is also a place of peace for neighboring tribes to ceremoniously gather salt. The exploitation threatening Zuni Salt Lake would siphon millions of gallons of pristine water from beneath the lake for the mining, and create persistent toxins and contaminants that would forever alter the integrity and home of Salt Mother, including the well-being of the Zuni and other tribal Nations in the region who are culturally and nutritionally reliant on Zuni Salt Lake.

Elsewhere in the southwest region, when the Navajo Dam was built, it destroyed key cultural sites, including the place of the Water that Flows Together Clan. And the waters and riparian zone of the Rio Grande River, a primary waterway in the region, have been severely impacted by the spraying of toxic contaminants by non-Indigenous entities, where the Nde’ People’s traditional plants and herbs live. These poisons have leached in to the waterways and primary municipal waters sources affecting the plants, animals, peoples, lands, territories and cultural lifeways of the Nde’.

These are just a few examples in one region of the world. Such violations take place across the globe. We know that in too many places a polluted stream is our only source of Water. In too many places, our peoples are struck down by waterborne and vector borne disease, due to the lack of accessible, clean water on our territories caused by diversion and contamination, and the impacts of climate change. We hunger and can no longer plant our gardens, not because we have forgotten how to nurture life from a seed, but because without access to Water, our crops cannot flourish, and we cannot thrive without them. Our Water ceremonies are dying and our songs for the Water no longer fill the air.

Brothers and sisters of the world, are we prepared for what will happen when the world grows dry and quiet? What were once rich landscapes awake with forests and gardens, rivers and cornfields, alive with animals and birds, and a harmonious biodiversity of Indigenous cultures, are quickly becoming parched lands which only our tears can soften. Soon, even our most lush lands will be barren. Soon, even our tears will dry up and we will only have blood in our eyes as the wars for oil quickly transform into Water Wars that shroud the globe in a clash which humanity cannot survive. The Earth will burn. Too many of us are already dying of thirst. Our children, and the generations to come, will inherit this conflict and it is for them that we call upon the Permanent Forum and offer this intervention, for the Water - the essence of Life, for peace.

Elahkwa – Thank you.

Human Rights Violations Texas-Mexico Border Wall

As we prepare to submit our intervention, tomorrow, on the issues of Human Rights, Indigenous Peoples, Militarization and the Texas-Mexico border wall at the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues,

We warmly invite you, our sisters, brothers, and allies, to review the papers on these issues as they pertain to our case at this site, here.


Ahe'he'e

Margo Tamez

Lipan Apache Women Defense an Indigenous Peoples' Organization (United Nations)

Today we are representing the community concerns of human rights violations at the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues

See the video of Global Indigenous Women Caucus, in which the Lipan Apache Women Defense has participated in dialogues, discussions and debates related to customary title, aboriginal title, cultural resource management, social and economic issues, and human rights related to the the issues confronting Indigenous Women in a local, regional, national, international and global context.

UPDATE: TAMEZ & BENAVIDEZ CASE & DOCUMENTS

Your support is very important to the critical examination of the U.S. law system as it pertains to indigenous peoples whose customary and traditional lands are within the U.S. political boundaries, and at U.S. international borders.

Thanks to all who have been holding vigils for the Benavidez and Tamez extended clans on the El Calaboz side, and the Premont and Redford sides of the impacted families. Ahe'he'e to all the Nde' who are faithfully keeping watch.

There are too many to thank, so if you are reading this and are familiar with the efforts since 2006 of the elders of El Calaboz to retain customary and traditional rights to the lands in El Calaboz Rancheria, and you have been supporting this effort, then... at some point along the way you came to respond to this collective work even on your very busy path. You have helped us to support the wishes of the elders of El Calaboz in their legal, spiritual, political and social movement. El Calaboz Rancheria has a long and consistent history of indigenous peoples taking up issues of injustice, and the periodic rise of state violence in their lands.

Even if not directly, your work is making a difference in our lives and in the steady progress of this case--in the United States and in the international spheres.

The last 36 hours have been tough, grueling, as well as full of revelations, as they were back in 2006, when the government armed personnel attempted to take possession of customary and traditional lands along the last 70 miles of the Texas-Mexico border through the use of armed force and intimidation of the elders.

This was the famous 'waiver' period--when the Customs Border Patrol and DHS agents attempted to force community members to surrender their lands on the spot using a piece of paper, and forcing them to sign--in violation of constitutional and international law.

The last 24 hours has been focused on a temporary restraining order, the Judge's response to that order, and preparing the affected landowners (TAMEZ, BENAVIDES, et al)due to the fact that the United States, in direct violation of the condemnation and possessionorder, plowed ahead and built the wall on our elders' lands.

The Garcia, Cavazos and the Benavides lands are traditionally used for pastoralist goat and cattle herding, subsistence only, by the families also known as 'originarios'--First Peoples.

The wall went up in approximately 24 hours on both Garcia/Cavazos lands (Eloisa Garcia Tamez) and the Benavidez lands. Please reference Kevin Sieff's story in the Brownsville Herald.

As we continue to demand that the United States adhere to Judge Hanen's order to consult the families prior to building the wall (NOT a mute point), we are also looking ahead to the still-scheduled jury trial in October on the issues of compensation. Please recall that the United States government argues that the impact to the future generations of this possession and condemnation is $5000.

After the jury trial in October, we will then pick up the process of the 5th Circuit appeal, which will be led again by our attorney, Peter Schey (Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law) who on a conference call yesterday, faithfully committed to our elders to continue to challenge the gross violations of the constitution and civil rights.

One step at a time...this morning will be a challenge for effected landowners of the traditional and customary rancheria of El Calaboz. They are being represented by civil rights attorney, Corinna Spencer-Scheurich,a Texas attorney, who is standing in for the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, who could not be present at the hearing on consultation violations, called less than 24 hours ago.

The last 36 hours and the work products which we completed and compiled to educate the government about 'consultation' for our community ("Consultation...", Temporary Restraining Order, Research Poster, Briefing on Indigenous Peoples by UT Law Working Group, and other supporting docs ) could not have come to existence without the tireless work of the following individuals: Attorneys Peter Schey and Chris Scherer; Dr. Jeff Sheperd--UT El Paso; Professor of Law, Denise Gilman, UT-Austin; Lipan Apache Band of Texas, Council Chair, Daniel Castro Romero, Jr.; Dr. Enrique Maestas; Erik K. Hrabovsky, and of course, the Benavidez elders and Dr. Eloisa Garcia Tamez.

Dagotee' gozhoole' (Beauty all around...)
Margo Tamez
Co-Founder, Lipan Apache Women Defense

"THE UNITED STATES TAKES THE LAND, BUT THEY WILL NOT TAKE MY VOICE" --Eloisa Garcia Tamez

US seizes Tamez/Lipan Apache lands on the Texas-Mexico border for border wall
By Brenda NorrellEL CALABOZ, Texas --


With the hope of change evaporating during the Obama Administration, a federal judge ruled that Homeland Security can seize the Tamez family land. After a court battle, with an alert to the international community, the Tamez family said a federal judge condemned the Lipan Apache family land for the US/Mexico border wall.

"A federal judge in Brownsville, Texas issued an order today granting the federal government's request to condemn the ancestral land of the Tamez Family, who are Lipan Apaches," the Tamez family said April 16. "Although this land has been in the Tamez family prior to the Spanish colonization, and also designated to them through Spanish Crown law (1767, as of today, it is in the possession of the United States Department of Homeland Security.""The landowner, Eloisa Tamez, heard about Judge Hanen's order while participating in the Western Social Sciences Association Conference in Albuquerque, where she was participating in a Three part panel: 'Indigenous People's and the U.S.-Mexico Border: Militarization, Resistance, and Rights.' She is with a group of colleagues from several bi-national Indigenous Border communities and experts on militarization and the impact of the border wall," the Tamez family said in a statement.

The seizure of the Tamez family land raises new questions about the actual intent of the US government as it acquires private property from California to Texas for the border wall. The US covert scheme to acquire borderlands includes seizing private land and seizing the use of American Indian lands, such as Tohono O'odham land in Arizona, for the border wall corridor.
The land seizures were facilitated by the fear created by 9/11, then fueled by immigrant racism and xenophobia on television news and finally accelerated by the so-called drug war in northern Mexico. However, more questions are now being raised regarding the covert US government's role in the drug and weapons trafficking in the borderzone. The Zetas, the most notorious murderers, were trained as US Special Forces, while the US appetite for drugs provides the demand. The weapons also come from the US.

Meanwhile, in Texas, the Tamez family reports that this is an urgent situation which needs international attention and wide press coverage.

An interview with Eloisa Tamez, by Ansel Herz, is here.


Excerpt: "Mediahacker: I know that you met Barack Obama while he was campaigning. Have you seen any changes in terms of DHS policy since his taking office and do you hold out any hope that him and the new Homeland Security Secretary will change plans at all?
Tamez: I see no change. I’ve seen no comment on it. I don’t know what the plans are, because, well, they haven’t said much. So I’m still wondering what we’re going to see. And I still remember that he voted for the wall when he was a Senator. He voted for it ..."

Judge Hanen Orders Condemnation and Possession of Indigenous Lands; Tamez Family Continues Fight for Lands & Ancestral Sites

"I am captive in my own land," Eloisa Tamez tells audience of researchers, scholars and indigenous peoples at Western Social Sciences Association 51st Annual Conference, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 16, 2009.



Eloisa Tamez, at the Albuquerque Peace & Justice Center, hours after hearing the news that the U.S. (Obama Administration) will take possession of her lands, irregardless of numerous attempts by her, Margo Tamez, attorneys, and the Lipan Apache Women Defense support community to encourage peace settlements, peace negotiations, and dignity for human and indigenous peoples' rights.

Press Release: Eloisa Tamez’ Land condemned for Border Wall
April 16, 2009



Albuquerque, New Mexico--A federal judge in Brownsville, TX issued an order today granting the federal government's request to condemn the ancestral land of the Tamez Family, who are Lipan Apaches. Although this land has been in the Tamez family prior to the Spanish colonization, and also designated to them through Spanish Crown law (1767, as of today, it is in the possession of the United States Department of Homeland Security.

The landowner, Eloisa Tamez, heard about Judge Hanen’s order while participating in the Western Social Sciences Association Conference in Albuquerque, where she was participating in a Three part panel: "Indigenous People's and the U.S.-Mexico Border: Militarization, Resistance, and Rights." She is with a group of colleagues from several bi-national Indigenous Border communities and experts on militarization and the impact of the border wall.

The Tamez family reports that this is an urgent situation which needs international attention and wide press coverage.

Opportunities for press interviews will be held at the WSSA Conference location, at the Hyatt Regency in Albuquerque, New Mexico, 330 Tijeras NW, following the panel discussions below.

Panel II Friday April 17 8:00am-9:30am Sendero Room 1 “Militarization”
Panel III Friday April 17th 2:45pm-4:15pm Sendero Room 2 “Resistance”

Contacts:
Cynthia Bejarano 575-571-7359
April Cotte acotte@igc.org



BOLETIN DE PRENSA

16 de abril

Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico, EEUU--Un juez federal de Estados Unidos envío ordenes para otorgarle libertad al gobierno federal en "condenar" las tierras ancestrales de la familia Tamez, ubicadas en el pueblo de El Calaboz a la orilla del Río Bravo, estado de Tejas. Aun sin embargo dicha tierra ha pertenecido a la Familia Tamez y los apache Lipan desde la época colonial pero a partir de hoy, se convierte en propiedad de Homeland Security en perpetuidad.

Eloisa Tamez e hija (Margo Tamez) son integrantes de una numerosa comunidad de indígenas binacionales e individuos o grupos expertos en asuntos migratorios y militarización quienes han sostenido una serie de medidas de resistencia y rechazo a las amenazas de Homeland Security desde agosto 2007. Aunado a ello se han organizado para elevar sus protestas a los tribunales federales, y al Presidente Obama quien mañana se reúne con el Presidente Felipe Calderón en la Ciudad de México.

El aviso oficial con fecha 18 de abril fue presentado por la Corte Distrital de Estados Unidos en Brownsville Texas. En términos legales le avisan a la Dr. Eloisa Tamez que el gobierno federal le decomisa el terreno de 0.25 acres para instalar, construir y operar caminos, cercos, barreras vehiculares, sistema de vigilancia y estructuras diseñadas en relación a la seguridad del muro entre Estados Unidos y México dentro del Estado de Tejas.

A partir del 25 de febrero de 2009, el gobierno federal sometió una moción para lograr posesión de dicha propiedad. La familia Tamez inmediatamente se negó a negociar pero por medio del documento de hoy, se busca ignorar dicha rebeldía.

Como resultado del programa federal por construir cercos o mayores barreras fronterizas a lo largo de la división territorial entre Estados Unidos y México, actualmente están en pie de lucha varias familias quienes se encuentran en la misma situación.

Lo extraordinario es que entre los grupos de familias y pueblos indígenas, también se encuentran empresas privadas quienes ya han resuelto la problemática de tener un muro vergonzoso en sus propiedades exclusivas y costosas. Como resultado de dichas negociaciones “privadas”, hoy se pueden apreciar una serie de “hoyos” o interrupciones oficiales en la secuencia del muro. Pero son amparados por el poder político de grupos multimillonarios como las familias Hunt y Moody, al igual que la Universidad de Texas en Brownsville y el campo de golf River Bend Resort.

Hasta la fecha la familia Tamez ha llevado sus quejas hasta los foros internacionales por medio de las Naciones Unidas, Foro Permanente de Asuntos Indígenas en su Séptima Sesión, Comisión Interamericana, OAS y Al-Jazeera, al igual que los medios europeos incluyendo numerosos diarios mexicanos como La Jornada, Reforma, El Universal, medios hispanos regionales y locales, etc.

Aun a pesar de ello se considera continuar insistiendo en la demanda de los grupos en rebeldía para obligar que el gobierno federal desista en condenar dichos terrenos. Entre los mas apremiantes continua la exigencia de que el gobierno inicie un dialogo conciliatorio lo cual han presentado por escrito pero hasta la fecha no han recibido respuesta alguna por el gobiernos federal.

Últimamente dichas familias presentaron una solicitud para negociar sobre la tenencia de la tierra argumentando que según los acuerdos virreinales –dicha oferta se les negó. Los afectados proponen llegar a un acuerdo pacifico pero ha fallado y aparentemente el gobierno prefiere la confrontación ancestral como el único medio para resolver los asuntos fronterizos.

LOS AFECTADOS SE ENCUENTRAN PARTICIPANDO EN LA CONFERENCIA ANUAL DE: WESTERN SOCIAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION ABRIL 15 – 18, 2009 EN ALBUQUERQUE, NUEVO MEXICO.


Como panelistas el grupo participara:
· Viernes 17 de 8:00 a 9:30 Cuarto Sendero I, sobre “Militarización” en la frontera.
· Viernes 17 de 2:45 a 4:15 Cuarto Sendero II, sobre “Resistencia” de los asuntos indígenas en la frontera.

A LAS 10:00 A.M. CONVOCAN A UNA CONFERENCIA DE PRENSA PARA LOS MEDIOS INTERESADOS EN MAYOR INFORMACION.

PARA ENTREVISTAS, FAVOR DE COMUNICARSE CON:

CYNTHIA BEJARANO (575) 571-7359
Por correo electrónico con Abril Cotte acotte@igc.org
Margo Tamez: 509-595-9666

NEW WEBSITE: UNIDOS CONTRA EL MURO /\/\/\/\ UNITED AGAINST THE WALL

Eloisa Garcia Tamez signs banner of the people's protests that will travel to Washington D.C. with citizen delegation this week.

UNIDOS CONTRA EL MURO~UNITED AGAINST THE WALL LAUNCHES NEW WEBSITE

Friday, March 13, 2009
Delegation to DC


CASA members continue united against the border wall, and during spring break, CASEROS will embark in a trip to Capitol Hill in Washington, DC to challenge the consciences of our elected officials, and policymakers. As members of CASA, we want to make sure that our elected officials hear our position against the border wall. There is a tremendous lack of political representation in our area, CASA members feel that our elected officials are not advocating for the interest of their constituents. They have heard the voices of the people who are opposing the border wall, but they have fail to listen to the concerns of the citizens.


--Elizabeth Garcia, CASA

STILL BREAKING NEWS: NON-PROFIT SUES FEDS OVER BORDER FENCE

Published on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 by the Associated Press
Non-Profit Sues Feds Over Border Fence
by Christopher Sherman

McALLEN, Texas - A national consumer advocacy group sued the federal government Wednesday on behalf of a University of Texas law professor seeking documents about the planning of the border fence.

Public Citizen, the group founded by Ralph Nader, filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court in Washington against the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection and the Army Corps of Engineers.

The suit alleges the agencies didn't comply with a request from the University of Texas Working Group on Human Rights and the Border Wall. Denise Gilman, a law professor and member of the group, used the Freedom of Information Act to request documents in April regarding the location of the fence segments and criteria used in determining its placement.

The lawsuit asks that the government provide the documents.

The government is nearing completion of 670 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. The project has met widespread opposition in South Texas, where segments will touch hundreds of private property owners and leave thousands of acres of farmland between the fence and the Rio Grande.

The Texas group has suggested the fence disproportionately impacted low-income minorities.

"Researchers have found statistically significant differences between the income and race of property owners whose land will be affected by the wall versus those whose land will remain unaffected," the lawsuit reads. "Affected property owners are, on average, less wealthy and include more people of color than property owners whose land will not be affected."

According to the lawsuit, the Department of Homeland Security referred Gilman's request to Customs and Border Protection, which is overseeing the fence project.

That agency has provided a partial response to Gilman's request. The Army Corps of Engineers told Gilman that her request would incur copying costs of $54,545 and after appeals partially filled her request.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesman did not immediately return a call for comment.

"We sincerely hope that the Obama administration, which has pledged greater transparency and accountability in government, will release the requested documents so that informed debate and consultation regarding the border wall can take place before there is any further construction." Gilman said in a prepared statement.

© 2009 Associated Press

REPORT: NOW PUBLIC--CROWD POWERED MEDIA

Pentagon warns of US military intervention in Mexico’s drug war

Mexico drug gangs threaten cops on radio, kill them
TIJUANA, Mexico (Reuters) - Mexican drug gangs near the U.S. border are breaking into police radio frequencies to issue chilling death threats to cops which they then carry out, demoralizing security forces in a worsening drug war. "You're next, bastard ... We're going to get you," an unidentified drug gang member said over the police radio in the city of Tijuana after naming a policeman.Robin Emmott
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE51558E20090206Violence spills over into the US
Just as government officials had feared, the drug violence raging in Mexico is spilling over into the United States. U.S. authorities are reporting a spike in killings, kidnappings and home invasions connected to Mexico's murderous cartels. And to some policymakers' surprise, much of the violence is happening not in towns along the border, where it was assumed the bloodshed would spread, but a considerable distance away, in places such as Phoenix and Atlanta.ALICIA A. CALDWELL
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090209/ap_on_re_us/border_spillover_violenceEscalation, Escalation, Escalation.... something has to give (or be taken). -Seems to be playing out nicely.

GNN Reports: The United States Joint Forces Command issued a report last November to the effect that, in the very near future, Mexico is going to need the same kind of “help” as Pakistan.

USDFC Reports
The United States Joint Forces Command (USJFC), charged with anticipating global threats to US imperialism, issued a report last November entitled “Joint Operating Environment 2008 naming Pakistan and Mexico as the nations whose governments are most likely to undergo what it termed “rapid collapse.” This term goes largely undefined, beyond the assertion that it “usually comes as a surprise, has a rapid onset, and poses acute problems.”

Ominously, the study concludes: “Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone.” The immense implications of this statement become clear when one considers that the USJFC—one of the nine branches of the Department of Defense—controls nearly all conventional military forces based in the continental United States—a force of 1.6 million.--Kevin Kearney

BREAKING NEWS: U.S. CONGRESS & OBAMA GEARING UP FOR TROOP DEPLOYMENT TO U.S.-MEXICO BORDER

OBAMA & U.S. COMMANDER DISCUSS MILITARY "INTERVENTION" IN MEXICO

Obama and US commander discuss military intervention in Mexicoby Bill Van Auken

Global Research, March 10, 2009
World Socialist Web Site

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen briefed President Barack Obama over the weekend on the so-called drug war in Mexico and the prospect of increased US military involvement in the conflict south of the border.

Mullen had just returned from a six-day tour of Latin America, which took him on his last and most important stop to Mexico City. There he held meetings with Mexico's secretary of national defense and other top military officials and discussed proposals for rushing increased US aid to Mexico under the auspices of Plan Merida, a three-year, $1.4 billion package designed to provide equipment, training and other assistance to the Mexican armed forces.

In a telephone press conference conducted as he returned from Mexico, Mullen said that the Pentagon was prepared to help the Mexican military employ the same tactics that US forces have applied in counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US military, he said, was "sharing a lot of lessons we have learned, how we've developed similar capabilities over the last three or four years in our counterinsurgency efforts as we have fought terrorist networks." He added, "There are an awful lot of similarities."

With US backing, Mexican President Felipe Calderon has increasingly militarized the country, deploying tens of thousands of troops in areas ranging from Matamoros and Reynosa in the east to Tijuana, Guerrero, Michoacán and Sinaloa in the west.

On the eve of Mullen's visit, the Mexican military poured some 5,000 additional troops into Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, Texas, redoubling patrols by combat-equipped units and effectively sealing the city off with roadblocks. Some 2,500 troops had already been deployed in the city last spring.

He said that in his meetings with Mexican military officials he had discussed US aid focusing on "intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance," or ISR in US military parlance.

He indicated that intelligence-sharing had already been implemented, but that "there are additional assets that could be brought to bear across the full ISR spectrum."

In the first instance, this could mean the deployment of US manned surveillance aircraft as well as unmanned drones over Mexican territory. It could likewise suggest the deployment of Special Forces units or military "contractors."

Mullen refused to answer when questioned whether unmanned drones had already been deployed over Ciudad Juarez and other Mexican cities.

According to an unnamed US military official cited by the Associated Press, the meeting between Mullen and Obama on Saturday focused on how to increase US military aid.

"Clearly one of the things the president was interested in was the US military capability that may or may not apply to our cooperation with the Mexicans," the official said. "He was very interested in what kind of military capabilities may be applied."

In a March 1 television interview, Defense Secretary Robert Gates sounded a similar note, praising Calderon for having "taken on the battle" against drug trafficking by deploying the army and claiming that the "old biases against cooperation" between Mexico and the Pentagon were "being set aside." As a result, Gates added, Washington was prepared to provide the Mexican military "with training, with resources, with reconnaissance and surveillance kinds of capabilities."

The indications of more direct US military involvement follow a growing chorus of official as well as media reports portraying Mexico as a potential "failed state" and a mounting threat to US national security.

In its annual report assessing global security threats, the Pentagon's Joint Forces Command lumped Mexico together with Pakistan as countries that "bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse." The document added a warning: "Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response, based on the serious implications for homeland security as well."

This was followed by a report released at the US Military Academy in January by retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who was director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Bill Clinton. Mexico, he wrote, is "fighting for survival against narco-terrorism" and required greater US intervention.

"The proposed US Government spending in support of the government of Mexico is a drop in the bucket compared to what we have spent in Iraq and Afghanistan." McCaffrey continued. "Yet the stakes in Mexico are enormous. We cannot afford to have a narco-state as a neighbor."

In the media there has been a steady drumbeat of reports warning that the drug violence, which has claimed over 1,000 lives in Mexico so far this year, will inevitably spill across the border into US cities.

Obama's US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano echoed these warnings in an interview with PBS television last week. While acknowledging that there was no indication that such violence had crossed the border, she continued, "But let's be very, very clear. This is a very serious battle. It could spill over into the United States. If it does, we have contingency plans to deal with it."

What is deliberately obscured in all of these responses to the situation in Mexico, is that the decision of Calderon to pursue a militarized response to the longstanding and essentially socioeconomic problem of drug-trafficking, has everything to do with immense social tensions building up in the country as well as the political crisis of his own presidency, which a substantial portion of the population still sees as illegitimate following the disputed 2006 election.

These tensions have been immensely exacerbated by the onset of the world financial crisis, which has wiped out more than half a million jobs in Mexico since November—while driving large sections of manufacturing, and in particular the country's extensive auto assembly and parts production sector—into depression conditions. Last week, Volkswagen announced another 1,050 layoffs at its assembly plant in Puebla.

Meanwhile Ciudad Juarez, where the Mexican army is carrying out its current occupation, is also one of the main centers of the maquiladora industry, the assembly plants that exploit cheap Mexican labor in the production of consumer goods bound for the other side of the border. Layoffs have swept through many plants in the city, leaving large sections of the population desperate for work.

The official unemployment rate rose to 5 percent in January, from 4.32 percent the month before. This figure grossly underestimates the real situation, however, as it excludes the so-called informal sector, which accounts for 40 percent of the economy, and counts as employed anyone who works as little as an hour a week.

Last month, Mexico's telecom mogul Carlos Slim, counted as the second richest man in the world, warned that "unemployment will rise as we have never seen in our personal lives [and] companies small, medium and large will go bankrupt."

Meanwhile, the number of remittances sent by Mexican citizens working in the US fell by 20 percent between January 2008 and January 2009. This money sent home for the most part by poorly paid undocumented workers constitutes the second largest source of foreign exchange for the Mexican economy after oil exports. There is also a growing fear that many of the Mexican immigrants in the US, unable to find work, will begin returning home to find even worse prospects.

It is in this explosive context that Calderon's deployment of the military serves as a means of social control and repression.

The sending out of the army has resulted in a growing number of denunciations of severe human rights violations, with the military charged with crimes ranging from massacres to extra-judicial executions, torture, rapes and illegal detention. The government's own National Commission on Human Rights has reported receiving a total of 1,602 such complaints between January 2007 and December 2008.

One representative case took place in Ciudad Juarez in January with the military's abduction of Jaime Irigoyen. A 19-year-old law student at the Universidad Autonoma de Ciudad Juarez and a varsity pitcher for the university's baseball team, he was dragged from his bed by uniformed soldiers as his family screamed in protest.

Later, as relatives protested outside the local military base, Irigoyen's blindfolded and gagged body was discovered dumped in the street. It is suspected that the abduction and execution was a case of mistaken identity, based on faulty intelligence obtained by means of torturing other suspects. Nonetheless, the military subsequently laid siege to the funeral home where Irigoyen's wake was held, searching the cars of mourners, blocking surrounding streets and arresting several of those in attendance.

It is under conditions of this type of ongoing military violence that the Obama administration and the Pentagon are now proposing to apply the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan, while providing the hardware and advisors to prosecute a civil war against a restive working class south of the US border.

Bill Van Auken is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Bill Van Auken

BREAKING NEWS: INDIGENOUS PEOPLE ALONG TEXAS-MEXICO BORDER INVESTIGATE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES

INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES ON THE TEXAS-MEXICO BORDER INVESTIGATING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
Saturday, March 7, 2009, 9:57 a.m.

El Calaboz, TX, March 7. Dr. Eloisa G. Tamez, Lipan Apache, is talking with relatives and residents of the rancheria and collecting evidence related to her lands based upon reports from elder eyewitnesses who believe that the U.S. DHS/Contractors and U.S. Customs Border Patrol are encroaching upon the lands currently in dispute related to her legal case against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs Border Patrol and U.S. Army Corps Engineers to stop the construction of the Berlin-style wall on her ancestral lands. The construction of the wall, which now abuts Tamez' land, is clearly disturbing sensitive vegetation, wildlife, riparian, religious and cultural resources near, on and to the north of the levee. In a telephone communique this morning, Tamez indicated that she is documenting the possible violations against a standing court order which protects the lands in the area of dispute until her jury trial in June 2009. The land in question is situated within the International Boundary zone, which is governed by international customary law with related ties to indigenous international law. Tamez made telephone calls to the representative of the International Water and Boundary Commission numerous times on Friday. She attempted to communicate to IBWC officials of potential violations by contractors and to remind IBWC of the land-grant landowners' primary right-of-way in the dispute area. The IBWC failed to return her phone calls, nor has the IBWC provided a reasonable explanation as to why they have not processed her application to install a private property barrier across her section of the levee and riparian strip, an application which she filed more than nine months ago.

According to Tamez, the landowners of the original land grant have the first right of way to the land, resources, water and ecological and cultural resources. Tamez further insists that IBWC must consult land owners on all matters related to the levee and lands in question. According to Tamez, "the wall construction is now up to my property line on both sides--all the non-land grant peoples (those not descended from the original peoples) sold to the U.S. We're surrounded. By building the wall on the north side of the levee--literally at the foot of the levee--the U.S. reveals a rushed and forced process to spend the money Chertoff awarded to contractors. They built the footer right on top of the flood zone--putting the entire levee behind the wall and trampling over the property rights of land owners in litigation. When this weight dissolves the levee in a major storm, will they then ingress further? This is entirely out of hand. This is an outrage. They are encroaching upon my land and the impact is damaging. The Border Patrol units and the machines of the contractors are numerous; the high level of traffic in the area is intense. Not only is this harmful, it is dangerous. The levee is in no condition to hold this massive structure. It is obvious that this is about greed, payoffs and spending down the taxpayer's money in the final days of Chertoff's control. It appears that the new IBWC director (appointed by Bush after the sudden death of the former IBWC director, Carlos Marin) and the U.S. contractors made deals without consulting the land owners, nor did those of us-- in litigation against the construction of the wall-- receive prior notice or free and prior informed consent. By authorizing the construction of the wall on the north side of the levee, the IBWC is in violation of long-standing international laws, indigenous peoples' rights, human rights, and collective rights of indigenous peoples in El Calaboz. The customary laws of our community have protected lineal-descent land owners with Spanish land grant title."

El Polvo, Texas, March 7. Jumano-Apache community members are calling for an emergency investigation into widespread human rights violations targeting specific Jumano-Apache families by the U.S. Customs Border Patrol/I.C.E./DHS in the small community of El Polvo, situated on the banks of the Rio Grande River near the Big Bend National Park. A recent series of armed invasions by U.S. government personnel into the living spaces of noncombatant, unarmed Jumano-Apache communities have struck terror into parents, elders and children. Members of the Jumano-Apache community cite human rights violations stemming from forced displacement of rural indigenous families which they claim is a direct result of U.S. Customs Border Patrol abuses, threats, and armed assaults deployed against the quiet, rural village of traditional farmers in recent months. In the past year, numerous attempts by community members to resist Border Patrol violations of property rights, indigenous rights, community rights and human rights have been met with retaliatory measures in this community which is designated as one of the poorest in the United States, according the the 2008 U.S. Census. Eyewitnesses in El Polvo connect the violations experienced to intensified militarization of the Texas-Mexico border wall construction, the war on terror, the war on drugs and the war on migrant workers.
--Margo Tamez


Contact Eloisa G. Tamez (El Calaboz) at Eloisa.tamez1@gmail.com
and April Cotte (El Polvo) at acotte@igc.org
http://redfordtexas.blogspot.com/
lipanapachecommunitydefense.blogspot.com


Related Stories:

U.S. 'COUNTERINSURGENCY' 'AID' TO MEXICO

MEXICO SENDS TROOPS TO NORTHERN BORDER STATES/ (AFTER U.S. PROVIDES MONETARY & EQUIPMENT 'AID')

"BACK TO THE WALL"

by Melissa del Bosque, Texas Observer
February 6, 2009

Back to the Wall:
Can Janet Napolitano stop the border-fence boondoggle?
Melissa del Bosque | February 06, 2009 | Features

As President Barack Obama champions change in Washington, D.C., Eloisa Tamez waits to see whether an 18-foot steel and concrete wall will be built in her backyard.

The Department of Homeland Security has already taken Tamez to court in an effort to condemn a piece of property, a mile inland from the Rio Grande, that has been in her family since the 18th century. The wooden survey stakes that sprout from her land remind her that the bulldozers could arrive anytime. “Just about every week, DHS announces that they will start building,” Tamez says. “It seems to be some kind of strategy to keep everybody here uptight and nervous.”

If that’s the strategy, it has worked. Last February, the Observer wrote about Tamez’ fight to keep her land in El Calaboz, a small rural community west of Brownsville (“Holes in the Wall,” Feb. 22, 2008). Since then, the 73-year-old has sued the federal government, held several protests against DHS on her property and, in the process, become an international spokeswoman for indigenous rights. (Tamez is part Lipan Apache.) But like many others, she remains trapped in the slow grind of a Washington bureaucracy that demands she forfeit her land to make room for a border wall that could end up costing taxpayers $30 billion—and which bypasses golf courses and resorts but targets working-class families and landowners like Tamez.

A new presidential administration and a new Homeland Security chief could bring an end to Tamez’ troubles. Along with the 121 other border residents embroiled in lawsuits with DHS, Tamez is cautiously optimistic that Janet Napolitano, Obama’s new secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, will stop the construction before it’s too late.

“Once the wall is built, it means that DHS has lawlessly taken my land,” Tamez says. “It will take me until my last days to right that wrong. And after I am gone, my children will have to take up the fight.”

In 2006, with the passage of the Secure Fence Act, Congress mandated the construction of 670 miles of fence along the southern border by the end of 2008. As of Jan. 21, according to Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Angela de Rocha, 582.2 miles had been built. Despite the Dec. 31 cutoff date in the Secure Fence Act, DHS is still building its wall. So far it appears that properties entangled in lawsuits, like Tamez’, have been mostly bypassed. But there’s no telling how long that will last.

In Tamez’ case, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, has likely ensured that the bulldozers won’t be rolling in tomorrow. In March, he ruled that negotiations must take place between landowners and Homeland Security before property can be seized. The trial, set for June, will determine whether DHS has conducted “good faith negotiations” with Tamez over a fair price for her land.

Meanwhile, the agency continues putting up the fence on federally owned property such as the Lower Rio Grande Valley Wildlife Refuge, just east of McAllen, where other federal judges have allowed DHS to move ahead without negotiations. In Eagle Pass, a small border city 145 miles southwest of San Antonio, a mile of fence has already been built through the city-owned golf course. DHS plans to build another mile through the city’s downtown park, says Mayor Chad Foster.

Eagle Pass was the first city in Texas to get hit with former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff’s prerogative to waive federal law and condemn property to speed construction of the wall. Congress granted this unprecedented power in the 2005 REAL ID Act. “We weren’t even aware of it when it came,” Foster says. “It was just another blow under Chertoff—a tactic to steamroller us.”

The mayor hopes that Napolitano, as a former elected official from a border state, will work with communities and local elected officials on both sides of the border to come up with alternatives to the fence. “Napolitano understands the border and she has a history with the border governors,” Foster says. “And in this country boy’s opinion, that’s the way we’re going to resolve this issue—by working with our neighbors.” Chertoff never showed much interest in that approach.

When she was governor of Arizona, Napolitano once said, “Build a 50-foot fence; I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder.” Despite the comment, the new Homeland Security secretary is not completely against fencing. During her Senate confirmation hearing on Jan. 15, she told senators that a fence in urban areas “might make some sense.” Napolitano was not asked to elaborate, but in past hearings, Border Patrol agents have testified that fencing in urban areas gives them time to detain crossers before they blend in with crowds of people.

Immigration reform and border control will not be the first items on the new Congress’ agenda, says U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat who has been a staunch opponent of the border fence. And with an economic crisis and two wars being waged, they’re not high on the Obama administration’s agenda, either. “There’s a shift in priorities now with the economy,” Grijalva says. “Throwing $450 million at a fence pales in comparison to fixing our economy.”

The shift in focus away from border security might give Napolitano some much-needed time to evaluate and reinvent a department that has been taxpayers’ worst nightmare, and private contractors’ idea of heaven, ever since its creation after 9/11. In 2006, the agency estimated that a mile of fence would cost $1 million. By August 2008, the price tag had shot up to $7.5 million per mile.

Last year, legislators finally became frustrated by the agency’s lack of disclosure and escalating costs, and they refused to appropriate more funds to DHS to finish building the wall. Chertoff then transferred money from other programs, including port security and virtual fence technology, to continue the construction.

That’s been the mantra of the department Napolitano has inherited: Build fence, no matter the cost. “She has inherited that mentality,” says Grijalva, “and no doubt there is a rush to get the fence done.”

Napolitano has also inherited a pork-barrel mentality. From the agency’s inception, it has enthusiastically outsourced a majority of its duties. No one has benefited quite like the Boeing Corp. In 2006, Boeing won a three-year contract to build 6,000 miles of physical and virtual fences along the southern and northern borders. As of last August, Boeing had been awarded $993 million, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Boeing also has the right to three one-year extensions to the contract if Homeland Security is happy with the results.

Which raises another endemic problem: oversight, or the lack thereof. Private companies who get DHS contracts do not have to report the progress or outcomes of their work to the American taxpayer. Even members of Congress have difficulty getting answers about how the billions are being spent—another legacy of the Bush administration that Napolitano will have to grapple with. “The administration has ... hidden contractor overcharges from Congress, international auditors and the public,” Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California said in 2007, “impeding oversight and diminishing accountability.”

Conveniently enough, private contractors are also doing more of the oversight. The fence-building project, called SBInet, is a component of the DHS’s Secure Border Initiative program. In a 2007 audit report, Richard Skinner, inspector general for Homeland Security, said that 65 of the 98 DHS staffers responsible for oversight of SBInet were private contractors. After being criticized by Congress for the lack of oversight, DHS estimated that it would need at least 470 employees to properly oversee SBInet contracts. After a round of hiring, the agency still has only about half the staff it needs: 129 government employees and 164 contractors, according to a September 2008 GAO report.

“So much is kept under wraps, you don’t know what worked and what didn’t,” says Pete Sepp, a spokesperson for the nonprofit National Taxpayers Union. “You don’t know whether the expenditures that went out of the government’s treasury were worth it or not.”

But it is clear that those expenditures amount to a virtually bottomless pit. Stunningly enough, Boeing’s SBInet contract has no spending limit, despite repeated protests from government auditors. As costs continue to climb, DHS must go to Congress to beg for more money—and until last year, when Congress finally applied the brakes, they were getting it.

“We don’t want another industrial-military complex where contractors have an inordinate amount of control over policy,” Grijalva says. Referring to the Department of Defense, long known for its largesse in doling out private contracts, Grijalva adds, “We don’t need another DOD, which is what’s starting to happen at DHS.”

It’s been happening all along. A 2006 Forbes magazine article estimated that DHS had already doled out $130 billion in private contracts since 9/11. The department is certainly not shy about wooing private contractors; it even has a Web page called “Open for Business.”

“The federal government now spends nearly 40 percent of discretionary spending on contracts with private companies, a record level,” Waxman said in 2007. “This surge in contract spending has enriched private contractors like Halliburton, but it has come at a steep cost to taxpayers through rising waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement.”

Nobody has gotten richer off DHS contracts than Boeing. And as the lead contractor on the border, the company has in turn subcontracted out a large portion of the management, design and development of the fence to hundreds of other companies. Boeing will not release the names of those subcontractors, calling this “proprietary information.” Among the names that have leaked out is Texas-based Perot Systems, owned by former presidential candidate Ross Perot.

One classic example of the waste to which Waxman referred is Boeing’s Project 28. In this pilot project, a high-tech “virtual fence” with video surveillance towers, sensors and radar devices was to be put up along 28 miles of the Mexican border. After an original $20 million investment was run through, DHS gave Boeing $65 million to upgrade its software; the original version, one used by police dispatchers, did not meet the Border Patrol’s needs. The system had been developed, it turned out, without consulting with Border Patrol agents working in the field.

Last year, Congress deemed Project 28 a failure. Once touted as a key component of border security by the Bush administration, the virtual fence was put on hold, with the remaining money transferred to build more physical fence.

Sepp says it will be a stiff challenge for Napolitano to reform Homeland Security. “The new secretary will have to bring an outsider’s perspective and approach it as if it were a fresh initiative,” Sepp says. “It will have to be a top-down process. Congress will be the wild card, because they will have to decide how much power they are willing to cede to the executive branch to rein in costs.”

Members of Congress typically find it difficult to ignore the power of lobbyists from companies like Boeing, or requests from their home districts to invest in pet border-security projects. And when it comes to lobbying, Boeing, the second-largest aerospace and defense contractor in the world, has some of the most powerful connections in the Beltway. Its board of directors includes such Washington heavyweights as former Secretary of Commerce William Daley, who served on the Obama/Biden transition team, and Kenneth Duberstein, a former chief of staff for President Ronald Reagan. In 2008, Boeing was the top recipient of federal contracts, at $2.9 billion, according to the nonprofit OMB Watch.

During the 2008 election cycle, Boeing gave more than $2.1 million to political campaigns. The top recipient was Barack Obama, who received $167,098. Most members of the Texas congressional delegation also got some of Boeing’s bounty, led by Republican Ron Paul ($22,688) and Democrats Ciro Rodriguez ($10,250), Silvestre Reyes ($10,000), Solomon Ortiz ($7,500) and Ruben Hinojosa ($2,500). Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s re-election campaign got $9,000 from Boeing.

Reyes, Ortiz and Hinojosa all voted against the Secure Fence Act in 2006. Rodriguez was not a member of Congress at the time but told the Observer that he opposes building the fence. Obama, Cornyn and Paul all voted for the fence legislation. Cornyn did not respond to requests for comment. Paul’s media director, Jesse Benton, said that his contributions came not from Boeing but from individuals who identified themselves as Boeing employees. “Dr. Paul often says that lobbyists do not even bother to visit him on Capitol Hill because they already know they will get zero concessions,” Benton said in an e-mail. Ortiz reiterated his opposition to the border fence in an e-mail, adding that “campaign contributions have not altered or influenced my position on the border security.”

Janet Napolitano has thus far refused to talk about her plans for the border fence. She told the Arizona Star in December that she would have no comment “Until I actually get in and see what the status of the project is, the status of payment of the project is, what’s anticipated, what problems have been incurred and the like.”

Eloisa Tamez, Mayor Chad Foster and others who’ve been battling Homeland Security think Napolitano should come to Texas and take a gander. “The new secretary needs to come to Cameron County and see what the land looks like,” says Tamez. “Chertoff never set foot down here.”

In 2007, Congress tried to force DHS to reach out to border communities. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez added wording to a Homeland Security appropriations bill requiring the agency to consult with folks about plans for the fence. The agency’s response was to outsource the job—in this case, to E2M, a Colorado company. E2M asked border residents to submit their questions and complaints in writing to a stenographer. They have received no responses.

Tamez, long since tired of waiting, sued Homeland Security last February over the plan to run the fence through the center of her land. Tamez filed a motion for formal discovery in federal court in Brownsville to force the agency to explain how the value of her property is being assessed and what DHS plans to do with her land. Among other things that DHS hasn’t made clear to property owners like Tamez is whether there will be entryways to access their properties on the other side of the fence. Nor do they know whether the fence on their land will have cameras or other surveillance devices, which could be an invasion of their privacy.

Unlike most complainants, Tamez has been granted a jury trial, scheduled for June. “We’re really lucky here, because we have a judge who really values and follows the Constitution,” she says. Her lawsuit seeks fair market value for her land, claiming this right under the U.S. Constitution. (Most property owners have been awarded far less than market value by the feds.) Ultimately, she hopes her legal action will put off the fence-building long enough for the Obama administration to halt the construction.

Along with property owners, environmental and wildlife-conservation organizations have also been battling the DHS in court, but with little success. The nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court last March, arguing that the Homeland Security secretary’s authority to waive laws to build the border wall violates the constitution’s separation of powers. In June, the court rejected the petitions without explanation.

The results of Homeland Security’s sweeping powers were all too vivid when Noah Kahn, a federal lands associate with Defenders of Wildlife, recently went to see some of the border fence under construction just east of McAllen. The steel and concrete fence is being built on a federally owned tract of the Lower Rio Grande National Wildlife Refuge. “Mud and fill were being dumped in the wetlands,” Kahn says. “Palm trees and native hardwoods were covered in mud. A silt fence had been installed, but it was clearly too little, too late.”

Kahn sees the damage as directly related to Homeland Security’s ability to ignore legal restrictions. “When you disregard environmental laws, it leads to real adverse impacts,” he says. “It’s not just an academic argument.”

So far, the new Homeland Security regime has provided few clues about how it will reinvent the department—or overhaul the waste-laden SBInet project. During her six years as Arizona governor, Napolitano managed to anger groups on both sides of the immigration debate. She was the first governor to call for National Guard troops to patrol the border, pleasing the right wing. She supported drivers’ licenses for undocumented immigrants, angering conservatives.

Napolitano’s early actions at Homeland Security have hardly done more to indicate a clear direction beyond assessing the damage already done. Her first directives to the staff involved gathering information and reviewing programs and strategies inherited from the Bush years. Urging the staff to create a “more effective and efficient department” is about as specific as she’s gotten so far.

But like others who battled the old department and lost, Kahn sees reasons for hope, noting that Napolitano “has made the comment that DHS is still a new agency and there is still an opportunity to shape it. I think she will make the agency more transparent and more responsive.”

All of which is well and good, Tamez says. But she won’t rest until Napolitano stops the bulldozers. “I’m just really angry,” she says. “It’s aggravating and appalling that the executive branch continues to persecute us. They have tried in every way to keep us from having justice served.”

http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2951