The changes were subtle at first, new migrant trails forming east of the railroad tracks in the desert going past the house and a more visible Border Patrol presence. The trickle became a stream that turned into a flood right around the time the Border Patrol put up a temporary checkpoint on 1-19 three miles south of the ranch. The migrants walk north until they have passed the check-point, then turn west to the freeway under heavy natural cover, call their rides on cell phones, pop out of the underbrush after leaving everything they were carrying behind, hop into the car and they’re gone. There has been a demand for their labor in agriculture, construction, and the service industry; the remittances they send home are a large part of their country’s income. The “false documented” workers with the fake Social Security cards pump billions of dollars into that fund, but will never claim it. Is it any wonder that this problem has not been dealt with politically in this country?

We get hundreds of trespassers every week on this property. Whether they are walking, driving, or riding, they drop trash as they go, cut fences, bust water lines, and scatter cattle. The migrants wear scruffy clothes, the Border Patrol wear green uniforms, but whatever they are wearing they are infringing on our personal space and I’m sick of it!

Here are some typical scenes:

As the moon gets fuller and the nights are brighter, the human smugglers and the solos start their trek north. During the night the dogs bark out into the desert letting us know people are passing. In the morning I walk several hundred yards into the desert and count 8, 10, or 30 sets of fresh footprints.

Someone is on the tractor at l0am and can see a group of 8 migrants walking along the river. They call Border Patrol and describe, again, where we are located, how to get in here and down to the river. The last agents who learned the lay of the land have been reassigned, so a new batch has to learn where to go. By the time they show up the walkers have moved into dense cover in the mesquite trees. They won’t be found.

I’m out on my daily walk enjoying a gorgeous stretch of the Santa Cruz River when the dogs let me know there are people. A migrant peers out from behind a bush. I look at him, he looks at me, I wave, he waves, and then I make a detour and continue on my way while he ducks back into the shadows of the trees. The next day, in the same general area, I’m sitting on a log enjoying the view when a BP agent comes galloping along on his horse. He almost passes me before he sees me. He slows down and comes over. I notice his horse is lame, “Have you seen any people?” he asks. “Not today” is my reply “but maybe you should check where all the garbage is a half mile that way.” He moves off at a fast clip and I regret, for the horse’s sake, not pointing out that it’s lame on the right front. A short while later I watch him gallop back the way he came.

A frustrated young BP agent from Arkansas is huffing back to his vehicle, “They didn’t stop when I yelled STOP. The academy didn’t tell us they wouldn’t stop!

An older migrant resting in the shadows explains that he is headed back to Florida where he has lived for 18 years and where his wife, kids, job, car, and house are. He was caught and deported when he let his driver’s license expire; now he’s headed home. It’s his third try.

It’s Saturday and we’re driving on I-19. A convoy of pick-up trucks that have seen better days is going south, each one piled high with furniture, toys, bikes, appliances, etc. Goods accumulated during the owner’s stint in the US, but now they are headed home. This is a common sight.

It’s the end of the day and we are sitting outside enjoying a beer and the sunset when a large BP truck with a spy tower bolted to the flatbed drives noisily by on the ranch road to the desert. A short while later another BP truck misses the turn off for that road and is coming towards the house; I amble out to greet him. “Your buddy went that way. What’s happening?” I ask. “A large group is going through.” I contemplate following them out to watch the excitement, but the beer and sunset are more entertaining. Fifteen minutes later they leave, empty-handed.

We are jumping on the trampoline at dusk. The unmanned spy tower is visible a mile away, but since so many migrants walk past I assume that its all for show – but maybe we show up as two bouncing blips on the night vision scope and give the boys in green a chuckle.

It’s dark and I step outside to breath in the cool night air. I immediately hear the helicopter a quarter mile away and I see its lights illuminating a hill in the distance. I watch with mild curiosity and wonder if I’m in Fly-speck, AZ or South Central LA. The noise goes on for 20 minutes or so, then the chopper leaves and the dogs let me know people are going past. I can hear the excited voices of the BP agents as they walk the distance back to their vehicle in the moonlight, empty handed. The fresh prints the next day tell me that the group they were after broke into smaller groups and moved deeper into the desert. The smugglers know this land as well as I do and as well as the Indian scouts from a hundred years ago; we all just melt into the landscape if we have to.

Night has arrived and the news is on saying that in the continuing effort to secure the border 200 more agents have been assigned to the Tucson Sector. I roll my eyes as I roll over in bed. During the night the dogs will bark letting us know people are going past.

Our stories could fill volumes, and everyone who lives along the border region has variations, mine are not unique.

My observations would be incomplete if I didn’t mention the trash. I know of four huge campsites on this property alone, hidden in the trees. Each one would fill a dump-truck up with Made in Mexico blankets, Made in Korea shoes, Made in Taiwan jackets, Made in China backpacks, and enough plastic bags and bottles to sink a boat. I’m sure that if all the trash were picked up within a 5-mile radius it would overwhelm the local landfill.

Everything is made of synthetic materials that won’t break down for decades; they will become artifacts in 50 years! The four large sites on the ranch are reaching the critical point smothering the grass that the cattle would eat as the garbage spreads out over an acre. Maybe we could dig 4 large holes with the tractor and hire some of these migrants to toss it all in. They are the only ones who would want the job at the rate I would want to pay. Why is it our responsibility to deal with this volume of trash that’s there because of failed politics?

As the campaign season heats up I would love to hear the candidates talk about this issue, and not just about securing the border–because that’s a pipe dream. The solid fence being erected along the border is cutting off wildlife corridors; although blowtorches are already cutting holes in it (where there is a will there is a way). The multi-million dollar permanent checkpoint that is back on the table for the Amado area would be a huge, expensive, inefficient (they walk around it for Pete’s sake) eyesore that wouldn’t change anything from my perspective. Throwing more money and gadgets at the Dept. of Homeland Security is not the answer. Let’s do like the Italians have done and give all the migrants with a job and a place to stay a green card. It would be business as usual and the workers wouldn’t be afraid of getting deported when they got their card. Then we can sort out who’s whom and the migrants can come out of the shadows and have a voice. Another good idea I heard a few years ago was for the migrant to open a bank account at the border on their way into this country with the money that would have gone to the smuggler, then have a portion of their pay deposited into it. When it was time to return home they would have a nice sum in their account as incentive to leave. Mine is only a small voice in the wind, but it is part of a loud chorus in the border region. I hope we make enough noise to be heard and some creative politics comes into play to end this insanity.

The Border Patrol does not have any current plans for and is not actively seeking to place a station in Arivaca. They were looking into it in the past fueling much speculation.

The Project 28 towers, though called a “successful” experiment, will be scrapped and replaced with new towers in the same area, though not necessarily in the same exact locations. Director King said that technology has dramatically improved since way back in October of 2006 and the towers will be rebuilt from the ground up. The new towers will feature portable, pre-formed concrete bases without guy wires, solar power with generators used only as backup, and cameras and radar now being used on mobile truck units. Microwave communications will replace P28′s satellite communications. $64 million of custom software will tie it all together.

Boeing is still the lead contractor for the towers and for the SBInet as a whole. Border Patrol officials didn’t know if there are any performance requirements in any of the task orders for the new towers. In fact, the new towers were described by one official as another test, another experiment. The new towers are expected to be in place by the end of 2008. Any existing towers will come down afterward. The Arivaca Surveillance Tower may be moved depending on its operational capability said Director King. It did not perform well in the P28 system. Then again, the entire system did not perform to expectations.

As with the P28 system, the Border Patrol called the Sasabe fence a success even while admitting that people can get past it and it must be manned to be effective. Those who have analyzed barriers and surveillance used to secure borders point out that they are much more effective at keeping people in than keeping them out. The Border Patrol concurred when they said the real advantage was in apprehending crossers trying to get back over the wall after being spotted. They said the number of people seen crossing is down dramatically in the area of the fence but did not address the fact that most simply go around it.

There are plans to build a vehicle barrier along the border from the east end of the Sasabe fence into the National Forest, perhaps all the way to Flat Top Mountain east of California Gulch and just short of Sycamore Canyon. The barrier would be of the rail on post type, similar to the one at Organ Pipe National Monument. A substantial construction road would accompany the barrier along the border in the National Forest. The project has not been funded yet, however, and it is not known when it will be built.

The Border Patrol said they intend to do environmental assessments and mitigation even though the Real ID Act waiver of environmental regulations has been invoked. It is not clear if any assessments will be public ally available. Presumably, no project would be stopped because of environmental concerns.

A special meeting will be arranged with the branch of CBP that operates the helicopters to address issues that many residents have with their operations.

It is the intention of the Community and the Border Patrol to meet more often to discuss issues, perhaps quarterly.

Thanks to Mary Scott for arranging and moderating this meeting.

Copyright 2008 Peter Ragan

Regarding the surveillance towers, Tom King, BP Director of Field Operations from Washington, DC told us that “Boeing didn’t hit the ground running” when it took on the erection of the 9 towers last year (at a cost of 20 million tax dollars) from the Babo through the Altar Valley to Tres Bellotas Road south of Arivaca. Now, a year later, deadlines unmet and a basketful of excuses, they admit the towers are so flawed they are unworkable and will be abandoned.

So what’s in the future? King says they will replace the faulty towers with all newly designed models. When asked who has the contract for this upgrade, King said, “Boeing. ” A snicker went through the crowd but there was no reproach; we were all making nice.

Reinforcing the general attitude from the head table, Agent Fitzpatrick, Assistant Chief of the Tucson sector, told us that “we may or may not abandon the Tres Bellotas Road location (the spy tower that overlooks our 1,500+ residents), but it won’t have anything to do with how the citizens feel about it, it will be a matter of logistics. ” – Logistics? Their system of reasoning places public opinion – the constitutional rights to privacy and freedom from undue surveillance – in the trash can! Boeing has been granted another massive sum of money to create these new toys ($68+ million. The cost of living has gone up 3.4 times, right in line with our daily bread… ).

The table of dignitaries certainly did not prove to those of us who attended the meeting that the situation of smuggling, migration or terrorism (a word they wisely refrained from using this time around) would be improved by more millions being thrown at Boeing, a corporate giant closely linked to Cheney and Halliburton.

When is all this BS going to end? The country slides closer and closer to total bankruptcy and we are all now feeling the crunch, while Boeing laughs all the way to the bank!

Two wrongs will never make it right. It won’t ever help our southern neighbors feed their children or help the human species to survive, and that is the bottom line.

Copyright 2008 C. Hues

Today we know that P28 is not effective as designed, though you won’t hear that from DHS Secretary Chertoff. At a February 22 press conference where DHS took full acceptance of P28 he did nothing but praise the system and said it met all DHS requirements. At a February 27 House Committee on Homeland Security hearing, Richard Stana, Director of Homeland Security and Justice Issues for the Government Accountability Office, concluded his overview of the project this way, ” P28 resulted in a product that did not fully meet user needs and will not be used as a basis for future SBInet development”. Chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management and Oversight Christopher Carney said in a February 27 statement he had been told by DHS acting Deputy Secretary Schneider that P28 does not do what DHS expected it would.

At the House hearing, a representative for DHS said that people’s expectations got out of hand somehow, that P28 was never intended to be an operational system ready to roll out along the border. It was an “initial prototype demonstration designed to be a proof of concept”, to “demonstrate the feasibility of the SBInet solution. With problems at every level, you’d think that feasibility was emphatically not demonstrated. Instead, DHS went ahead and fully accepted the project.

The Department’s solution to the SBInet solution is to praise P28 while scrapping it and starting over with new hardware, new software, new communications links, new everything. It plans to put its new system in two locations in the Tucson sector by the end of 2008, then extend it through the Tucson, Yuma and El Paso sectors by the end of 2011. More deadlines to watch come and go.

The House Committee hearing on February 27 was titled, “Lessons Learned; The Future of the SBInet”. What lessons has DHS learned? They say they’ve learned that off the shelf components do not automatically interface with each other out of the box, that systems need to be thoroughly tested in the lab before being put in the field, that input from people on the ground is vital to designing a system for their use.

These commonsensical lessons could have been learned from experience before P28. In 2005, the DHS inspector General reported on two border surveillance programs ongoing since 1998. They produced a system that was triggered by insects, horses and weather so that BP agents didn’t bother to investigate 60 percent of sensor alerts. Of the rest, 90 percent were found to be false alarms. All at a cost of $429 million. Lesson unlearned.

What lessons can we learn from the P28 experience? Once again, we learn that we cannot expect DHS to deliver honest, accurate assessments on anything to do with the border. We learn that no level of futility will keep them from steamrolling ahead with towers and fences.

We also learn that along with outsourcing conception, design, procurement, installation, support and maintenance, DHS shipped off their oversight and management responsibilities as well. If not for the GAO and the House Committee on Homeland Security there would be no public oversight at all. And this oversight is one or two levels removed and only grudgingly gets accurate information from DHS. On February 27, Subcommittee Chairman Carney said that only recently had DHS finally informed him privately of P28′s problems and he was still disappointed that their public statements were so “disconnected from reality”.

Boeing seemingly wrote its own contract for P28. Said Chairman Carney, “In an ideal world, Boeing wouldn’t have played such a large role writing their own contract specs”. These specs did not originally include operational performance requirements for the system.

The $20.6 million that Boeing received for P28 is a small fraction of the $1.1 billion in task orders it has been awarded for SBInet projects through February 15, 2008. Some of these contracts are for fencing, Boeing is big into fencing now. Still, they received $135.9 million for mission and systems engineering, testing and evaluation before the P28 contract. They received $69 million for designing and planning the extension of SBInet even as they were missing deadlines on P28. They received $8 million for support and maintenance and $64.5 million for new software at the same time DHS announced “conditional” acceptance. SBInet is a contract mill for Boeing.

We’ve seen it in Iraq, in New Orleans and elsewhere in government: this administration’s insistence on privatizing and outsourcing government functions isn’t resulting in greater effectiveness and efficiency. It’s bringing more abuse and a lack of accountability.

The biggest lesson we can learn here is that there is no technological miracle coming to make problems on the border disappear. We are experiencing an enormous migration of people into this country being driven by global economic and political forces that overwhelm any attempts to control them through mere law enforcement. These are forces of our own making, generated by our own global economic exploitation. As a visiting professor from the Netherlands said at a border issues conference in Arivaca awhile back, if you want globally mobile capital and globally mobile markets you’re going to also get globally mobile labor. Our attempts to secure the border have been counterproductive because they don’t align with the economic and political realities that we ourselves have created. And they don’t deal with human issues from a human perspective.

For too long people have suffered and died to get into this country to do jobs that are already waiting for them. Jobs we are told no one else will do. Jobs we are told are necessary in our economy. Yet we respond to these people as if they were attacking us. We’ve created a low level war situation on the border between countries that should be allied neighbors. The lesson of 14 years of experience is that ever increasing levels of law enforcement have only led to increased violence, increased suffering and decreased civil and human rights along the border. It hasn’t diminished the number of people crossing but has increased the illegal immigrant population in this country by making it more difficult to cross back and forth.

The vast majority of people illegally crossing the border are not criminals or “terrorists”. Militarization of the border is a misguided and futile response. We need immigration and economic policy reform to address the real human issues faced by the large number of border crossers. If we can deal with immigration through humanistic policies that allow
needed people to come here and work and help create opportunities in other countries, we can dramatically reduce the number of people trying to cross the border illegally. Reasonable levels of law enforcement can deal with the remaining criminality. The threat of terrorism does not necessitate the fencing and surveiling of our entire southern and northern borders.

Of course, there are substantial interests in keeping the situation like it is. There is huge money in smuggling people across the border now. So much so that drug smugglers are getting more involved. This is increasing the violence perpetrated on migrants. As we’ve seen, there is huge money in securing the border on this side and much of our economy is fueled by exploiting migrants for substandard wages. War is an economic engine.

We’re told not to expect any significant discussion on comprehensive immigration reform until well after November’s elections. The war at home on our own border needs to be addressed as much as the war in Iraq and the economy. This is an opportunity to bring the issue before the public and make it stay there.

DHS is coming to the Arivaca Community Center for the latest in our series of community meetings on Thursday, April 10 at 6pm. Now that they own the obsolete P28 system, maybe they’ll be interested in removing the Arivaca surveillance tower, the one that can’t see south even if it could work. It’s not such a shining example of progress in securing the border anymore. We’ll see.

Copyright 2008 Peter Ragan

I was forcibly pulled over by the Border Patrol on my way to work. I have traveled that road every day for the past 10 years. Mostly without incident, but I have been harassed a few times, such as the BP tail-gating with their bright lights in my rear view mirror. But up until now I haven’t ever had any real trouble. I’ve heard stories of people being hurt, held at gunpoint, and forced from their vehicles. This list goes on. My sister was hit in the face, dragged from her vehicle, thrown to the ground and handcuffed with her face in the dirt. I can’t say that in light of these things I feel very safe when in comes to those little boys.

I have always been told, in every self-defense class, even those taught by law enforcement, that you should go to a populated area before you pull over for anyone you don’t know including law enforcement. Slow down, drive as close to the right side of the road as possible without leaving the pavement and continue to drive until you reach a populated area.

The Border Patrol turned their lights on me at about milepost 20 after following me for about 4 miles. I did what I was taught. I slowed down to 20 miles per hour, pulled to the side of the road and continued to drive. They followed me for a little way and then the first vehicle pulled in front of me and cut me off. I hit the brakes and a second BP vehicle sandwiched me in. Both agents jumped out of their vehicles and pulled their guns. They screamed at me several times to get out of my vehicle. I told them no and they continued screaming at me. “Roll down the window! Get out of the vehicle! Why do you hate authority?” etc. I tried to explain that I was moving slowly toward a populated area.
“We only have a mile to go. Can we just get to the Cow Palace?” They answered, “No, you’ve already proven that you’re going to run.”

Now even a moron knows that if you’re going to run you should go a little faster than 20 mph. Something in me was more afraid to be outside of my vehicle with them than to die in my vehicle from a bullet to the brain at 6 inches. I didn’t leave my vehicle. They “threatened” to call DPS and I said, “Please do.” They finally told me to pull off to the side of the road so that we weren’t obstructing traffic. In the meantime 5 more Border Patrol cars showed up. I guess they felt really threatened by me. I’m 49-years-old, have blonde hair, drive a small pickup and I work at a book store. They could see in the back – there was nothing.

Finally the Sheriff’s deputy showed up and talked to them first. Then he edged his way up the passenger side of my truck and knocked on the window. I rolled it down and told him how glad I was to see him. He asked for my ID and I gave it to him. He asked what was going on here and I told him the story of my sister. I told him I was afraid and I only wanted to drive to someplace safe before cooperating with them. He asked why they were pulling me over and I told him I really didn’t know. “Maybe I look like a Canadian terrorist.” He laughed, “Never saw one of those before.” He then told me that I could be charged with a felony for not pulling over when the lights came on. He said I could be arrested. He told me that my obligation to them was to pull over and show ID. They couldn’t do anything else. They can’t force me to exit the vehicle. They can’t search my vehicle or my person.

The information came back letting them know that I was not a terrorist; he gave back my ID and told me I could go. I haven’t found out why they pulled me over.
And, after following me for 4 miles, using their ethnic profiling techniques couldn’t they tell that I am not Hispanic or Iraqi? We’re told they are here to protect us, to keep our borders safe. But who is going to protect us from them?

Copyright 2007 Monica Tilley

The supposed purpose of the meeting was to give input on the issue to Representative Giffords and the Border Patrol, represented by Tucson Sector Chief Patrol Agent Robert Gilbert. A few hundred or so mere citizens showed up as well, hoping to have some say. Chief Gilbert spent his opening remarks defending himself against a Daily Star article from the day before whose headline screamed that the checkpoint is not a matter of public debate. In the article he said that the experts on the subject, the Border Patrol, had the right to decide the issue and they had decided to build. At the meeting, Chief Gilbert said that the headline was wrong but the article was right. This may have confused some folks but Arivacans understand – we’re welcome to have debate and give as much input as we like as long as we don’t expect it to change anything.

The Border Patrol decided to build the checkpoint before this meeting, many years before this meeting. Under the Patriot Act and Homeland Security and whatever else, they don’t have to ask any permission or take any input from any mere citizens, or any other governmental institutions, to make this decision. No doubt Chief Gilbert was not moved to reconsider his position.

The meeting was primarily for Representative Giffords’ benefit. She has vacillated on the question
of a permanent checkpoint and politically want to avoid alienating those on either side of the issue. In her favor, the disagreements in the presentations didn’t really represent political divides- the option presented to a permanent checkpoint is still a very conservative, pro enforcement program. There was no mention in either of the community subcommittee reports of economic or immigration policy changes being needed as much or more than enforcement increases. When asked by an audience questioner if she thought there was a law enforcement solution to border issues, Representative Giffords said she realized that government policy changes are needed but that law enforcement is still a large part of it. She wants to be on both sides equally.

Apparently catching many members of both subcommittees by surprise, the first subcommittee report consisted mostly of a PowerPoint propaganda barrage, complete with images of the flaming twin towers and terrorist insurgents, claiming that a permanent checkpoint is desperately needed to protect us all from another 9-11.

The second, options committee, said that permanent checkpoints have no proven deterrent effect on trafficking of any kind, are easily avoided and cause community and local law enforcement problems in surrounding areas. “Secure the border at the border” is their mantra. They are still for spending millions and billions on increased enforcement. They are still for checkpoints but roving checkpoints that have the element of surprise. They are for more agents, the SBI Net, more vehicle barriers, and even biometric ID cards, presumably for all citizens.

Judging from the carefully measured cheer to boo ratio and the show of bodies when those against a permanent checkpoint were asked by an audience member to stand, the audience was decidedly in the against column. Whether or not such disrespectful measures have any weight, only the attending official representatives know.

Interestingly, the first subcommittee made a suggestion that may be an out for Representative
Giffords and a good way to approach the issue. They suggested that the effectiveness and impacts of the current, “fixed temporary”, checkpoint on I-19 be measured as much as possible. That data should be compared to performance measurements of other permanent, fixed and temporary checkpoints in all sectors. All of this information should be able to tell us if a permanent site is of any benefit.
The problem with this seemingly reasonable, even conservative, approach is that the Border Patrol doesn’t gather the necessary data. A 2005 GAO report states that the the Border Patrol “does not even collect the necessary performance measures to be able to accurately judge the relative impact of interior checkpoints in overall border enforcement strategy”. It suggests that the Border Patrol do so but there is no evidence that they have acted on that suggestion.

Chief Gilbert said at the meeting that the reason the Tucson sector is the focus of immigrant and drug traffic is that it has no permanent checkpoint. Let him prove his assertion. If he can’t, through existing performance measures or those he can gather in the future, then there should be no permanent checkpoint. If the Border Patrol hasn’t bothered to collect the necessary performance data, that’s their fault.

This approach would allow Representative Giffords to simply do her job- demand oversight, demand accountability, demand performance. This should be the job of all our elected officials, regardless of their political affiliations. It should apply to all border enforcement programs, increasing agent numbers, increasing fencing, and, especially, the dysfunctional SBI Net.

A rigorous analysis of performance measures and impacts of interior checkpoints might lead us to the conclusion that they are not effective. Beyond that, it might lead us see a permanent checkpoint 30 miles from the border as a monument to the failure of our efforts to control that border. We might realize it would essentially and quite literally cement into place our unwillingness to deal with the real, underlying human problems creating our current situation.

And what is the point of demanding proof of performance when the Border Patrol can unilaterally
decide to go ahead with programs anyway? The Border Patrol can decide to do whatever it wants but it can’t build or expand or go ahead without funding. Funding for a permanent checkpoint has not been approved by Congress. The same is true for the rollout of the SBI Net and perhaps for the proposed new Border Patrol stations, one of which is to be located in, of course, Arivaca.

Which is why mere citizens do still have a modicum of input through their elected representatives. We can choose to use it or not.

Increasing enforcement of bad policy has only resulted in more negative impacts on both sides of the border. A permanent checkpoint on I-19 at kilometer 50 will increase negative impacts on more citizens and do nothing to solve border problems. When we address the real underlying issues on the border with our neighbors, treating our neighbors as neighbors, not as cold, and sometimes hot, war enemies, finally, we’ll have some progress on the border.

Copyright 2007 Peter Ragan

Many people have joined in the protest of this tower, which was erected between May 21-24. The generator has been running since May 24, although it reportedly has not always been functioning due to software problems. To my knowledge it has not been finally approved by the US Congress.

We have gotten our message of disapproval out, and the forces of change are listening. We have had much media coverage, as I have reported in the past two issues of the Connection. We deluged ACLU with complaint letters and then scheduled a meeting with them on Wednesday, July 18, at the Community Center. Alessandra Soler Meetze, Executive Director of AZ ACLU from Phoenix, and Carolyn Trowbridge from the Tucson sector, informed us of what could be done. We presented them with a 3″ think loose leaf notebook containing our information, our actions and media coverage’s, the eight meetings and also enclosed with a 160+ page copy of the SBInet document which details Project 28 and the test towers.
On Friday, July 21, I had a call from Dan Pochoda, Legal Director of ACLU AZ in Phoenix, who informed me that he would be working with us to research and develop a legal action.

He asked me to announce to our people that we need to report anything that could be a negative impact on the community as a reaction to the operation of the Tower. IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT PLEASE CONTACT: C Hues 398-8231 or Ellen Dursema 398-2567 or Peter Ragan 203-5495; we will get you a Complaint Form to fill out, or you can write a letter, and mail it to ACLU AZ PO Box 17148 Phoenix, AZ 85011; or you can email Dan directly at dpochoda@acluaz.org. Be sure to mention the Arivaca Tower.

This is a serious issue. We are the guinea pigs, the only town in this nationwide test project. If we fail to react to Big Brother watching US, the US will spread across the whole country with spy towers making U.S. Citizens enemies of the government.

Boeing has illustrated contempt for our Rights since the 1st day, April 4, when it delivered the SBInet document to the Library and gave us virtually no opportunity to study it or comment on the proposed erection of the tower. Homeland Security has been asked at public meetings for answers to our questions; our questions are being stonewalled. The arrogance of these powerful entities has shown that they believe themselves to be above the Law, and that they do not need to honor taxpayers’ concerns.
A few Sundays ago, Patrick Leahy, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, appeared on Meet the Press and stated, “We are in a Constitutional crisis.” I agree. If we do not stop this base level erosion of our Civil Rights, we will all end up prisoners in a Hitlerian nightmare.

I want to thank the people of Arivaca (and other friends also) for its enthusiastic support in making these latest developments happen. Many, Many people have contributed in unusual and creative ways. I love this community and I am sooo proud of all of us!

Copyright 2007 C. Hues