President Trump is correct about a wall on the southern border

During the two-year presidential campaign, PRESDT promised that during his administration, a wall would be constructed along the southern border of the United States and Mexico. The stated reason was to restrict the invasion of illegal aliens and drug

runners/assassins. Those of the C/S persuasion loudly and often protested that such was “illegal, unconstitutional and immoral” – which, in my opinion, was not surprising since one of their unstated reasons for this invasion is to bring in more welfare users (and thus illegal voters). In recent elections, there have been reports of precincts, usually in heavily Democrat-controlled areas, where the number of votes cast substantially exceeded the number of registered voters.

No nation can continue to exist unless the borders are controlled and the entrance and departure of noncitizens are continually recorded and controlled. We have seen far too much error in our ways in this necessity in the past 40 years in my observation. One of the criteria for an immigrant obtaining citizenship is the ability to read, write, speak and understand the English language, and yet we see voting instructions in English, Spanish, French, and now, middle eastern languages. In Oklahoma, the inner envelope for absentee ballot returns has instructions in both English and Spanish, and no explanation has been forthcoming from the State Election Board. Back to the wall.

A story in the daily paper, well in the back pages on March 9, carried the headline, “Public notices posted for Mexico border-wall prototypes.” The credit was to Alicia A. Caldwell of the AP and datelined Washington. The first paragraph read: “The Trump administration wants to build a 30-foot-high border wall that looks good from the north side and is difficult to climb or cut through, according to a pair of contract notices posted to a government website.”

The third paragraph stated: “One of the CBP contract requests calls for a solid concrete wall, while the other asks for proposals for a see-through structure.” Also included in it was that both would require the wall to be at least six feet into the ground. At least there is activity beginning on the quest for a border wall, as promised. Unfortunately, as usual, the rest of the story carried subtle suggestions that there are many opposed to this project. I am strongly favorable to it.

In my files is a letter dated December 30, 2016, to my Congressman, Jim Bridenstine, written in preparation for a meeting with him about a suggested design and method of construction of “the wall.”

He was selected as my representative and also seemed to have some input into the PRESDT transition team and so could pass it on. Keeping in mind the caution to never telegraph your punch, some of the items we discussed should not be publicized, such as details of design and construction. One item of interest to both of us was the suggestion that construction done on site be accomplished by military units, particularly the Reserve and National Guard.

If memory is correct, the Oklahoma National Guard has two construction battalions that each year must activate for a training session, usually two weeks.

Then the Navy has SeaBee units that distinguished themselves in World War II in the Pacific arena. Bridenstine immediately stated that they could be activated for a three-month tour which seemed even better to me to allow more training. It was further determined that combat teams should also be deployed for protection against the thugs.

The story indicated that the call was for prototypes to be built on the California border. My suggestion was to build the wall beginning at the New Mexico border, since it is of shorter length, and possibly less violent. In design, it was to be 30 feet deep by 8 feet wide with steel reinforcement and equipment has been located to cut such dimensions in one pass.

Nothing further has been heard but it seems to me to be a better approach and perhaps less costly.