| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Border Sheriff fears terrorist infiltration |
| 2005-11-13 |
| Slightly trimmed. Gonzalez, Zapata County's chief lawman and chairman of the Border Sheriff's Association, told a San Antonio conference yesterday it's not a matter of "if," but "when," a terrorist will enter the U.S. through Mexico with a dirty bomb or some other weapon of mass destruction. The fault, Gonzalez said, can be placed on the federal government for failing to protect its borders, San Antonio's WOAI radio reported. "We tried everything we know, with little success, to make the federal government aware of the problems we face and how they have affected us. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security has done nothing to help us," he told the Washington Times last month. Gonzalez credits federal officials with warning him that al-Qaida terrorists are looking to use smugglers, including the Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, gang to bring terror operatives across the border. Additionally, the sheriff was told, terrorists-in-waiting have been going to The current "catch and release" policy for illegals from countries other than Mexico is "ridiculous," Gonzalez said, noting that all the other 16 Texas-border sheriffs and Border Patrol agents in the field agreed with him. "Illegal aliens will come across, and once they come across they will even change into better clothing, come out of the brush, and simply surrender to the Border Patrol," he said. "They get processed and they get a certificate telling them to go to a hearing before an immigration judge, and then they let them go. Of course, they don't show up for the hearing." Gonzalez's beat is made all the tougher by the fact Zapata County is only 50 miles south of Nuevo Laredo, the site of an ongoing war between Mexican drug cartels that has claimed 135 lives in 2005 and is being fought with the help of the Zetas, a gang of Mexican military deserters – heavily armed and trained in the U.S. – providing protection services. Border sheriffs became so frustrated with the lack of assistance from Washington as well as policies like "catch and release" they formed the Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition to speak with a "single voice" on border issues, particularly the need for funding as they commit more time and resources to border security. "Protecting the border is a national security issue, and it's always been our concern," Gonzalez said. "But each sheriff along the border thought it was just his problem to deal with. But our residents are living in fear. And it's not just happening to one sheriff, but to 16. We used to deal with it in silence. Now, we can speak together." Gonzalez and most of the other border lawmen are supporting a proposal by Rep. John Culberson (R-Houston) to provide funds for border counties to deputize and train citizens as "reserve officers" to patrol the border, much as volunteers with the Minuteman organization have done. New Mexico's Rep. Steve Pearce told members the Border Patrol has captured two illegal immigrants from Afghanistan, two from Indonesia, nine from Iran and one from Syria in his district over the past two years. That's the kind of information Sheriff Gonzalez says keeps him awake at night. Me too. |
| Posted by:Jackal |
| #10 I expect only 0.1% doesn't want change - the gov't/elites who run the place. The country has so many natural resources, available labor coming out the ears, yet they refuse to educate the populace, for reasons of cheap labor - hell, they know those who come north will be cash cows |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-11-13 22:44 |
| #9 At the point of a bayonet? CIA factbook Mexico: 106 Million people. You wanna ask them nicely, first? |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-11-13 22:33 |
| #8 then quit treating them as equals. It's a kleptocracy, full of xenophobics and pseudo-socialists, promising crap they never intend to deliver. The last time I was in Mexico City, I was warned not to leave th eAirport, due to robbery and kidnapping prevalence. Call it like it is: a 3rd world shithole that refuses to change - albeit with nice people (off the border region) and beautiful lands. To do less is to accept their infection, or hide your head til the revolution hits. Make them CHANGE! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-11-13 21:56 |
| #7 Frank G: What you suggest makes great sense, except in Mexican politics. Foreigners owning coastal property is as sensitive an issue there as Social Security is up here. The biggest, most important, make or break issue in the presidential elections is, and has been for years: keeping the price of tortillas and beans low. Crazy. Second is the preservation of PEMEX as a national monopoly. Talk about bizarre priorities, but that is as they are. Credit where credit is due, Fox is treading very dangerous ground as it is. Only Porfirio Diaz and Carlos Salinas tried to modernize the country, and both of them were punished for it. Otherwise, Mexico is stuck in low gear when trying to get ahead. Their worst enemy is demographics, but it's not their only one. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-11-13 19:48 |
| #6 As much as I would like to see the border closed, and believe me I do; I cringe with the thought of using mines. Let's try to find another solution here. Maybe have the illegals on the work detail building the fences? Catch, work then |
| Posted by: Jan 2005-11-13 19:16 |
| #5 A fence and scatterable mines would be a good place to start. Lots and lots of mine signage, in English and Spanish also. Maybe a CD's or leaflet drops, get the word out. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2005-11-13 18:48 |
| #4 a fense of rocky impassable mountains is still a fence. I agree that there are priority areas where th emost bang for teh buck works. The message to Mexico's gov't has to be "get your house in order - the pressure relief valve's closing". Plenty of places to make income. For instance, Mexico's baja coasts would be a riviera if tehy allowed Americans to buy without games where some ejido claims the land after you build your retirement home on it.... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-11-13 17:48 |
| #3 Frank G: The complete fence is a ruse used by those who want *no* border controls. They couch it in terms of an "all or nothing" solution. Even if forced to build the fence, they will turn it into a boondoggle to rival the Big Dig--and showing less results. That being said, the best bet is to go for the "most bang for your buck" arguments. I've written before how you might be able to shut down 80% or more of the illegals by just putting fencing on 15% of the border area--the major corridors. Beyond that, you get into some serious "law of diminishing returns" with your fencing. My guess is that fencing peaks out at about 20% of the border area (and 90% of the illegals). Beyond that is a waste of money. Remember that much of the border is impassable because it is nothing but rocky desert on both sides, no roads even. Very, very few are going to hike 50 miles across the Sonora even in winter. Putting fence up there might stop literally a half dozen a year. The pro-illegal immigration types would *start* by building the fence there, rather than on the corridors, wasting years and billions of dollars while allowing most illegals to still cross. At the same time, the US will have to do some major restructuring of our economy to make up for those hundreds of thousands of labor intensive jobs for which there will no longer be workers. Everything from produce and meat to housing costs will about double in price. There will almost have to be a guest worker program to keep parts of our economy from serious inflation. On top of everything else, Fox in Mexico has come up with the most amazing development plans for his country that you can imagine. Called the PPP, he plans to turn southern Mexico into an immense transshipment region for the Americas, with two superhighways going up the coasts like larger versions of the Pan-Am Highway from Canada to Chile, seaports, airports, railroads, etc. The trouble is, that the land is currently occupied. So he is running the peasants off their land, and telling them to head North to either work in the border factories, or better yet go to the US and make their dreams come true. This explains much of the recent surge in illegals coming here. Ironically, though Fox will soon leave office, he has spent much effort convincing the ruling parties to keep his plan going. And, if he's right, it should be a major lasting boost to the Mexican economy, which will reduce the number of illegals. This is the reason that Fox is the #1 advocate of the FTAA. Even if it is only involves most of the Americas, Mexico will still make a ton of money. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-11-13 17:29 |
| #2 If you close the border with fencing, Moose, you've effectively stopped the flood the OTM's hide in. I'm sick of all the apologists and their reasons why this can't be done. It will be done. I'd prefer it before a lot of dead Americans happen. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-11-13 15:55 |
| #1 I keep saying that the illegal problem needs to be subdivided into hispanics and others. Different problems need different solutions. If you want the border sealed airtight, and quickly, to "others", it is possible: offer bounties to Mexicans for non-Mexicans! With a $500-$15,000 bounty, no non-Mexican could get within 50 miles of *anywhere* on the border without a dozen phone calls coming in. South of the border, that modest sum is a fortune. We should even pay in cash, so the local police don't steal the money from the tipster. This could be done NOW with a tiny investment, and even with private money. The only snag in it is the "catch-and-release" program for foreigners. Unless the federals agree to KEEP any non-Mexican they catch, anything anybody does is meaningless. As far as stopping Mexicans goes, we have been working on that problem since the 1920s, and I doubt that it will be solved any time soon. So the best bet is to focus on the non-Mexicans. The bounty program could be up and running with $2M and two weeks, to get the word out. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-11-13 15:16 |