Article

2004-09-03 Home Front: WoT

Three members of the Congressional Homeland Security Committee visit the Valley Tuesday with concerns for tighter security measures along the Texas-Mexico border - particularly in the Rio Grande Valley. Action 4 News has learned that Al Qaeda cells - each group having from seven to fifteen suspected terrorist members can be found just across the Rio Grande Valley in Mexico. "We know from intelligence reports that there are middle easterners that are making their way in our direction," said U.S. Congressman Jim Turner during a news conference at the Veterans Memorial International Bridge in Brownsville. "We don't know their purpose, but we do know that they are there and those reports are coming in increasing numbers. So it should be a wake-up call."

Action 4 News has learned that federal agents have been placed on heightened alert. Local law enforcement agencies have also been notified to keep a watchful eye out for possible terroristic movement. "I think they know exactly where they might be, so I feel very comfortable knowing that once we get the right information we can put a stop to it," said U.S. Congressman Solomon Ortiz. But there is a problem says Ortiz and the other homeland security committee members who say the Texas border is not secure enough. And that is why they wanted to see the border facilities first hand.

Another major concern is the increasing number of Central and South American immigrants who are coming into the country. "We do have a very serious problem... The Salvatrucha gangs are very serious, very viscous and we have confirmed that they have had contact with Al Qaeda," said Ortiz. El Salvador, Honduras, even Brazil are among the Central and South American countries where gangs have been potentially infected by Osama Bin Laden's recruitment for terror. Members of the House Homeland Security Committee say surveillance is there but the nation is not secure. It's a critical border shortfall committee member Sheila Jackson Lee is bringing to light. "We have failed to pay attention to some of these areas and provide full funding."

The committee points to a billion dollar border upgrade for technology, manpower, training, equipment and most of all detention cell space. Statistically some 400,000 illegal immigrants are detained each year. Thousands every day. But with only 19,000 detention cells to hold them, it's a border battle Congressman Turner says we are losing. "About 80 to 90 percent of those released into our country never show up for a hearing. You know that represents a serious security threat to this country and it's got to stop." The lawmakers agree on one clear message: "We need help!"

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-09-03 12:38:24 PM|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I cannot say this enough: Venezuela under Hugo Chavez is the country to watch. He has enough money, hatred/resetment towards the US, and a fairly large muslim population to pose a clear and present danger.

Posted by Anonymous6134 2004-09-03 12:55:04 PM|| 2004-09-03 12:55:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Statistically some 400,000 illegal immigrants are detained each year. Thousands every day.

But with only 19,000 detention cells to hold them, itâs a border battle Congressman Turner says we are losing.

"About 80 to 90 percent of those released into our country never show up for a hearing. You know that represents a serious security threat to this country and itâs got to stop."

The lawmakers agree on one clear message: "We need help!"

Why in the hell are we "detaining" these people???? Anyone caught sneaking across the U.S./Mexico border should be deported IMMEDIATELY, no questions asked. That'll solve the problem real quick.

It's not a matter of needing help, it's a matter of adjusting policy and procedure so as to not make it needlessly difficult for ourselves. If doing so means less "sensitivity" with regard to border jumpers, tough. This problem with illegal border-crossers has been going on for too long, and it's pretty obvious that playing nice isn't the answer.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-09-03 1:53:18 PM|| 2004-09-03 1:53:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 BAR-I like your idea of deportation, but there is a problem. If we do not have diplomatic relations with the detainee's country of origin, we cannot deport-we intern him instead-sometimes for decades. Paying room and board for terrorist scum for decades isn't going down my throat easily. Anyone know how many/which countries we do not have diplomatic relations with, and whether any of them are jihadist states?

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-03 2:00:50 PM|| 2004-09-03 2:00:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 If we do not have diplomatic relations with the detainee's country of origin, we cannot deport-we intern him instead-sometimes for decades.

The solution is simple; the people picked up crossed over from Mexico, so they get immediately sent BACK to Mexico, regardless of their ethnicity, and regardless of what the Mexican authorities think. We should not be obliged to send back people any further than where they were caught crossing over from. If the Mexicans have a problem with this approach, then maybe they should do something about what's happening on THEIR side of the border.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-09-03 2:45:27 PM|| 2004-09-03 2:45:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 My question is why the hell dont we have the detetion facilities? We have known about this for years. I say lets start building detetion camps.

And isn't Venezuela under Hugo Chavez selling Venesuelain passports to AL-Q terrorists?

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-09-03 2:48:13 PM|| 2004-09-03 2:48:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 We do have them, CF-I don't know the exact term-is it detention or internment, but that's what we do. I just don't like the idea of keeping them alive for years and years.

We need a immigration policy overhaul by the Bush administration. The current wooing of Vincente Fox and absolution of illegals makes me sick-it is putting our country at great risk.

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-03 2:52:26 PM|| 2004-09-03 2:52:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 My question is why the hell dont we have the detetion facilities?

As I see it, the problem with more detention facilities is the pressure to use them instead of doing the right thing, which would be to send them back promptly. With adequate detention facilities (which cost $$$ to build, BTW), we end up with their occupants' upkeep for the time we have them, and the taxpayer inevitably ends up paying for this. ALL of it. (don't count on any Mexican peso contributions)

Ain't that just dandy?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-09-03 4:21:10 PM|| 2004-09-03 4:21:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#8
Just shoot them on the spot where they are captured. Period.

And leave the bodies laying where they died to rot in the Sun.

Concurrently, we need an Israeli type wall with automated mini-guns, anti-personnel radar and a 300 yard deep minefield on the Mexican facing side.

I forgot the interlocking fields of fire. My bad.

It is WAY past time to get absofuckinglutely savage with these people.

On the other hand, we could just sit around and play Canasta.

CiT

Posted by CiT 2004-09-03 6:02:20 PM|| 2004-09-03 6:02:20 PM|| Front Page Top

17:50 Pancho Poodle8452
17:34 Elmerert Hupens2660
17:22 DooDahMan
17:15 DooDahMan
17:10 DooDahMan
17:08 DooDahMan
17:08 DooDahMan
16:52 DarthVader
15:31 NoMoreBS
15:24 DarthVader
15:20 NoMoreBS
15:15 Griter+Slash1619
15:04 NoMoreBS
14:51 Grom the Affective
14:50 Secret Master
14:06 swksvolFF
13:45 Lord Garth
13:33 trailing wife
13:32 Ebbuger Whuque4103
13:17 Frank G
13:01 SteveS
12:56 mossomo
12:55 mossomo
12:43 swksvolFF