They say old habits are hard to break; in many circumstances, I certainly agree. My career as an Intelligence Officer had just gotten off the ground when 9-11 turned everything upside down. No doubt espionage and intelligence collection would be more important than ever, and an essential part of the process has always been about understanding the target. Now that I'm retired, I get my details from the news, just like everyone else. But things have come a long way since my days as a rookie Intel Officer, and I can always find a treasure trove of useful information by switching from one news channel to the next. Having spent time in Europe, I am familiar with the various press agencies, and during the Nice terror attack of last July, my knowledge of French kept me watching the live news bulletins directly from France.
Aside from the horrific terrorist attack in Brussels on March 22, 2016, which killed thirty-two civilians, the last three prolific terror attacks on European soil took place in Nice, Berlin, and most recently in London. I have separated these three from the Brussels incident for a number of reasons. The terrorist group known to the west as ISIS has long made use of vehicular weapons. For years, Iraqis and Syrians have been victimized by car bombs which purposely target large public events, including holiday celebrations and funerals. ISIS will continue to use this method of delivering death because it's a basically simple way to cause a high number of casualties. Rigging a vehicle with explosives and attaching a detonator does not take a munitions expert, and it's just about impossible for security in some countries to disrupt this manner of attack. In Nice, Berlin and London, though, no explosives were used. The perpetrators used their vehicles as weapons, flooring the accelerator and running down civilians with no warning. In all three attacks, the perpetrator intended to exit the vehicle after coming to a halt, to continue their rampage with either handguns or knives. It's important to note that these three attacks were carried out by one person. No doubt, other persons either new of the attack beforehand and/or provided assistance, but the actual event itself was carried out by one individual. The perpetrators were not rank-and-file ISIS operatives, but rather Islamic Extremists who had made contact with like-minded persons through Social Media. For some time, law enforcement in the United States has been rightly concerned with the possibility of well-trained, terrorist sleeper cells embedded on our communities. The reality is, as we open our borders to refugees who have traveled directly from countries which are known to harbor large numbers of ISIS operatives and sympathizers, we increase the possibility of either type of attack.
Most police officers in the United Kingdom are unarmed, as are law enforcement personnel in a number of European countries. From my perspective, as long as the policy suited each respective country, then its a good thing to have fewer weapons on the streets. I assume that this policy is being reconsidered, given that Police Officers have certainly become targets, and they should have the right and the ability to defend themselves. The London attacker used a car and two knives to brutally kill four people. A society can go to extreme lengths when trying to create a weapons-free environment, but time and again we are reminded that a person who is intent on harming another person will always be able to find a weapon. Its much easier for the perpetrator to carefully choose what type of normally innocuous instrument to use as a weapon, but more difficult for the victim, when being attacked, to make a split-second decision on what to use for self-defense.
I chose to highlight the three vehicular attacks in Nice, Berlin and London, because they do not appear to be intricately-planned, resource-intensive attacks. ISIS was not directly responsible for any of the three vehicular attacks in question, although they do deserve total responsibility because of their efforts through Social Media to encourage these type of attacks. What is so frightening is that ISIS can claim responsibility and benefit from these heinous events, without actually having to utilize valuable, professional operatives, who are free to continue hiding in plain sight, until all the pieces come together to conduct a Brussels and Paris style attack, one that is heavy on resources and personnel. It may be too late for Europe, but it is essential that the United States government take all necessary precautions regarding the resettlement of refugees from areas of conflict. The Executive Order that has caused such an uproar, does nothing more than delay resettlement of refugees for three months. I believe National Security and the integrity of our international border are worth the effort.
Showing posts with label Executive order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Executive order. Show all posts
Sunday, March 26, 2017
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Why its so important to defend President Trump's Executive Order dealing with refugees.
Last week during the Question and Answer segment of a speaking engagement, a young person asked me how I could be sure that I was on the correct side of any particular issue. No doubt at one time or another, most people have considered this question. When I was younger and knew very little of the world, I was very careful before pronouncing an opinion on political or international issues. Frankly put, I didn't want to look foolish. During my college days, if some group or another was protesting apartheid or speaking up on the issue of abortion, for instance, I would find the time to learn as much as I could before I put my credibility on the line by stating my opinion, and my audience was usually limited to my friends and family. Today when I listen to the various groups protesting President Donald Trump and his actions since his inauguration, I frequently hear Trump and his supporters referred to as "Nazis and Racists", with the President himself constantly being compared to Nazi Dictator Adolf Hitler. I'm willing to bet that the great majority of people using the term "Nazi" and making comparisons to Hitler, probably could not find Germany on a map, let alone accurately explain Hitler and his National Socialist movement. Regardless, the name-calling and bullying won't be ending anytime soon, so those of us who support President Trump had better prepare ourselves for the long-haul.
When President Trump took office, he immediately went to work following through on a number of his campaign promises. Anyone who followed the 2016 presidential election shouldn't be surprised by Trump's Executive Order temporarily halting immigration from seven Muslim-majority nations. Contrary to what is regularly written by the left-wing press, the order does not "ban" immigrants from any country. Instead, it temporarily freezes the process, to allow officials from the Department of Homeland Security to review and properly investigate each applicant. According to Trump's own language, the review must be completed within a four-month window. Actually, on two separate occasions, President Obama took the same action, albeit his effort included only two "Muslim-majority" nations. What were President Obama and now President Trump intending when issuing these orders?
We have been incredibly fortunate in that significant terror attacks in the United States over the last decade have only occurred about once a year. Europe, which is ground-zero for refugee resettlement, is basically at war with Muslim extremists. The French have felt the brunt of violence, with the United Kingdom and Germany not far behind. Terror-related deaths have also occurred in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. Along with individual terrorist actions, Europeans have had to deal with rampant sexual assaults against women at public celebrations, including New Years. It seems that Muslim extremists have decided that any woman wearing what they consider to be revealing attire, is a justified target fro sexual assault. The terror attacks that fill the headlines of European newspapers are almost always directly tied to the refugee community. Why hasn't the United States suffered the same frequency of terror-related events? One reason is because we have just recently bought into the refugee "come-one, come-all" attitude that the left seems to believe is safe, intelligent policy. President Trump's Executive Order was intended to prevent some of what Europe has suffered. With so many refugees arriving on the borders of Hungary, Greece and Italy every day, it has been impossible for European law enforcement to adequately investigate each new arrival. President Trump enacted his Executive Order so that our law enforcement would have the time and resources to accomplish what the Europeans have so far failed to do- protect innocent civilians from terrorists who have been purposely seeded into refugee communities.
The fact that one court in Washington State and another in California have ruled against the President should come as no surprise. These activist, leftist judges believe that their authority overrides the Executive Branch, which flies directly in the face of the Constitution. If the President of the United States does not have the authority to control the border, then who does? If you speak to rank-and-file Border Patrol and Immigration Enforcement Officers, those who are most familiar with Immigration Law (yours truly has a bit of experience in that area as well), they will tell you that the President absolutely has the authority to take action limiting immigration. Interestingly enough, our Justice Department includes the existence of Immigration Courts, who are trained to interpret law relating to immigrants. Instead, we have the California-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ignoring the Constitution for the sole purpose of damaging a President whom they despise.
At the end of the day, those of us who call ourselves Conservatives must be more aggressive in support of our President and the policies for which he was elected. At the moment, the left is running rampant, destroying property, threatening people and bullying our society into hiding behind our locked doors. Their behavior, which has yet to be criticized by any national Democratic Party leader, is an attempt to overurn the results of the 2016 election through intimidation and fear. But they may have a surprise coming. Sixty-four million American citizens voted for Donald Trump, and groups within that block are beginning to mobilize, so that our voices may be heard. At times I almost regret not behaving in such a fashion when Obama was piling up twenty trillion dollars in debt, destroying our reputation internationally, and leaving wounded veterans to die on the streets. Hindsight is 20/20, as the cliche reminds us, so I'm going to focus on the future.
When President Trump took office, he immediately went to work following through on a number of his campaign promises. Anyone who followed the 2016 presidential election shouldn't be surprised by Trump's Executive Order temporarily halting immigration from seven Muslim-majority nations. Contrary to what is regularly written by the left-wing press, the order does not "ban" immigrants from any country. Instead, it temporarily freezes the process, to allow officials from the Department of Homeland Security to review and properly investigate each applicant. According to Trump's own language, the review must be completed within a four-month window. Actually, on two separate occasions, President Obama took the same action, albeit his effort included only two "Muslim-majority" nations. What were President Obama and now President Trump intending when issuing these orders?
We have been incredibly fortunate in that significant terror attacks in the United States over the last decade have only occurred about once a year. Europe, which is ground-zero for refugee resettlement, is basically at war with Muslim extremists. The French have felt the brunt of violence, with the United Kingdom and Germany not far behind. Terror-related deaths have also occurred in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. Along with individual terrorist actions, Europeans have had to deal with rampant sexual assaults against women at public celebrations, including New Years. It seems that Muslim extremists have decided that any woman wearing what they consider to be revealing attire, is a justified target fro sexual assault. The terror attacks that fill the headlines of European newspapers are almost always directly tied to the refugee community. Why hasn't the United States suffered the same frequency of terror-related events? One reason is because we have just recently bought into the refugee "come-one, come-all" attitude that the left seems to believe is safe, intelligent policy. President Trump's Executive Order was intended to prevent some of what Europe has suffered. With so many refugees arriving on the borders of Hungary, Greece and Italy every day, it has been impossible for European law enforcement to adequately investigate each new arrival. President Trump enacted his Executive Order so that our law enforcement would have the time and resources to accomplish what the Europeans have so far failed to do- protect innocent civilians from terrorists who have been purposely seeded into refugee communities.
The fact that one court in Washington State and another in California have ruled against the President should come as no surprise. These activist, leftist judges believe that their authority overrides the Executive Branch, which flies directly in the face of the Constitution. If the President of the United States does not have the authority to control the border, then who does? If you speak to rank-and-file Border Patrol and Immigration Enforcement Officers, those who are most familiar with Immigration Law (yours truly has a bit of experience in that area as well), they will tell you that the President absolutely has the authority to take action limiting immigration. Interestingly enough, our Justice Department includes the existence of Immigration Courts, who are trained to interpret law relating to immigrants. Instead, we have the California-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ignoring the Constitution for the sole purpose of damaging a President whom they despise.
At the end of the day, those of us who call ourselves Conservatives must be more aggressive in support of our President and the policies for which he was elected. At the moment, the left is running rampant, destroying property, threatening people and bullying our society into hiding behind our locked doors. Their behavior, which has yet to be criticized by any national Democratic Party leader, is an attempt to overurn the results of the 2016 election through intimidation and fear. But they may have a surprise coming. Sixty-four million American citizens voted for Donald Trump, and groups within that block are beginning to mobilize, so that our voices may be heard. At times I almost regret not behaving in such a fashion when Obama was piling up twenty trillion dollars in debt, destroying our reputation internationally, and leaving wounded veterans to die on the streets. Hindsight is 20/20, as the cliche reminds us, so I'm going to focus on the future.
Monday, December 8, 2014
Since Obama Took Office, Foreign National Criminals Rarely Face Deportation
Links: A. Foreign Criminals Allowed To Stay In The U.S.
B. Almost 31,000 Foreign Criminals Released In U.S.
Forgive me; the two links I have chosen tonight deliver almost the same exact message. I chose to include the second link because the source of the first, The Daily Caller, makes no bones about its decidedly anti-Obama perspective. Occasionally another less-political source can provide a bit of seriousness to an issue. The debate regarding President Obama's determination to utilize an "Executive Order" to reform Immigration Policy is in full swing. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the results of the most recent midterm elections were a referendum on President Obama's intentions, more than an indictment of his record. I'm sure some folks who are directly impacted voted in support of the Keystone Pipeline, and persons in parts of Kentucky voted for Mitch McConnell because of fear that a Democratic Senator would support Obama's anti-coal agenda. But one issue resonated in every precinct from San Diego County to Bangor, Maine. The majority of Americans do not support an Amnesty for persons living in the United States illegally. Here is a news flash for the Beltway Politicians from both parties. The average American does not get caught up in the weeds of an issue. How long has the person been here illegally? Have they spent any time in jail? What were the living conditions like in their home country? Why didn't they pursue resident alien status during their time living here sin documentos? Who cares? At the end of the day, it is the simple case of an adult making the decision to predicate his first visit to this country with the breaking of one of our laws.
The average American, God Bless Him 'Em, likes to keep things simple. If someone purposely and illegally crossed the U.S. border from Mexico as an adult, and lived in this country for any particular amount of time, then they are subject to deportation according to the laws of the United States of America. This basic, concise declaration should be the platform for any conversation regarding illegal immigration. We should not allow persons with different viewpoints to confuse the issue by removing words such as "illegal". I have spent a good part of my life living in the third world. I am well-aware of the hardships most people face everyday just to feed themselves. Mexico is a paradise in comparison to most African countries. While special interest groups go before Congressional Committees and groan and sob about the lack of jobs in Mexico, the average man or woman on the street in Burundi would do anything to have the opportunities available in Mexico. The truth is, its all relative. The world is full of suffering people, and I am convinced that the United States has a role to play in alleviating some of that suffering, particularly over the long-term. But we cannot solve the problem by allowing every foreigner to become a U.S. citizen. If you show me a 36-year old citizen of Honduras who has been living in Chicago for 15 years, working construction jobs off-the-book, I will introduce you to a 36-year old Bangladeshi who digs through garbage dumps everyday to try and find enough food to feed his pregnant wife and their two children. Now you tell me who is more deserving, or in need of, U.S. citizenship? Does the fact that the construction worker has been able to avoid the authorities for 15 years somehow make him more legitimate?
This issue to be a very sensitive subject to MB. For a year of my life, I processed foreign national felons for deportation out of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Holiday Unit in Huntsville, Texas. If someone committed a crime in Texas that required incarceration, I worked with the deportation officers to prepare the paperwork to deport the individual after time served. Everyone needs a passport, and the gang banger originally from El Salvador isn't going to volunteer his passport to the authorities. So someone has to contact the Embassy or consulate of El Salvador to inform them that so-and-so is being returned to his native land after completing jail time, and is in need of travel documentation. At one time this job was the responsibility of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The INS died an unfortunate death after 9/11 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Deporting criminal aliens who had completed their time was now the job of DHS. To most folks, it just seemed like a change in uniform and title, and for the first decade, the United States continued to aggressively remove dangerous criminal aliens (yes, I consider someone on their third and fourth DUI/DWI to be a dangerous criminal alien). But the Obama Administration started slowing everything down. An order from above required that all deportation orders be reviewed. This was followed up by moratoriums on deportations in certain sectors. Entire deportation offices were no longer functioning as designed. This process continued, with fewer and fewer criminal aliens being deported after time served. Its almost too crazy to believe. Not only does this Administration want to end deportations of illegal aliens, it has now embarked on a mission to end deportations of CRIMINAL illegal aliens. The actual statistics provided in the links is not political in the slightest. It is clear and clean data collected from the Department of Homeland Security. If a Mexican national kills another person during a robbery attempt, and is found guilt by a jury and sentenced to 25 years in prison, that Mexican national MUST be deported after serving his time. But its just not happening, at least not in most instances.
I don't like this issue. There is no enjoyment in expressing my shock and frustration at what has been allowed to happen over the past 6 years. When I was a child, national borders denoted a sea change, from one society, culture and sometimes language, to another. The border separated currencies, histories, and in some cases political ideologies. A passport, and in many cases, a Visa was required to enter another country. American history in Grade School taught me that corruption and taxation without representation convinced the founders of our great nation to take up arms and put their lives in jeopardy to make a better future for their children. In 2014, the young men and women in Mexico are aware that the system in their country is corrupt and that a small percentage of families control most of the wealth. Are they encouraged to march in the streets, and take up arms if necessary, to create a better life for their children? NO. They are advised to enter the United States illegally, find a job as a landscaper, construction worker or in fast food, and send whatever money they can afford back home to their parents. I remember that this particular reality truly mystified my late father. He could not understand why the young men of Mexico, who obviously love their heritage and traditions, would not rise up and take the country back from the thieves who currently run the show. It is no great secret that Mexico is blessed with natural resources. Besides the oil (the easily accessed stuff is about used up), Mexico is a nation of tremendous livestock and agricultural potential. Every week, Mexican fishermen catch enough fish to feed Latin America for a year. As for industry, Mexico produces and produces and produces....cars, microwave ovens, tile, cell phones, clothes, etc. And yet, for some reason, Mexican workers have to sneak into the United States to find employment that will pay a decent wage. If the wealthy class in Mexico would steal just a little bit less every year, then Mexico might avoid another revolution indefinitely.
Again, I am in agreement with the average American on this subject. I like it kept simple: if you are in my country illegally and you are an adult, then you need to be removed and returned to your own land. If you decide to return as a tourist or even on an Immigrant Visa, then you should be required to reimburse the U.S. government the money that was spent on your deportation. We cannot have an open border policy, nor should we accept that federal law enforcement releases foreign national felons on our streets after they have completed their sentence for their crime. Hey, I'm glad so-and-so turned himself in and completed his 3-year sentence for domestic abuse, but what about the sentence for his original crime? You know, the "entering the United States without documentation or alternate authority" crime? I can only imagine what the next couple of years will be like.
B. Almost 31,000 Foreign Criminals Released In U.S.
Forgive me; the two links I have chosen tonight deliver almost the same exact message. I chose to include the second link because the source of the first, The Daily Caller, makes no bones about its decidedly anti-Obama perspective. Occasionally another less-political source can provide a bit of seriousness to an issue. The debate regarding President Obama's determination to utilize an "Executive Order" to reform Immigration Policy is in full swing. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the results of the most recent midterm elections were a referendum on President Obama's intentions, more than an indictment of his record. I'm sure some folks who are directly impacted voted in support of the Keystone Pipeline, and persons in parts of Kentucky voted for Mitch McConnell because of fear that a Democratic Senator would support Obama's anti-coal agenda. But one issue resonated in every precinct from San Diego County to Bangor, Maine. The majority of Americans do not support an Amnesty for persons living in the United States illegally. Here is a news flash for the Beltway Politicians from both parties. The average American does not get caught up in the weeds of an issue. How long has the person been here illegally? Have they spent any time in jail? What were the living conditions like in their home country? Why didn't they pursue resident alien status during their time living here sin documentos? Who cares? At the end of the day, it is the simple case of an adult making the decision to predicate his first visit to this country with the breaking of one of our laws.
The average American, God Bless Him 'Em, likes to keep things simple. If someone purposely and illegally crossed the U.S. border from Mexico as an adult, and lived in this country for any particular amount of time, then they are subject to deportation according to the laws of the United States of America. This basic, concise declaration should be the platform for any conversation regarding illegal immigration. We should not allow persons with different viewpoints to confuse the issue by removing words such as "illegal". I have spent a good part of my life living in the third world. I am well-aware of the hardships most people face everyday just to feed themselves. Mexico is a paradise in comparison to most African countries. While special interest groups go before Congressional Committees and groan and sob about the lack of jobs in Mexico, the average man or woman on the street in Burundi would do anything to have the opportunities available in Mexico. The truth is, its all relative. The world is full of suffering people, and I am convinced that the United States has a role to play in alleviating some of that suffering, particularly over the long-term. But we cannot solve the problem by allowing every foreigner to become a U.S. citizen. If you show me a 36-year old citizen of Honduras who has been living in Chicago for 15 years, working construction jobs off-the-book, I will introduce you to a 36-year old Bangladeshi who digs through garbage dumps everyday to try and find enough food to feed his pregnant wife and their two children. Now you tell me who is more deserving, or in need of, U.S. citizenship? Does the fact that the construction worker has been able to avoid the authorities for 15 years somehow make him more legitimate?
This issue to be a very sensitive subject to MB. For a year of my life, I processed foreign national felons for deportation out of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Holiday Unit in Huntsville, Texas. If someone committed a crime in Texas that required incarceration, I worked with the deportation officers to prepare the paperwork to deport the individual after time served. Everyone needs a passport, and the gang banger originally from El Salvador isn't going to volunteer his passport to the authorities. So someone has to contact the Embassy or consulate of El Salvador to inform them that so-and-so is being returned to his native land after completing jail time, and is in need of travel documentation. At one time this job was the responsibility of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The INS died an unfortunate death after 9/11 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Deporting criminal aliens who had completed their time was now the job of DHS. To most folks, it just seemed like a change in uniform and title, and for the first decade, the United States continued to aggressively remove dangerous criminal aliens (yes, I consider someone on their third and fourth DUI/DWI to be a dangerous criminal alien). But the Obama Administration started slowing everything down. An order from above required that all deportation orders be reviewed. This was followed up by moratoriums on deportations in certain sectors. Entire deportation offices were no longer functioning as designed. This process continued, with fewer and fewer criminal aliens being deported after time served. Its almost too crazy to believe. Not only does this Administration want to end deportations of illegal aliens, it has now embarked on a mission to end deportations of CRIMINAL illegal aliens. The actual statistics provided in the links is not political in the slightest. It is clear and clean data collected from the Department of Homeland Security. If a Mexican national kills another person during a robbery attempt, and is found guilt by a jury and sentenced to 25 years in prison, that Mexican national MUST be deported after serving his time. But its just not happening, at least not in most instances.
I don't like this issue. There is no enjoyment in expressing my shock and frustration at what has been allowed to happen over the past 6 years. When I was a child, national borders denoted a sea change, from one society, culture and sometimes language, to another. The border separated currencies, histories, and in some cases political ideologies. A passport, and in many cases, a Visa was required to enter another country. American history in Grade School taught me that corruption and taxation without representation convinced the founders of our great nation to take up arms and put their lives in jeopardy to make a better future for their children. In 2014, the young men and women in Mexico are aware that the system in their country is corrupt and that a small percentage of families control most of the wealth. Are they encouraged to march in the streets, and take up arms if necessary, to create a better life for their children? NO. They are advised to enter the United States illegally, find a job as a landscaper, construction worker or in fast food, and send whatever money they can afford back home to their parents. I remember that this particular reality truly mystified my late father. He could not understand why the young men of Mexico, who obviously love their heritage and traditions, would not rise up and take the country back from the thieves who currently run the show. It is no great secret that Mexico is blessed with natural resources. Besides the oil (the easily accessed stuff is about used up), Mexico is a nation of tremendous livestock and agricultural potential. Every week, Mexican fishermen catch enough fish to feed Latin America for a year. As for industry, Mexico produces and produces and produces....cars, microwave ovens, tile, cell phones, clothes, etc. And yet, for some reason, Mexican workers have to sneak into the United States to find employment that will pay a decent wage. If the wealthy class in Mexico would steal just a little bit less every year, then Mexico might avoid another revolution indefinitely.
Again, I am in agreement with the average American on this subject. I like it kept simple: if you are in my country illegally and you are an adult, then you need to be removed and returned to your own land. If you decide to return as a tourist or even on an Immigrant Visa, then you should be required to reimburse the U.S. government the money that was spent on your deportation. We cannot have an open border policy, nor should we accept that federal law enforcement releases foreign national felons on our streets after they have completed their sentence for their crime. Hey, I'm glad so-and-so turned himself in and completed his 3-year sentence for domestic abuse, but what about the sentence for his original crime? You know, the "entering the United States without documentation or alternate authority" crime? I can only imagine what the next couple of years will be like.
Thursday, October 23, 2014
Immigration....The Most Important issue Facing Americans in 2014
Links: DC Prepares For A Flood Of Resident Aliens
Thousands Of Undocumented Felons Released
Full fathom five thy father lies:
Of his bones are coral made:
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
-From William Shakespeare's "The Tempest"
Any issue regarding the safety of U.S. citizens belongs in the realm of national security. Immigration is and always has been part of the national security discussion. I could also argue that the stampeding herd of elephants that is our national debt is an issue of national security, but today we will focus on immigration. When Barrack Obama ran for President in 2008, he did not disguise his determination to reform the immigration system. I assume other priorities, including Obamacare, took precedence during his first term, and so Obama has decided to fight the immigration battle in 2014 (following the Nov 2 midterm elections, mind you). Actually, we won't get to observe a battle, or a debate, or even a vote in Congress. President Obama has openly declared his intention to use Executive Action to address immigration reform. Obama's intended Executive Action will be primarily focused on the thirty million undocumented persons living in the U.S. (there are many guesses as to how many people live in the United States illegally. . .thirty million seems a bit conservative, but let's give the benefit of the doubt). We've had this conversation before. During the Bush Administration, the decision was made to build a fence along the southern land border. Not a white-washed picket fence like the one Tom Sawyer was supposed to paint, but an electrified fence that was intended to be part of a broader monitoring system. Although a few stretches of fence were constructed, the effort never got close to completion. From the get-go, the fence was opposed by Democrats in Congress, and a variety of legal challenges really killed the effort. If you've read my blog more than a few times, you should know that I always appreciate keeping things simple, so this is my simple question:
If the United States has an international border with Mexico, why is it wrong to demarcate that border with a fence?
We never got the fence. But Congress has paid for a steady increase in Border Patrol, Customs and Inspections personnel. I understand this issue because in a former life I was a Federal Agent working on the International Ports of Entry in Laredo, Texas. Any honest Border Patrol or Homeland Security Officer will tell you that we probably only interdict five to ten percent of those who are trying to enter the U.S. illegally from Mexico. The percentage of drugs that we stop is probably close to five percent as well. Should the average American be concerned about undocumented persons living in the United States? The answer is yes. No hospital emergency room is going to refuse service to a sick person because of lack of identification or documentation. When the bill does not get paid, the physician/hospital system has to absorb the loss and the difference is passed on to the taxpayer. And it happens all the time. I'm not saying that emergency rooms should deny treatment, I'm only dissecting the issue. Every public school system in the United States is required by law to teach the children of undocumented persons. This has become a tremendous liability for the respective school districts. Undocumented persons don't pay school or property taxes, so the district has to come up with the additional funds (not just to teach undocumented children, but to pay for bilingual teachers, create bilingual education programs, books, etc.) by raising the school tax rate. Our prison systems have become heavily burdened with gang members from Mexico, Central and South America. Gangs like Mara Salvatrucha 13 and the 18th Street Gang originated in Central America and are deeply involved in drug smuggling both inside prisons and on the outside. We can only guess at the depth of the involvement that various Central and South American gangs have in the importation and distribution of drugs on the streets of America. The smuggling of both people and narcotics used to be exclusively controlled on the south side of the border in Mexico. That has changed: the gangs that run the coyotes (a smuggler of people) and the mules (an undocumented person smuggling narcotics) have established themselves in U.S. locations like El Paso, Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Tijuana, Yuma, Douglas, Nogales, McAllen, Laredo, and Brownsville. A Border Patrol Chief who has been a close friend for decades told me that he believes at least five of the homes purchased and built in the exclusive, gated community in which is lives, belong to narco-traffickers.
These are only a few of the reasons why immigration is a national security issue. We haven't even touched on the issue of terrorists sneaking across the porous border pretending to be Latino. Special Interest Aliens (persons from countries with known terrorist connections, for instance Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan) having been pulling the "just pretend to be Mexican" trick for years. Now that we no longer deport undocumented Mexican nationals, you can bet that a few bad guys are presently holed up in cheap hotels in Nuevo Laredo and Matamoros, practicing a few words in Spanish. No doubt at least a few readers have decided that I harbor some racist tendencies, a charge that often seems a futile effort to continue to refute. Except to state the obvious; nothing in the above paragraph can be construed as applying to solely to one particular ethnicity. More importantly, nothing I have stated applies to every person of a particular ethnic group. I love Mexico, I love the Hispanic culture, and I speak fluent Spanish. Whenever I return home from a long trip abroad, I never feel "at home" until I hear someone speaking Spanish. So lets cut the crap and leave all that "racist" bullshit at the door. We have a problem, and I'm beginning to fear that it may be out of control. On top of everything that we have previously discussed, we must consider the fact that President Obama intends to issue an Executive Order that provides a path to citizenship for most of the nation's undocumented persons. It's true that many of these people have been living in the United States for decades and certainly in their own way have contributed to the growth of the nation. While it's been argued that providing a Social Security number for persons who were previously undocumented will increase the tax base, hold your horses, folks: it won't make that much difference. Filthy rich Americans still constitute the great majority of the nation's tax base.
The piece of this issue which really gives me the red-ass has nothing to do with taxes or narco-trafficking. What really pisses me off is that EVERYONE realizes that this fast-lane to citizenship is meant to create as many as twenty million additional Democratic voters. Even Democratic talking heads on television admit this shameful fact. The vast majority of persons affected by the impending Executive Action (forgive me for making assumptions, but see me in November and call me a liar) will be persons of Hispanic heritage (this proportion may possibly even as high as ninety-nine percent as not very many Austrians or Sri Lankans are hiding out from La Migra). When this is taken together with the fact that in 2012, seventy-five percent of Hispanic voters cast their vote for Barrack Obama (stated in National Review magazine) the impact becomes clear. Every statistic I found echoed this kind of political dominance not just for Obama, but for Democratic candidates in general. So, no "rocket science" here: if President Obama signs an Executive Order fast-tracking citizenship for millions and millions of undocumented Hispanics in the United States, we will be staring a "one-party state" right in the face. Why don't Hispanic Americans (documented or not) vote Republican? On occasion, it happens. The Cuban-American community in the Miami area have been staunch Republicans, mostly because of the Castro issue. And a Hispanic Republican Governor (Martinez in New Mexico) and Republican Senator (Cruz in Texas) have been recently elected, which seems to give some conservatives hope. I don't buy it. Hispanic Americans have been loyal Democrats since the days of John F. Kennedy, and I do see a Sea-Change on the horizon (I love the phrase Sea Change; it comes from a song Shakespeare wrote as part of "The Tempest").
I don't have a problem with providing rights to persons who have been part of the fabric of our nation for decades. I believe that, instead of creating a fast-track to citizenship, it would be preferable to provide an avenue for persons to obtain Resident Alien status (Green Card), and require that they utilize the system in place for adjusting to U.S. citizen. Its terribly unfair for individuals who have followed the existing law and been waiting for years to become Americans, to be pushed to the back of the line by persons who entered illegally. As tough as it may be for some people, we must remember that we are dealing with persons whose entire presence in this country is predicated on an illegal act. I realize that Mexico can be a difficult country for young people with hopes and aspirations, and I don't judge anyone who is trying to provide for their family, but this issue is beginning to impact OUR families, especially those with children and grandchildren. I had hoped for some form of political compromise, something that did not include a fast-track to citizenship. I just can't see why that part of the equation is so important. If someone entered the United States illegally in 1989, they should have the opportunity to apply for a Green Card. Once that process is complete, if they are interested in becoming citizens, they can follow the law that is already in place. IMPORTANT: Don't believe the Democrat narrative that Congress has been AWOL on this issue. The House of Representatives has approved a number of Immigration Reform Bills that were not allowed to even reach committee. Sometime in 2012, Harry Reid decided that President Obama should rule by decree. So for all practical purposes, he ended the functions of the U.S. Senate as of October 21. At that time, three hundred fifty-two Bills that had passed the House were languishing in Harry Reid's personal purgatory. With Congress unable to act, Obama can say (without the hint of a smile) that the do-nothing Republicans won't act on immigration, and he is therefore obliged by his responsibilities as President of the United States to utilize Executive Authority. Once he signs the Executive Order, no one knows how many formerly undocumented people will follow through with the process, but if they do, they get to be the latest addition to a rapidly expanding Democratic voter roll.
Thousands Of Undocumented Felons Released
Full fathom five thy father lies:
Of his bones are coral made:
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
-From William Shakespeare's "The Tempest"
Any issue regarding the safety of U.S. citizens belongs in the realm of national security. Immigration is and always has been part of the national security discussion. I could also argue that the stampeding herd of elephants that is our national debt is an issue of national security, but today we will focus on immigration. When Barrack Obama ran for President in 2008, he did not disguise his determination to reform the immigration system. I assume other priorities, including Obamacare, took precedence during his first term, and so Obama has decided to fight the immigration battle in 2014 (following the Nov 2 midterm elections, mind you). Actually, we won't get to observe a battle, or a debate, or even a vote in Congress. President Obama has openly declared his intention to use Executive Action to address immigration reform. Obama's intended Executive Action will be primarily focused on the thirty million undocumented persons living in the U.S. (there are many guesses as to how many people live in the United States illegally. . .thirty million seems a bit conservative, but let's give the benefit of the doubt). We've had this conversation before. During the Bush Administration, the decision was made to build a fence along the southern land border. Not a white-washed picket fence like the one Tom Sawyer was supposed to paint, but an electrified fence that was intended to be part of a broader monitoring system. Although a few stretches of fence were constructed, the effort never got close to completion. From the get-go, the fence was opposed by Democrats in Congress, and a variety of legal challenges really killed the effort. If you've read my blog more than a few times, you should know that I always appreciate keeping things simple, so this is my simple question:
If the United States has an international border with Mexico, why is it wrong to demarcate that border with a fence?
We never got the fence. But Congress has paid for a steady increase in Border Patrol, Customs and Inspections personnel. I understand this issue because in a former life I was a Federal Agent working on the International Ports of Entry in Laredo, Texas. Any honest Border Patrol or Homeland Security Officer will tell you that we probably only interdict five to ten percent of those who are trying to enter the U.S. illegally from Mexico. The percentage of drugs that we stop is probably close to five percent as well. Should the average American be concerned about undocumented persons living in the United States? The answer is yes. No hospital emergency room is going to refuse service to a sick person because of lack of identification or documentation. When the bill does not get paid, the physician/hospital system has to absorb the loss and the difference is passed on to the taxpayer. And it happens all the time. I'm not saying that emergency rooms should deny treatment, I'm only dissecting the issue. Every public school system in the United States is required by law to teach the children of undocumented persons. This has become a tremendous liability for the respective school districts. Undocumented persons don't pay school or property taxes, so the district has to come up with the additional funds (not just to teach undocumented children, but to pay for bilingual teachers, create bilingual education programs, books, etc.) by raising the school tax rate. Our prison systems have become heavily burdened with gang members from Mexico, Central and South America. Gangs like Mara Salvatrucha 13 and the 18th Street Gang originated in Central America and are deeply involved in drug smuggling both inside prisons and on the outside. We can only guess at the depth of the involvement that various Central and South American gangs have in the importation and distribution of drugs on the streets of America. The smuggling of both people and narcotics used to be exclusively controlled on the south side of the border in Mexico. That has changed: the gangs that run the coyotes (a smuggler of people) and the mules (an undocumented person smuggling narcotics) have established themselves in U.S. locations like El Paso, Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Tijuana, Yuma, Douglas, Nogales, McAllen, Laredo, and Brownsville. A Border Patrol Chief who has been a close friend for decades told me that he believes at least five of the homes purchased and built in the exclusive, gated community in which is lives, belong to narco-traffickers.
These are only a few of the reasons why immigration is a national security issue. We haven't even touched on the issue of terrorists sneaking across the porous border pretending to be Latino. Special Interest Aliens (persons from countries with known terrorist connections, for instance Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan) having been pulling the "just pretend to be Mexican" trick for years. Now that we no longer deport undocumented Mexican nationals, you can bet that a few bad guys are presently holed up in cheap hotels in Nuevo Laredo and Matamoros, practicing a few words in Spanish. No doubt at least a few readers have decided that I harbor some racist tendencies, a charge that often seems a futile effort to continue to refute. Except to state the obvious; nothing in the above paragraph can be construed as applying to solely to one particular ethnicity. More importantly, nothing I have stated applies to every person of a particular ethnic group. I love Mexico, I love the Hispanic culture, and I speak fluent Spanish. Whenever I return home from a long trip abroad, I never feel "at home" until I hear someone speaking Spanish. So lets cut the crap and leave all that "racist" bullshit at the door. We have a problem, and I'm beginning to fear that it may be out of control. On top of everything that we have previously discussed, we must consider the fact that President Obama intends to issue an Executive Order that provides a path to citizenship for most of the nation's undocumented persons. It's true that many of these people have been living in the United States for decades and certainly in their own way have contributed to the growth of the nation. While it's been argued that providing a Social Security number for persons who were previously undocumented will increase the tax base, hold your horses, folks: it won't make that much difference. Filthy rich Americans still constitute the great majority of the nation's tax base.
The piece of this issue which really gives me the red-ass has nothing to do with taxes or narco-trafficking. What really pisses me off is that EVERYONE realizes that this fast-lane to citizenship is meant to create as many as twenty million additional Democratic voters. Even Democratic talking heads on television admit this shameful fact. The vast majority of persons affected by the impending Executive Action (forgive me for making assumptions, but see me in November and call me a liar) will be persons of Hispanic heritage (this proportion may possibly even as high as ninety-nine percent as not very many Austrians or Sri Lankans are hiding out from La Migra). When this is taken together with the fact that in 2012, seventy-five percent of Hispanic voters cast their vote for Barrack Obama (stated in National Review magazine) the impact becomes clear. Every statistic I found echoed this kind of political dominance not just for Obama, but for Democratic candidates in general. So, no "rocket science" here: if President Obama signs an Executive Order fast-tracking citizenship for millions and millions of undocumented Hispanics in the United States, we will be staring a "one-party state" right in the face. Why don't Hispanic Americans (documented or not) vote Republican? On occasion, it happens. The Cuban-American community in the Miami area have been staunch Republicans, mostly because of the Castro issue. And a Hispanic Republican Governor (Martinez in New Mexico) and Republican Senator (Cruz in Texas) have been recently elected, which seems to give some conservatives hope. I don't buy it. Hispanic Americans have been loyal Democrats since the days of John F. Kennedy, and I do see a Sea-Change on the horizon (I love the phrase Sea Change; it comes from a song Shakespeare wrote as part of "The Tempest").
I don't have a problem with providing rights to persons who have been part of the fabric of our nation for decades. I believe that, instead of creating a fast-track to citizenship, it would be preferable to provide an avenue for persons to obtain Resident Alien status (Green Card), and require that they utilize the system in place for adjusting to U.S. citizen. Its terribly unfair for individuals who have followed the existing law and been waiting for years to become Americans, to be pushed to the back of the line by persons who entered illegally. As tough as it may be for some people, we must remember that we are dealing with persons whose entire presence in this country is predicated on an illegal act. I realize that Mexico can be a difficult country for young people with hopes and aspirations, and I don't judge anyone who is trying to provide for their family, but this issue is beginning to impact OUR families, especially those with children and grandchildren. I had hoped for some form of political compromise, something that did not include a fast-track to citizenship. I just can't see why that part of the equation is so important. If someone entered the United States illegally in 1989, they should have the opportunity to apply for a Green Card. Once that process is complete, if they are interested in becoming citizens, they can follow the law that is already in place. IMPORTANT: Don't believe the Democrat narrative that Congress has been AWOL on this issue. The House of Representatives has approved a number of Immigration Reform Bills that were not allowed to even reach committee. Sometime in 2012, Harry Reid decided that President Obama should rule by decree. So for all practical purposes, he ended the functions of the U.S. Senate as of October 21. At that time, three hundred fifty-two Bills that had passed the House were languishing in Harry Reid's personal purgatory. With Congress unable to act, Obama can say (without the hint of a smile) that the do-nothing Republicans won't act on immigration, and he is therefore obliged by his responsibilities as President of the United States to utilize Executive Authority. Once he signs the Executive Order, no one knows how many formerly undocumented people will follow through with the process, but if they do, they get to be the latest addition to a rapidly expanding Democratic voter roll.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)