border patrol: Page 1
Border Patrol dep. chief: 140,000 unaccompanied children (UACs) might cross border in 2015, around ten times 2012 - 06/06/14
Politicians and others in the U.S. have sent the message that the we aren't serious about immigration enforcement and that we're going to implement comprehensive immigration reform. That message hasn't gone unheeded in Latin America, and thousands of unaccompanied children have responded by trying to cross the border illegally.
From their press release :
The House Judiciary Committee has obtained internal U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) documents, which show that the Obama administration is cooking the books to achieve their so-called ‘record’ deportation numbers for illegal immigrants and that removals are actually significantly down – not up – from 2009.
The video below shows Chris Crane of the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council - a union representing 7200 ICE officers and employees - claiming that the orders from the Department of Homeland Security are to just release those who claim to be covered by Obama's DREAM Act
"Project Gunrunner" was a BATF scheme in which they encouraged gun stores to sell to those who were likely to send the purchased guns to Mexico to be used in that country's drug wars. Two of those guns might have been used to kill Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE agent Jamie Zapata.
The supposed goal of Gunrunner was to trace the guns to Mexico in order to catch the higher-ups, but it apparently had very little success. And, it would be nearly impossible for their not to be a political component. The Obama administration has been harping on guns being sent to Mexico for two years, despite that apparently not being that great an issue. One goal of Gunrunner might have been to save face, and another part might be a component of a larger, anti-gun agenda.
In any case, the question is: who knew about this and who approved it?
However, from this:
In an exclusive interview with CBS News, the lead ATF official in Mexico at the time Darren Gil says somebody in the Justice Department did know about the case. Gil says his supervisor at ATF's Washington D.C. headquarters told him point-blank the operation was approved even higher than ATF Director Kenneth Melson.
"Is the director aware of this," Gil asked the supervisor. Gil says his supervisor answered "Yes, the director's aware of it. Not only is the director aware of it, D.O.J.'s aware of it... Department of Justice was aware of it."
Gil goes on to say senior Justice official Lanny Breuer and several of his deputies visited Mexico amid the controversy last summer, and spoke to ATF staff generally about a big trafficking case that they claimed was "getting good results." Gil says Melson, ATF's Acting Director, also visited Mexico City. Gil's Deputy Attache and his Analyst questioned Melson about the case that surrounding all the weapons showing up in Mexico. "His response was 'it's a good case, it's still going on,'" recalls Gil, "and we'll close it down as soon as we possibly can."
According to justice.gov/agencies/index-org.html, there are only two people higher-up than the ATF Director: Holder, and the Deputy Attorney General. Until February 2010 that was David W. Ogden (link). Since then it's been James M. Cole.
And, per this:
The ATF operates under Justice Department, and two assistant U.S. attorneys in Phoenix authorized virtually every wiretap, affidavit and investigation conducted in Operation Fast and Furious [note: the Phoenix version of Project Gunrunner].
Chuck Grassley tried to obtain information from the DOJ but was apparently rebuffed. Now, Darrell Issa is trying. Tweet him @DarrellIssa and encourage him to subpoena the DOJ if they won't provide the documentation voluntarily.
4/1/11 UPDATE: Issa has now issued a subpoena demanding documents related to Project Gunrunner.
Border Patrol agents shot beanbags at a group of suspected bandits before the men returned fire during a confrontation in a remote canyon, killing agent Brian Terry with a single gunshot, records show...
...The (FBI) documents say the group of illegal border entrants refused commands to drop their weapons after agents confronted them at about 11:15 p.m. Two agents fired beanbags at the migrants, who responded with gunfire. Two agents returned fire, one with a long gun and one with a pistol, but Terry was mortally wounded in the gunfight...
Terry's brother, Kent Terry, said the other agents who were there that night told him that they were instructed to use the non-lethal beanbags first. It's a policy that doesn't make sense to Kent Terry.
"You go up against a bandit crew that is carrying AKs, and you walk out there with guns loaded with beanbags - I don't get it," Terry said in a phone interview from Michigan. "It's like going to the Iraqi war with one knife. It boggles my mind. ... These guys (Border Patrol agents) are professionals; they should be able to use their judgment call on their own."
It's worth recalling the 2004 controversy surrounding the Border Patrol's use of non-lethal weapons. George P Bush - nephew of George W Bush - spoke out against those weapons and later somewhat backtracked. But, not before the Mexican government threatened to sue. No doubt there's a combination of reasons why the DHS would use beanbags: they're worried about unarmed people being shot, they don't really want to stop the flow of people and (perhaps less likely) drugs, and they're worried about suits from the Mexican government and their little helpers in the U.S. such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and MALDEF.
If you don't like the current situation, it's possible to somewhat neuter those last groups by helping discredit them. Unfortunately, and while I'm grateful for any help I've received, after years of not getting much help I'm not too hopeful. The loudest opposition to Barack Obama - the tea parties - concern themselves with not much more than trying to help the Koch family make more money. Discrediting groups that support illegal immigration is beyond their abilities, but so too is helping those who are able to discredit such groups.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a congressional panel Wednesday that U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and his fellow agents were not under orders to refrain from using lethal force in a December gunbattle near the Mexican border that resulted in Mr. Terry´s death.
Testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Miss Napolitano said agents are allowed to use lethal force “if you are under threat of serious injury or death.” She said she herself had asked whether the four agents involved in the Dec. 14 shootout with bandits on the border in Arizona had their hands tied by orders, and she said the answer is “absolutely not.”
“Our lethal force policy is the same as virtually every law enforcement agency in the country - that is, if you are under threat of serious injury or death, you may use lethal force,” Miss Napolitano said.
I believe that's what we already knew. The issue is that the agents might have been too scared - due to law suits and the like - to initially confront the smugglers with real guns.
According to a new GAO (Government Accountability Office) report, the Department of Homeland Security only has "operational control" of 44% of the U.S.-Mexico border, and only 15% of the border is "controlled" (the highest level that GAO measured). A write-up is here and the PDF is at this link.
On the plus side, the percentage under operational control has been rising over the past five years (see the chart in the PDF). And, in some cases (such as around Big Bend in Texas) the terrain might make crossing much more difficult and thus much less likely than around San Diego. Note also that the definitions of whether an area is secure doesn't necessarily mean that someone wouldn't be able to cross the border, just that they'd eventually be caught in that region:
Border Patrol’s definition of operational control considers the extent to which its agents can detect and apprehend illegal entries, but does not require agents to have the ability to detect and apprehend all illegal entries, according to officials in Border Patrol’s Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis Division. Yuma sector, for example, reported operational control for all of its border miles although Border Patrol did not have the ability to detect and apprehend illegal entries who use ultra-light aircraft and tunnels.8 In fiscal year 2009 Yuma sector reported that of the known illegal entries, about half were apprehended somewhere in the sector, about 40 percent were turned back across the border sometime after entry, and about 10 percent were "got aways."
Nearly two-thirds of the 1,120 southwest border miles that had not yet achieved operational control were reported at the “monitored” level, meaning that across these miles, the probability of detecting illegal cross-border activity was high; however, the ability to respond was defined by accessibility to the area or availability of resources (see fig. 5). The remaining miles were reported at “low-level monitored,” meaning that resources or infrastructure inhibited detection or interdiction of cross-border illegal activity. Border Patrol reported that these two levels of control were not acceptable for border security.
The video below shows an interview in which a Border Patrol official seems to admit that some form of "mass effect" device, aka WMD, was caught being smuggled into the U.S. In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security denies that such an incident ever happened.
Obviously, there are a lot of possibilities here. The DHS could be lying (which wouldn't be surprising). The DHS official could be following orders to try to scare people (see Were terror alerts faked to elect Bush?) If you're on the fringe, maybe the DHS could be planning a false flag operation designed to crack down on civil liberties. Or, maybe the official was just confused.
An unedited version of the video is at peekURL.com/vq5xepC (around 5:50).
Here's the relevant portion of the interview (link) with "Al Hallor, who is the assistant port director and an officer with Customs and Border Protection":
"So, specifically, you're looking for the dirty bomb? You're looking for the nuclear device?" asked [10News investigative reporter Mitch Blacher].
"Correct. Weapons of mass effect," Hallor said.
"You ever found one?" asked Blacher.
"Not at this location," Hallor said.
"But they have found them?" asked Blacher.
"Yes," said Hallor.
"You never found one in San Diego though?" Blacher asked.
"I would say at the port of San Diego we have not," Hallor said.
"Have you found one in San Diego?" Blacher asked.
At that point, a public relations flack who's been shadowing the two of them throughout the interview stops his reply. She says something about having to check whether they've found such devices.
After the interview, the DHS released the following statement. Note that only the first sentence concerns the interview, the rest is just useless verbage:
CBP has not specifically had any incidents with nuclear devices or nuclear materials at our ports of entry. CBP is an all-threats agency. The purpose of many security measures is to prevent threats from ever materializing by being prepared for them. And, we must be prepared to stop threats in whatever form they do materialize at the border, whether it’s an individual or cargo arriving by land, air, or sea. Regardless of what the contraband or threat is, we’re being smart, evaluating, and focusing in on anything or anyone that is potentially high-risk.
We were able to show you first-hand one example of how we evaluate segment risk, inspect, etc. in the cargo environment by air and sea here in San Diego. This is one portion of the CBP mission, and hopefully gives you some examples of how much has evolved in the past decade, with the new technologies we have at our disposal. This, coupled with document requirements at the border, advanced passenger and cargo information, better information sharing, and many other measures help us to secure the border - and each measure doesn’t work individually or in a vacuum, but rather in the layered security that we were able to demonstrate one facet of.
Two recent but unrelated stories about immigration terrorism:
A book celebrating suicide bombers has been found in the Arizona desert just north of the U.S.- Mexican border, authorities tell Fox News.
The book, "In Memory of Our Martyrs," was spotted Tuesday by a U.S. Border Patrol agent out of the Casa Grande substation who was patrolling a route known for smuggling illegal immigrants and drugs.
Published in Iran, it consists of short biographies of Islamic suicide bombers and other Islamic militants who died carrying out attacks.
2. From this:
U.S. border authorities have arrested a controversial Muslim cleric who was deported from Canada to Tunisia three years ago and was caught earlier this month trying to sneak into California inside the trunk of a BMW, according to court documents.
Said Jaziri, the former Imam of a Muslim congregation in Montreal, was hidden inside a car driven by a San Diego-area man who was pulled over by U.S. Border Patrol agents near an Indian casino east of San Diego. Jaziri allegedly paid a Tijuana-based smuggling group $5,000 to get him across the border near Tecate, saying he wanted to be taken to a “safe place anywhere in the U.S.”...
...But Jaziri’s supporters said he was targeted for his fundamentalist views: Jaziri backed Sharia law for Canadian Muslims and led protests over the publication of the prophet Muhammad cartoons in a Danish newspaper in 2006.
For background on extremists and potential terrorists crossing the border, see all the entries at the first link in this post such as Reading the 9/11 Commission Staff Reports: Chapter 3 (2004), "Terror-Linked Migrants Crossing Into U.S." (2005), and "U.S. Fears Terrorism Via Mexico's Time-Tested Smuggling Routes" (2004).
If you want to help resolve this issue before something disastrous happens, promote the question authority plan.
...migrants and drug smugglers (marijuana, mainly) are attracted to parts of Arizona for a specific reason. On these federal lands, environmental regulations prevent the Border Patrol from doing its job. That's what the mainstream media won't report... [On the video below], (Rep. Rob Bishop) makes this simple point. The U.S. side of the 1,950-mile border with Mexico is about 60 percent private land and 40 percent federal. "Almost all" of the migrants and drug smugglers come across federal lands, protected by stringent "wilderness" designations or endangered species rules. The federals are submissive before the environmental regs that interfere with border enforcement. The Border Patrol, a division of Homeland Security, has to complete lengthy environmental reports and get permission from the Departments of Agriculture and Interior before it can do anything. This can take several months.
The author contrasts the situation in Arizona with that in Texas where most land is private, which makes some sense. And, he says that Rep. Raul Grijalva - someone on the opposite side from Bishop - "seems to be primarily interested in representing Mexican interests", something I've found to be true. (Unfortunately, the author tries to weave this into a larger libertarian-oriented framework against redistributionism and environmentalism and the like. Giving this issue a partisan sheen isn't generally advised.)
The 37-minute Bishop video from June referred to above is at http://peekURL.com/vq864qf
For the 2-minute version, see http://peekURL.com/vvkj6l2
And, Bishop challenges Department of the Interior secretary Ken Salazar on http://peekURL.com/vum86ga
The reader is encouraged to go to one of Salazar's public appearances and ask him when he'll be doing the items on the last video, or ask him to explain exactly why he won't be doing them.
Bishop is also the sponsor of HR 5016: "To prohibit the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from taking action on public lands which impede border security on such lands, and for other purposes.".
Federal agencies in effect join boycott over Arizona immigration law (Education, Border Patrol) - 06/24/10
Two federal agencies have joined the "boycott Arizona" trend and nixed conferences there out of concern over the state's immigration law, a Democratic Arizona congresswoman said, calling the development "very troubling."
..."It is very troubling when the federal government becomes involved in a boycott against our state," (Rep. Gabrielle Giffords) said in a written statement. "Although I personally disagree with the immigration law, it came about because of growing frustration over the federal government's unwillingness to secure the border. The federal government's participation in this boycott only adds to that frustration."
...According to Giffords, the (Department of Education) canceled a convention set for October at a Tucson resort after the Mexican government said it would not send any representatives to the meeting. The department then moved the event to Minnesota.
Further, her office said the Border Patrol "verbally" canceled a conference set for May at a resort in Prescott after an official asked that it be moved out of concern over the immigration law debate. The Border Patrol -- which has more than 4,000 agents in Arizona, representing nearly a quarter of its force -- had booked 40 rooms for the event before canceling, though there was no contract signed for the event, according to Giffords' office.
UPDATE: Giffords stands by her comments (link):
"We have the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Education that had planned for meetings, had then canceled those meetings with the reason given that it was because of the immigration law," she said on Saturday, repeating a charge she first leveled earlier in the week.
But the Customs and Border Protection, the agency above the Border Patrol, has denied canceling any conferences in Arizona.
"We conducted a thorough review across our organization to ensure this is, in fact, the case," the statement said. "The agency has reached out to Rep. Giffords' office to clear up any misunderstanding."
The Education Department acknowledged moving a joint event held with Mexican and Canadian partners in a student exchange program.
But Assistant Education Secretary Peter Cunningham said in a statement that it did so because the Mexicans, an equal partner in the program, asked that it be moved. Each agency pays for its part of the joint North American Mobility Program.
"The Department of Education will continue to hold conferences in the state of Arizona, including one next week."
The latest establishment attempt to support illegal immigration and undercut those who want stronger border enforcement comes from Martha Mendoza of the Associated Press. The original AP title is "AP Impact: US-Mexico border isn't so dangerous"  and it's based on statistics contained in a new FBI report  and on data they received via a FOIA request from Customs and Border Protection (CBP):
It's one of the safest parts of America, and it's getting safer.
It's the U.S.-Mexico border, and even as politicians say more federal troops are needed to fight rising violence, government data obtained by The Associated Press show it actually isn't so dangerous after all.
The top four big cities in America with the lowest rates of violent crime are all in border states: San Diego, Phoenix, El Paso and Austin, according to a new FBI report. And an in-house Customs and Border Protection report shows that Border Patrol agents face far less danger than street cops in most U.S. cities.
1. Its about 236 miles from Austin to the nearest major Mexican city (Nuevo Laredo). San Antonio is closer to the border, and it's a larger city. Considering that their crime rates are about the same  it's unclear why she used Austin. However, both cities aren't really in the border area, unless you have a Washington DC mindset. Phoenix is also not on the border. Unfortunately, the FBI statistics only show larger cities, and the only larger cities that are right on the border are El Paso and San Diego. It's misleading to pretend that statistics for a college, high-tech, and administration center like Austin that's hours from the border is representative of border crime.
2. The violent crime rate for Phoenix is 0.5% per capita, but that for Tucson is 0.65% per capita. The latter city is closer to the border but still not on the border.
3. Those who enter illegally over the border won't necessarily stay there: most will move to other cities and will have an impact on those cities' crime rates. Mendoza's article doesn't mention that.
4. Violent crime only tells part of the story. See all of the entries on the immigration terrorism page. And, just as pernicious is the possibility that local officials have been corrupted into allowing drug or human smuggling.
5. Crimes against illegal aliens stand a lesser chance of being reported than crimes against others; such crimes won't appear in the statistics.
6. The article contains "I have to say, a lot of this is way overblown," said Gary Brasher of Tuboc, Arizona, who is president of the Coalition for a Safe and Secure Border. From their site , make of it what you will:
[A permanent checkpoint on the I-19 corridor between Nogales and Tucson] is essentially a monument to over 3 decades of this obviously flawed strategy that will be circumvented by smugglers. This will inevitably result in illegal and violent activities moving into our neighborhoods along the I-19 corridor... It is also important to note that it is not the intent of the CSSB or this blog to criticize the service of the men and women serving in the Border Patrol. In fact, many residents in this area have been victims of crime perpetrated by smugglers and the Border Patrol has often been the first responders.
7. The article contains:
"Politicians are hyping up this incredible fear across the country about the border, but these numbers show these are lies being perpetrated on the American public," said immigrant advocate Isabel Garcia at Tucson-based Derechos Humanos. "The warnings about violence are just an excuse to crack down on migrants who want to work and be with their families."
Read about her at the links.
Obama admin will reduce number of Border Patrol agents at Mexican border, increase at Canadian border - 09/28/09
Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border... (Border Patrol Director of Media Relations Lloyd Easterling) said on Tuesday that in fiscal 2009, 17,399 Border Patrol agents have been deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border. In fiscal year 2010, the Border Patrol plans to decrease that by 384 agents, leaving 17,015 deployed along the Mexican frontier. At the same time, the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Canada border will be increased by 414, from a fiscal 2009 total of 1,798 agents to a fiscal 2010 total of 2,212.
Numbers USA informs us (link) that Rep. Raul Grijalva's Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act (H.R. 324) "would cover a gigantic area of Arizona" - including illegal immigration corridors - but it doesn't provide for the Border Patrol:
The Border Patrol is increasingly being limited in its enforcement on various park lands. Promoters of illegal immigration inside the federal government seem to be on a trend of turning parks into sanctuaries for illegal alien traffic.
The fear is that the H.R. 324 designation will be used to prevent the Border Patrol from setting up communication towers, cameras, sensors and so on, on the massive land included under the bill.
Rep. Rob Bishop is sponsoring an amendment to correct that issue; I haven't reviewed it but - knowing Grijalva - one of the things he's trying to preserve is illegal immigration. Numbers USA has action you can take at the link.
* Require employers to use the federal government's E-Verify database to make sure they're hiring legal workers.
* Increase the number of Border Patrol agents by 6,000.
* Create a pilot program to increase aerial surveillance and use other new technology to secure the border.
* Hire more Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and create grants for some local law enforcement officials.
* Expedite removal of illegal immigrants by expanding detention capacity and adding immigration judges.
According to this, T.J. Bonner - president of the National Border Patrol Council is "underwhelmed" by Barack Obama's recently announced border control plan. He's concerned about working with his counterparts from Mexico considering that many Mexican law enforcement agents have been corrupted and are "rotten to the core". And:
Bonner wants a greater priority placed on border security, and said he is "in a word, underwhelmed" by Napolitano's plan. "We need to take more aggressive steps to stop that violence from spilling into the United States," he said, calling the strategy "showmanship in advance of the diplomatic outreach to Mexico."
Much more at the link.
The new chief of staff of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is a dual citizen (Mexico and the U.S.)
Just let that sink in.
On Wednesday, an alleged group of looters were arrested at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego; it was claimed that they were collecting supplies meant for the victims of the recent wild fires in order to resell them. Apparently one or more admitted they were stealing, and one person said it was for resale. Some were illegal aliens; when that was suspected the San Diego Police called the Border Patrol who then deported a few of them. A few others have been released.
The exact details, and everyone who was involved, isn't clear at this time (and probably never will be). However, one thing is crystal clear: Amy Isackson of NPR/KPBS, Leslie Berestein of the San Diego Union-Tribune, and the ACLU will reflexively support illegal aliens and try to prevent them from being deported. And, they'll ignore the fact that they've been charged with stealing supplies from fire victims.
First, here's Berestein with "Border Patrol presence at stadium causes anxiety" (link):
The apprehension and removal to Mexico of two couples, one with three children, after they were accused of looting at Qualcomm Stadium Wednesday has created unease among some of the Latino evacuees staying there... Andrea Guerrero, field and policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union in San Diego, said about 25 families who were staying at the stadium left after the incident because they were undocumented, or of mixed legal status... Guerrero said the police department should not have called Border Patrol agents, some of whom are stationed at the stadium assisting other law enforcement officers, unless formal criminal charges were filed. [SDPD spokeswoman Monica Munoz], however, said the department did not violate protocol and that the accused individuals admitted to stealing. [...one of the deported illegal aliens says she wasn't stealing...]
And, here's the similar "Arrest of Six Illegal Immigrants at Qualcomm Raises Concerns" from Isackson (link):
The arrest of six illegal immigrants at the Qualcomm Stadium evacuation site yesterday raises questions regarding how San Diego Police handle immigration issues. Civil rights activists are concerned police may be violating their own policy with respect to the Border Patrol... Kevin Keenan is Executive Director of the ACLU. He says he hopes police can resolve the discrepancy [vis-a-vis a sanctuary-style policy]...
For a point of reference, here's Gillian Flaccus of the Associated Press with "Thieves and scam artists try to take advantage of SoCal fires" (link):
At the stadium, volunteer Karen Huff said she and other volunteers alerted police earlier this week when they spotted a half-dozen people loading two pickup trucks with relief items. Police confronted the thieves and recovered the goods... "Thousands of dollars worth of stuff was being taken from these victims," Huff said. "It's the worst type of crime you can commit, when you take advantage of a situation like this." ...The Border Patrol detained eight people Wednesday who were suspected of stealing cots, blankets and dry goods, said San Diego police Capt. Bob Kanaski. Police officers questioned 15 people who were suspected of filling up two trucks and a sedan with stolen property and brought in the Border Patrol after surmising that some were illegal immigrants. The other seven were released... ...Authorities said some charlatans were coming to the disbursement center up to four or five times a day to stock up on supplies.
When even the AP is less biased, you've got a problem.
...When prosecutors in Arizona's Cochise County proudly announced the first-degree murder charges against Border Patrol agent Nicholas Corbett this week, the failed to mention some important details that could prove damaging to their case.
First is the fact that their key witnesses are the two brothers and a sister-in-law of the shot man, who incidentally joined him on his illegal border crossing journey. Secondly, is the fact that Mexican Consul officials were allowed to interview and coach the already biased witnesses before they gave statements to U.S. authorities.
Mexican officials were granted unrestricted access to the apprehended illegal immigrants by the Border Patrol agent in charge of the Naco station where they were detained immediately after the January shooting.
The senior agent, Darcy Olmos, has a long history of pandering to Mexico and Mexican aliens and refers to illegal immigrants as "my people." In fact, when ranchers near the border complained of vandalism by illegal aliens, Olmos said that ancestors of the ranchers had stolen the land from her people.
In May of last year, America's beloved president (George W. Bush) visited Yuma in Arizona to announce "Operation Jump Start", whereby National Guard troops would assist the Border Patrol with their mission. The photo above comes straight out of his scrapbook of his fun vacation.
I have a feeling that it won't be too very long before even more truth comes out about the case of the two Border Patrol agents (Ramos/Compean) who strongly appear to have been railroaded by their own government. So, let's take a look at the short, select list of some of those who've supported the Bush administration's side of things:
President Bush's new budget would pay for only about half of the 700 miles of U.S.-Mexico border fence he and Congress four months ago promised to build.
From this (no permalink):
Congressional members interviewed by the newspaper said they were unaware until recently that Border Patrol agents were required to file Significant Incident Reports - normally used for shootings and other serious border incidents - when congressional members made unannounced visits in the summer along the U.S.-Mexico border.
A border rights coalition asked federal officials Wednesday to suspend Border Patrol high-speed chases pending a review of a Yuma-area rollover two weeks ago that resulted in multiple deaths.What the article fails to note is that the CHRCL is headed by Peter Schey, someone who's collaborating with the Mexican government on a website. He's also representing some illegal aliens who were arrested under a new Arizona law, and there is some kind of involvement of the Mexican consul. And, an "opposition research" paper he wrote appears on a Mexican government website.
The letter from the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law also asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and the heads of Customs and Border Protection and the Border Patrol to update Border Patrol hot-pursuit policies.
The letter was sent on behalf of the Border Human Rights Working Group, a coalition of organizations involved in human-rights advocacy in the four states bordering Mexico.
It also sought through a Freedom of Information request copies of all Border Patrol documents concerning the Yuma chase and crash, and policies and training materials concerning high-speed chases...
And, this is at least the second time that the AP has failed to note these connections.
At post time, google shows no results for "Border Human Rights Working Group". (UPDATE: See the info below.)
Please contact the AP at email@example.com and suggest they start telling their readers the whole truth. Also, here are the sources currently featuring this article and their contact information:
KTVK (contact link at bottom of page)
KVOA (contact link on left sidebar)
KOLD (the only contact form I could find is here; also has their phone numbers)
Daily Star (perhaps their News and Research Services Director: eraines *at* azstarnet.com)
AZCentral (try firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com)
UPDATE: A copy of the letter that "BHRWG" sent is at this link. However, you'll need to right-click, choose "Save as", and add ".pdf" to the end of the file name since it doesn't have an extension.
The letter reveals who's in the BHRWG:
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas
American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico
American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona
American Friends Service Committee (San Diego, CA)
American Friends Service Committee (Tucson, AZ)
Binacional Migration Institute (Tucson, AZ)
Border Angels / Gente Unida (San Diego, CA)
Border Action Network (Tucson/Nogales/Douglas)
Border Network for Human Rights (El Paso, TX)
Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Services (El Paso, TX)
Coalicion de Derechos Humanos (Tucson, AZ)
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
No More Deaths (Tucson, AZ)
South Texas Civil Rights Project (McAllen, TX)
Southern Poverty Law Center (Montgomery, AL)
Texas RioGrande Legal Aid
Derechos Humanos is working with the Mexican government. So is the CHRCL. So, MALDEF, the ACLU and the SPLC are associated with at least two groups openly working with the Mexican government.
Sensenbrenner: no amnesty; perhaps U.S. Chamber of Commerce should register as foreign agent - 01/26/06
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the House point man on immigration, yesterday said that a guest-worker program like the one proposed by President Bush is amnesty and that he cannot accept it in a final immigration bill...
U.S. and Mexican officials on Tuesday were investigating a bizarre encounter between Texas lawmen and heavily armed intruders who were wearing Mexican military uniforms while evidently escorting a caravan of sport utility vehicles that was smuggling marijuana into the United States.
A CATO Institute-sponsored report intended to discredit efforts to secure the U.S. border has instead bolstered findings that immediate deployment of troops in support of the Border Patrol is the only means of stopping the current hordes of illegal immigrants invading U.S. territory.
I already posted this inside another post, but this May 9, 2002 column deserves its own post:
...Near the end of the NRO article Griswold [of the Cato Institute] insists that he is not for "open borders," but his record suggests otherwise. A story in the Christian Science Monitor (August 30, 2000) by Scott Baldauf is particularly revealing. Baldauf describes a new project of the Immigration and Naturalization Service's Border Patrol that specifically targets highly sophisticated criminal smuggling rings that employ infrared scopes, two-way radios, and computer databases. The project goes after smugglers associated with organized crime rather than simply individuals who cross the border illegally.
These criminal gangs have done enormous damage. One gang, headed by Mexican criminal Nick Diaz smuggled about 12,000 foreigners, most of them from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and India, into the United States. These illegal immigrants paid $20,000 a piece to be placed in safe houses in 38 different states. Senator Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) praised the new INS/Border Patrol initiative. So too, did Judy Marks, a spokeswoman for the National Immigration Forum, a left-wing advocacy group, that nearly always opposes any form of border control.
But not Dan Griswold of the Cato Institute. Instead, Griswold specifically attacked the new Border Patrol initiative that targets organized crime. Scott Baldauf records Griswold's response as follows: "Noting the INS's new strategy, he sighs, 'It's just another example of government trying to stop people from doing something that is natural, to better their conditions.'" In addition, Baldauf quotes Griswold as declaring: "The problem with illegal immigration is not the immigration; it's that it's illegal..."
Previous coverage in:
More Kato-Aid, senor?
Imagine, if you will, a group of thirty people. Five groups of six people each will do. Keep that image in your mind:
With agents clad in dark riot gear looking on, about 30 activists gathered outside the Border Patrol station in Temecula on Monday to protest recent immigration sweeps in Southern California.
Meanwhile, thousands of U.S. citizens have phoned and emailed the DHS and other agencies in support of the sweeps. Yet, somehow, the illegal-alien-supporters win out. Odd, no?
Perhaps it's because those in Washington are afraid being called names:
"We're organized and we're ready to fight this Gestapo-style movement," said Joe Mota, who represented the United Farm Workers at the demonstration.
(BTW, BugMeNot.com is a great resource)