Thread: Obama set to send 1,200 troops to US-Mexico border

By Erica Werner And Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press Writers 8 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama will send 1,200 National Guard troops to help secure the U.S.-Mexico border, an administration official and an Arizona congresswoman said Tuesday, pre-empting Republican plans to try to force votes on such a deployment.

Obama will also request $500 million for border protection and law enforcement activities, they said.

The National Guard troops will work on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support, analysis and training, and support efforts blocking drug trafficking. The troops will temporarily supplement border patrol agents until Customs and Border Patrol can recruit and train additional officers and agents to serve on the border, the administration official said.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of a public announcement, disclosed the plans shortly after Obama met at the Capitol with Republican senators who pressed him on immigration issues including the question of sending Guard troops to the border.

Arizona Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl have been urging such a move and Republicans planned to try to attach it as an amendment to a pending war spending bill.

In a speech Tuesday on the Senate floor, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the situation on the border has "greatly deteriorated." He called for 6,000 National Guard troops to be sent to the U.S.-Mexico border. "I appreciate the additional 1,200 being sent ... as well as an additional $500 million, but it's simply not enough," McCain said.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., said in a statement that the administration would announce the deployments later in the day Tuesday.

Homeland Security and Pentagon officials have been jousting over the possible National Guard deployment for the better part of a year. Pentagon officials worried about perceptions that the U.S. was militarizing the border and did not want Guard troops to perform law enforcement duties.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_nation...NsawNwcmludA--


Lawmaker: Obama to send 1,200 troops to border
By Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 45 mins ago

PHOENIX – The Obama administration plans to announce Tuesday that it will send as many as 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to improve border security, an Arizona congresswoman said.

Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords also said in a statement released Tuesday that President Barack Obama will request $500 million in funding for border security. Part of Giffords' district borders Mexico.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's spokesman said the governor hadn't been told of the move prior to her office being contacted by The Associated Press and had no immediate comment.

In 2006, President George W. Bush sent thousands of troops to the border to perform support duties that tie up immigration agents. The troops wouldn't perform significant law enforcement duties. That program has since ended, and politicians in border states have called for troops to be sent there to curb human and drug smuggling and prevent Mexico's drug violence from spilling over into the United States.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/...NsawNwcmludA--

I see the bait ... where is the hook ?


comments

What a joke and a waste of money. There is nothing the troops can really do given the current laws and situation. More feel good BS in an election year. A vacation on the border and being taken away from the family to sit is not what the American people have in mind. I am just guessing here.

---

Thank god finally, Now put 30,000 more and put a 2 mile buffer zone between USA and Mexico,any one caught trying to come over anywhere else but the crossings should be shot on sight and we fix America

--

"...to curb human and drug smuggling and prevent Mexico's drug violence from spilling over into the United States."

Well - here are two points worth addressing.

1. - human smuggling: if American companies would stop hiring illegal aliens (and paying them next-to-nothing wages), that problem would be solved.

2. drugs: if we found a cure for Americas addiction to drugs, we could curb the flow of drugs.

But it is much easier to blame the other country instead of taking a long, hard look at ourselves.

---

Does anyone remember the last time troops were deployed, specifically the incident when drug smugglers and members of Mexico's Federal Police attacked a Nat Guard lookout position? the troops had to flee farther back into the US as they weren't authorized to use live ammo. I agree, what a joke and that so-called congresswoman should be ashamed of herself for pandering.

--

Watch his other hand instead of this one! He's up to something.

---

Way too little way too late.

Nice try Obama but we know how really feel about American workers.

The same way you feel about the Gulf of Mexico.

Your motto is do nothing * avoid conflict.

--

Well, I hope he at least has them doing some actual work while they are there, and not like when Bush sent them just to laze around. Unfortunately, he is only doing this because they are scared as they are losing elections to - gasp-- the tea party. They tried to keep their heads stuck in the sand and pretend the tea party was nobody, instead of the huge majority it is. And the dem staffers are all probably reading the internet chat rooms and blogs and seeing that people are with Arizona a million to one.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Mexico Tells Obama What To Do With Those National Guard Troops
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.co...o-do-with.html

Literally. Mexico told Obama what to do with the national guard troops Obama just ordered to the border.

Not kidding. Mexico told Obama what to do with the national guard troops Obama just ordered to the border.

You may not understand. Mexico did not make a profane suggestion, as in, put those troops up your ....

No. Mexico issued a statement telling Obama that the troops should stop gun traffic and organized crime, and should not be used in connection with stopping illegal immigration, via The Embassy of Mexico (emphasis mine):

Regarding the Administration’s decision to send 1,200 National Guard servicemen to the US Southern border, the Government of Mexico trusts that this decision will help to channel additional US resources to enhance efforts to prevent the illegal flows of weapons and bulk cash into Mexico, which provide organized crime with its firepower and its ability to corrupt.

Additionally, the Government of Mexico expects that National Guard personnel will strengthen US operations in the fight against transnational organized crime that operates on both sides of our common border and that it will not, in accordance to its legal obligations, conduct activities directly linked to the enforcement of immigration laws.

Mexico is determined to continue working on its side of the border to enhance the security and well-being of border communities, and to deter and dismantle organized crime and its links to drug trafficking and human smuggling.

As part of our joint strategy in the fight against transnational organized crime, there are actions that our two governments have undertaken together, and there are other measures taken independently by Mexico and by the US within their respective territories. In this regard, the Mexican Government fully respects the sovereign decisions of the US Government, but underscores that joint responsibility must continue to underpin our joint efforts in rolling-back transnational organized crime operating on both sides of the border.

Will Democrats once again give a standing ovation? And will the Obama administration obey?


comments

Note that the President of Mexico is lying about "illegal flows of weapons...into Mexico". That canard has been thoroughly debunked.

In support of my statement regarding illegal weapons trafficking into Mexico, there is this article in the LA Times (of all places .. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...0,229992.story ), which reads, in part, "The Feb. 21 attack on police headquarters in coastal Zihuatanejo, which injured four people, fit a disturbing trend of Mexico's drug wars. Traffickers have escalated their arms race, acquiring military-grade weapons, including hand grenades, grenade launchers, armor-piercing munitions and antitank rockets with firepower far beyond the assault rifles and pistols that have dominated their arsenals.

Most of these weapons are being smuggled from Central American countries or by sea, eluding U.S. and Mexican monitors who are focused on the smuggling of semiauto- matic and conventional weapons purchased from dealers in the U.S. border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California."

The myth that America is involved in arming Mexican cartels is part and parcel of the left's attempt to disarm us.


And what exactly is our "legal obligations" with regard to not enforcing illegal immigration?

---
Hmmm

The Mexicans do ackowledge human trafficking in this statement. I read it as an acknowledgement by Mexico of how bad the situation really is and how close Mexico is to anarchy. They have a point: The problem is bad enough that 1,200 guardsmen isn't enough. There are really three problems here: drug and arms smuggling, "normal" illegal immigration and wide-scale trafficking. Mexico acknowledges all of them in this statement and hopes we will use the initial 1,200 guardsmen in their best interests. This problem is bad, really bad and we have to wake up. Yesterday.

So Mexico wants us to be there policemen on this side to stop money and guns from coming into their country but it doesn't want us to try to stop illegal aliens. I hope Obama and the white house isn't stupid enough to agree to that. But knowing them they probably will. I'd tell them we'll try to stop guns and money coming into your country if you put troops on your side and stop illegal aliens from coming to our side. If you don't then forget it. We're not going to be your policemen and just ignore the illegal alien situation.

Obama's border plan looks similar to Bush's
By Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press Writer 54 mins ago

PHOENIX – President Barack Obama's plan to send as many as 1,200 National Guard troops to the US-Mexico border appears to be a scaled-down version of the border security approach championed by his predecessor.

The 6,000 troops who were sent by President George W. Bush to the border from June 2006 to July 2008 were generally credited within law enforcement circles as having helped improve border security, but restrictions placed on the soldiers were denounced by advocates for tougher enforcement who are now leveling similar objections at Obama's plan.

Some law enforcement officials along the border said they worry that Obama will repeat Bush's mistake by limiting the troops to support roles, such as conducting surveillance and installing lighting, rather than letting them make arrests and confront smugglers. They also believe the scale of the force — one-fifth of the size of the one sent by Bush — is too small to make a difference along the length of the 2,000-mile border.

Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, whose jurisdiction includes about 80 miles of the Arizona-Mexico border, said 1,200 soldiers might make a difference in a smaller portion of the border. "But if you spread it across the border, it's like spitting into the wind," Dever said.

Under the Obama plan, the troops will work on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support, analysis and training, and support efforts to block drug trafficking. They will temporarily supplement border patrol agents until Customs and Border Protection can recruit and train additional officers and agents to serve on the border. Obama also will request $500 million for border protection and law enforcement activities.

Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat who has prosecuted rings of drug and immigrant smugglers, said the planned deployment was a good first step, but believes that the president's plan should evolve to include more troops and more authority for the soldiers.

"I'll take what we can get," Goddard said. "Again, I don't think this is the final response."

The Mexican government issued a statement saying it hoped the troops would be used to fight drug cartels and not enforce immigration laws. Mexico has traditionally objected to the use of the military to control illegal immigration.

When Bush sent the National Guard to the border, the troops performed support duties that tie up immigration agents, who then had more time to arrest illegal immigrants.

The troops under the Bush deployment didn't perform significant law enforcement duties. They installed vehicle barriers, operated remote cameras, repaired vehicles, worked as radio dispatchers and performed other duties. Troops who manned mobile observation towers had used binoculars to search for and report border breaches.

The effect of the troops was felt by the smugglers and would-be border-crossers during 2006 in Palomas, Mexico, a smuggling hub south of the village of Columbus, N.M., where a buildup of border agents, surveillance cameras, vehicle barriers and troops were credited with reducing smuggling traffic.

Vendors in Palomas reported a significant drop in the number of backpacks they sold to border-crossers for carrying their food, water and clothing in during their walk into the United States. "There are not many people because of the soldiers that were put on the border," vendor Elisco Hernandez Gonzalez told The Associated Press two months after the Guard was sent to the border.

Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce of Arizona, the author of the state's new immigration law, said he fears Obama will repeat Bush's mistake in not giving the troops the power to confront violent smugglers and other armed criminals along the border.

Pearce was disturbed by an incident in 2007 where National Guard troops backed off and called in federal agents as gunmen approached their post near the Arizona-Mexico border.

While supporters of the decision said the Guard members did as they were supposed to, Pearce questioned the point of having troops on the border if they can't confront such dangers. "It was a welcome-wagon role last time," Pearce said. "They weren't allowed to do anything."

T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, a union representing 17,000 agents, said he doesn't see the broad outlines of the Obama plan as a solution to border violence.

"People shouldn't be surprised if the violence continues," Bonner said. "They shouldn't expect that the announcement of up to 1,200 National Guard members will send a shock wave of fear in the cartels and that they will start playing nice."

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, a major in the Arizona Army National Guard who served as a commander in Yuma, Ariz., during the 2006 deployment, said Obama's plan is welcome news that will help confront border security weaknesses, but it doesn't go far enough.

Babeu, who wasn't speaking on behalf of the National Guard, said the visible presence of armed soldiers is an effective deterrent for illegal immigration. "They're not given law enforcement authority, but the fact that they're there, keeping watch, 24/7, has proven to be the most effective solution for border security," Babeu said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/...NsawNwcmludA--

Obama's new security strategy breaks with Bush
By Anne Gearan And Robert Burns, Ap National Security Writers Wed May 26, 8:33 pm ET

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is breaking with the go-it-alone Bush years in a new strategy for keeping the nation safe, counting more on U.S. allies to tackle terrorism and other global problems. It's an approach that already has proved tricky in practice.

The administration's National Security Strategy, a summary of which was obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, also for the first time adds homegrown terrorism to the familiar menu of threats facing the nation — international terror, nuclear weapons proliferation, economic instability, global climate change and an erosion of democratic freedoms abroad.

From mustering NATO forces for Afghanistan to corralling support to pressure North Korea to give up its illicit nuclear weapons program, the U.S. has sometimes struggled in leaning on friends and allies in recent years. Still, the new strategy breaks with some previous administrations in putting heavy emphasis on the value of global cooperation, developing wider security partnerships and helping other nations provide for their own defense.

In his first 16 months in office, Obama has pursued a strategy of gentle persuasion, sometimes summarized as "engagement."

His administration has attended more closely to ties with Europe, sought a "reset" of relations with Russia, pushed harder to restart stalled Mideast peace talks and consulted widely on a roadmap for defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Obama's critics, however, assert that his policies have largely failed, given the continued defiance of Iran and North Korea on nuclear development, the stalemate in Afghanistan and rising worries about terrorist attacks at home.

Presidents use their national security strategy to set broad goals and priorities for keeping Americans safe. But the document isn't an academic exercise: it has far-reaching effects on spending, defense policies and security strategy.

For example, President George W. Bush's 2002 strategy document spelled out a doctrine of pre-emptive war.

"We must be prepared to stop rogue states and their terrorist clients before they are able to threaten or use weapons of mass destruction against the United States and our allies and friends," the Bush strategy said, with Iraq clearly in mind. The following year U.S. forces invaded, launching a conflict that has lasted far longer and cost far more money and lives than Bush intended.

Obama's new strategy is expected to move away from that doctrine.

Bush, too, valued alliances. But some of his action, especially the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, ripped holes in the fabric of U.S. foreign relations, particularly in Europe.

Bush pursued what he called "a distinctly American internationalism." One of the central pillars of his national security strategy — spelled out in 2002 and repeated in 2006 — was a call to "strengthen alliances to defeat global terrorism" and to "work with others to defuse regional conflict."

But because of Iraq, the indefinite detention of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay and other actions, the Bush administration estranged some traditional allies — a situation exploited by U.S. foes.

John Brennan, the White House's top counterterrorism adviser, said Wednesday that the administration would add combating homegrown terrorism to its strategy.

Terror attacks like the shooting at Fort Hood last year, which killed 13 bystanders, as well as the failed Times Square bombing on May 1, have thrust homegrown terrorism into the spotlight, and U.S. citizens like Najibullah Zazi and David Headley have been charged with plotting terror attacks.

Obama's revision would be the first time that homegrown terror threats were a pillar of the document. President Bill Clinton did not mention domestic terrorism in his 1998 revision, even though the Oklahoma City bombing had occurred just three years earlier. Bush made only passing reference to homegrown terrorism in his final national security strategy, published in 2006.

Brennan, speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, did not disclose specifics of Obama's strategy paper. But he hinted at its philosophical underpinnings. Denouncing al-Qaida as "a small band of cowards," Brennan said the U.S. would defeat the militant network while maintaining "our values as a nation."

Obama's document enshrines principles and policies that he has advocated since his election campaign. It will be the foundation for a National Military Strategy document, due soon.

The strategy makes it clear the United States intends to maintain the world's most powerful military, with unsurpassed reach and capability despite being stretched by two wars and other challenges.

Obama touched on many of the themes in the new strategy during a commencement address Saturday to graduating cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

The U.S. must shape a world order relying as much on the persuasiveness of its diplomacy as the might of its military, he said. All hands are required to solve the world's newest threats: terrorism, the spread of nuclear weapons, climate change and feeding and caring for a growing world population, he added.

Obama said the men and women who wear America's uniform cannot bear that responsibility by themselves. "The rest of us must do our part," he said. "The burdens of this century cannot fall on our soldiers alone. It also cannot fall on American shoulders alone."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100527/...NsawNwcmludA--


comments

"The U.S. must shape a world order "

- He can't even stop an oil spill in his back yard and he wants other countries to take him serious?

---



North Korea - weapons of mass destruction, sunk a South Korean warship, sponsored terrorism and abductions, human rights violations, and restrict freedom of speech, the press, religion, movement, privacy, etc

Iran - building weapons of mass destruction, state sponsored terrorism, restricts freedom of speech, the press, religion, etc.

Syria - state sponsored terrorism. Restricts freedom of speech, the press, religion, etc.

Russia - invades neighboring state Georgia.

War On Terror

The real world is a very dangerous place with some really bad/evil people.
Good intentions don't always make for sound judgement or good policy.
Good intentions can have terrible consequences.
Good intentions can and have gotten a lot of people killed.

Peace through strength. Trust but verify. Lessons learned not forgotten.

---

"The U.S. must shape a world order as reliant on the force of diplomacy as on the might of its military to lead, Obama said then."

Let's see, I understand the might of the military but what exactly is the "force" of diplomacy? Are we going to talk them to death? Inquiring minds want to know.

Border Patrol seeks text on suspicious activity
Nicholas K. Geranios, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jun 8, 1:49 pm ET

METALINE FALLS, Wash. – U.S. Border Patrol agents often use horses to look for smugglers in the forested mountains along the Canadian border, but now will be adding a more modern tool to help them keep watch — text messaging.

The agency on Tuesday began asking residents, campers, hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts to send anonymous text messages to report suspicious people they come across in the lightly populated area from Washington to Montana.

"Each alert person is going to be an extra set of eyes and ears for us," said Danielle Suarez, spokeswoman for the agency's Spokane Sector, referring to the 200 agents who patrol the region.

The agency is also pushing a companion service that allows people to send tips through the website, tipsubmit.com. Officials say the e-mail is necessary in a region where cell phone coverage is sparse and some residents don't have the devices.

"Texting, I'm not hip with that yet," said Pat Zimmerman, who co-owns the combination quilting shop and state liquor store in Metaline Falls, a scenic town of 220 people about 10 miles south of the border. She said she'll likely use the e-mail service.

Immigrant rights groups say they are worried because similar efforts have devolved into racial and ethnic profiling.

"It can lead to targeting of particular communities," said Pramila Jayapal, executive director of OneAmerica, a Seattle immigrant rights group. "It creates the sense that somehow we should be suspicious."

To prevent profiling, the Border Patrol has been running classes in border communities to teach residents what to look for, Suarez said.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said the plan makes good sense, adding that many police departments are set up to receive text message tips.

"There is no reason this cannot and should not be implemented in the area of border security," he said.

The border here is a 10-foot wide clearcut called "the Slash," carved from the dense forest. Short obelisks are located every few miles that say "Canada" on one side and "United States" on the other. People can quickly disappear into the trees here.

Lonnie Moore runs the Metaline Falls, Wash. office, which has 21 agents and covers more than 33 miles of the border.

About 95 percent is public land, and agents use trucks, all-terrain vehicles, snowmobiles and horses on their daily patrols, where they sometimes find themselves contending with moose and grizzly bears.

Most of the illegal activity involves drug importing from Canada, along with people trying to get into the United States from places like Mexico, India and South Korea, after making the relatively easy entry into Canada, Moore said.

Having the aid of residents and others to report tips would be a huge help, Moore said.

"We already receive calls," Moore said. "We would receive even more."

Agents already make nearly 90 percent of their contacts based on tips from the public and other law enforcement agencies, he said.

A key element of the plan is anonymity for the text message sender, which is important in small towns where people often know nearly everyone. Each tip is automatically assigned a number, allowing agents to ask for more information without knowing who the sender is.

The text service is active now. People who see suspicious activity can text 274637 (it spells "crimes"), type `bordertip" and send a message.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100608/...JkZXJwYXRyb2w-

As the Obama Admin. cuts Nat'l Guard troops on the border by 75% (http://bit.ly/rFlT98), consider this stunning testimony from a former DEA Chief regarding terrorists looking to exploit that weakness. Braun said Iranian-backed Hizbollah - which murdered 241 Marines in Beirut in 1982 - are supporting Mexican cartels to gain access to their networks for border entry, human trafficking, money laundering and forged documents, and operations in 250 U.S. cities. The goal? Exploit our porous defenses with terror cells - far easier than our ports and airports, thanks to the Feds' continued failure to secure the border. But don't worry: Obama and Big Sis say it is safer than ever!


Former DEA Chief: Hezbollah Terrorists Eyeing Southwest Border, Warns of ‘Hell to Pay in the Not Too Distant Future’
By Penny Starr February 2, 2012

The Iranian-supported Shi’ite terrorist group Hezbollah has spread its influence all the way to the U.S. border with Mexico, a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Iran’s influence in the Western Hemisphere heard on Thursday.

Michael Braun, a former chief of operations at the Drug Enforcement Agency, said Hezbollah had developed relationships with the powerful Mexican drug cartels to “move their agenda forward.” He cited a plot, recently uncovered by the DEA, involving an Iranian operative in Mexico allegedly planning to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C. “Hezbollah are absolute masters at forming close relationships with existing organized crime groups around the world that helps them facilitate what they need to do to move their agendas forward,” Braun told CNSNews.com following the hearing. “And if anyone thinks for a moment that they don’t have their eye on the southwest border and all of our country, then they couldn’t be more wrong.”

In his prepared remarks Braun, who also served as interim director of the Department of Justice’s Drug Intelligence Fusion Center, said Hezbollah and other terrorist groups understand that the Mexican cartels are already operating successfully inside the United States. “If anyone thinks for one moment that these terrorist organizations do not understand that the Mexican drug trafficking cartels now dominate drug trafficking in our country – reportedly in more than 250 cities – than they are very stupid or very naive,” he said. “And these groups most assuredly recognize the strategic value of exploiting that activity, and all that has been built to support it, for moving their vision forward in this part of the world.”

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairwoman of the committee, cited Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force and its connections to the Zeta drug cartel in the foiled assassination attempt on U.S. soil. She asked Braun whether he believed Iran had “strategic interests” in Central America and the southwest border.

Braun said Quds Force and Hezbollah work “very, very hard” to develop relationships with criminal groups that already have in place systems for illegal activities, including drug and human trafficking, money laundering and forged document operations. “And by developing those relations it provides them with the ability to operate far from home in our neighborhood and – as I said earlier – on our doorstep,” he replied.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), committee member and chairman of the Homeland Security Committee’s subcommittee of oversight and investigations, asked about Hezbollah’s relationship to criminal organizations in the Western Hemisphere and what it means for U.S. security. Braun warned that those relationships allow “these groups to operate freely in our neighborhood” and said the U.S. would regret it if the threats were not taken seriously. “I don’t want to sound too crude, but I think there’s going to be hell to pay in the not too distant future,” he said.

For the most part the tone of the hearing was bipartisan in nature, with Democrats on the committee agreeing that Iran is trying to exert influence in the Western Hemisphere. Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.) said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent trip to Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador and Nicaragua, is proof that Iran is “up to no good.”

But Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), ranking member of the committee, defended the Obama administration against claims that it is complacent about the threat Iran poses closer to home. “Our government is fully attentive to this matter,” he said.

An expert witness testifying before the panel, Norman A. Bailey, called for Venezuela to be named a state sponsor of terrorism for “facilitating Iranian illicit activity,” noting among other things Iran’s role in the Venezuelan banking system. “Responding to this threat requires the United States and allied governments to complicate Iranian access to the Americas, and penalize those involved in facilitating Tehran’s intrusion, said Bailey, who served in the Reagan administration’s National Security Council and later in the Office of the Director of Na*tional Intelligence, where he served as “mission manager” for Venezuela and Cuba. “This includes measures such as the designation of certain Venezuelan banks and affiliates by the U.S. Treasury Department and other agencies for their role in facilitating Iranian illicit activity, and even the outright declaration of Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism – a move that would open the door for the U.S. to take more direct and punitive action against the Chavez regime for its collusion with both Iran and Hezbollah,” Bailey said.

Ros-Lehtinen recalled what Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, focused on global threats to the U.S. “[Clapper] stated this week, ‘Iranian officials – probably including supreme leader Ali Khamenei – have changed their calculus and are now willing to conduct an attack in the United States.’”

Ros-Lehtinen said Iran’s alliances in Latin America provide it with “a platform in the region to carry out attacks against the United States, our interests, and allies.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/form...ll-pay-not-too

comments

Considering their support for FARC, it's a true wonder that Venezuela hasn't already been named a state sponsor of terrorism. Most likely, our government is paralysed by our dependence on Venezuela's oil to do what is obviously right.

...

It'll take another 9/11 size event before our government FINALLY admits that the Mexican border IS Americas biggest threat!! This is absurd that we have this much chaotic violence right in our back yard and Obama refuses to do ANYTHING!!

..

Why does Washington turn it's back in protecting our border. Drug money going to the pockets of the good old boys in power. Cheap talk about closing the open doors to illegal aliens in this country but no ACTION.

..

Yes. Why are we now seeing the recent phenomenon of beheadings in Mexico?

..

Oh I feel real safe with Obama and his minions running the show. Texas caught 3 Iranians on the border and turned them over to ICE. ICE turned them loose and told them to report for a court date. They disappeared and have not been seen since. This incident alone really does NOT make me feel safe at all.

“If anyone thinks for one moment that these terrorist organizations do not understand that the Mexican drug trafficking cartels now dominate drug trafficking in our country – reportedly in more than 250 cities – than they are very stupid or very naive,” he said. “And these groups most assuredly recognize the strategic value of exploiting that activity, and all that has been built to support it, for moving their vision forward in this part of the world.”

14 Illegals in 24 Seconds (Caught on Video Crossing Arizona)
By John Hill on February 4, 2012

PARDON THE INTERRUPTION: While America is focused on the Super Bowl, or a meaningless state primary – the constant, steady, MASSIVE stream of illegal aliens continues across our border….unabated, undefended, as the video below video – posted this very morning – demonstrates.

With the Administration reducing National Guard troops on the border by 75% by May 1st…with nearly zero progress on the border fence since 2006…with the Border Patrol ordered away from “wilderness” areas to “protect endangered wildlife”… They keep on coming. 14 illegals captured in just 24 seconds in the video below – 30 miles North of the border near Tucson.

While TSA body scans your toddler, or strip searches your grandma…invaders FROM ANYWHERE stream across our border unmolested.

Who are those illegal in the video below? Dishwashers, grape pickers? Or perhaps rapists? MS-13?

What are they carrying? Pot, meth, heroin? Or perhaps C4? Anthrax? Plutonium?

Do we have any idea? Does anyone care at all?

Sorry for the interruption. Enjoy the Super Bowl.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature..._YZ5zyalk#t=0s


http://standwitharizona.com/blog/201...ssing-arizona/


comments

as you all whine and cry about this minimul crap our jobs are being sent overseas by trade agreements. This current administration brags about 3 trade agreements made. Ya know what trade agreements mean to USA. Less jobs for cheaper items. So if anyone missed my point. LESS AMERICAN JOBS for ITEMS OF LESS QUALITY MADE SOMEWHERE ELSE. The quality of the American middle class is directly related to participation in organized labor. Yes I said it Unions are good for america, right to work laws are good for corporations!

...

sensor activated cameras. check out blueservo! Blueservo is a volunteer website run by Texas sheriffs coalition! You can help monitor 26 unmanned cameras! Sign up and do your part EVERYONE and ask that your own Sheriff Dept use the same idea if you live in the border region!

Border Patrol gets first new strategy in 8 years
By ELLIOT SPAGAT | Associated Press – 20 mins ago

SAN DIEGO (AP) — The U.S. Border Patrol on Tuesday unveiled its first national strategy in eight years, a period in which the number of agents more than doubled and apprehensions of people entering illegally from Mexico dropped to a 40-year low.

The new approach — outlined in a 32-page document that took more than two years to develop — uses buzzwords like "risk-based" and "intelligence-driven" to describe a more nuanced, targeted response to constantly evolving threats.

The Border Patrol previously relied on a strategy that blanketed heavily trafficked corridors for illegal immigrants with agents, pushing migrants to more remote areas where they would presumably be easier to capture and discouraged from trying again.

"The jury, for me at least, is out on whether that's a solid strategy," Chief Mike Fisher told The Associated Press.

The new strategy draws on intelligence to identify repeat crossers and to try to determine why they keep coming, said Fisher, who was expected to address a House subcommittee on the plan Tuesday.

"This whole risk-based approach is trying to figure out who are these people? What risk do they pose from a national security standpoint? The more we know, the better informed we are about identifying the threat and potential risk," he said in a recent interview.

Conditions on the border have changed dramatically since the last national strategy, putting pressure on the agency to adapt to a new landscape. An unprecedented hiring boom more than doubled the number of agents to 21,000 since 2004, accompanied by heavy spending on fencing, cameras, sensors and other gizmos.

At the same time, migration from Mexico has slowed significantly. Last year, the Border Patrol made 327,577 apprehensions on the Mexican border, down 80 percent from more than 1.6 million in 2000. It was the slowest year since 1971.

The Pew Hispanic Center reported last month that the largest wave of migrants from a single country in U.S. history had stopped increasing and may have reversed.

The new strategy moves to halt a revolving-door policy of sending migrants back to Mexico without any punishment.

The Border Patrol now feels it has enough of a handle to begin imposing more serious consequences on almost everyone it catches from Texas' Rio Grande Valley to San Diego. In January, it expanded its "Consequence Delivery System" to the entire border, dividing border crossers into seven categories, ranging from first-time offenders to people with criminal records.

Punishments vary by region but there is a common thread: Simply turning people around after taking their fingerprints is the choice of last resort. Some, including children and the medically ill, will still get a free pass by being turned around at the nearest border crossing, but they will be few and far between.

The new strategy makes no mention of expanding fences and other physical barriers, a departure from the administration of President George W. Bush. Fisher said he would rule out more fences but, "It's not going to be part of our mantra."

The strategy makes only brief mention of technology in the wake of a failed $1 billion program that was supposed to put a network of cameras, ground sensors and radars along the entire border. Fisher said the agency is moving more toward mobile surveillance like unmanned aerial vehicles and helicopters.

"We're still trying to understand what the capabilities are with all the technologies and the platforms," Fisher said. "I'm just trying to figure out what is the best suite on all this stuff."

The strategy makes it a top priority to ferret out corrupt agents, which has emerged as a growing threat as the agency has expanded.

It is the Border Patrol's third national strategy since 1994, when the agency poured resources into the San Diego and El Paso, Texas, areas. That effort pushed migrants to remote mountains and deserts and made Arizona the nation's busiest crossing for illegal crossings.

http://news.yahoo.com/border-patrol-...100323478.html

comments

If we would just E-Verify at all employers in this country, they would have no reason to come here and those jobs and welfare payments would be going to Americans that came here legally and have paid for these rights.

..

I lived in a border town in Texas. The illegals just keep coming across and no one does a thing. Pregnant Mexican women will come across the border to have the child born in America and get all the rewards. Honest,they would coming across while in labor and border patrol does nothing. I think an illegal should be tatooed they cross and then we can keep track of how many time this guy has come across. One tatoo for each capture.

...

"failed $1 billion program that was supposed to put a network of cameras, ground sensors and radars"

... wonder which campaign donor got that contract ?? They could have bought a lot of fence for a billion dollars.

..

build border prisons where your prison time is increased every time you are found in the U.S. illegally... make it hard labor and plant some crops to help offset the economy that they have destroyed. It would be following the Mexican immigration policies...

...

"Why do they keep coming"...C'mon.....the way this "new strategy" is set up, these agents will soon finding themselves, sitting behind a desk, instead of cathing, and deporting illegal aliens(criminals). I guess this is the way our current administartion wants it....can't wait for november...

..

Basically the new policy is to roll out a red carpet and give each illegal $50 to spend as they like in the USA. Why do we bother with a border patrol if they aren't going to stop illegals? The liberal left once again screws with the dictionary. An "illegal" immigrant is one who does not wait in line and prefers to break laws to enter the country. A "legal" immigrant goes to the embassy and asks permission to enter our country with a green card. A person who follows the rule of law and would someday make a good taxpaying citizen. The USA has always welcomed immigrants. We, the sons and daughters of immigrants hate "illegals" stealing their way into the country.

..

Obama is the first President in US history to have 2 illegal alien relatives living in our country in defiance of deportation orders, and one of them lives on the backs of us taxpayers, and receives SSI, free housing, Medicaid, cash assistance and food stamps......gosh aren't we lucky?