![]() | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Comptroller Suggests State Control of School Funding | Main | I'm an excellent driver » December 28, 2005Break on Through to the Other SideBy Donna Locke From Oct. 1, 2004, to Sept. 30, 2005, the Border Patrol made 1,188,977 apprehensions along our land borders between the ports of entry, according to Maria Valencia, a U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman I talked with today. Of those apprehensions, 165,175 were non-Mexican illegal entrants, Valencia said, and non-Mexicans apprehended in fiscal year 2004 came from about 175 countries. Multiply those apprehensions by the estimate above, and you'll have some idea of the number of people who were not caught but slipped past the Border Patrol and into our country. Often, illegal entrants, including those from terrorism-sponsoring countries, are released into our country with orders to appear in immigration court. In 2004, 90 percent of those so ordered did not show up. What a shock. I don't know the current percentage of no-shows, but I doubt it's much improved, although in Sept. 2005, the Department of Homeland Security expanded its expedited removal process from three to nine Border Patrol sectors, implementing the program across the southwest border. Expedited removal targets non-Mexican illegal aliens only and returns those aliens to their countries of origin as soon as possible, without release into the United States. Away from the border, we have 6,000 special agents for interior enforcement of immigration laws, said Dean Boyd, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). That number does not include other ICE employees such as detention and removal officers, the Federal Protective Service, or intelligence analysts, Boyd said. Because of the 2003 merger of the old Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) with Customs, some sources say 2,300 or fewer agents are doing real interior immigration enforcement now. ICE has been instructed to concentrate only on illegals who have committed other crimes here or have absconded. For a trip behind the smoke screen, read John W. Slagle's book, Illegal Entries. Slagle, a retired Border Patrol special agent and highly decorated military veteran, rips the veil off the Homeland Security charade and details how we've lost our national sovereignty via our presidents and Congress since 1965. Also, please read this. Posted in Immigration
Comments
Care to elaborate on how we've lost our "national sovreignty"? Posted by: Chris Wage at December 28, 2005 10:57 PMI believe it was Ronald Reagan who said, "A nation without borders is not a nation." Somewhere between President Eisenhower and Bush II, it was decided or allowed to become U.S. policy that this country does not belong to its citizens but to the world and is free for the taking. Or hadn't you noticed that? The loss of English as our common language should have been a clue. And when Mexico can meddle in and dictate domestic policy in this country, as it does, and encourage and facilitate what can only be called an invasion of our country while our nation's leaders smile and praise "our good neighbor to the south," do you think U.S. citizens control their own country anymore? I won't even get into the dual-citizenship rig or the state elected officials who are quite open in representing the interests of illegal aliens, not U.S. citizens (the only ones who should be voting), in this country. In some academic and political quarters, it's assumed the United States, Mexico, and Canada will merge in our lifetimes, and preparations are underway. Those preparations may include pods, I don't know. They would certainly come after the loudmouths like me first. Posted by: Donna Locke at December 28, 2005 11:58 PMAnybody else hear the report on NPR yesterday about the boarder patrol spending 1/2 BILLION dollars on an automated panning camera system that doesn't even work? For all of this they've got less than 200 cameras going and almost none of them operate based on the motion sensors as designed. Even Bill's penchant for expensive digital cameras can't touch this... that's like $2.5 million per camera for a system I could get going in my garage with off the shelf parts in a couple of months for less than a thousand bucks. I really don't see anything wrong with the president's plan for documented-worker status to get our hands around this problem; but you've got to wonder who has their heads up their @$$s to spend $1/2 BILLION on a surveillance system that doesn't work. Posted by: jimmy at December 29, 2005 10:12 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||