The Command Post
Global War on Terror
October 13, 2004
Gertz: 25 Chechen terrorists might have infiltrated U.S.

From the Washington Times:

U.S. security officials are investigating a recent intelligence report that a group of 25 Chechen terrorists illegally entered the United States from Mexico in July.

The Chechen group is suspected of having links to Islamist terrorists seeking to separate the southern enclave of Chechnya from Russia, according to officials familiar with intelligence reports.

Members of the group, said to be wearing backpacks, secretly traveled to northern Mexico and crossed into a mountainous part of Arizona that is difficult for U.S. border security agents to monitor, said officials speaking on the condition of anonymity...

Posted by Lonewacko at October 13, 2004 01:15 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Bush could prevent things like this by making sure the Border Patrol is not stretched so thin.

Three million illegal aliens will cross the border this year; if that number were much smaller, groups like this could be spotted and stopped.

The best ways to reduce illegal immigration are to fine employers and stop giving incentives to come and stay here illegally. Bush has greatly reduced the number of employers who are fined for hiring illegals, and he supported banks being allowed to accept Mexican ID cards. Those ID cards are only of use to illegal aliens, and the FBI and the DOJ call them a security risk.

How could someone reconcile their belief that Bush is protecting the homeland with obvious failures to protect the borders?

Posted by: Lonewacko [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 13, 2004 01:36 PM

Bill O'Reilly will have a field day with this. He has harped on the lack of border security for the last 18 mos. or so. This will not play well the Bush's base.

Posted by: derby [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 13, 2004 02:27 PM

Not letting Bush off the hook (never having been a fan of his policies in this area), but has John Kerry ever said how he would prevent something like this? And I mean actual methods (no matter how unrealistic or absurd), not unspecified plans or vague claims of 'some other way.'

Posted by: Achillea [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 13, 2004 03:29 PM

At tonight's debate, Kerry said a few dumb things in the illegal immigration question, but he also said a smart thing or two.

Namely, he said he'd fine those who employ illegal aliens.

That is something Bush is hardly doing at all. And, that's one of the key ways you can reduce illegal immigration.

Plus, divided government under Kerry would mean the GOP could regain some of its opposition against illegal immigration. Bush supports illegal immigration and those politicians who think like he does. With divided government, it would be easier for pro-American conservatives to have an effect on our immigration policies.

Posted by: Lonewacko [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2004 12:23 AM

Bush is for illegal workers because we can't provide certain service jobs without them. Meat processing plant jobs are all done by illegals, all produce picking is done by illegal, office buildings are cleaned by illegals and many other bottom rung jobs are filled by illegals. How do you propose to get your meat and produce to the grocers if we have no illegals? Americans won't do those jobs, period. I want to know "Kerry's Plan".

Also he mentioned we should be using hi-tech id equipment like iris and fingerprinting. That's fine, if you can catch 'em. The ones that swim in or are trucked in aren't too likely to get id'd when they arrive, are they? Most of that 4,000,000 every year aren't stopping by the border entry points. They're sneaking in, John.

Posted by: jane m [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2004 12:13 PM

How do things get done in states without many illegal workers then? Maine, for instance, has very few illegals, yet somehow they manage to function quite well.

There's also automation. That's a better choice than serf labor. See the links in this post for more information. The "jobs Americans won't do" is just an AILA talking point and nothing more.

Posted by: Lonewacko [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2004 02:31 PM

Bush is a die-hard believer in Free trade and taking full advantage of wage differentials. Kerry is also, BTW, despite his ridiculous "hold your finger to the wind" rhetoric.

America does not have an agrarian-based economy any longer, and believing Americans will work for below poverty wages picking strawberries is a mistake. You might retort with a statement like "if illegals didn't drive the price of labor down so much, maybe an American could make an honest wage picking strawberries or mowing lawns." There is error in this line of reasoning, too. A Mexican can make an honest wage doing these jobs, because of the exchange rate differential. A Mexican can take his/hers wages back to Mexico, and support his family with those valuable dollars.

The benefits are: lower costs for us, higher levels of productivity for the Strawberry Business, and a better standard of living for the Mexican family. I know, I know "what about the American who lost his job picking strawberries!!" Well, at a Macro level, the benefit of the many (lower costs, higher productivity) outweigh the cost of the 5th grade educated strawberry picker. Sorry.

Posted by: jackhammer [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2004 03:44 PM

A Mexican can take his/hers wages back to Mexico, and support his family with those valuable dollars.

I discuss remittances here. They're a horrible "benefit" both from the Mexican perspective and from the American perspective. We've made an entire country dependent on money from their citizens who are in our country illegally. That leads Mexico to do all manner of wacky things, like sending their consuls to city council meetings encouraging those councils to change our laws to suit Mexico. Not a good thing by any stretch of the imagination.

The benefits are: lower costs for us, higher levels of productivity for the Strawberry Business, and a better standard of living for the Mexican family. I know, I know “what about the American who lost his job picking strawberries!!” Well, at a Macro level, the benefit of the many (lower costs, higher productivity) outweigh the cost of the 5th grade educated strawberry picker. Sorry.

That doesn't even make sense from the economic standpoint. Perhaps we shouldn't be growing strawberries at all. Perhaps we should be growing crops that lend themselves more readily to automation.

From a social standpoint, how many 3rd worlders - some with just a few months of schooling - can the U.S. absorb in order to keep our "critical" strawberry industry humming?

In the last comment, I provided a link where I fisked the comments of a cheap labor pimp. For those who haven't checked that out, these are the key links provided at that link:

"In Florida Groves, Cheap Labor Means Machines"

"The Mirage of Mexican Guest Workers"

"In the Strawberry Fields"

I don't support serf labor, and we should seek alternatives whenever possible.

Posted by: Lonewacko [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2004 11:11 PM

Dude, you lost any chance you had of me ever reading another paragraph of yours when you tried to compare a state like "Maine" with any other state that actually has industry and uses cheap labor like Texas or California. What the fuck are they going to do in Maine? Pick lobsters? Then what? Hitchhike the 3,000 miles back to Mexico?

Come to Austin sometime, you can witness this firsthand and realize whats really going on instead of reading some pugfuckers college piece on what he thinks is wrong with immigration laws.

Posted by: Ronin [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 15, 2004 06:22 PM

You know, I really shouldn't respond to people like that. Nevertheless: I've been to Maine, and, yes, they do have illegal workers there from Mexico. See, smugglers brings people from Mexico via the border and then put them on airplanes bound for the East Coast.

I live in L.A. From the geographical standpoint alone my views on the "wonders" of massive illegal immigration would carry quite a bit of weight. L.A. is much larger than Austin, it's an illegal immigration hub, and it's in a state run by a near-socialist legislature.

It also has a crumbling infrastructure, a very large uneducated population, and the beginnings of a two-tier society.

Come to L.A., you'll learn something.

Posted by: Lonewacko [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 15, 2004 11:15 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?