Jun 02 2007

The Real Danger Over Our Borders

Published by at 9:48 am under All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT

While the far right is obsessed with halting all progress on immigration until the guest workers get more punishment (which is apparently more important than the actual violent criminals we could deport under the new bill) we cannot let their lack of focus distract us from the real enemy out there. Yes, there are nannies and hairdressers and taxicab drivers and painters and cooks who have all overstayed their welcome in this country – but who have not committed any serious crime. This is the focus of the immigration hypochondriacs. This is where they want to direct law enforcement resources that would have to be double what we have now to deal with the 12-20 million illegal immigrant workers here. This is the problem they have focused on over everything else. Back taxes and fines are not enough punishment for the hypochondriacs. So while they fiddle something is burning over our borders that is a real problem. And it is not on our southern border (where the fence goes and all eyes on the far right are now diverted):

The 17 suspects arrested in Toronto one year ago today for allegedly belonging to an al- Qaeda-inspired terrorist cell were part of a larger group of almost 50 that were under investigation, sources say.

A year after the RCMP led Canada’s largest counter-terrorism bust since the 9/11 attacks, the National Post has learned that almost two-thirds of the suspects probed during the investigation were not charged.

They include those who were believed to have trained overseas and provided supplies to the group but who were not among the 12 adults and five youths arrested under the Anti-Terrorism Act on June 2, 2006.

Intelligence expert Martin Rudner said terrorists are usually surrounded by a circle of supporters who help with recruitment, training, finance, arms acquisition, documents fraud, logistics, safe houses, espionage, planning and reconnaissance. “Terrorist organizations, and indeed terrorist activities, involve an array of people and processes other than just the attackers,” said Prof. Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies.

Distractions can be very dangerous.

9 responses so far

9 Responses to “The Real Danger Over Our Borders”

  1. Boghie says:

    It is rather funny that all these righty’s (of which I am normally one) whine and bitch about nannies and grannies and babies getting screened at airports

    – but –

    they want nannies and grannies and babies getting hassled and arrested and deported by other departments in Homeland Security.

    In the meantime 24 year old jihadists are probably taking ocean liners to the various ports on the east and west coasts. Maybe theme cruises at that!!!

    I do agree with the righties that ‘z visas’ and other forms of legalization should not be initiated till we build a family friendly fence to the south – and maybe to the north, but… I am bored by the argument that their immigrant grandparent came here legaly – when all they had to do was set foot in America and not have TB…

  2. Terrye says:

    I thought our border was about 13,000 miles, but that is just our coastline. I looked at the CIA fact book and I saw this:

    Area – comparative:
    Definition Field Listing
    about half the size of Russia; about three-tenths the size of Africa; about half the size of South America (or slightly larger than Brazil); slightly larger than China; more than twice the size of the European Union
    Land boundaries:
    Definition Field Listing
    total: 12,034 km
    border countries: Canada 8,893 km (including 2,477 km with Alaska), Mexico 3,141 km
    note: US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is leased by the US and is part of Cuba; the base boundary is 28 km
    Definition Field Listing
    19,924 km, Coastline.

    My God, that is big.

    And something about Canada, they have been controlled by that whole multicultural PC driven political class for so long that they have allowed people into that country that are really very scary.

  3. Terrye says:


    Yes, back then there was no legal or illegal immigration, there was just immigration and there were people here who hated them too.

    I had people come over from Ireland years and years ago. I read shopowners used to put up signs in windows. NINA. No Irish need apply.

  4. Jacqui says:

    I still contend that if they broke the current bill into two bills and the first one was a security bill that was completely funded and included additional resources for the borders and ICE with barriers-fencing -etc – then follow with a legalization and enhanced guest worker program that kicks in when say 70% of the security bill was completed – you would see the legalization/guest worker bill pass with little or no resistance from the right. The security bill could start in the House because appropriations are involved and the Senate could work the legalization/guest worker bill and tie it with the House bill as a trigger.

    The main argument with the current bill for me and many others continues to be security. Many people remember that bill in the 1990’s that Clinton signed promising thousands of new police officers in our cities – a lot of hype – good photo op- little funding – never happened. The bill to build the border fence last year – did not get 100% funding for that either. People are afraid of the same thing happening here. Congress passes many bills promising lots of things but without appropriations they are empty words.

    Take care of the security aspect and the arguments for the rest of the bill fade to a murmur.

  5. retire05 says:

    Gee AJ, did you not read the headlines? Bush insisted that the “back tax” provision be removed. It was a sweetheart deal to begin with; the newly minted “legal” alien would have been required to pay only three of five years worth of back taxes. Considering what I paid just last year, I would be better off going to Mexico on vacation, paying a cayote two grand to smuggle me in and claim I was an illegal.

    Yes, there are nannies and cooks and hairdressers and cab drivers and sheetrockers and carpenters and grass cutters who have overstayed their welcome but I see you do not talk about the thousands of sex offenders and murderers that have also overstayed their welcome. So you must have no problem with importing crime.

    It is not us, who believe in the rule of law, AJ, that has resorted to name calling. It is you with your “right wing” and “hypochondriacs” that refuses to argue this bill on it’s merit. Others like myself have posed sensible, reasonable questions, none of which you will answer. For every front end of a deal there is the back end. And that back end is the problem.
    You say we don’t have the resources to deport 12 million people but want us to believe that we have the resources to background check 12 million people.
    This bill does not apply simple logic. Let’s say you are an illegal who is making $7.50 an hour under the table. If you get a Z-visa, your salary will increase by $.250 an hour. You gain nothing. Your increase in pay will be eaten up with taxes, FICA other taxes like state taxes. Your boss will have to kick in an extra .0775% in Social Security matching funds. Now obviously, the boss man has no problem with hiring illegals because the labor costs are cheaper. So do you really think Mr. Bossman is going to eat an addition $131.00 a week in salary or is he going to lay you off and look for another illegal?
    And when you are laid off, now that you are legal, who will pick up the tab for your unemployment benefits, your food stamps and the public housing you will be eligible for?
    I assume you have read the bill (otherwise you would not feel qualified to support it, right?). Where does it establish any law that is not already on the books? Where does it provide any punishment for the clown that stole my Social Security number?
    And just how long do you think the “fine” part of the bill will hold up once the ACLU gets a hold of it?
    The questions we “hypochrondriacs” have about this bill are legit. We are not name calling, we are not saying “no” to LEGAL immigration. We are saying NO to a bill that provides law breakers with more rights than American citizens.

  6. Terrye says:


    I think there is some debate about that. I for one do not know how they would figure it up. I think a penalty of some kind would be better.

  7. Terrye says:

    And you know something else? The people that are calling anyone who supports comprehensive immigration traitors or whatever are not demanding that people on their side of the issue read the entire bill before commenting on it. Oh nooo, as long as they will call people they disagree with dummies and liars and traitors they can glean all the information they have on this bill from talk radio or the comment threads at Lucianne. And in fact it is not necessary to read any other bill in order to comment on policy. No, that requirement only applies to one side of the debate on one issue.

    You can google this bill and up will come sites with text from the bill. But the thing is one side of the debate never intended to give this bill a fair hearing. They made up their minds from the outset that they would destroy it and anyone else who failed to kiss their behinds. They will accept no compromise, they would rather kill the bill and split the party and make Hillary Clinton the next president than try to fix it and they will never be satisfied with anything anyone else comes up with. I have come to that conclusion.

    Hopefully if there is some way to certify the border security aspect of the bill it will help with some people. But I think that there are people who would never feel satisfied and never accept any certification.

    You can tell a lot about people from their tactics and I am seeing a side to some people on the right that makes me feel kind of sick.

    In the end they might well end up with status quo they themselves claim is intolerable.

  8. Terrye says:

    And btw, if you follow AJ’s link to Harold’s site he makes a good point too, there is something really nasty about someone who would call a man like John McCain a traitor. Whether you agree with the policy or not, McCain deserves some respect for the years he spent in a POW camp in the service of this country and if the people who are out to get this bill can not manage that…then I am not sure I want to be on the same side they are on.

  9. thecentercannothold says:

    Terrye says

    “I had people come over from Ireland years and years ago. I read shopowners used to put up signs in windows. NINA. No Irish need apply. ”


    “You can tell a lot about people from their tactics and I am seeing a side to some people on the right that makes me feel kind of sick. ”

    What about your tactics? When the Irish, who did not have the
    wide physical dissimilarity to the majority which hispanics have,
    came, America was not overpopulated ,had good carrying capacity for economic growth, and had no brewing cauldrons of inter-minority ethnic feuding as there are in Southern California with ethnic gang warfare ongoing between blacks and Latinos.

    For starters.