The Canadian Spin...

Dean Beeby with the Canadian Press has authored an article that I read in the National Post. Based on a focus group study by the EKOS group he submits a headline that America does not view Canada as a safe haven for terrorists. They conducted two focus groups, one democrat and one republican of so called (they used the following term and Beeby quoted it) "informed U.S. citizens of higher than average socio-economic status". Beeby states that the study indicates that these "informed" people view Mexico as a more likely entry point for terrorists than Canada or that they would be home grown. Beeby states that the report indicates that Canada has often been more effective at beefing up border security infrastructure than the United States. In an amazing statement, the study did not provide the number of participants.

How a reporter would quote this type of study is a question in itself, but I guess Mr. Beeby felt comfortable with the information. I, however, view it as nothing but propaganda trying the difuse a slow, but sure acknowledgement that Canada, because of it's lax immigration policy is a threat. Yes, Canada a greater threat for terrorism than Mexico. Another reason they are a threat is that they do not feel that they are targeted for terrorism, so they have no personal stake or vested interest. Sure the damage to the American economy by another 9/11 would hurt Canada as one of our largest trading partners, but it is not the same as an in-country attack.

While Mexico certainly has the infra-structure for human smuggling, what they don't have is strong connections to the terrorists regions of the world that threaten America. Canada on the other hand has welcomed immigrants from these areas with open arms. Ahmed Ressam, the terrorist interdicted entering the U.S. from Canada in 1999 is a good example. If you don't recall, he had the explosives with him.

As far as border security, Canada won't even trust their border agents with firearms. I have yet to see the Canadian border services working outbound to the United States as we work outbound interdiction to Canada. While the facilitation versus enforcement balance has always been on the front burner in the States, listen to the Canadian politicians promote facilitation over security as the rule in their country.

So with all due respect ( however that much is, is certainly in question after the article) to Mr. Beeby and EKOS, this informed U.S. citizen of above average socio-economic status calls B.S.!


BT

Immigration Laws....

They need to change. I am not talking so much about the laws letting people into the country, but the laws getting people to leave the country. It is absolute insanity to have to jump through so many hoops to remove people from the U.S. To have to go in front of a judge, in some cases, makes no sense. I am a long way from anti-immigration, but unless Congress makes changes, nothing will solve this problem.

If someone is here illegally, Border Patrol or ICE should be able to pick them up and arrange transport to what ever border they crossed. If they came in through Mexico, that is where they go, If they came through Canada, that is where they go. Anything short of this goal just makes it unworkable. A court once held that when in country, illegal aliens are provided with the protection of the Constitution. Congress needs to change that, and all I mean is the removal requirements.

As for the laws regarding entry, there should be three types of visas, Business, Pleasure, and Other and we can fill in the blanks for Other. If we say yes they can enter, if we say no, they can't. If we change our mind while they are here, they have to go.

Immigration law is complex, that needs to change and Congress has the ability to fix it. They just don't seem to have the desire to do more than talk about it on television.

On another somewhat related front, it looks like the move to generalists is being tempered somewhat. Hopefully, this is just the beginning of many positive moves within the border agency.

BT

Securing the Borders.....

If Congress really wants to secure the borders, it can be done. All you need is the manpower, meaning they have to hire thousands of new Patrol Agents. You have to get them out of the office, which means making it easier to deport those who enter the country illegally. Get their prints, photos, put them in the system, make sure they don't already have warrants and then send them back.

I don't just mean on the Southern Border either, same procedure for those crossing illegally from the North. In some cases where the Ports are overstaffed, we should use those Officers between the borders as well. A new version of the Customs Patrol Officer. They are all designated as immigration Officers and could certainly help with the situation.

On another front, technology could help as well. If we can detect and track submarines at sea, we can certainly do the same on our border rivers and lakes.

I don't know what the stats are now, but there was a time when the BP Academy washed out about half of their trainees during the long 26 weeks. That means hiring twice as many, to make sure of the numbers getting to the field.

It boils down to this, Congress has to provide the funding, change the Immigration laws to allow those charged with securing the borders to work more efficiently and realize that political rhetoric is nothing but bluster, so as they say down South, "mochate"

BT

Ouch.....

You know sometimes you just have to bite your tongue. I read an article this evening in the Post about Customs and Border Protection. It was kind of a fluff piece with a small jab at the agency for not letting their people be open about what is going on with the merger. It is the kind of article that makes me want to hit the keyboard and zap the author with an adjustment of some sort. The only trouble with doing that is that most of the time, only bad stuff comes out. Legitimate concerns that turn into complaints, moans, and whining. The good things don't come out and with CBP, there is a bunch of good stuff. The commissioner is probably the smartest and most experienced in recent history and he stands good with the big boss.

One face at the border is a good idea and good in practice, CBP just needs to have specialists (really, not the fluff in the article) so the best service can be given to the country. Let people do what they are good at and good things will happen, it is a fact. There is some wonderful technology being used by the agency, but it has to be utilized as tools for the Officers, not the other way around.

There have been some very good promotions of late, but there is still alot of dead wood that needs to be cleared. INS was smart, they promoted many people before the merger, allowing them to be placed in key positions after the merger. Old thinking and practices that should have been abolished too. Too many people who have never done the job or even anything close to the job, running programs and training. The good news is that there is some very qualified people just chomping at the bit to provide superior performance.

CBP needs to stop hiring old people, it is not a job for old people and hasn't been for a long time. On the other hand, the agency has hired some awesome young people, now if they can be retained and steered in the right direction, the future is promising.

Last but not least, on the borders, it has to be about interdiction. The borders are the last filter to keep the bad guys out or caught. After all the wonderful programs and pre-screening it gets to the border and it is either interdicted or let into the country. I vote for interdiction and yes I do understand the importance of facilitation for the economy's sake, but I also understand what will happen to the economy if there is another 9/11.

Not bad for a bite my tongue, post.

BT