American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Administration Will Cut Border Patrol Deployed on U.S-Mexico Border

More news stories on Immigration Law Enforcement

Terence P. Jeffrey, CNS News, Sept. 24, 2009

Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Border Patrol Director of Media Relations Lloyd Easterling confirmed this week—as I first reported in my column yesterday—that his agency is planning for a net decrease of 384 agents on the U.S.-Mexico border in fiscal 2010, which begins on October 1.

A Department of Homeland Security annual performance review updated by the Obama administration on May 7 said the Border Patrol “plans to move several hundred Agents from the Southwest Border to the Northern Border to meet the FY 2010 staffing requirements, with only a small increase in new agents for the Southwest Border in the same year.”

Easterling said on Tuesday that in fiscal 2009, 17,399 Border Patrol agents have been deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border. In fiscal year 2010, the Border Patrol plans to decrease that by 384 agents, leaving 17,015 deployed along the Mexican frontier. At the same time, the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Canada border will be increased by 414, from a fiscal 2009 total of 1,798 agents to a fiscal 2010 total of 2,212.

The Border Patrol is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of border, including the U.S.-Mexico border, the U.S.-Canada border from Washington state to Maine, and sectors of coastline in the Gulf of Mexico, Florida, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Each year, the Border Patrol sets a goal for “border miles under effective control (including certain coastal sectors).” “Effective control,” as defined by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, means that when the Border Patrol detects an illegal border crosser in a particular area of the border the agency can be expected to succeed in apprehending that person.

In the May 7 update of its performance review, DHS said the Border Patrol’s goal for fiscal 2009 was to have 815 of the 8,607 miles of border for which the agency is responsible under “effective control.” The review also said the Border Patrol’s goal for fiscal 2010 was to again have 815 miles of border under “effective control,” meaning DHS was not planning to secure a single additional mile of border in the coming year.

However, Acting Deputy Assistant Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Todd Owen told a House committee in July that the Border Patrol already had 894 miles of border under effective control as of May 31 of this year. These 894 miles, Owen said, included 697 miles on the Mexican border, 32 miles on the Canadian border and 165 miles in the coastal sectors.

Easterling said this week that as of now the Border Patrol still has the same 894 miles of border under effective control that it had under effective control as of May 31. He also said the agency would not relinquish control of any of these miles in the coming year. After the beginning of the new fiscal year, he said, the Border Patrol would reevaluate the situation and set a new goal for border miles under “effective control” for 2010 that would at least equal, and might exceed, the 894 miles currently under effective control.

“The intention is to take back the border incrementally, and make gains that we can keep,” Easterling said. “We do not intend, nor will we give back, miles that we have gained control over.”

Easterling said the Border Patrol would be able to maintain the current number of miles under effective control on the Mexico border with fewer agents deployed there thanks to “force multipliers,” including new fencing, roads and other infrastructure that has been built in recent years. He also cited the assistance the Border Patrol receives from local police and sheriffs departments and community watch groups.

But even if the Border Patrol is able to maintain or marginally improve on the current level of security on the U.S.-Mexico border, most of the border will remain effectively open to smuggling both contraband and persons.

The entire U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long, according to the International Boundary and Water Commission. While 697 of those miles are now under “effective control,” according to the Border Patrol, 1,257 miles are not under “effective control.”

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on September 25, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — ranger wrote at 6:30 PM on September 25:

The entire basis of the leftist scheme to destroy the white power structure is in bringing in millions of non-whites who will reduce the clout of the white vote.

This scheme, like so many others from these same types throughout history, are divorced from reality, and in our case, what drives this recent bunch is nothing more than anti-Anglo, Christian hatred, and their brainwashed minions who are too stupid to figure out they’re being used.

But, like other scemes to multiculralize areas, this one too is impractical and amounts to no more than an impossible dream that came from airheads who always think they have a better way.

This proves my contention accurate when I said to look for this anti-white administration to reduce enforcement on the Southern border, because they perceive that more non-whites coming into the country is a way to water down white power.

Look for more blatant outrages to occur, like the failure to prosecute threatening Black Panther intimidators, and the condemnation of a white cop who dared to arrest an anti-white, black racist professor.

They are committing acts that are creating a growing white backlash, and every indicatiuon is that it is no way slowing them down one iota.

And, why? Because they’re blinded by black arrogance into thinking they can’t be stopped. Also black inability to reason is to blame as well. And, like everything else they try, this too will fail, but the one great difference is that this time they could well be damaged irrepairably, because, as the black professor Carol Swain said, we’re very likely headed for racial conflict.

Did you see the video:

Mmmm mmm mmm. Barack Hussein Obama!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPMnbyX5C4w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08iomNFrzU4
Muslims praising their savior Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08BAfKCfu74&NR=1
Ode to Obama Kim Jong Il

2 — Anonymous wrote at 9:27 PM on September 25:

Why should the Democrats secure the border? Every illegal alien that crosses over is a potential amnesty candidate that will provide votes for the Democratic party.

However, what the Democrats fail to realize is this: When enough illegals and present Hispanics have gained the right to vote, they’ll have sufficient numbers for their own party: The Raza Unida Party.

This party will eventually outnumber the Republicans or Democrats by sheer demographics alone. When that day comes, and it will, America as we know it is finished. America’s enemies will have won. Our present US Constitution and history books will be rewritten and America will no longer be a White, Protestant nation.

There are only two ways to win a war:

1. Use military force to conquer your enemy; or

2. Change the demographics of your enemy.

America’s enemies have chosen option two. At the current pace, they will win this war. This war started in 1965 and will likely conclude by 2050. Without major deportations and a complete change in our immigration and border enforcement policies, this nation will soon become a distant memory.

3 — Worse is Better wrote at 1:23 AM on September 26:

Actually Anonymous isn’t quite correct in their analysis, stating that the elites who wish to wipe whites have decided to change the demographic of their enemy. No, we are their enemy, the non-whites are merely tools. What we need to do is get whites to change their idea of the demographic of their true enemy. And the real enemy isn’t the brown and black foot-soldiers per se. It’s those caucasians pulling Obama’s strings. That’s our real enemy and the moves that these arrogant haters are making are actually causing more whites to sit up and take notice, to look past the politicians and see who’s telling them what to do, what lobbies are calling the shots.

4 — NiveusVir wrote at 2:04 AM on September 26:

The will of the American people means nothing to these despots.

It seems odd to me that this seems to coincide with the passing of E-verify and just recently H.R. 324. The people, myself included called congress and sent faxes in order to make them aware of our desire to have the borders more secure.

” H.R. 324 (the Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act) late this afternoon was amended to ensure that nothing about the designation would affect the ability of the Border Patrol to carry out its enforcement duties. Without that language, there was a huge loophole that very well might have been used to block efforts to stop the movement of illegal aliens across that huge Arizona area. “

- Numbers USA

We participate in the system, making our voices heard. They then say, alright, we’ll pass and approve the laws and amendments you want only to turn around and now reduce the number of border patrol agents.

They seem to have a countermeasure for everything the American people want!

5 — Whiteplight wrote at 2:32 AM on September 26:

I think Ranger hates whites that he sees disagreeing with his definitions more than the non-whites that are arriving. That is at the core of the white problem.

6 — D. Andrews wrote at 4:06 AM on September 26:

again, apologies for lack of cap’s and certain punctuation.

this time i’ll be brief. most of what needed to be said about this subject already has and has been stated beautifully.

the only thing i can possibly add is that barry sotero has absolutely no interest in stopping the southwest hemorrhaging of mexicans and ”other than mexicans” or ‘otm’s’ which scare me worse. they are most often middle-easterners with dark skin and when wearing a baseball cap or serape, could pass as a latin-american any day. it will take one of these guys smuggling in a suitcase bomb that will flatten houston - and when we have our absolute backs up against the wall - for them to take any real action toward ‘effectively’ sealing the border.

it can be sealed, we know that, but millions of americans lives will have to be incarcerated until americans will rise up and demand effective border control. i’m 56 now and i’m glad i won’t be around to see the fall of america due to it’s preventable changing demographic.
thank you, teddy kennedy for ”the immigration reform act of 1965” and every other person in the white house - especially clinton and gwb…for differerent reasons, of course - who have looked the other way while we were swamped with ‘amigos’ from ”south of the border, down mexico way.”
like i say, i will be too old - and too feeble - too help fight the last war for america.

7 — June wrote at 9:28 AM on September 26:

Well, since this action is an open invitation to those still left in Mexico to walk in, looks like Obama will reach his goal of replacing white America sooner rather than later. I measure the invasion by my local supermarket. Each time I visit, I see more evidence on the shelves of Hispanic cooking products and the people who use them. I was there ten minutes yesterday before I heard English spoken. It is amazing how these people are pandered to. What is it? If it’s so difficult to come here legally, and the population of Hispanics seem to have quadrupled, is this country only letting Hispanics in, or are they all illegals?

8 — Bill wrote at 11:23 AM on September 26:

Absolutely nothing will change as long as leftists retain any power at all. The first goal must be to get them out of office on every level. Enforce the existing laws. And if Mexico continues to subvert our border, once we have a conservative regime running the show, declare war on Mexico and call EVERY hispanic here illegally enemy combatants and spies, and pursue them as such. I’d bet 90 percent of the illegals would scurry across the border immediately. The illegal immigration problem has two sponsors. Washington DC and Mexican presidents. Remove those sponsors from our political machine, and warn Mexico their continued assault on our border by their citizens and drug dealers is an act of war. After all, it IS a war on us in THEIR eyes.

9 — Anonymous wrote at 2:40 PM on September 26:

There is an old Russian saying: “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it.” - Lenin

Who do you think is easier to control, white Americans or the lower IQ ones like Hispanics?

Now do you understand why demographics is so important?

10 — Anonymous wrote at 7:41 AM on September 27:

“fifth column - a treasonous group or faction who give support to an enemy. For example, a nation might be successfully fighting an external enemy, but then be undone by the appearance of a fifth column within their midst. The term dates from the Spanish Civil War (1936-39), in which four columns of rebels attacked Madrid, while rebel contingents within Madrid organized a campaign of sabotage and uprisings. They became known as the fifth column.”

http://iamericanspirit.com/politicaldictionary.html

11 — Morton The Geek wrote at 12:42 PM on September 27:

Sounds good to me. Why not replace the Border Patrol Guards with WELCOME WAGONS where each new visitor is provided with Free Room and Board for the first 30 days they are here along with a New Chevrolet Suburban to drive (without a license or insurance) so as to not inconvenience our newest guest with seeking transportation or a place to pound down Bud Lites as they drive along?

12 — ranger wrote at 7:36 PM on September 27:

5 — Whiteplight wrote at 2:32 AM on September 26:
“I think Ranger hates whites that he sees disagreeing with his definitions more than the non-whites that are arriving. That is at the core of the white problem.”

Nothing you wrote above makes any kind of sense.

What are my “definitions?” What are you referring to?

What is at the core of the white problem?

This kind of vagueness and lack of clarity is all too common and it makes whites appear to be no better at reasoning than the people we criticize.


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search