Drug trafficking from Mexico into Cameron County has increased, not decreased, since the border fence was built, a sheriff’s lieutenant said Saturday at a public meeting.
It was one of many points discussed at the “Border Wall Impact” meeting hosted by State Senator Eddie Lucio Jr. at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course. The event brought together legislators, city representatives, state and county law enforcement and private citizens to air concerns about the fence.This outcome was as predictable as the sunrise. Law enforcement has known for years that most drug trafficking happens at the legal checkpoints, not in between them. Even in between the checkpoints, the wall can be easily defeated with tactics ranging from flying ultralight aircraft to drop drugs on the other side to flinging drugs with large catapults to waiting accomplices on the US side. Anyway, show me a 20 foot wall and I'll show you a 21 foot ladder.
“Is the fence keeping drugs from coming in? No,” Lieutenant Rick Perez said responding to a question. “We have more drugs now than before.”
Perez is part of the special investigations unit of the Cameron County Sheriff’s Department.
This was never more than symbolism, and even Governor Rick Perry can see a border wall adds little to border security. But state Rep. Rene Oliveira told the audience, “The wall is here whether we like it or not ... I don’t think anybody is going to tear it down. The political will is clearly nonexistent for that.” For my part, I wouldn't be so pessimistic. There were many years when one could easily say there was "no political will" to bring down the Berlin Wall, but eventually the wall fell. Who knows, maybe if Rick Perry is elected president, he'll go to Congress and demand, echoing Ronald Reagan, that they "tear down this wall."
.jpg)
40 comments:
By golly Grits, every once in a while you and I do agree with each other.
They crossed the border and quickly surged to majority status in Texas. We must keep the border open and continue the progress.
12:50, your reference, I assume, is to white settlers entering the Mexican state of Tejas back in the 1830s? ;)
FWIW, not to focus on facts when you don't really care about them, the lieutenant's point was that the wall hasn't lessened drug smuggling at all. Don't let reality get in the way of your opinions, though.
As for modern illegal immigration, who needs a wall? Bankrupting the economy took care of that problem by eliminating the jobs they were coming for. Was it worth it?
". . . most drug trafficking happens at the legal checkpoints, not in between them. Even in between the checkpoints, the wall can be easily defeated with tactics ranging from flying ultralight aircraft. . . ."
I suspect that a lot more tunnels exist that just the ones they discover. And, with the unlimited population explosion due to those coming over (and under), I've given up any concern for the environment. We have to make a choice and the environment has to go. The people I know in the environmental organizations are now just giving lip service to the issue. They know what the score is, but will never say so in public.
Maginot Line theory
Back in 1986 a CIA pilot, Eugene Hasenfus, was shot down over Nicaragua. Documents aboard the plane showed that the CIA had been smuggling cocaine into the USA for years, with dealers from the DEA selling it in the ghettos of Los Angeles and the profits going towards the funding of Contra rebels attempting a counterrevolution in their Nicaraguan homeland.
It has only recently been made public that Mexican helicopters from their Army and their Navy as well, have been flying excursions into Texas and Arizona, with the tacit approval of the federal government.
The drug war will never be won. In fact, it wasn't designed to be. Since its official inception in 1971 we have spent more money insuring it continues than actually trying to stop illegal drug use.
Just imagine for even a minute the tremendous impact on our economy if it were ended today. A half-million cops unemployed along with their support personnel. And the DEA who at its outset had 1,470 Special Agents and a budget of less than $75 million. Today, the DEA has nearly 5,000 Special Agents and a budget of $2.02 billion. Then there are the prisons. Entire communities depend on the funds generated from these human warehouses. What would become of them?
No, regardless of what method is chosen, the drug war will never end. There will always be sufficient supplies to insure sufficient arrests. Not because the use of recreational drugs is necessarily any worse than the legal drug alcohol, but because our economy depends on it to survive.
Grits said FWIW, not to focus on facts when you don't really care about them, the lieutenant's point was that the wall hasn't lessened drug smuggling at all.
The lieutenant gives no specific data to validate what he said. So why do believe him?
The fence covers only a tiny portion of the border. If someone comes across a section of the fence, it's easy to just walk a few yards to where it stops and walk on in.
10:14, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The wall now stretches many miles beyond the urban centers.
9:14, do you have reason to think he's lying? In addition, the assertion jibes with all other analyses I've seen, including record-low cocaine prices, etc., that indicate US demand for illegal drugs is still being quite adequately supplied.
Anon citing the "Maginot Line theory" has it exactly right. Texas can't keep contraband off death row, so how can they keep it from passing through more than a dozen checkpoints with millions of vehicles passing through them?
2:58, I think tunnels are more common in California and to a lesser extent Arizona. With the river between Texas and Mexico, such a construction project would be a much more involved operation here.
9:14, do you have reason to think he's lying?
Never have been a wall supporter.
WTBS, the Lt. may be right but opinions, or assertion as you say, are like assholes, everyones got one. That's all his statement is; an opinion without any data to support it.
Anyway, it's different but refreshing seeing you believing a law dog :)
6:55, I believe it because it jibes with every other assessment you can find. Even the Justice Department says "Overall, the availability of illicit drugs in the United States is increasing." Sure, they're "law dogs," too, but all data about law enforcement comes from somebody with a badge - that doesn't mean I automatically think they're liars.
Grits said:
"Bankrupting the economy took care of that problem by eliminating the jobs they were coming for. Was it worth it?"
Then, why are they still coming, and why are they still here?
They're "still here" because people who came years ago put down roots. As for "still coming,' new entries are way down since the recession hit. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.
9/18/2011 08:39:00 PM said:
"It has only recently been made public that Mexican helicopters from their Army and their Navy as well, have been flying excursions into Texas and Arizona, with the tacit approval of the federal government."
Pilots in south Texas are well aware that for years, Mexican and other south of the border military helicopter flights have been coming up and landing at a depot north of Corpus Christi for re-armament and maintenance. They always stop off for fuel at Corpus Christi. I'm sure all at the US taxpayers expense, of course. But, I somehow doubt that they are ferrying drugs. I've followed them both coming and going.
7:16, I should add that another key reason illegal immigrants are "still here" is, ironically, increased border enforcement. For decades illegal immigration was mostly migrant workers who came to the states for ag jobs, etc., and left when the harvest was done. Making it riskier and more difficult to get back in encouraged folks to stay long term: Chalk it up to the law of unintended consequences.
Gritsforbreakfast said...
7:16, I should add that another key reason illegal immigrants are "still here" is, ironically, increased border enforcement. For decades illegal immigration was mostly migrant workers who came to the states for ag jobs, etc., and left when the harvest was done. Making it riskier and more difficult to get back in encouraged folks to stay long term: Chalk it up to the law of unintended consequences.
-------------
And of course, it has nothing to do with the "free" education and healthcare they get here, or the $4.2 BILLION illegal aliens received from the U.S. Treasury last year under the Earned Income Tax Credit--4 times what it was the previous year.
10:52, the reality is people came for jobs, not welfare, and stopped coming when the jobs dried up. It's also undeniable that expanded enforcement turned former migrants into permanent residents. Employment is the driver in this situation: As the drug war has proven over and over, free (and/or black) markets trump prohibitionist laws. It turns out, that's true of labor markets as well.
The great wall of china was constructed to keep its enemies out. Never had to cross the wall, just pay off the gate guards and walk right in...
I will agree with the point that erecting the wall won't stop the drugs. The saddest point to the drug trafficking is how damned sick Americans have become creating a huge marketplace for drugs.
However, I don't agree with the general pacifist attitude expressed by this posting towards Mexico, Mexican criminal government, and the Mexican drug traffickers in general. If you want to hold hands, kiss, and what not with theses assholes, pack it up and move to Mexico.
2:46, I don't know what you mean by "pacifist" ... if you don't think the wall works, then what's your beef?
Nothing I've written here advocates being soft on drug traffickers (nor even mentioned the Mexican government). In fact, I've long advocated going after their US-side infrastructure. If you believe the border wall is a waste, then you likely agree we're diverting scarce resources for it from tactics that might actually confront violent drug traffickers. The wall is just for show.
It's not a matter of "holding hands and kissing" with Mexico, just acknowledging reality. The key is identifying the actual source of the problem which, as you implied with your China reference, is mostly at the checkpoints, not in between them.
The fastest way to undermine the sovereignty of a country is to dissolve its borders.
I know it's in your playbook to deny that you are advocating this, but that's exactly what you are pushing.
If you want to claim opposing the border wall (a view shared by Rick Perry, no less) is the same as support for "dissolving" the border, you're entitled to your (bizarre, absurdist, ahistorical) opinion. It doesn't change the fact that the wall was a waste of time, money and was a do-nothing political distraction that did nothing to reduce the influx of drugs from Mexico.
US "sovereignty" is far more endangered by the debt crisis than by any imagined threat from Mexicans.
Anon 04:04... if you're so sure that your ideas are the correct one, please use your real name so you can be called on the carpet properly. Secondly, if you have a disagreement in any form of debate, it helps if you bring facts to the table and not just arm-flinging and Chicken Little antics.
The illicit drug trade in the US is not soley caused by Mexico. Mexico is merely a transport medium. Mexico didn't cause this market. Americans have. And the market is growing. Thailand, Laos, Afghanistan, Columbia, Cuba and a host of others are just as complicit in the supply side. But those damn Mexicans are convenient aren't they? Bullshit. In Mexico most could never afford a car. In the US you could easily afford to get something that runs. Their government relies on a poor economy to subjugate them. Someday they'll realize this and take action. A large part of Mexican citizenry lives in squalor most US citizens wouldn't subject their goats to. But curse them for being next door? Just nuts.
It is bizarre to believe the border is "dissolving." It's still there, but no one respects it anymore. Anyone who wants to just walks across--anytime they want to. It's not dissolving, it just, de facto, serving no purpose.
"Anyone who wants to just walks across--anytime they want to."
You know, 6:54, folks perpetuating these kind of lies is why nativist claims about the border are hard to stomach. It's just not true. Have you ever even been to the border?
Wonder why we (US border) never close our border crossings? Wouldn't that bring Mexico to its knees so to speak?
If their loud mouth president wants to keep blaming the US for their problems lets just close the doors to the US.
2:06, you truly must never have visited the border. Closing the checkpoints would hurt the US - especially Texas - at least as much if not more than it would harm Mexico. You ever heard of "maquiladoras"? Mexico is Texas' biggest trading partner.
Your suggestion would bring the Texas economy to its knees!
Have visited it recently or are you referring to third/fourth hand political rhetoric. Otherwise you would be referring to "maquiladoras" as something that may soon be extinct. Everyday more and more are chaining up the doors and boarding up the windows closing down due to extortion.
Now as for your statement about "...Texas to its knees," now that is just out and out propaganda. It may put a few businesses in a bind that have been using illegal aliens to bypass labor laws. And it may put a few banks under that have been laundering drug money. SO WHAT! Long term benefits will far outweigh the short term set backs. When you say "biggest trading partner" indluding drug trade or excluding drug trade?
The Isreali's seem to have a pretty good handle on securing a border, maybe we should learn from their experience.
Anon... if you really wanna live in a police state, nobody's stoppin' ya from moving to Israel.
D. Reznicek...
If Isreal took the casual ass stance regarding their border like the US does regarding its southern border, there would be no nation of Isreal.
If you think that our law enforcement is corrupt, just take a look at what the Mexican government has become. Mexico is by far more of a "Police State" than Isreal.
Every citizen (not just law enforcement) in Isreal knows how important it is to have a secure border.
"Police State," good grief lets just talk out our ass for awhile.
I would be willing to bet that most of Mexico would gladly live under Isreal's system than the Mexican system.
And therein lies the rub... obviously, Mexico and her citizens DON'T want to live under a system such as what you advocate. If they did, then there would already be that very system set up and running in that nation.
Grits, I'm afraid that we're just getting trolled here.
So, I guess that means that Mexico and her citizens prefer a country high in crime and poverty, and run by drug cartels, right?
Re: Mexico as Texas' biggest trading partner, see here. According to those data, five years ago Mexico accounted for $45 billion in exports from Texas businesses. Today it's certainly higher. Close the border entirely and that revenue vanishes. But please, don't let facts get in the way of your rants.
DR, there's no doubt we're being trolled: Over-the-top, anonymous, fact-free opinions seem to dominate every comment string remotely associated with these topics. C'est la vie.
GFB and DR, are you opposed to the doing business with countries that have no regard for the environment? or that do not utilize fair trade practices?
Keep flattering yourself DR, LOL. "Being trolled..." luring, isn't that really the whole idea behind having a website like this? Or is it simply there for a bunch of suck ups that rarely have an independent thought that differs from the poster.
GFB, Five years ago there was literally little to no violence being extolled on the Mexican people by the drug cartels. Anything reflecting how much business in the last year or so?
How about checking travel statistics and look at how much tourism has absolutely come to a stand still in Mexico within the last two years.
Actually, no, if you have a logical debate that you can actually substantiate with facts, I'd be willing to have a debate/conversation with you. However, as it is now, you have done nothing but throw up talking points and propaganda like they're actual facts. Please reveal to us your resources, not anecdotal data. Oh, and if you would, please reveal to us your name, as well. I've given mine, Grits' is easily looked up. You still haven't shown anything other than that you're a crotchety old bastard who doesn't give a shit for brown-skinned people. Then again, I guess that first round of Prohibition was successful, right? At least, if you're a gangster who made a crap-ton of money and then bought a Congressional seat (Kennedy name sound familiar?). BTW, your violence levels that you state as empirical data (no real data provided) is approximately 40,000 dead, but it wasn't because of the drugs. Anyone with a brain knows it was 'cause Calderon ramped up the drug war with $$ from the Merida initiative. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that minus human interaction, all of these "drugs" that you fear so much don't do much of anything other than react to gravity by sitting on a table; the same as any firearm in any household. I haven't heard you calling for a ban on firearms, and from your arguments, I'm doubtful one would. You've shown to be a hypocritical troll who refuses to name yourself, your sources, or to offer solutions. Yes, that is indeed the definiton of a troll.
...DR you appear to be way over-reliant on spoon fed unreliable liberal bullshit. Try visiting with some of the Mexican families as I have who have experienced the violence firsthand. Don't have a problem with "brown-skinned" people as you have spewed. But I do have a problem with opening the doors of America to the violence that goes hand-n-glove with drug trade. Regardless of the country and regardless of when, always extreme violence surrounding the drug business. But go ahead, roll you a fatboy and headshop talk the matter away citing media propoganda rather than personally eyewitnessing "facts." It is obvious to those of us who have on the ground knowledge of what is going on in Mexico, that your contribution is nothing more than "headshop" rhetoric.
I promise you, if you ever get a chance to hear firsthand from family members, like I did, a weeping account of how their little girl was chained between two cars and pulled apart and left in the street. All because their father refused to pay extortion for his candy shop, who later was shot dead... You will drop all this candy ass political gaming that you so poorly attempt to do. You will suddenly realize it doesn't matter what party you align youself with, this stuff is beyond belief. Yes, I do fear this crap coming across the border because on more than one occasion I personally have seen the lack of regard for human life.
Why do I need to identify myself, if it is debate does the content actually change if you put your name on the billboard?
DWTP
Huh... that's funny. I didn't realize that the Reason Foundation, Rand Institute, and CATO Organization were all "liberal" propaganda machines.... damn, us lying libertarians!! Anyhow, more anecdotes, and still a refusal to admit that you haven't provided a shred of factual evidence that's been documented. Damn that history book, right? And, the next time you wanna try an emotional outcry and plea to me, understand that I'm not the tree-hugger that my family is full of. I've served in various places around the world, including in Thailand when I saw MiGs fly over head and in the "Shock & Awe" assault in Iraq in '03. I'm not some sugar-cookie liberal, but am instead someone who's tired of being lied to by a bunch of moralists. Lemme guess, gonna trot out the one I heard about how there are jobs out there for us veterans when we get discharged, too, right? I bought that one, as well, but not now. I'd like to know how you feel about all of those shoot-outs that Anheiseur-Busch and Miller/Coors get into over who gets to sell beer in Jerry Jones' giant stadium, right? Oh, they don't do that since Prohibition ended? Damn, must not be all of those "evil drugs", after all, right? If you'll excuse me, I'm on my way to class, as I'm attending under the 9/11 GI bill in order to further myself and won't be able to respond until 1700 CST or so.
All you have to ask yourself is would you mind your son or daughter crossing the border for spring break.
Actually, if my hypothetical children (the wife and I don't have any) were to go south of the border after they turn 18, then they're on their own. I'd be upset, but if they make the concious decision as adults to travel someplace that is potentially dangerous, then I'd tell them to be careful. Shit, it isn't like I was only attending the cultural parts of town when I was a young Marine. We knew the risks and accepted them. Even at the age of 16, I was able to accept the responsibility of my actions. If you're concerned about your children being in a situation that they're not mature enough to handle, then keep them close, but don't tell me and mine how to behave simply because you worry about your own.
Half of Arizona has a wall and half doesn't; guess which half gets5 times as much traffic as the other?
Post a Comment