April 19, 2016
Front Page Magazine
The Obama administration's immigration policies, including outrageous executive orders and other such directives, have hobbled all efforts at immigration law enforcement. “Surges” of unaccompanied minors across our nation's southern border, the release of thousands of illegal aliens who have serious criminal convictions – for crimes of violence, including rape, weapons possession, drug offenses and even homicide – have made it clear that the term “immigration law enforcement” is now a virtual oxymoron.
Now the Obama administration, to the consternation of Americans across the United States, is preparing to admit at least 10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States with less scrutiny than ever before. This was the focus of my April 15, 2016 article for FrontPage Magazine, “How Obama's Refugee Policies Undermine National Security: Obama orders 'shields down' in the wake of a succession of deadly terror attacks.”
Furthermore, the huge quantities of heroin and cocaine present in towns and cities across our nation lay waste to the administration’s absurd lie that our borders have never been more secure.
On June 27, 2015, CAPS (Californians for Population Stabilization) posted my article, “Heroin Epidemic: The Real Metric for Determining Border Security.” In my judgment, the failures of our immigration system, while devastating to America and Americans, is actually a twisted “success story” for organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a laundry list of other organizations and individuals that are intent on flooding America with huge numbers of foreign workers, tourists and students to maximize profits at an extraordinary price: obliterating the “American Dream” and even, all too often, costing Americans their very lives.
Clearly the Obama administration has done more than any other administration to undermine the integrity of the immigration system and hobble any efforts at immigration law enforcement. The immigration crisis is a long time in the making. Indeed, prior administrations of both parties also bear responsibility for the immigration crisis that now threatens national security, public safety and the future of our nation and our citizens.
Back on May 5, 2005, I participated in a hearing that was conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims. The topic of the hearing was, “New "Dual Missions" Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.” My prepared testimony for that hearing begins on Page 12 of the transcript of the hearing. What I said then absolutely applies today. I was accompanied at the witness table by three other witnesses: Mr. T.J. Bonner, President, National Border Patrol Council; Ms. Janice Kephart, former September 11 Commission Staff Counsel; and Mr. Richard Stana, Director of Homeland Security and Justice Issues, U.S. Government Accountability.
The hearing was convened approximately 44 months after the attacks of 9/11 to determine how the newly created Department of Homeland Security was dealing with the immigration issue, an issue that was central to the ability of the terrorists to carry out that deadly attack.
The coincidence that we must not ignore is that it took the United States and our allies 44 months after the attack at Pearl Harbor to successfully wage war against the Axis Powers (principally Japan and Germany) to bring that war to a successful end. We must also not lose sight of the fact that the 19 terrorists of the 9/11 attacks inflicted more casualties on the United States mainland than did the entire Japanese navy at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
In response to that attack at Pearl Harbor and to the attacks by the Nazi war machine in Europe, the United States quickly mobilized to join with its allies to defeat our common enemies by building fleets of thousands of a wide variety of aircraft and thousands of ocean-going vessels, including Liberty Ships, battleships, submarines and aircraft carriers. We created brand new weapons systems, including the completion and deployment of nuclear weapons. No task was too daunting for the “Greatest Generation.”
I strongly urge you to watch an excellent documentary, "WW2 from Space HD-Full Documentary" posted by Armed Forces Videos, about the true magnitude of the success America and her allies scored back then.
Now let's contrast the grit and resolve of the Greatest Generation with where we are today and our current “leaders” by considering this statement from Richard Stana's prepared testimony at that hearing:
Our work showed that ICE and CBP have made some progress, but much confusion still exists about roles, mission, responsibilities, performance measures and accountability. Reorganizing the bureaus now before the mission and strategic plans are fully developed and operational could further disrupt the mission and operation of these bureaus. More needs to be done to ensure that each element of the framework is put in place. If it isn't done in proper sequence, mission, then planning, then structure, this could result in a case of ready, shoot, aim.
Now consider the exchange between Congressman Steve King and Mr. Stana:
Mr. KING. And Mr. Stana, you referenced in your testimony that the mission for ICE is national security and not immigration enforcement. And can you reference a policy statement that establishes that?
Mr. STANA. I wouldn't say it is either/or. What I would say would be immigration in the context of national security. I would just reference that to the DHS strategic plans and then the ICE – well, ICE doesn't have a strategic plan in final form yet, but in their interim plans and CBP plans, they mention the nexus to national security. It doesn't preclude immigration efforts.
Mr. KING. And is there any directive on the part of Congress that you know of that DHS would be reacting to in order to promote that kind of a policy, or do you believe that is an internal conclusion?
Mr. STANA. I think what they are doing is taking the mission that was given to them statutorily and interpreting it in that way. I would point out, though, that of all the agencies that are mentioned in the homeland security legislation in 2002, only one was abolished, and that was INS, for whatever reason. And I know some of us have been in hearings for years and years and years, it goes back past the Jordan Commission – talking about how to deal with INS, and apparently one solution was just to dissolve it.