It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mexican Cartel Violence- Congressional Testimony

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Janet Napolitano


Because our border security efforts are inextricably tied to the efforts undertaken by the Government of Mexico, our strategy also focuses on forging unprecedented partnerships with Mexican law enforcement as we work together to combat the shared threats to our mutual security. Mexico, under the strong leadership of President Calderón and his administration, has been conducting a valiant campaign to disrupt and dismantle the drug cartels that pose the threat of cross-border violence. To do our part to address this shared threat, DHS has deployed its resources to maximize the pressure we put on smuggling organizations with the goal of disrupting and dismantling their operations.



Manpower

DHS has put more boots on the ground at the border than ever before. Today, the Border Patrol is better staffed than at any time in its 85-year history, having nearly doubled the number of agents from around 10,000 in 2004 to more than 20,000 in 2009



In the first year of the Southwest Border Initiative, seizures of contraband rose in every major category – cash, drugs, and weapons – compared to the year before, while illegal crossings continued to decline.



The steps we have taken over the last 15 months to bolster security on the Southwest border have put substantial pressure on cartels, making it much more difficult for them to thrive. However, we must also remember that the cartels themselves are adaptive; their tactics evolve in response to our enforcement efforts. This reality means that, for our own part, we must continue to evolve, and that our work is not done.


www.dhs.gov...




posted on May, 20 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Thanks for the update. One section that bothered me is this one:

"Last month, I signed a memorandum of cooperation with both Secretary García Luna and Mexican Interior Secretary Fernando Francisco Gomez-Mont that will enable DHS to electronically share some criminal history information with Mexican law enforcement about Mexican nationals who are being repatriated from the United States and who have been convicted of felonies in the United States – enabling the seamless transmission of vital information regarding possible cartel operatives."


Because sometimes, "some" becomes "just a little more info" and then "all" eventually; we really don't need the cartels via the federales, or Mexican government officials, having complete access to NCIC files.

Here's hoping I am wrong.......and access is carefully monitored and audited on a very routine basis.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by manta78]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by manta78
 


Does seem like a cause for concern.

Maybe electronically share means that DHS will electronically send the files rather than giving them access to the database.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by jam321]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   


Mexico has a fairly large standing army...they are well armed and trained

We beat Mexico in both categories:

US Army - 548,000 Regular, 205,000 Reserve, and 353,000 Army National Guard
US Navy - 332,000 Active, and 67,000 Reserve
US Marine Corps - 203,000 Regular, and 40,000 Reserve
US Air Force - 323,000 Active, 67,000 Reserve, and 107,000 Air National Guard
US Coast Guard - 41,000 Active, and 11,000 Reserve

Mexican Army - 192,000
Mexican Air Force - 11,770 *the air force is a branch of the Mexican Army*
Mexican Navy - 56,000 (inc 20,000 Naval Infantry)
Mexican Federal Police - 10,700 *has military status*

As for training and equipment ... the US military is about 10 x superior. We also have tons of real time combat experience unlike Mexico.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by ChrisF231]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


That would be better, but still opens the door to hackers--who knows, they (cartels) may already have access



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ChrisF231
 


What does the size of the US armed forces have to do with Mexico not using their armed forces to combat the cartels?



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
What a crock. Did you read the part that says; " It may seem counterintuitive, but violence..." means we win!!

What nonsense!! They take all the thousands of murders and claim it means victory!1 I guess a million deaths would mean they are REALLY getting the job done!!

Is it not amazing? The government admits that Prohibition causes multi-thousands of deaths, but tells us that it does NOT mean it is a failed policy...no...it really means that they are WINNING the battle because more deaths mean that more vicious and less civilized people are replacing those busted!! Huh? Can anyone call that insane?

It staggers the mind: The Feds are so boldly twisted in their logic that it insults the intelligence of anyone with a mind. More deaths equals doing a good job....less deaths means they need to change policies a bit until MORE deaths occur...so they can claim they are winning!! it is sick...and anyone that believes that crap either is a Fed or a moron.

" It may seem counterintuitive '...really means: " I know this makes no sense but I am going to say it anyway". It makes you want to strangle every bureaucrat alive for changing good to bad without a hint of guilt.



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Jam, excellent post! S&F.

Not only are the cartels running things on the border, take a look at this interview and see who else they are striking deals with.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Thanks,
Pax



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


=======================================

Jam321 I would like to add this new thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

to your very important thread here, as it gives the official position of the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers, on illegal immigration from the viewpoint of former "insiders" Let me know if any problem with same. Thanks.

]



[edit on 21-5-2010 by manta78]



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Thanks for all the replies.

Like I said before, I agree with the Sheriff about the Merida initiative. I don't think throwing money at Mexico to control or eliminate the cartels is a good idea.

The same thing was done in Colombia and if I am not mistaken they are still a drug producing country.

It is a complex issue and IMO an issue that many politicians don't want to face.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Adding a video to this important thread. Mexico's Drug War 2010 and how mexican cartels are fighting to control the lucrative border routes into the United States: Listen carefully to the general's responses to El Chapo questions by the reporter.


www.youtube.com...



[edit on 23-5-2010 by manta78]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Here's a report entitled: "Backsliding on National Security - The Immigration Connection" by Jack Martin, Director of Special Projects:

It's a long report at 23 pages but this is from the shorter Executive Summary to give you a quick overview:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
"In a public relations campaign that evokes the image of Orwellian “newspeak,” the Department of Homeland Security has announced a long list of accomplishments in improving national security while at the same time it has adopted a number of measures that represent a significant backsliding on national security. If only the rhetoric is heard, the public may think its safety is in good hands. If, however, recent actions concerning the illegal alien population and the flow of foreign nationals into and out of the country are examined, a very different picture emerges. The areas in which rhetoric and action widely diverge include:

A willingness to abandon progress on implementation of a secure identification system based on state-issued driver’s licenses using national standards for verification of "breeder” documents and electronic exchange of information among the states and the federal government.

Restriction of federal-local cooperation in the apprehension of foreigners illegally in the country.

Abandonment of a system to discourage further illegal immigration based on curtailing job opportunities for those in the country illegally.

Pursuit of an amnesty for foreigners illegally in the country which will work at cross purpose to efforts to gain greater border control by deterring illegal immigration. While talking toughness on national security, the Obama Administration appears to give a higher priority to its relationship with narrow political interest groups that it courted in the last election than to reducing the nation’s exposure to the threat of international terrorism. And,while President Obama’s efforts to assure foreigners around the globe that Americans are their friends is commendable, it is no substitute for enhanced homeland
security. If the Obama Administration were seriously interested in advancing national security, it would:

Reverse course and welcome the assistance of local jurisdictions that aggressively identify illegal aliens for deportation.

Push for the E-Verify system to be adopted as a national requirement for all employers and all workers. In the meantime, implementation of the “no-match” letter screening system would represent a significant deterrent to the mass illegal immigration that compromises border security.

Withdraw support for an amnesty for illegal aliens and, thereby, convey the message abroad that the United States is serious about enforcing its immigration laws.

Rapidly pursue implementation of a comprehensive electronic database that matches entry and departure of foreign visitors, and expand the special tracking database for students to include all long-term visitors.

Reverse the recent expansion of the Visa Waiver Program that allows the entry of nationals of 35 countries to enter without consular screening and gradually eliminate it.

Tighten the criteria for admission of nationals of countries with active terrorist organizations in the refugee and asylum programs."


Source:www.fairus.org...





[edit on 26-5-2010 by manta78]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join