Congresswoman: Three Al Qaeda Caught in U.S. After Crossing Border with Mexico

Wednesday, November 9, 2005 | Kristinn

[kristinn]

Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) let slip a bombshell disclosure at a news conference today to announce a bill targeting states that allow illegal aliens to get drivers licenses.

During the Q&A with reporters, Myrick gave as a reason for proposing the bill the recent capture of three al Qaeda terrorists at the U.S.-Mexico border.

A check of Google News turned up no references to this incident, yet Myrick stated this was a 'given fact.'

No reporter asked her about this revelation, but it was noted at the end of a Charlotte Observer article by Tim Funk.

Two Representatives from North Carolina, Virginia Foxx (R) and Patrick McHenry (R) stood with Myrick at the press conference. Neither commented on her matter of fact statement.

Rep. Myrick's remarks can be heard online at her Congressional Website here. the statement is made at about 8:45 into the press conference.

A call placed to Myrick's office in D.C. was not answered as the office is closed for the evening.

Transcript:

"Our main concern is, who's in our state? I mean this is a critical issue today. I mean they just arrested down on the border, what a couple of weeks ago, three al Qaeda members who came across from Mexico into the United States. I mean that's a given fact. They were holding them in the jail down there."

[trubluolyguy]

Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) let slip a bombshell disclosure at a news conference today to announce a bill targeting states that allow illegal aliens to get drivers licenses.

---

Someone's going to be in trouble with the OBLoonies

[hosepipe]

[ During the Q&A with reporters, Myrick gave as a reason for proposing the bill the recent capture of three al Qaeda terrorists at the U.S.-Mexico border. ]

How do you tell an Al Queda muslim from a non AQ muslim.?..
No doubt many travel the Canadian border regularly..

Mexican insurgents are coming over the mexican border not Al Queda ones and thats the problem.. Terrorists have enough money they can fly in from about anywhere.. Muslim insurgents and Mexican insurgents are two different problems.. Mixing them is disinformation..

Any that say Mexican insurgency is no problem.. is a problem..

[nicmarlo]

Or the jails, Czar....the Imams (I believe the Hamas kind) have been proselitizing the jailed criminals for years into Muslim.

[NewJerseyJoe]

I refuse to believe this. As we all know, the open border with Mexico is not a problem or security threat in any way whatsoever. Guv'mint would have done something if it were.
</sarcasm off>

[Guenevere]

bttt

[Thombo2]

It's great we caught 3 terrorist's,but i'm worried about the one's we didn't get.

[COEXERJ145]

You are aware, aren't you, that the nineteen hijackers who murdered 3,000 innocent Americans were here legally.

Don't bring facts to threads like this. Those obsessed with the border don't really care about facts. The entire thread is proof since as far as anyone can tell, what the woman said could easily be totally bogus. (If it was true, we'd be hearing the moron Tancredo screaming about it 24/7 and calling for the President's head.)

[devolve]

[jdm]

For those on dial-up who want to hear Myrick's comments, here's a 22 second snippet.

[Chena]

Perhaps if in one of your posts to me you had simply stated that you are FOR securing our borders, then I would not have misunderstood your position on the matter.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

This is news to whom? There have been AQ people picked up in Harlingen and Brownsville. ICE is the most corrupt federal organization there is.

[ozarkgirl]

By the TSA? Are you kidding me? And believe me it won't be that hard to get someone through that we have NO clue about either.

So, if you were a terrorist, what would be your plan? I stick by my plan. Before you answer, please remember someone who was on the "no fly list" had a plane diverted to Canada and all kinds of hoopla before they were allowed to come to even cross over the continent on their way to Mexico. That was within the last 8 months. I do realize as a no-name jihadist I might have a good chance to fly and actually land.

[MikefromOhio]

So, if you were a terrorist, what would be your plan?

Depends on my personnel, my desperation level, the amount of cash I have access too, what I want to accomplish; that is a very loaded question.

[TaxRelief]

The Charlotte Observer article and thread is posted here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1519066/posts

[Chena]

Hi Stingy Dog. Apparently, RedBloodedAmerican is not against securing our borders. His posts left quite a different impression, but he posted this comment to me. "If you think I am "arguing against" securing borders, well, there you go again. See ya, no time for you."

[Stellar Dendrite]

FOLKS!!

Nothing to see here, move along!

[Deo volente]

Hugh Hewitt just mentioned this story on his radio show. He couldn't believe that nobody followed up on the Congresswoman's startling assertion.

He said it's either a blockbuster news story, or an urban myth. He's trying to find out whether it's true.

Stay tuned.

[burzum]

When we fought WWII we fought the axis power on the land, on the sea, and in the air. We fought them in Africa and Italy, and France, in the Pacific Rim, etc. We fought them where we could find them and we defended ourselves from every possible means of attack. Just because the Japanese attacked our fleet at Pearl Harbor didn't mean that the protection of naval bases was the only priority in the war.

This is the War on Terrorism. They've done their Pearl Harbor attack. We've set up defenses against another WTC airliner attack. We've also beefed up our identification of terrorists. Terrorists may not be able to fly to the US to prepare for attacks now. Things have changed since 9/11 and we need to defend ourselves. There are significant advantages from invading from Mexico. #1 is that terrorists can bring in hardware (something they would have to acquire in the US instead) from Mexico (and don't doubt that it exists--the drug war has shown that to be false). #2 is that terrorists can bring in their terrorist specialists (who are more likely to be IDed and banned from airports). A major terrorist operation is like a military operation. It requires a division of roles to be effective.

Lets not be tunnel sighted and only focus on the last type of attack. We need to be prepared for the next type of attack: think boxing.

[NewJerseyJoe]

Time to dust off an idea I had suggested once before (below):

---

I support Dubya on almost all issues, but disagree with him completely on this one. [viz., militarizing the border: 9/27/04] The U.S. definitely needs a new way to combat this. I've had sketchy ideas of how this could work, and my ideas are something like this:

1. Continuous electronic surveillance of our borders with a fleet of UAVs using our Predator-style technologies. Different types of modified Predators could be deployed to seek different things: infrared (heat), motion, etc.
2. Establishment of a new military sector consisting of rapid deployment border enforcement personnel. This could be divided into four sectors (northern border, southern border, coastal, arctic); each would train differently to deal with the different terrains and climates.
3. Establishment of high-tech military bases located at periodic intervals along the borders – perhaps every 75 miles. (If there is an existing military base in the general area, a portion of it could be set aside for these new units.) The personnel from #2 would be based here and equipped with fast helicopters to allow for rapid deployment to incursion areas (monitored by #1).
4. Staffing: personnel could be volunteers from all branches of the DoD, or recruited from the services to apply for training. Personnel in this billet could be rotated every 6 or 12 months, to get cross-training in the other areas of defending our borders.

Just an idea.

[nicmarlo]

cool...let us know! thanks.