Insecure Borders: Let’s Give Blame Where Blame Is Due

There is only one person who has the power actually to do something about the egregious state of our immigration law enforcement and lack of border controls. As FSM Contributing Editor Peter Gadiel charges, that person is the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

For five years, members of 9/11 Families for a Secure America have lobbied in Washington and in many state capitols for immigration law enforcement and secure borders. The opponents of our goals are many throughout Congress and elsewhere, but during this period the most powerful of them has been that individual with the sole authority to require the federal government to enforce these laws and who, by his refusal to do so, has made that government a co-conspirator in undermining the security of this Nation. That person is of course, George Bush.

As chief of the Executive Branch he has under the Constitution not only the sole power but the duty to enforce the laws of our country, a duty he refuses to honor. He thumbs his nose at the obligations imposed on him by the Constitution, which, in the name of the God he claims to worship, he has sworn to uphold. Since the people of the United States have no recourse through the court system to make him enforce the law, he alone has the power to decide that illegal aliens will be permitted to prey on Americans, and he has made that decision.

The harm that George Bush has done to this country is seen by many but felt most severely by those who have been the victims of crimes committed by illegal alien criminals, many of whom, after all, are in the United States due to Bush’s refusal to enforce federal laws already on the books.

The president’s efforts to undermine the collective security of the Nation and the individual security of citizens have caused many to ask: “Why does Bush allow illegal aliens, every one a law breaker, to enter the United States freely? Why does he refuse to enforce existing law and to allow terrorists, violent felons and drug smugglers full access to their intended American victims? Why does he continuously ignore the Constitution and the oath he swore to uphold it? Why doesn’t he care about Americans suffering as a result of depressed wages and working conditions, or about the Americans who have been the victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens?”

Each time I speak with a person whose family has been shattered by the violent act of an illegal alien, an illegal who almost invariably has had numerous previous encounters with the law, I wonder anew what kind of man it is who occupies the White House and tolerates, and by that tolerance encourages, these crimes. What kind of man is this who lifts not a finger to acknowledge his role in these acts of violence and refuses to take action to prevent future crimes?

I have been meeting such victims and families for almost six years. As time passes I’ve grown more disturbed by what the Bush malfeasance indicates about his character. In part this is so because I meet ever more victims and see the list of victims grow longer. But there is another list that is also growing and this too affects my view of the man: the number of elected officials I have spoken with who, because of their positions in the government, have had one-on-one conversations with the president and who insist he is fully aware of the crimes inflicted by his illegal alien friends. There was a time when I gave Mr. Bush the benefit of the doubt; I believed he was insulated from the facts…that he didn’t know what was happening in the states. But now I grasp the truth: He does know. He doesn’t care: What kind of man must this be?

Shortly after September 11, I began encountering 9/11 family members who were convinced that George Bush had had advance knowledge of this conspiracy and that for his own purposes he refused to interfere. Vehemently, I disagreed for two reasons. First, I did not believe that George Bush would intentionally allow thousands of Americans to die. Second, I believed that the incompetence of our government was so highly perfected that it would be impossible to keep secret for very long the fact that officials had advance knowledge of such a catastrophic event.

Today, I have had over five years’ experience in meeting with bureaucrats and members of Congress. I’ve read Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports; transcripts of Congressional Committee hearings and testimony; the 9/11 Commission Report and its associated documents; reports produced by private think tanks and individual experts on crime, immigration and national security. These have confirmed my judgment that our government is staffed by so many individuals who are incompetent or corrupt that it is insane to believe that a secret such as advance knowledge of 9/11 could remain a secret six years after the event. (The 9/11 Commission, in an exquisite formulation of words succeeded in describing and excusing the pervasive incompetence and negligence of federal officials with the phrase “a failure of imagination.”)

But as to George Bush (and many other elected officials and bureaucrats) I have come to realize my original appraisal was wrong. His actions since 9/11 have, for me, established that he lacks concern for the lives of individual Americans. Three thousand people died on 9/11, but since that day far more than three thousand have been killed, individually or in small groups, by illegal aliens. And still he refuses to enforce the laws that would end the killing. Thousands of Americans have been killed in intentional murders, or as ‘by-products’ of robberies, rapes, beatings or auto accidents caused by drunken illegals driving automobiles. Thousands more lives have not been ended but have nevertheless been shattered by acts of violence short of murder, such as child molestation. (The Bush Administration makes a proper accounting of these crimes impossible by virtue of its refusal to require local police to inquire into the illegal status of those arrested.)

That George Bush’s refusal to enforce the laws of this Nation has been the direct cause of these Americans’ death and suffering is simply beyond dispute. He and the Tony Snows and Michael Chertoffs he hires can protest all they want about the “impossibility” of securing our borders. He and they can pretend to be merely incompetent for only so long before Americans wake up and realize they’re not just incompetent, they are misrepresenting the truth.

To the many who wonder why Bush is doing what he’s doing, I offer some advice. For a long time I wondered too. Finally, I realized the futility of spending another moment on this imponderable. The reason why doesn’t matter. The fact that it is so is all that matters. But for those who need to have an answer as to the ‘why’ of the Bush actions I suggest you look at the motives of others who have betrayed our country: ideology, revenge, greed.

One or more of these pretexts must be what Bush employs in his own mind to justify his tolerance of violence and death. In that sense he is undoubtedly conventional, typical of his breed. But in one respect Mr. Bush has carved out a place that is unique among corrupt politicians. In his obsession to pass his amnesty, a major tool in the permanent elimination of our borders, he offered what amounted to a bribe, in public, to members of the US Senate, telling them that if they would vote for his amnesty bill he would provide 4.5 billion dollars to build the border fence that a 2005 federal law he signed required to be built. In those two years Mr. Bush has managed to get only a few miles of that fence built, but suddenly he saw that enforcement of this federal law could be used as a payoff to be offered to Senators to vote for his amnesty. Presto, he promises to come up with four and a half billion to build it.

Of course Mr. Bush is far from the first politician to engage in illegal or immoral behavior. But it is customary for politicians to try and keep their corruption a secret. For example, Boss Tweed of New York; Sen. Tom Dodd (father of the current Sen. Dodd) of Connecticut, Ted Kennedy. These bribe takers, philanderers, drunk drivers and lady killers at least tried to keep their crimes hidden from the public. As reprehensible as they were or are, they at least comprehended that their actions deviated from the norm and felt sufficient concern for public opinion that they didn’t want their crimes exposed. Mr. Bush appears to be unique in this regard, for either he lacks awareness that his behavior is wrong, or his contempt for the people of the United States is so absolute that he is doesn’t care that we see him offering bribes.

Naturally, when corrupt politicians are discussed Bill and Hillary Clinton cannot be ignored: Whitewater; cattle futures; Travelgate; Vince Foster; pardons for Susan McDougal, Puerto Rican terrorists, and Marc Rich; questioning the meaning of the word “is.” We also cannot forget that for eight years prior to September 11, while Moslem terrorists escalated their attacks against the United States these co-Presidents successfully schemed to avoid dealing with terrorism by sweeping it under the rug for their successor. These are the two who paved the way for September 11 by their refusal to respond with sufficient force to the numerous terrorist acts that occurred during their presidency: the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the embassy bombings, the Mogadishu atrocities, the bombing of the USS Cole, etc. By their inaction they encouraged and permitted the growth of the power of binLadin. Ultimately, the greatest responsibility for September 11 lies not with Bush but with the Clintons.

Yet it is George Bush who has been in office for six years after the murders of 3000 on 9/11. It is he who has been president since then as crimes by illegals have killed thousands more. It is possible to excuse the inaction of the Clintons as opportunistic passing of the buck to their successor in the White House. But George Bush cannot claim that excuse. The resulting damage was obvious for all to see. He cannot claim ignorance. He cannot avoid his guilt. Yet, he marches on, completely dismissing the blood that is spilled and the pain that results from his refusal to act.

It is useless to speculate about “why” he permits these crimes. So to those who continue to wonder, my advice is: don’t waste another moment of thought on the matter. Use your energy to contact your members of Congress, your governor, state legislators. Then contact them again, and then again. Educate your friends and enlist them in the cause of immigration reform.

Elected officials do respond to pressure from constituents. You have power, but only if you use it by communicating repeatedly with them. The richly funded campaigns of LaRaza, Chamber of Commerce, Ford Foundation, bankers, lawyers, et al., to open our borders succeed precisely because they make themselves heard while others remain silent. Your silence in the face of their campaigns is as powerful an ally of the open borders lobby as the open borders lobbyists themselves. So, make yourselves heard. You have a voice. Use it.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Peter Gadiel is the president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America. He is a lifelong Republican who voted for George Bush in 2000.

The one sure fire way to expand an economy is to expand the gross number of people. Remember that Bush inherited a poor economy, so it was imperative to open up all channels of investment - including illegal immigration. Once 9/11 occurred, they simply accelerated the process by essentially turning a blind eye to the border.

According to the President of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, the economy in February 2001 was "It’s hard to find a word to sum up the U.S. economy’s performance during this expansion. Remarkable? Astounding? Phenomenal? Well, it has been all that–and more."

According to him, the period between 1991 and 2000 was the longest expansion in U.S. history. The previous five years had a real GDP of over 4 percent. The fed started raising interest rates in 1999 to slow the growth of the economy to control inflation.

Where did you read that Bush inherited a poor economy?

He violated his oath of office to protect America from invasion.

Then so did Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton (and other Presidents before them).

He has ruined every chance he had to make his legacy great.

Reagan gave amnesty to the illegals. Do you consider his legacy to be ruined or great?

He didn't create the "problem" with AQ, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't address it.

Agreed. Same could be said for former Presidents, but they didn't address it either. In fact, Reagan granted amnesty to illegals - and look at the place he holds in the hearts of conservatives.

His failure to secure our borders, including setting in place a system to track and deport visa overstays, violates the responsibilities of his office

Then I guess Reagan violated the responsibilities of his office as well. . .right?

I'm not saying the problem shouldn't be addressed. I have worked hard at trying to bring this issue to the attention of the President and my Congress critters. But Bush didn't start this problem, and he's not the only President that did things to make the problem worse. And yet, he seems to be getting all the blame from some here on FR, and that's just silly.

Then I guess Reagan violated the responsibilities of his office as well. . .right?

Yes, his granting of amnesty was a mistake and his failure to secure our borders afterwards helped create the current problem of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. The big difference is 9/11, which has raised the importance of this issue to a different level. We suffered more casualties on 9/11 than we did during Pearl Harbor.

But Bush didn't start this problem, and he's not the only President that did things to make the problem worse. And yet, he seems to be getting all the blame from some here on FR, and that's just silly.

9/11 changed the equation. Four of the 9/11 hijackers were visa overstays, i.e., illegal aliens. We still have not established a system to track down and deport visa overstays. And the FBI has apprehended ME terrorists coming across the Mexican border. If this country is hit again with a 9/11 scale attack and it is found that they were visa overstays or entered illegally from Mexico or Canada, then the President must accept the blame. It has been almost 6 years since 9/11 and we still have not secured our borders.

While Bush didn't actually create the problem he has acted to make it much, much worse.

So did Reagan - he granted amnesty to illegals which contributed greatly to opening the floodgates.

It is this act which is most directly responsible for the all-out assault on our borders and the sub-prime lending debacle currently unfolding.

I believe it all started with Reagan's granting of amnesty.

No president before him has done more to sell out America than George W. Bush.

I disagree. I think the granting of amnesty by Reagan played a huge role in the problem we have today.

I think Reagan was one of our greatest Presidents, but his granting of amnesty was the biggest mistake he made. Interesting that I never see anyone on FR carrying on about that.

There have been terror attacks for a long time. 9/11 wasn't the first.

If you believe that 9/ll was just another attack in a long series of attacks, you are living on a different planet. We suffered more casualties than at Pearl Harbor and it was on our home territory, not on a possession as wads the case of Pearl Harbor or the Japanese attacks on Alaska. If this nation is hit again by a terrorist WMD attack, i.e., nuclear, biological, or chemical, then Bush will be responsible, not Reagan.

So did Reagan - he granted amnesty to illegals which contributed greatly to opening the floodgates.

Not only did he cave to big-business and liberal democrats like Ted Kennedy, Reagan also dropped the ball on enforcement. Gee, what a surprise? The GOP refuses to enforce the law. This is news?

But, Reagan didn't sign an agreement with Mexico to formally encourage illegal immigration as Bush has done. Reagan didn't bring banks together with the Mexican government by placing bank employees in Mexican consulates (in Mexico) to guide the potential border-jumpers on how to obtain US bank accounts, auto and home loans. Reagan didn't change the banking rules to allow these border-jumpers to obtain US bank accounts, auto home loans using only a Matricular Consular card for ID and an income tax return as proof of employment. In Reagan's time, one needed a valid SSN to obtain a (legal) job, bank account or loan. Thanks to Bush, this has changed.

Neither did Reagan sign a Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico that gives Mexican illegal aliens and their families back home access to US Social Security benefits for the time they worked illegally in the USA.

Reagan also didn't order the border patrol to stand down on internal enforcement as Bush has done.

I disagree. I think the granting of amnesty by Reagan played a huge role in the problem we have today.

Okay. Reagan started it. Bush made it worse. Happy now?

Interesting that I never see anyone on FR carrying on about that.

What has Bush done to reverse what Reagan did wrong? The answer is 'nothing'.

The real question is when are you going to start holding Bush responsible for his actions instead of excusing them simply because Reagan did it first?

Back then it wasn’t the all consuming issue it is now.

Perhaps, but the amnesty he granted played a huge role in making it the all consuming issue that it is now.

He had his hands full bringing down the Soviets and undoing the damage to the economy of the carter years with a demon666rat dominated congress behaving badly as ever.

Bush has his hands full with 9/11, fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, dealing with a downed plane in China, dealing with N. Korea, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, fighting to keep the tax cuts againsts the Dems, fighting against the Dems to keep our soldiers funded, fighting for nominees he's named for various posts, etc etc etc. Presidents are always busy. Doesn't excuse Reagan's error in granting amnesty.

Tell that to the thousands of American victims of illegal alien drunk driving, murder, rape, robbery, burglary, shootings, drug smuggling, fraud, etc over the past 6 years.

Those things occurred before Bush took office as well. If you want to fault Bush on this issue, then you must also fault Reagan and Bush Sr. (Reagan especially, since he granted the amnesty which played a big role in the increase in illegal immigration.)

The big difference is 9/11, which has raised the importance of this issue to a different level.

There were terror attacks both here and abroad before Bush took office. Also, Reagan had the issue of Russian spys who would have liked nothing better than to harm the U.S. because of the pressure Reagan was putting on the USSR. So he had real reason to close the border - but didn't.

9/11 changed the equation.

Meaning Bush gets all the blame that should be shared by former Presidents?

Four of the 9/11 hijackers were visa overstays, i.e., illegal aliens.

Yep. And people overstayed their visas under former presidents as well.

By the way, your comment implies that the other hijackers were legal immigrants. So what is your proposal there - stop all legal immigration as well?

We suffered more casualties than at Pearl Harbor

Yep, we did - primarily because the buildings collapsed. I'm not making light of 9/11, but we've had other terrorist attacks. It is only by the grace of God we haven't had more casualties during those attacks.

If this nation is hit again by a terrorist WMD attack, i.e., nuclear, biological, or chemical, then Bush will be responsible, not Reagan.

If the people who do it are citizens, then what? Would you still blame Bush? If so, why?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.