Radical Imam Sneaks Into US by Crossing the Border From Mexico

Said Jaziri, paid smugglers in Mexico to get him to the US.

Additional Sources:

DailyMail

PatriotActionNetwork

 

The U.S should give a $50,000 reward to any Mexican that turns in a terrorist trying to come into the U.S... I personally think that is just a diversion, Most of the terrorist enter the U.S from Canada...

 

And to think I almost hired this guy to mow my lawn.

 

I believe that is a myth. While some have entered through Canada, most have entered through the front door. All of the 9/11 hijackers entered with visas.

 

It's no myth, Canada is a safe haven for terrorist... They get fed, housed, medical and kinds of welcome gifts... Canada is too soft when it comes to letting people into the country... I am pretty sure there are many terrorist cells in Canada waiting for the call, so they can enter America... I feel safer with the Mexican border, then I would with Canada's when it comes to terrorist...

 

The Ressam case happened pre-9/11. Canada has since passed legislation similar to the Patriot Act (the Anti-Terrorism Act) that makes it possible for the government to indefinitely hold guys like that until the courts decide what to do with them. Both countries have had screw ups (at least some of the 9/11 hijackers were on the FBI's radar prior to the attacks but they obviously were not monitored closely enough), but I do not see the difference in the way the two countries handle terrorists at the moment. Canada certainly doesn't let risky people roam at large anymore while awaiting refugee status, as evidenced by the hundreds of Sri Lankans who have been detained since arriving in Canada last year on a boat to seek refugee status.

If you're worried about the Canadian boder, what would make sense is a common external border, like the Schengen Area in Europe. Instead of trying to perform the impossible task of policing the longest shared border in the world and negatively affecting both countries' economies, it would make sense to have a uniform external immigration policy, and jointly patrol North America's external border. The resources used to divide the two countries could instead be redirected to ensuring that undesirables do not enter either country.

Regarding your comment about the Mexican border's superior safety when it comes to terrorists, would you camp out in remote territory near the Arizona/Mexican border at night, or in the remote Minnesota/Ontario border at night? I would consider narco-terrorism a form of terrorism...

 

Yah, but how does that help keep GWorld out of the US?

 

Thanks for the update, and I agree a joint border patrol would help, but comparing drug trafficking to religious terrorism is like comparing apples to oranges, when we are talking about bomb plots and attacks... Canada allows its share of ecstasy and prescription drugs through its borders also... A terrorist from Saudi Arabia for example, would stick out like a sore thumb in Mexico, in Canada they would just blend in. For a terrorist to enter the U.S from Canada, would be as easy as crossing the street...

 

While the horse is out of the barn on any undesirables already living in either Canada or the US as far as a future external border goes, it's still true that if we have a common external border with uniform immigration policies, it might keep future GWorlds from even entering a country next to the US.

Just seems more sensible to me to have Canadian/American troops on the American-Mexican border, and patrolling the high seas, than it does to try to shore up the world's longest land border. A joint Canada-US border zone could only be practically entered by airports or seaports, except for the Mexican border, so a joint immigration policy would be easy to enforce and more efforts could be focused on the illegal immigration coming from Mexico.

 

A few points:

-I'm glad you agree with the idea of a joint border patrol. It seems that if we can have NORAD to protect Canadian and American airspace jointly, there ought to be a land-based equivalent.

-I'm not comparing drug trafficking to religious terrorism, but the violence associated with drug trafficking to religious terrorism. I'm fairly certain that the amount of deaths against innocent people resulting from drug gangs in Mexico has outnumbered the deaths caused by religious terrorists in Canada and the United States combined.

-Prescription drugs don't seem like a big threat to me. I don't really see a valuable purpose in using border agents to prevent the flow of drugs which can be legal with a prescription, instead of using those resources to focus on terrorists or people smugglers.

-Ecstasy may be bad, but Mexico is a way bigger drug supplier, with the money going to worse gangs. Also, nothing about Canada's geography promotes the production of ecstasy more than the United States, so I'm not sure that removing the border would cause an increase in the flow of ecstasy to the US.

-In regards to the comments about terrorists from Saudi Arabia going to Canada, I would say that if there were a joint immigration policy like the Schengen Area, that would not be an issue, though I must say that Canadian authorities already take terrorism seriously and have anti-terrorism laws as tough as the American ones. The exact same visa requirements would apply in both countries, so that nobody could enter Canada who could not also enter the United States, and vice versa.

 

To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing Canada,America and even Mexico unite as one like the E.U.... I've heard something about it, but not much... Uniting the 3 countries would go along way in securing north America... We could limit the drugs being brought into the U.S, and make it harder for terrorist to sneak in...

 

Interestingly, it was done once before (between Canada and the US only). See the Jay Treaty of 1794, brought in by George Washington's government.

It wouldn't be anything new. Rather, we would simply be restoring what our relations were prior to the War of 1812. It seems that Canada and the United States have been allied in enough wars since then that we ought to get over the War of 1812.

 

I'm all for it, we could train the Mexicans, and limit the drugs that comes in from there, and bring some stability to that country.... I heard about it on the news, but not much info was given...

 

*jaw drops* wow a debate without insults and name calling .

A few opinions :

- lol at the terrorist in the trunk , i guess you can call him "sharia in a box" , pull the lid and the clown comes out .

- It is not possible under the current conditions for NAFTA to become more E.U. like simply because the U.S. need a brutal crackdown on immigration before it can face closer ties to Mexico . At the moment the bads outweigh the goods and Obama is to busy doing .... something rather then building up the US . We in the E.U. expected the US to upgrade NAFTA to something bigger a at the beginning of the millennium but right now it's nowhere in the foreseeable future .

- The US needs even more security at the borders and a better internal security policy there are a lot of loopholes in the systems , to many one would say .

 

I wouldn't suggest an E.U.-like relationship with Mexico; just Canada and the US. A few reasons:

-Mexico is not in NATO; Canada and the US are
-Canada and the US share a common language
-They share the same English legal system
-Both are safe countries. Mexico is not.
-The border between Canada and the US is the longest in the world and is unlikely to ever be fully sealed, whereas it would be possible to do so with the much smaller, harsher climate Mexican/US border.
-There are other land borders with Mexico from two different countries, and those borders are not well-guarded. There would be no land border with the US/Canada except for Mexico.

Certainly, there's good reason to secure the border with a dangerous country like Mexico, but I think the resources used to put up arbitrary checkpoints along some of the Canadian border while leaving thousands of miles relatively unguarded would be better spent by redirecting them to the Mexican/American border.

I don't think the US/Canadian agreement would require much work to accomplish. A common immigration policy is really the only thing in terms of national security that would be required. Other agreements would probably be a uniform external tarriff, and uniform product marking requirements. Otherwise, I don't see any major steps that need to be taken.

Perhaps an initial step for this would be to remove quotas on both sides of the border for permanent residency applications. I don't see that requiring much more than the stroke of a pen, since the rest of the rules would be maintained.

 

Ya a U.S. Canada union would yeld only benefits from what I can see . Little work to do , the U.S. dollar could replace the CAD and further boost it's value (althou that might give China a weat dream) trade and taxes could get tons better , Canada would benefit from the USes pitbull attitude and the liberals could take lessons from Canada . Maybe your next president could lay the basis for that to happen .

 

The US and Canada don't need to give up their sovereignty to run joint defense operations, but I do like the idea of saving money on government expenses where possible. It would be nice to be able to talk about Mexico the way we talk about Canada but they are a long, long, long way off. In the lawless south of the country, it is the police and the army that do a lot of the raping and killing. Extortion by cop, even in D.F., is still a very common occurrence. To have an entirely open relationship with a country, you have to be on a similar socio-economic footing.

 

Reverse the Situation

What about when the US sneaks agents to a foreign soil ?

 

All countries do that , they are called embassy attaches .

 

Many interesting thoughts in this thread, I've really enjoyed reading the comments. I'm not exactly sure what the current level of cooperation is between the US and Canada in protecting the border. However, I did find this - Smart Border Declaration