The following was the summary statement from a report generated by the
staff of US Representative Charlie Norwood, converted from a PDF located
at http://www.minutemanhq.com/pdf_files/norwood_minuteman_report_61705.pdf
Rescuing America from Cultural Disaster
Frederick A. Peterson III, JD
The tide of illegal crossings on the Borders of
the United States is beyond unsatisfactory;
it is catastrophic. It does not ebb and flow -
it only grows. Mass illegal migration is not 'controlled'
except as a raging surf is controlled. It is
rising without measure and eroding the very fiber
of our safety, life and culture. Its contribution
to the economy is illusory: it in fact robs opportunity
for upward growth from our own citizens while
it rewards lawlessness and economic dislocation.
On the human side of the issue, mass illegal migrations
are not at all humane. On the contrary, a policy
which encourages death by thirst, snake or scorpion bite,
or hunger in the desert is cruel and disgusting.
Only the most childish -- or cynical -- moral myopia could
define such a policy as 'humanitarian' when in fact it
serves only the crassest of selfish economic interests
of a greedy few.
Such [a] virtually open border fills our prisons,
feeds drug habits, fattens gangs and dealers in
human cargo, and are fraught with daily human tragedy
of face-in-the-sand death in the desert. It happens daily.
The dying moans of 'shirtless ones with dreams'
are not heard in the salons of the open border humanitarians
who posture as moral superiors and neglect the
very real consequences of their flip irresponsibility.
As we wage the War on Terror in foreign lands,
we have all our doors and windows open at home as
more than 10,000 a day scamper aboard ...
the insanity of such a policy, or silent toleration
of such a policy is almost criminal in itself.
The Minuteman Project demonstrated that
illegal immigration on America's southern border
can be dramatically reduced to manageable levels.
What is missing is not the means to control;
it is the Will. With a Will, there IS a way ...
It also demonstrated that 'Border-Watch Volunteers',
properly selected, instructed, screened and supervised,
can perform a significant role in reducing
illegal border crossings. Such citizen-volunteer
border security thus may contribute measurably
to the internal security and territorial integrity
of the United States.
Approximately 900 total volunteers participated in
the Project over the 30-day period. An estimated
125-450 volunteers were actively involved
in the Project at any given time.
Volunteers functioned in observation-constabulary role,
without arrest powers.
Minutemen volunteers paid all their own expenses,
received no pay, and were drawn from all regions
of the country. Marginal volunteers were
denied participation in the project.
Some volunteers were lightly armed (legally
licensed handguns only) and carried such arms
under strict rules of safety and engagement
which prohibited un-holstering except
when lives were threatened. Any violation of rules was
cause for immediate expulsion from the Project.
The cost of background checks and screenings
were also borne by the volunteers themselves.
At no time during this observation did either
of the delegation observe any behavior or expression
which was racial, violent, threatening, or
disrespectful to migrants. Rather, compassion
was demonstrated on several occasions,
and the law was respected.
Daily scheduled and non-scheduled press briefings,
interviews, radio broadcasts, internet postings etc.,
were conducted for myriad local, state, national
and international media. The management of
this press deluge was a Herculean task and
handled with surprising competence and
without evident conflicts. The press was generally respectful
and much of it supportive in private comments.
Volunteers received approximately two days training
before active duty assignment. Trainers included
Minuteman Project leadership and experts
in various aspects of assignment; border briefings,
situation reports, communications, security,
Rules of Conduct and Engagement, etc. Special attention
was given throughout the training and during deployments
to strictly forbid any hostile, provocative,
confrontational behavior toward migrants,
law enforcement authorities, media, or protestors.
Many volunteers were former military veterans, police,
fire service, EMS, and retired government employees.
Others were business people, technicians, and
tradesmen representing a full range of civilian employment.
Virtually all volunteers were mature adults. Some had
law enforcement training. All races were represented
among the volunteers. Operational organization
was military in nature, and overseen by decorated
military veterans.
Based on field observations, the Minuteman Project
accomplished this demonstration through deployment
of 6-20 or more volunteers per border mile, day and night,
at an unsustainable tempo, and with conditions
that artificially amplified the impact of Project volunteers.
Volunteers all had radio communications and
were deployed in teams - none were assigned alone.
The Project became a magnet for attention from
law enforcement, Border Patrol, media and protestors.
Therefore, wherever the Project was, -- day or night --
there was noise, attention, activity. Noise and
light discipline at night was non-existent. The consequence
was reduced activity in that area. Yet reports were
rampant that migrant activity was building up
on the Mexican side of the border as a result of the
'presence' and that there was an organized effort
to shuttle around the Minutemen.
Federales were deployed on the Mexican side -- in
numbers more than a thousand -- and logistics assistance
was being provided to migrants directly by the Federales.
There also was an artificially large and responsive
federal presence of assets within the Project sector.
Border Patrol from throughout the West were TAD
to the sector; additionally, Forest and Parks Service,
BLM, and other assets were TAD for 30 days to the sector.
This uncommonly large presence contributed to the
reduction of pressure at the Project site. Yet,
unconfirmed reports alleged increased activity
to the East and West. A FOIA inquiry regarding
personnel assignments and re-assignments within this area
should be instructive.
A successful permanent replication of the Minuteman Project
would reasonably require an average 12 -24 enforcement
personnel per mile, or around 36,000 - 72,000
total additional personnel and their support infrastructure
to adequately secure the southern border. As the 'pressure'
varies with geography, these personnel would
not be static but responsive to technical detection
of border breach as well as direct observation.
Technology can be far better employed to give a
more timely alert and response to border violations and
can result in a more efficient employment of manned assets.
Tactical and small unit UAVs can be particularly useful
to border patrol. Interviews conducted at Ft. Huachuca
discussed current technologies with great promise
in border monitoring, such as long line acoustic monitors, etc.
Technology proved to be a liability and well as an asset
in the observations of the authors. Many false positive
trips of ground sensors -- likely caused by media,
ACLU and other activists, and curious random visitors --
allegedly caused mis-deployment of Border Security assets.
The issue of 'false positives' was also used in
an attempt to discredit the Volunteers by media
and spokesmen for the Border patrol. Rank and file
Border Patrol had no such complaints and to the contrary
expressed uniformly warm gratitude and support
for the Volunteers. The uniforms were, however,
strictly instructed not to discuss their missions
or the success of the Project with the media and
to avoid contact interaction with the Minutemen. ...
Another interesting FOIA?
A disturbing major gap in Border security was surprisingly
found at the U.S Army border base at Ft. Huachuca, AZ.
This huge base of over 150 square miles is home of
the primary Army Intelligence School, and houses
technical intelligence research and development facilities.
The Base and its rugged terrain is a major trafficking route
for both drugs and illegal immigrants. Large groups,
sometimes 20-30, frequently walk through
occupied base housing areas, drink from garden hoses
and pools, and look for food.
There is seldom a timely response by Border Patrol
when these almost routine intrusions occur and
almost never a military response. No Volunteers
were permitted to enter the base. Military personnel
were ordered not to participate in the Minuteman Project.
The Ft. Huachuca problem is stunning in
its potential liability and lack of command attention
to even rudimentary perimeter integrity. Who is responsible
for this turf? Border Patrol has free access to
this military base and patrols on horseback.
But who would be help responsible for a tragic incident
'passing through' a major military installation?
A 'suitcase nuke' or terrorists could successfully traverse
a major Army Base and easily end up taking
a million American lives in Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta,
New York -- or Washington, DC -- with barely a risk of detection.
The Ft. Huachuca Command has devoted a grand total of
F-O-U-R enlisted personnel to perimeter security,
(say, 40 miles of rugged terrain each, 24/7!) and these
share duty with environmental protection --
amazingly, their primary assignment. They have
very limited assets (no ATV's, no air assets, no UAVs)
and carry only 9mm pistols - unloaded.
An aerostat -- a tethered blimp above the base --
has only air detection and NO look-down capability,
although it would be an ideal platform for
detecting ground movement or employing new technologies.
Due to winds its eyes are 'down' about half the time.
In spite of the Project's successes, unauthorized
'citizen volunteer' organizations such as
the Minuteman Project are potentially dangerous
and legally problematic. Certainly, they are not a
'first resort'- although many participants live
on the front line - they consider themselves as a
'last resort' to a government which has knowingly
and willfully abdicated its responsibility
to enforce its own laws, to the liability and
life of its own citizens.
Physical injury to migrants, or among volunteers themselves,
violence, and political border incidents were
avoided only through the exceptional leadership
exhibited by Minutemen Project leaders. The initial
high caliber and total mission dedication of
volunteer personnel the organization was able to field
for a limited 'demonstration' deployment
may not be replicated in subsequent operations.
Powerful, vigorous, skilled and well-funded opposition
to Minuteman volunteers are determined to mitigate
the effect of the volunteer border security concept
as Minutemen threaten to succeed in impeding free flow
across the borders. The ability and commitment
to maintain high standards over time cannot be assured
over time with an unpaid, transient, volunteer
organizational structure.
Inappropriate behavior and unfortunate reaction
under stress occur in the most highly trained
military organizations and have occurred in
virtually every police department in every major city.
It is far more likely to happen among volunteers
of necessity, sooner rather than later.
It is almost inevitable.
Yet, what is most evident is this:
that government must take up and wear
the primary responsibilities that accompany
its lawful authority. It is charged with both.
Or, in its abdication, it risks losing both
its responsibility and its authority.
Congress and the states could sustain the success
of the Minuteman Project with immediate provision
of an adequate number of lawfully authorized
auxiliary border enforcement personnel,
charged with similar light-armed constabulary duties,
and in coordination with and in support of the Border Patrol.
Command and Control should remain separate,
and community involvement encouraged. This could be
achieved through a combination of means,
some of which have been prototyped and already exist
within the states.
Congress or the President should provide for
immediate deployment of the National Guard
to secure the Borders. This initiative should be
fully funded and deployments should be coordinated
with the Border Governors.
In the alternative, Homeland Security Grants for
authorized State Defense Forces to assist the Border Patrol
should be authorized and fully funded. An added advantage
of State Defense Forces is that they already exist,
they are America's official Title 32 "reserve to the reserve"
dedicated strictly to homeland security duty, and
would eliminate further strain on our heavily-deployed
National Guard. SDFs are low cost, legal and effective,
and a pool of already-trained talent. California, New Mexico,
and Texas already maintain active State Defense Forces
that are fully capable of providing the field service
demonstrated by the Minutemen, but with full
legal authorization and in total coordination with
state and federal agencies including the
Department of Homeland Security.
In addition, there is no reason the remaining 20
State Defense Forces could not be placed on loan
for this mission at the discretion of their respective governors.
This provides access to roughly 14,000 troops immediately
in support of our Border Patrol, without affecting
our warfighting capacity. In addition, with even
minimal federal support, these forces could easily be
expanded to their World War II levels approaching
250,000 personnel.
The U.S. Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol could also
be utilized for aerial observation support. This would
provide access to the 64,000 volunteers currently
enrolled in CAP, and work as a powerful force multiplier
by the fact aerial observation can replace many foot patrols.
Volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary and
Title 10 Naval Militias could similarly be employed
to provide both equipment and manpower support on rivers
and in coastal areas.
Lastly, Congress could provide additional federal
homeland security support for local law enforcement
and sheriff's department auxiliaries to assist the U.S.
Border Patrol.
The primary impetus to stimulate the Minuteman Project is
a Border Out of Control; not for months, not for years,
not just since 9/11, but for many, many years.
Social and legal costs and cultural cohesion
far outweigh supposed economic benefit. At a time
of terror threat, the cost of irresponsibly
unsecured borders can be horrific.
The need -- and responsibility to act -- is immediate.
Therefore, the First Measure of any solution must be
-- as in a first aid emergency -- to Stop the Bleeding.
Yet, out-of-control illegal migration to the United States
is only part of a much larger problem:
United States Immigration and Acculturation Policy.
Such policy has not been revisited in forty years.
It is the opinion of the staff that the Minuteman Project
has attracted 'critical mass' to this issue.
Comprehensive Congressional legislation is
as needed to cure the patient as
Stopping the Border Bleeding is necessary
to save its life.
Legislative Recommendations:
1. Stop the Bleeding
a. First Priority: Preserve, Protect, Defend
and Reclaim the Legal Border of the United States
-- NOW!
b. Empower, Fund and Incentivize Border State
Governors to assign National Guard and/or
State Defense Forces to assist Border Patrol
in carrying out their duties
c. Increase Border Patrol Appropriated Funding
especially in technology and enforcement personnel,
and make general federal funding contingent upon
executive spending such appropriated funds
2. Empower and Require Local, State and Federal Law Enforcement
a. Enforce the Law
b. Investigate Violations
c. Hold and Process
d. COSTS: Paid or Supplemented by Federal Government
-- this can be used to incentivize local and
State law enforcement to cooperate as well as
require it for Federal Grants and Aid.
3. Repatriation of Violators
a. Destination: National Capitol of Origin.
b. Billing: Government of Origin
c. Disqualification from Legal Status,
Application for Legal Entry, for Penalty Period
4. Bill Country of Origin
a. Costs of Process, including Travel, Room and Board
b. Plus Handling Fee (to be shared between
Federal Government and apprehending agency
c. Escrow Accounts Required by Major Offending
Origin Countries
5. Legal Status Requirement for
a. Public Health Services Supported by Federal Funds
b. Payment of Emergency Medical Service not denied
but billed to Country of Origin
c. Other Services supported in any measure
by Federal Funds, such as Public Library,
Schools, etc. required and audited to insure
only legal residents use such services --
or lose all federal funding.
6. Secure and Positive Identification
a. Data Bank for Immediate Electronic Validation,
such as for Credit Cards
b. Fraudulent Application, Possession and or Use
of SS ID Cards imposes Immediate Process
and permanent disqualification of legal
applicant status
7. Federal Driver's License
a. Interstate Highway Use or any highway, bridge,
park, facility receiving federal funds
may have endorsement of State License which
states meet Federal Legal Status standards[1].
b. Enforcement of Highway Use standards
8. No Citizenship for Birth in US
a. if either parent is not in legal status.
b. This interprets Constitutional provision as
'implying' legal status.
c. Alternative: Constitutional Amendment
9. No Recognition of Dual Citizenship
a. Declaration of Citizenship requirement
b. Voting, Declaration, or Indicia of Citizenship
in any other country immediately disqualifies
and abrogates US Citizenship.
10. VISA Abuse Penalty
a. Ten Year Disqualification
b. Second Offense: Life Disqualification
c. Comprehensive review of VISA purpose,
process, time, legal status
11. Enforcement of Penalty for Employment of Illegal Aliens
a. Require Certification of Citizenship and
or VISA Status by Employer
b. Declaration by Employee
i. (with disqualification and
repatriation for falsehood)
c. Good Faith Reasonable Effort by employer
to determine status
d. Penalties and Incentives
12. Federal Offense:
a. To Aid, Abet, Support, Provide Logistical
or Communication support, Interfere with
Government Enforcement, or Assist in any way
the violation of any designated
US Immigration or naturalization law,
regulation, or any person or government officer's
enforcement thereof. This Provision
[would apply to] any person, group,
government entity, either foreign or domestic
-end-
Ref:
1. This is already partially addressed by the Real ID Act of 2005, which
takes full effect in all States in 2008. --klaatu
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"
.
|
