You really have to wonder if Barrack Hussein Obama suffers some sort of mental disorder. Why in hell would he have turned to one of the worlds sleaziest CEO’S for economic advice. I guess its the outstanding job “Jeffrey” has done at G.E. Let’s see he’s shed over 22.000 G.E. jobs here in the U.S., while expanding jobs oversees. In recent years “Jeffrey” has received major fines from the SEC for his fraudulent business practice at G.E. and was nailed with making illegal kickbacks to IRAQ during the U.N. oil-for-food program. You think his appointment as Obama’s top economic advisor had anything to due with political payback for supporting Obama’s disasterous health care takeover. G.E. has also been granted some major EPA waivers by the Obama administration since he signed on to OBAMACARE. Obama picked tax cheat Timothy Geitner as Treasury Secretary so “Jeffrey” is just one of many morons picked by Obama to ruin the economy. After 2 years of massive debt building spending unemployment has seen little improvement, GDP is stagnant and inflation is rising. All this should be no big surprise, Barrack Hussein Obama has been involved in sleezy political Chicago corruption for years and has been on the taxpayer’s dime his entire life. He’s has never created one job, he’s had no executive leadership experience, Obama has got to be the most inexperienced, unqualified person ever elected to the office. Let’s face it he had less then two years in the Senate before he started his run for president. While in the Senate he was known for missing votes, many times on purpose so he could avoid the being on record making it easier to appear as a moderate. I guess the real question is, will it be years or decades until our economy is healthy again after Obama finishes his assault on capitalism.
The SEC fined GE $50 million in August 2009, alleging the company used improper accounting on four separate occasions in 2002 and 2003 to “increase its reported earnings or revenue and avoid reporting negative financial results.”
“Beginning in January 2003, an improper application of the accounting standards to GE’s commercial paper funding program to avoid unfavorable disclosures and an estimated approximately $200 million pre-tax charge to earnings,” an Aug. 4, 2009 SEC news release highlighting the four offenses said.
“A 2003 failure to correct a misapplication of financial accounting standards to certain GE interest-rate swaps. In 2002 and 2003, reported end-of-year sales of locomotives that had not yet occurred in order to accelerate more than $370 million in revenue. In 2002, an improper change to GE’s accounting for sales of commercial aircraft engines’ spare parts that increased GE’s 2002 net earnings by $585 million,” it added.
In July 2010, the SEC slapped GE with a $23.4 million penalty for its involvement in the oil-for-food scandal. GE agreed to pay the fine, but again did not admit to any wrongdoing.
The SEC, in a July 27, 2010 news release, said four GE subsidiaries “made illegal kickback payments in the form of cash, computer equipment, medical supplies and services to the Iraq Health Ministry or the Iraqi Oil Ministry in order to obtain valuable contracts under the [United Nations] Oil-for-Food program” from 2000 to 2003.
The U.N. Oil-for-Food program instituted in 1996 was designed to allow Iraq to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian aid and medical supplies to go to Iraqis despite the sanctions that were imposed on the country then under Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship. But, the SEC found that Iraqi ministries demanded kickbacks on contracts. Several other U.S. and foreign corporations were also implicated in the scandal.
The SEC took 15 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement actions against companies involved in the oil-for-food scandal, collecting $204 million in penalties, the agency said.
GE owned two of the subsidiaries involved in the scandal before the U.S.-Iraq war began in 2003, and acquired two other companies after Saddam’s regime was toppled.
For all those Obama Kool-Aid drinkers your family is almost $30,000 poorer thanks to the Democrats disastrous stimulus boondoggle. Once again the proof that government does more harm then good to the economy proves true. Of course the Obama, Pelosi and Reid so called stimulus was never about creating job’s it was all payback to far-left special interest and big labor. Nothing in the Obama stimulus worked, clash for clunkers was a disaster and all the borrowed money from China did was benefit Chinese workers. Unemployment show’s no real sign of improvement, the GDP is stagnant what did all this spending achieve? All the job’s created where government sector, which long term are the worst for the taxpayer. Government workers are the least productive, most overpaid workers around. Start adding in long term cost of benefits and perks and you really give the taxpayer the shaft. All this debt has drastic short and long term effects that will degrade the quality of life of every American. This debt lowers the value of the dollar, in turn drastically driving down our purchasing power. When debt rises, the cost of capital for consumers can rise thereafter due to either decreased value of currency and/or limited government funding through monetary policy. When monetary policy limits money supply the cost of capital rises for consumers through higher interest rates as is the case with lower currency values. The effects of this rising debt are all negative, there are ZERO upsides to this situation we can hurt a bit now or hurt a lot later. The sad part is we know Barrack Hussein Obama refuses to accept reality, time will only tell if the Republicans do.
Gov’t Has Borrowed an Additional $29,660 Per Household Since Obama Signed Stimulus
Thursday, February 17, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey
President Barack Obama
President Barack Obama speaks at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, Monday, Feb. 7, 2011. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
(CNSNews.com) – The federal government has borrowed an additional $29,660 per household in the United States since President Barack Obama signed his economic stimulus law two years ago.
That brings the total national debt to $125,475.18 per household.
At the close of business on Feb. 17, 2009, the day Obama signed the $787-billion law, the national debt stood at $10.79 trillion ($10,789,783,760,341.41), according the Bureau of the Public Debt. At the close of business on Feb. 16, 2011, the national debt stood at $14.13 trillion ($14,129,889,690,377.50)—an increase of $3.34 trillion (3,340,105,930,036.09)
The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that there are a total of 112,611,029 households in the United States, which average about 2.6 people per household. That means that the new debt accumulated in the two years since Feb. 17, 2009, when President Obama signed his economic stimulus law, equals about $29,660.55 per household.
The current total national debt of $14.13 trillion can be divided into equal portions of $125,475.18 for each of the 112,611,029 households in the country.
It say’s a lot about the Democrats and there mouthpieces that they oppose having to show identification to cast a vote. Why in the world would Democrats oppose such a limited common sense requirement. Has there party become so hijacked by the lunatic left that even the minor act of proving citizenship is taboo. Does anyone really think that just anybody should be able to vote no matter what. This practice leads to tainted elections and foreign influence in are political agenda. When illegal aliens are permitted to vote they corrupt the process and dilute the will of the American people. With elections being so narrowly decided this corruption can have major results. These non citizens have there own agenda and influences that are often not inline with American taxpayers. The Democrats have a long history of corrupting elections so I guess there opposition to even minor requirements to cast a vote is no real surprise. In the last election we had groups like ACORN corrupting the process and in years past the mafia. Look back to JFK’s election in the 60’s, the Chicago mob fixed that vote. Nowadays the Democrats try and use illegal aliens to effect elections in there favor so they can cling to there declining power. Casting an honest legal vote is the very core of our democracy and without that we all lose. The one man one vote part of our electorally process is what has sustained our nation from spasms of violence and ugly regimes that populate the planet. The Obama left have dragged the Democratic party into a euro trash far-left of center operation. There opposition to common sense widely supported legislation just proves the point.
Missouri’s Senate approves photo ID requirement for voting
By Jim Corvey, News of the Force-St. Louis
The Missouri State Senate approved a measure yesterday that would require photo identification to vote, in a move supporters lauded as a step toward addressing problems of voter fraud in the state.
Meanwhile, opponents of the legislation worried that the measure would create unfair obstacles to voting for those without photo identification.
The final vote of 26-7 was cast along party lines, with Republicans favoring the bill. The measure will now move to the House, where a sizable Republican majority could bode well for the legislation. If the legislation passes both houses, it will go into effect only if a constitutional amendment is approved by state voters.
Opposition to the bill stemmed from concerns that it could limit voting rights among eligible voters. Democrats said that senior citizens or people with disabilities, among others, could be aversely affected.
After the vote yesterday, Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, displayed her discontent with the Senate’s decision on her Twitter account. “Senate just voted 26-7 to disenfranchise at least 230,000 voters. Just another day in paradise…” she wrote. Justus’ tweet refers to the estimated 230,000 registered voters in Missouri who lack state-issued photo identification, according to a number tracked each year by the secretary of state’s office.
On the other side of the aisle, Senate Republicans dispute that the legislation could compromise state residents’ ability to vote. For those without an ID, said bill sponsor Sen. Bill Stouffer, R-Napton, the measure would allow the option of voting a provisional ballot. But, Stouffer said, he does not see a reason why someone would not have a valid photo ID. “A government-issued photo ID is the standard everywhere we go,” he said in an interview. “You can’t send a package, get on an airplane, or rent a movie without a photo ID.”
This isn’t the first time the state’s Legislature has sought to enact a photo ID law. The General Assembly passed a photo ID measure in 2006, which was later overturned by the Missouri Supreme Court.
As Americans die and the violations of or borders continue, the mouthpiece for the Obama administration just keeps on lying. Are the Democrats so corrupt with power that they will continue there “Col Klink game of “I see Noooothing” while driving our economy and culture into third world status. There are few sectors of our border “under control” Napolitano’s double speak is insulting at best, in the worst case thousands could die. Border Agents will tell you its worse then ever, and current policies are making it more deadly every day. Let’s see if Napolitno would let her grandkids go hiking along the border on federal parkland, oops it already closed due to violence. It’s mind boggling how open and unsecure our borders are. We are the most lax country on the earth when it comes to border sovereightny, very little of are borders north,south or east, west is truly secure. Just about anybody can arrive by boat or plane and just wander around. Most if stopped are given a “notice to appear” and let go, in the times we live in this is nuts and it has already bit us in the ass. The Barrack Hussein Obama administration should be held responsible for ever single American that is made to suffer at the hands of these lax enforcement policies. Illegals drive down wages, dillute the job pool, leech tax payer money from government services and drive up healthcare and insurance costs. The list of negatives could fill pages, we need to cherry pick the best and brightest of those wanting to legally emigrate. Those folks who actually want to become Americans, learn ENGLISH and contribute to our culture. We don’t need a bunch of ungratefull pricks who are only here to make money and make little effort to “melt in”. To many sneek in, form pockets of home add nothing to our nation. We should be securing our borders and deporting those who criminally entered. There are millions of great folks waiting there turn what does it say to them about America that cheaters win while they play by the rules and get screwed. I guess it say’s “Welcome To Obama’s America”
NewsBorder Patrol Data Contradicts Napolitano’s Testimony That U.S. Has ‘Effective Control of the Great Majority’ of Both Northern and Southern BordersWednesday, February 09, 2011
By Edwin Mora
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
(CNSNews.com) — Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a division of the Department of Homeland Security, contradicts testimony that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano gave the House Homeland Security Commmittee on Wednesday in which she said that the U.S. government had secured “effective control of the great majority” of the both the northern and southern borders.
According to the data that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has provided to CNSNews.com, as of Sept. 30, 2010 (the end of fiscal year 2010), the U.S. government had established “effective control” of only about 44 percent (873 miles) of the 1,994-mile-long southwest border and only about 2 percent (69 miles) of the approximately 4,000 mile-long northern border.
Border miles under “effective control” is a metric the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) uses in its annual performance reports to measure the success of the Border Patrol.
As defined by DHS, a mile of the border is under the “effective control” of the government “when the appropriate mix of personnel, equipment, technology and tactical infrastructure has been deployed to reasonably ensure that when an attempted illegal entry is detected, the Border Patrol has the ability to identify, classify and respond to bring the attempted illegal entry to a satisfactory law enforcement resolution.”
In other words, a border mile under “effective control” is a place on the border where the U.S. government can be “reasonably” expected to intercept an illegal crosser.
Despite the CBP data showing that as of Sept. 30, 2010 only 44 percent of the U.S. Mexico border and only 2 percent of the U.S.-Canada border was under “effective control,” Napolitano told the House Homeland Security panel on Wednesday: “Well, I think in terms of manpower, technology, infrastructure, we have effective control over the great majority of both borders particularly at the ports and then we are using manpower and new technology to help us between the ports.”
“It is a project that is never-ending,” Napolitano told the committee. “We are relentless in it. We recognize that when you are a country as large as ours with the kind of land borders we have that you’re never going to seal those borders. That is an unrealistic expectation.”
“But I would say my top priority in terms of effective control is the Tucson sector of the southwest border,” she said.
Napolitano’s comments were in response to a question from Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Tex.), whose district lies on the border, who asked her to provide the percentage of both of the U.S. land borders that the U.S. government had under control.
After Napolitano’s testimony, CBP and DHS did not return calls from CNSNews.com seeking comment on the contrast between Napolitano’s claim to the congressional committee that the government had “effective control over the great majority of both borders” and CBP’s assessment that as of Sept. 30, the government had “effective control” over only 44 percent of the southern border and 2 percent of the northern.
The Border Patrol, a division of the CBP, is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of the U.S. border. This includes all 1,994 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border, approximately 4,000 miles of the U.S.-Canada border, plus sectors of coastline in the Gulf of Mexico, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Last October, a CBP spokesperson told CNSNews.com that as of Sept. 30, 2010, Border Patrol, had established “effective control” over 1,107 miles (about 13 percent) of the 8,607 miles it is responsible for securing.
Among the 1,107 miles under “effective control,” 69 miles are on the U.S.-Canada border, 165 miles are in the coastal sectors covered by the Border Patrol, and 873 are on the U.S.-Mexico border.
That means the U.S. government did not have “effective control” of about 56 percent percent of the 1,994-mile-long U.S.-Mexico border or about 98 percent of the approximately 4,000-mile-long northern border.
When CNSNews.com asked Rep. Farenthold if he agreed with Napolitano that the majority of both U.S. borders was under “effective control,” he expressed doubt.
“I think that if we had effective control of both borders we wouldn’t see the level of drugs getting in this country that we do,” the border congressman told CNSNews.com. “So, I’d say we don’t have the level of control that we need to have both in fighting the war on drugs and the war on terror.”
“It’s hard to believe you have control of the borders when you see the proliferation of drugs in this country,” he added. “It’s clear that there are good paths to get drugs into this country and my fear is that those same paths can be exploited by terrorists to bring people and the tools of terrorism into this country. So it’s an ongoing effort. I think they think they’ve got the best level of control they can, but it’s something that can always be improved.”
Mexico’s Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
Home > Mexico’s Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth
Mexico’s Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth
Created Feb 10 2011 – 03:51
•Mexican Drug Wars: Bloodiest Year to Date
•Mexico: Dynamics of the Gun Trade
Recommended External Links
•U.S. Government Accountability Office Report on Arms Trafficking
STRATFOR is not responsible for the content of other Web sites.
By Scott Stewart
For several years now, STRATFOR has been closely watching developments in Mexico that relate to what we consider the three wars being waged there. Those three wars are the war between the various drug cartels, the war between the government and the cartels and the war being waged against citizens and businesses by criminals.
In addition to watching tactical developments of the cartel wars on the ground and studying the dynamics of the conflict among the various warring factions, we have also been paying close attention to the ways that both the Mexican and U.S. governments have reacted to these developments. Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects to watch has been the way in which the Mexican government has tried to deflect responsibility for the cartel wars away from itself and onto the United States. According to the Mexican government, the cartel wars are not a result of corruption in Mexico or of economic and societal dynamics that leave many Mexicans marginalized and desperate to find a way to make a living. Instead, the cartel wars are due to the insatiable American appetite for narcotics and the endless stream of guns that flows from the United States into Mexico and that results in Mexican violence.
Interestingly, the part of this argument pertaining to guns has been adopted by many politicians and government officials in the United States in recent years. It has now become quite common to hear U.S. officials confidently assert that 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels come from the United States. However, a close examination of the dynamics of the cartel wars in Mexico — and of how the oft-echoed 90 percent number was reached — clearly demonstrates that the number is more political rhetoric than empirical fact.
By the Numbers
As we discussed in a previous analysis, the 90 percent number was derived from a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico (see external link).
According to the GAO report, some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.
This means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.
The remaining 22,800 firearms seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were not traced for a variety of reasons. In addition to factors such as bureaucratic barriers and negligence, many of the weapons seized by Mexican authorities either do not bear serial numbers or have had their serial numbers altered or obliterated. It is also important to understand that the Mexican authorities simply don’t bother to submit some classes of weapons to the ATF for tracing. Such weapons include firearms they identify as coming from their own military or police forces, or guns that they can trace back themselves as being sold through the Mexican Defense Department’s Arms and Ammunition Marketing Division (UCAM). Likewise, they do not ask ATF to trace military ordnance from third countries like the South Korean fragmentation grenades commonly used in cartel attacks.
Of course, some or even many of the 22,800 firearms the Mexicans did not submit to ATF for tracing may have originated in the United States. But according to the figures presented by the GAO, there is no evidence to support the assertion that 90 percent of the guns used by the Mexican cartels come from the United States — especially when not even 50 percent of those that were submitted for tracing were ultimately found to be of U.S. origin.
This point leads us to consider the types of weapons being used by the Mexican cartels and where they come from.
Types and Sources of Guns
To gain an understanding of the dynamics of the gun flow inside Mexico, it helps if one divides the guns seized by Mexican authorities from criminals into three broad categories — which, incidentally, just happen to represent three different sources.
Type 1: Guns Legally Available in Mexico
The first category of weapons encountered in Mexico is weapons available legally for sale in Mexico through UCAM. These include handguns smaller than a .357 magnum such as .380 and .38 Special.
A large portion of this first type of guns used by criminals is purchased in Mexico, or stolen from their legitimate owners. While UCAM does have very strict regulations for civilians to purchase guns, criminals will use straw purchasers to obtain firearms from UCAM or obtain them from corrupt officials. Cartel hit men in Mexico commonly use .380 pistols equipped with sound suppressors in their assassinations. In many cases, these pistols are purchased in Mexico, the suppressors are locally manufactured and the guns are adapted to receive the suppressors by Mexican gunsmiths.
It must be noted, though, that because of the cost and hassle of purchasing guns in Mexico, many of the guns in this category are purchased in the United States and smuggled into the country. There are a lot of cheap guns available on the U.S. market, and they can be sold at a premium in Mexico. Indeed, guns in this category, such as .380 pistols and .22-caliber rifles and pistols, are among the guns most commonly traced back to the United States. Still, the numbers do not indicate that 90 percent of guns in this category come from the United States.
Additionally, most of the explosives the cartels have been using in improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Mexico over the past year have used commercially available Tovex, so we consider these explosives to fall in this first category. Mexican IEDs are another area where the rhetoric has been interesting to analyze, but we will explore this topic another time.
Type 2: Guns Legally Available in the U.S. but Not in Mexico
Many popular handgun calibers, such as 9 mm, .45 and .40, are reserved for the military and police and are not available for sale to civilians in Mexico. These guns, which are legally sold and very popular in the United States, comprise our second category, which also includes .50-caliber rifles, semiautomatic versions of assault rifles like the AK-47 and M16 and the FN Five-Seven pistol.
When we consider this second type of guns, a large number of them encountered in Mexico are likely purchased in the United States. Indeed, the GAO report notes that many of the guns most commonly traced back to the United States fall into this category. There are also many .45-caliber and 9 mm semiautomatic pistols and .357 revolvers obtained from deserters from the Mexican military and police, purchased from corrupt Mexican authorities or even brought in from South America (guns made by manufacturers such as Taurus and Bersa). This category also includes semiautomatic variants of assault rifles and main battle rifles, which are often converted by Mexican gunsmiths to be capable of fully automatic fire.
One can buy these types of weapons on the international arms market, but one pays a premium for such guns and it is cheaper and easier to simply buy them in the United States or South America and smuggle them into Mexico. In fact, there is an entire cottage industry that has developed to smuggle such weapons, and not all the customers are cartel hit men. There are many Mexican citizens who own guns in calibers such as .45, 9 mm, .40 and .44 magnum for self-defense — even though such guns are illegal in Mexico.
Type 3: Guns Not Available for Civilian Purchase in Mexico or the U.S.
The third category of weapons encountered in Mexico is military grade ordnance not generally available for sale in the United States or Mexico. This category includes hand grenades, 40 mm grenades, rocket-propelled grenades, automatic assault rifles and main battle rifles and light machine guns.
This third type of weapon is fairly difficult and very expensive to obtain in the United States (especially in the large numbers in which the cartels are employing them). They are also dangerous to obtain in the United States due to heavy law-enforcement scrutiny. Therefore, most of the military ordnance used by the Mexican cartels comes from other sources, such as the international arms market (increasingly from China via the same networks that furnish precursor chemicals for narcotics manufacturing), or from corrupt elements in the Mexican military or even deserters who take their weapons with them. Besides, items such as South Korean fragmentation grenades and RPG-7s, often used by the cartels, simply are not in the U.S. arsenal. This means that very few of the weapons in this category come from the United States.
In recent years the cartels (especially their enforcer groups such as Los Zetas, Gente Nueva and La Linea) have been increasingly using military weaponry instead of sporting arms. A close examination of the arms seized from the enforcer groups and their training camps clearly demonstrates this trend toward military ordnance, including many weapons not readily available in the United States. Some of these seizures have included M60 machine guns and hundreds of 40 mm grenades obtained from the military arsenals of countries like Guatemala.
But Guatemala is not the only source of such weapons. Latin America is awash in weapons that were shipped there over the past several decades to supply the various insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in the region. When these military-grade weapons are combined with the rampant corruption in the region, they quickly find their way into the black arms market. The Mexican cartels have supply-chain contacts that help move narcotics to Mexico from South America and they are able to use this same network to obtain guns from the black market in South and Central America and then smuggle them into Mexico. While there are many weapons in this category that were manufactured in the United States, the overwhelming majority of the U.S.-manufactured weapons of this third type encountered in Mexico — like LAW rockets and M60 machine guns — come into Mexico from third countries and not directly from the United States.
There are also some cases of overlap between classes of weapons. For example, the FN Five-Seven pistol is available for commercial purchase in the United States, but the 5.7×28 armor-piercing ammunition for the pistol favored by the cartels is not — it is a restricted item. However, some of the special operations forces units in the Mexican military are issued the Five-Seven as well as the FN P90 personal defense weapon, which also shoots the 5.7×28 round, and the cartels are obtaining some of these weapons and the armor-piercing ammunition from them and not from the United States. Conversely, we see bulk 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm ammunition bought in the United States and smuggled into Mexico, where it is used in fully-automatic AK-47s and M16s purchased elsewhere. As noted above, China has become an increasingly common source for military weapons like grenades and fully automatic assault rifles in recent years.
To really understand Mexico’s gun problem, however, it is necessary to recognize that the same economic law of supply and demand that fuels drug smuggling into the United States also fuels gun smuggling into Mexico. Black-market guns in Mexico can fetch up to 300 percent of their normal purchase price — a profit margin rivaling the narcotics the cartels sell. Even if it were somehow possible to hermetically seal the U.S.-Mexico border and shut off all the guns coming from the United States, the cartels would still be able to obtain weapons elsewhere — just as narcotics would continue to flow into the United States from other places. The United States does provide cheap and easy access to certain types of weapons and ammunition, but as demonstrated by groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, weapons can be easily obtained from other sources via the black arms market — albeit at a higher price.
There has clearly been a long and well-documented history of arms smuggling across the U.S.-Mexico border, but it is important to recognize that, while the United States is a significant source of certain classes of weapons and ammunition, it is by no means the source of 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican cartels, as is commonly asserted.
This story should be no big shocker that ICE is unleashing criminals instead of deporting them. They fact that one single criminal is ever released from Local, State or Federal prison who isn’t checked for citizenship is a crime. The release of these Illegal Alien convicts to prey on American citizens is just another symptom of a completely broken system. Of course being its a responsibility of the Federal government its no surprise its a disaster. I’ve said this over and over but Illegal Aliens kill more Americans every year then Al Qaeda HAS IN OVER A DECADE that is an undeniable fact. What is it going to take before the feds act on this, how many Americans have to be raped, murdered and robbed. The violence in Mexico is already spilling into America and AMERICAN citizens are dying. You can add to that Americans killed daily by unlicensed drunken drivers whom often already have records. you then add to that thousands of Americans left severely injured. These criminals after release are free to run wild on the public, local law enforcement has no way of tracking the nameless villians. Its often the case where law enforcement has no clue who these criminals are. They often use aliases that U.S. law enforcement has no way of confirming and due to limited budgets they are just cycled thru the system. If these criminals where deported how many lives would be saved every year, or property not stolen. The growing problem of identity theft is often linked to illegal Alien Criminals. The cost of all this carnage is laid at the feet of every American taxpayer, I guess we can look at this as just another tax. I think we should call it the “Federal Incompetence Tax”
ICE Allowed the Release of 890 Imprisoned Deportable Aliens, Convicted of Serious Crimes, Into U.S. in FY 2009Wednesday, 2011
By Edwin Mora
These illegal immigrants, deported to Mexico on Wednesday, July 28, 2010, are shown near the Nogales Port of Entry in Sonora, Mexico. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
(CNSNews.com) – Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) failed to identify more than 800 criminal alien convicts eligible for deportation before they were released from U.S. prisons, including “many” of “the most egregious criminal aliens, who pose a significant pubic safety risk,” according to a report by the Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
According to the report, released on Feb. 4, ICE’s Criminal Alien Program, or CAP, “is responsible for identifying criminal aliens incarcerated in federal, state, and local prisons and jails who are eligible for removal from the United States.”
In fiscal year 2009, CAP failed to identify 890 criminal aliens eligible for removal from the United States, according to the report. These criminals had been incarcerated in facilities in Texas and California and were released back into U.S. society.
A criminal alien eligible for removal is a person who is in the United States illegally and is subsequently convicted of a crime or was a legal permanent residents convicted of a removable offense, such as murder and other felonies.
Once an alien is identified as removable, ICE issues a “detainer” for that individual, which notifies correctional facilities of “ICE’s intent to take custody of an individual in that facility for the purpose of instituting removal proceedings.”
According to the Immigration Policy Center, “If ICE does not take custody within 48 hours, the detainer automatically lapses, and the state/local law enforcement agency is required to release the individual.”
ICE’s Criminal Alien Program is available at all state and federal prisons, in addition to more than 300 local jails throughout the country. ICE requested nearly $200 million for CAP in FY 2010, approximately $50 million more than it was allotted four years earlier.
The Inspector General (IG) report focused on cases involving alien inmates held in federal custody throughout the United States and in state custody in California, Texas, and New York. Those states hold about 64 percent of the foreign-borne U.S. inmate population.
“ICE, through CAP, was successful in identifying 99% of the criminal aliens eligible for removal from the United States in federal custody during FY 2009,” the report stated. “However, identification rates in two of the four states reviewed were not as high. ICE agents did not identify approximately 4% of criminal aliens eligible for removal in California and 2% in Texas.”
The audit later added that the Texas and California FY 2009 rates of non-identified criminal aliens translate to “890 (262 federal and 628 state) out of a total population of 49,033.”
“Many of the 890 criminals are believed to have been Level 1 recidivist criminals,” the report added. “Level 1 are the most egregious criminal aliens, who pose a significant pubic safety risk.”
Level 1 offenses, according to the report, include homicide, kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, threats, extortion, sex offenses, cruelty toward family, resisting an officer, illegal weapon possession, hit and run, and drug offenses accompanied by sentences of more than a year.
The audit blamed the “non-identification” of the 890 aliens specifically on ICE agent “staffing challenges,” such as vacancies and “increasing workload levels” created by other criminal alien identification programs.
According to the report, ICE may have missed vetting some incarcerated criminal aliens eligible for removal because agents are not required to record aliens’ immigration status.
ICE agents “do not always record and retain critical information and documentation used to determine the status of foreign-born inmates incarcerated in federal and state prisons,” the report stated. “This is because ICE procedures do not require agents to record and retain such information.”
“As a result, ICE is unable to provide assurance that its [Criminal Alien Program] agents are screening all potentially removable foreign-born inmates incarcerated in federal and state correctional facilities,” the report continued.
According to the IG report, the screening under the criminal alien removal program refers to “electronic records check and interview that [ICE] agents may conduct to determine if a foreign-born inmate is removable.”
“Rosters of either self-proclaimed foreign-born inmates or all inmates incarcerated” at the state level are sometimes discarded, according to the audit, because ICE agents are not required to keep copies of those documents.
“Without these rosters, ICE cannot verify the number, type, and location of foreign-born inmates identified at federal and state facilities,” the IG report stated.
According to the job description for ICE agents working under the Criminal Alien Program, those agents “are expected to devote 75 percent of their time to detention, deportation, transportation, and escorting, leaving little time for screening and identification duties,” according to the report.
ICE concurred with the IG report recommendations of conducting 100 percent screenings of all criminal aliens and enforcing the retention of all screenings and identifications of foreign-born inmates.
“ICE estimates that 300,000 to 450,000 criminal aliens who are eligible for removal are detained each year at federal, state, and local correctional facilities,” the IG report stated.