Report: Illegal Migrants from Terror-Linked Countries Surging at Southern Border

 


Stand Up America Foundation has intel from its extensive network on the smuggling of long guns into the United States from Mexico just before the 2018 Congressional elections as well as more intelligence concerning the safety and security of the United States and its citizens.

From our friends at Breitbart. A reminder.

Report: Illegal Migrants from Terror-Linked Countries Surging at Southern Border

U.S. officials are trying to establish closer cooperation with various Latin American nations to combat an increase in the number of illegal migrants from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East attempting to sneak into the United States.

Between October 2015 and May 2016, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency, a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), detained 5,350 African and Asian migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to Reuters.

The apprehensions of illegals from Africa and Asia during that period marks an increase from those that took place in all of 2015 (4,261) and 2014 (1,831).

In its report, Reuters highlighted attempted entries into the U.S. by individuals from Pakistan, Syria, and Afghanistan, which the U.S. considers to be terrorism-linked countries.

Most countries considered by the U.S. government to be linked to terrorism are located in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. American border authorities are trying to stop the illegal migrants at the Mexico border with Guatemala, before they reach the United States.

Reuters reports:

U.S. agents deployed to an immigration facility on Mexico’s southern border have vetted the more than 640 migrants from countries outside the Americas who have been detained at the center since October 2015, according to U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) documents reviewed by Reuters…

The U.S. agents’ findings come as Mexican immigration data show 6,342 Asian, African and Middle Eastern migrants were apprehended trying to enter Mexico in the first six months of this year. That was up from 4,261 in all of 2015, and 1,831 in 2014.

U.S. border apprehensions point to the same trend. Between October 2015 and May 2016, U.S. agents apprehended 5,350 African and Asian migrants at the U.S. Southwest border. That’s up from 6,126 in all of fiscal year 2015 and 4,172 in all of fiscal year 2014.

“The reality is that the vast majority of the people that Mexico encounters that are extra-continental will eventually end up on our border,” an unnamed official from CBP, told Reuters.

The Reuters report came soon after Central American authorities dismantled a human trafficking network dedicated to smuggling illegal migrants into the United States from terror-linked countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

Moreover, the top American military official in Latin America and the Caribbean, U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) chief Navy Adm. Kurt W. Tidd, recently warned that there are various networks in his area of responsibility that specialize in trafficking illegals into the United States from countries affiliated with terrorism.

He noted that both the Shiite Lebanese terror group Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy, and the Sunni Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) are known to operate in the region.

Reuters points out:

Washington is seeking closer coordination with several Latin American countries to tackle a jump in migrants from Asia, Africa and the Middle East who it believes are trying to reach the United States from the south on an arduous route by plane, boat and through jungle on foot…

The migrants often fly to Brazil, obtain fake passports there, and are smuggled to Panama before heading through Central America to Mexico’s porous southern border, according to transcripts of 14 interviews conducted at the center and other internal briefing documents seen by Reuters…

U.S. concerns about potential security risks from migrants using the unusual and circuitous southern route have been growing in recent years, following a string of Islamic State-inspired attacks in the West and the surge in Syrian refugees fleeing that country’s civil war.

Breitbart Texas previously released leaked documents from CBP showing that hundreds of individuals from 75 countries outside the Americas, including some compromised by terrorist organizations, were attempting to sneak into the United States through the southern border.

Article

 

Used, Played and Lied to…Members of the Caravan revolt against organizers.

Sure enough, caravan migrants turn on their organizers

By: Monica Showalter
The American Thinker
December 24, 2018

It had to happen.  As we suspected would happen.

The caravan migrants, still cooling their heels out of sight of tourists in an isolated redoubt of Tijuana, in line awaiting for their U.S. asylum claims to be adjudicated, have finally turned on their rabidly left-wing organizers – namely, Pueblo Sin Fronteras.

The Associated Press has a pretty good report about the scope of the migrant disgust:

Thousands are now in Tijuana on the U.S. border, where they are likely to be camped for months or longer with no easy way to get into the United States, creating what is fast becoming a humanitarian crisis in this overwhelmed city.

Many blame Pueblo Sin Fronteras, or People Without Borders, made up of about 40 U.S. and Mexican activists.

Critics, including former allies and some of the migrants themselves, say Pueblo Sin Fronteras downplayed the dangers of such treks, especially for families and small children, and misled the participants about how long they would have to wait on the Mexican side to apply for asylum.

They were Chavistas, and as Chavistas, they were offering up the big goody-style free-stuff packages, except that they wanted Uncle Sam, not Hugo’s oil money, to pay for them.  When that fell through and the migrants ran into a U.S. president with a serious interest in border laws meaning what they say they mean, they got left high and dry, as stiffed on the promises as Venezuela’s fleeing refugees are.  The goody pot never materialized, though it might for some of them as they wait their turns in line.  With 90% of the migrant caravan composed of military- and gang-aged young men, don’t hold your breath.

What’s more, the migrants are not only angry at the Pueblo Sin Fronteras for its false promises of easy entry at the U.S. border, encouraging that (and the AP does not let them off the hook, either: it clearly pins the sponsorship role this group played), but they are also angry that the mysteriously funded NGO apparently discouraged them from taking Mexico up on its generous offer of school, jobs, and legal status in Mexico’s near-to-home southern states of Chiapas and Oaxaca, where labor shortages abound and jobs are there to be filled, all in a similar culture to Central America’s nations.  Migrants could get a leg up pretty quickly with neither enhanced education nor a language change necessary in those places, and crime is not bad there, either by Mexican state comparisons or, especially, as compared to the rest of Central America.  The Mexican government’s offer really was generous, and according to the AP, they seem to have run up against an expiration date, courtesy of Pueblo Sin Fronteras, whose project really has been political.

We know that the migrants have turned on the organizers because suddenly, they are nowhere to be found in Tijuana.  Some are still talking for the cameras, but the Tijuana mayor says he wants them behind bars for their negligent stunt (which has cost Tijuana a lot of money). Pueblo Sin Fronteras itself says it no longer wants to sponsor any more caravans.  Good riddance.  But, not to celebrate or anything, they say they will pursue their open-borders agenda by other means, which will probably be left-wing lawyers in the States.

The fact remains that their name negatively resonates among the migrant community, and word among that group has a way of getting around.  The reverberations should be strong for that, while questions are more than necessary here about who funds them – that’s a question that shouldn’t go away.  For now, nice to see at least some of their caravan pawns and moms-and-kids getting angry.  Frankly, after that particular stunt, they have a right to be.

Article

 

A Tribute To Admiral James “Ace” Lyons

 

To Fellow Flag Officers

 

It is with deep regret I inform you of the passing of Admiral James

Aloysius “Ace” Lyons, Jr., U.S. Navy (Retired) on 12 Dec 2018 at age 91.

Admiral Lyons graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in June 1952 and served

as a Surface Warfare Officer until his retirement as four-star

Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet on 1 October 1987.  In multiple

leadership assignments in Navy strategy roles in the Pentagon and in command

of Second Fleet and Pacific Fleet, ADM Lyons played critical part in in the

development and implementation of the President Reagan Administration’s

Maritime Strategy.  In multiple innovative exercises, such as Ocean Venture

81, ADM Lyons demonstrated to the Soviets that the U.S. Navy could truly

surprise and hurt them in the event of war, forcing the Soviets to have to

contemplate a much larger defense budget at a time when their economy and

internal situation were deteriorating.  A case can be made that  ADM Lyon’s

effective execution of the Maritime Strategy was the “straw that broke the

camel’s back,” contributing to the collapse of the Soviet Union several

years later; others might argue that the effect was even more direct and

decisive and was in keeping with Sun Tzu’s dictum that the highest form of

military art is to win without fighting (but a key to  that is to be ready

to win, which ADM Lyon’s epitomized.)

 

After a stint in the Merchant Marine, ADM Lyons enlisted in the U.S. Naval

Reserve on 30 Jun 1947, entering the U.S. Naval Academy in 1948 and

graduating with the Class of 1952, playing football and with a BS in Naval

Science.  His career got off to a bit of a slow start with three months

aboard  attack cargo ship USS LIBRA (AKA-12,) conducting training on the

U.S. east coast assigned to Amphibious Force, Atlantic Fleet.  This was

followed by two years as a patient at Portsmouth and Bethesda Naval

Hospitals, followed by a year at the Bureau of Naval Personnel.  He resumed

sea duty in November 1955 aboard the heavy cruiser USS SALEM (CA-139)

deployed for 20-months as a “permanent” flagship for Commander, SIXTH Fleet

and homeported in Ville Franche-sur-Mer, France.  During this period, SALEM

(last heavy cruiser in the  world completed and the only one still in

existence,) responded to the 1956 Arab-Israeli War/Suez Crisis and two

crises in Jordan.  In January 1958, he reported to the destroyer USS MILLER

(DD-535,) which supported the landings of U.S. Marines in Lebanon during a

Mediterranean deployment, after which she served as a training ship for over

11,000 Naval Reservists (gaining some notoriety when a cadet from a New

Zealand cadet training ship swam across Boston harbor at night and raised a

Russian flag on the MILLER as a joke.  Many were not amused.)  In July 1961

he reported to Commander Cruiser-Destroyer Flotilla FOUR as ASW and Gunnery

Officer/Staff Duty Officer operating along the Atlantic coast and engaged in

significant ASW experimentation.

 

In July 1963, ADM Lyons attended the U.S. Naval War College, followed by a

little over two years in the Office of the CNO as Surface Warfare Plans

Officer, Strategic Plans Division, Naval Warfare Plans section, where he was

promoted to commander in 1966.  In November 1966, he assumed command of the

destroyer USS CHARLES S. SPERRY (DD 697,) which deployed to the

Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, Arabian Gulf and Western Pacific during this

period.  In August 1968, he reported to the staff of Commander SIXTH Fleet

as Executive Assistant to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and

Plans/Head, Anti-submarine Warfare and Ocean Surveillance Division,

following the move of 6th Fleet from France to Gaeta, Italy.  Commencing in

June 1970, he studied for a year at the National War College, followed by

another two years in the Office of the CNO as Executive Assistant and Senior

Aide to the Deputy CNO for Plans and Policy, during which he was promoted to

captain.

 

In January 1974, ADM Lyons assumed command of the destroyer leader (later

re-designated cruiser) USS RICHMOND K. TURNER (DLG-20) for a homeport shift

from Newport to Norfolk, followed by a Mediterranean deployment.  In June

1975 he reported as Chief of Staff to Commander, Carrier Group FOUR, which

was engaged in a significant transformation to the modern Battle Group

concept (i.e, where the Flag is responsible for the whole battle group not

just the carrier and air wing.) Some credit him with turning the Carrier

Group from an administrative construct to a true warfighting organization.

In March 1978, he was back in the Office of the CNO yet again for four

months as Deputy Director, Strategic Plans and Policy Division, followed in

June 1978 by a tour in the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as Assistant

Deputy Director, Political Military Affairs where he was designated as a

rear admiral while serving in a billet commensurate with that rank (and

actually promoted rear admiral on 1 June 1979.)

 

In July 1980, he assumed command of Naval Surface Group Western Pacific

This was followed in July 1981 when he was designated a vice admiral and

assumed command of SECOND Fleet (and NATO Striking Force Atlantic) and

almost immediately participated in major NATO exercise Ocean Venture, a two

month exercise involving over 250 ships and 120,000 crewmen from 14

countries, spanning the South Atlantic to the North Cape of Norway, followed

by two more major exercises, characterized by extensive use of emissions

control, dispersed formations, deception, bold use of electronic warfare,

all calculated to get in the Soviet’s face, frequently by surprise.    In

July 1983, he returned  to the Office of the CNO as Deputy CNO, Plans,

Policy and Operations (OP-06,) which prior to the Goldwater-Nichols Act had

a much more operational role than today, which in addition to operations

affecting the Soviet Union also included significant anti-terrorist

activity, including the Achille Lauro hijacking incident.  He was then

designated an admiral (four-star) in September 1985 as Commander-in-Chief,

U.S. Pacific Fleet.  He immediately implemented a bold exercise regime

similar to that in the North Atlantic, using THIRD Fleet as a primary

warfighting force in the far northern Pacific in proximity to the Soviet

Union.  Yet, his tenure was also marked by a successful visit of U.S. Navy

warships to the People’s Republic, the first in 37 years.  Nevertheless, his

tenure was also contentious, as the “bugs” in Goldwater-Nichols between

Joint Theater Combatant Commanders and Fleet Commanders were still being

worked out the hard way.  Relations were rocky with the new U.S. Central

Command (in which ADM Lyons advocated much stronger action against Iran

during the “Tanker War,) and to a somewhat lesser extent, U.S. Pacific

Command, who was sometime caught as much by surprise by Lyon’s actions as

the Russians.  ADM Lyon’s deserved reputation for outspokenness was not

always well-received, and he came under pressure from Washington to retire

sooner than intended.  Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehmann would later

characterize this action as “the revenge of the nerds,” believing that the

services of a true warfighter had been lost prematurely.  ADM Lyons retired

in October 1987.

 

Admiral Lyons’ awards included two Distinguished Service Medals, the

Defense Superior Service Medal, two Meritorious Service, two Navy

Commendation and a Navy Achievement Medal.  Other medals and ribbons

included the Navy Expeditionary Medal (Cuba), Humanitarian Service and Armed

Forces Expeditionary Medal (Lebanon).  Foreign awards included the French

Legion D’Honnneur and the Republic of Korea Order of National Security

Merit.

 

Although ADM Lyons had a reputation as a driven task-master with

Patton-esque qualities, he was also mentor to a long list of officers (such

as Hank Mauz, Phil Dur and Hank Mustin, according to SECNAV Lehmann) who

went on to flag rank or major command tours.  ADM Lyons could definitely be

controversial, but his impact on the Navy, and on the outcome of the Cold

War, was profound, for which our Navy and nation should be grateful.

 

After retirement, ADM Lyons served as president and chief executive

officer of LION Associates, LLC., a global consulting enterprise.  He also

served on the board of directors for several companies, as well as on the

Advisory Board to the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and as

consultant to Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.  He also authored numerous

articles and columns for the Naval War College Review and Naval Institute

Proceedings, and other national and international journals and newspapers.

In his later years, he showed he remained unafraid to make controversial

statements on controversial subjects, and whether one agreed with any of

them or not, they were motivated by a sincere desire to assure the safety of

this nation.  (One cause he advocated, with which I agree, was to restore

Husband Kimmel’s four star rank.)  Regardless, his absence from the scene

will be noticed.

 

Services and burial at the Naval Academy Cemetery.

 

Rest in Peace Admiral Lyons,

 

Very respectfully,

 

Sam

 

On a personal note, I had one close encounter with then-VADM Lyons, in 1985

when he was OP-06 and I was an Undersea Warfare Watch Officer in CNO

Intelligence Plot.  One weekend the Soviets took an action with potential

lethal consequences for a U.S. Navy asset, necessitating that I call a long

list of senior Navy officials.  VADM Lyons got there first, still in shorts,

a tank top (that was too small) and flip-flops, indicating he hadn’t dallied

a moment in responding to my call.  Although he had a reputation amongst us

JO’s as being on the bombastic side, what I saw that day was a cool, calm,

utterly professional flag officer, who instantly grasped the situation and

potentially grave  implications of what the Soviets had done, and

immediately took decisive measures to unsure appropriate actions were taking

place in the Fleet and Numbered Fleet.  He was an inspirational example of

leadership in crisis that I never forgot.  In the end, it may have turned

out to be a really bad day for a beluga whale, but fortunately not for the

U.S. Navy.

 

Samuel J. Cox

RADM, USN (retired)

Director of Naval History

Curator for the Navy

Director, Naval History and Heritage Command

A must watch to the end:

 

 

Press Release: Updated Joint U.S.- Mexican Border Security Zone Proposed

Press Release

 

Joint U.S.- Mexican Border Security Zone Proposed

 

 

MONTANA DECEMBER 4, 2018

MG Paul E. Vallely (US Army Ret) has proposed the establishment of an enhanced security zone twenty miles deep on each side of the U.S. – Mexican border to be jointly monitored. Any group or persons occupying this zone engaging in criminal or illegal activities against Mexico or the United States would be targeted, engaged and neutralized.

The unfettered movement of transnational criminals, Islamic extremists, and illegal border crossers transiting our porous southern border poses a clear and immediate national security threat. The sophistication of the illicit networks that traffic in narcotics, foment terror and exploit human suffering for profit has exceeded our current ability to protect the homeland.

The northern states in Mexico; Baja California Norte, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas are under rogue control, and the Mexican Police and Army are helpless to stop them. It is, therefore, in the national interest of the United States and the responsibility of the federal government to restore order on the border as well across our borders. Because of this clear and present danger to US Citizens and our economy, positive action must be taken without further delay.

 

We must continue to be vigilant but adopt a more aggressive, offense-oriented border strategy. You cannot win and defeat this national threat by being on defense all the time using limited assets and restrictive rules of engagement.

The U.S. government has not yet formulated a comprehensive and integrated National Border Security Strategy, which, in addition to law enforcement brings to bear all the instruments of national power – diplomatic, intelligence, military and economic – and coordinated by a single command and control system spanning our southern land border and ports of entry.

The proposed plan uses elements of the conventional and unconventional military and law enforcement assets. It combines the best use of already-existing forces that will encompass intelligence, targeting and structural organization to accomplish the mission, including base operations, offensive, and defensive operations.

The first step is to organize three Joint Border Task Force Groups (JBTFG) and position them in three operational bases, one in Texas, one in Arizona and another in Southern California. These bases have been identified but will be kept confidential for now. Each JBTFG will be organized based on joint task forces of Special Ops, Army, Air Force, and Navy. Selected units and personnel will be relocated and moved to the designated bases. A Joint Operations Center will be established for US and Mexican personnel.

Approximately 5,000 military personnel would be assigned to each JBTFG. The organization would be commanded by a Two Star “Warrior” and each of the three JBTFGs would be commanded by a Brigadier General. The mission for the military element of the Command would be to target and conduct offensive operations on the Mexican side of the border in coordination with Mexican authorities, when possible. National Guard, Border Patrol, DEA, and local sheriff’s units would conduct border security operations on the United States side of the border. This initiative does not violate any existing Posse Comitatus laws. Integrated operations will be conducted with the National Guard on the border states as well as US Border Patrol and DEA.

“The concerns and anxiety of Americans, particularly in the Border States have grown significantly in the past year. Changes in law enforcement operations have forced smugglers of drugs and illegal aliens into ever more isolated areas, increasing the number of deaths and the level of violence to a point where even the most hardened enforcement officials are alarmed. The political ferment over illegals has never been greater – much concern as the result of the Kate Steinle murder verdict in San Francisco Seventy-eight percent of Americans think and know that the government is not doing enough to control our borders; talk shows bristle with demands for action. Additionally, Global jihad and jihadis are a major threat as they eye the southern border as a path of least resistance to strike inside the United States.” said Vallely.

 

MG Vallely presented his plan to the White House, DOD, and DHS three months ago and the President has, in Phase One, moved Active Duty Forces to the Border.

 

Media Contact:

 

 MG, US Army (Ret)

Chairman, Stand Up America US Foundation

Chairman – Legacy National Security Advisory Group

Founding Member – Citizens Commission on National Security

Co – Trustee , Soldiers Memorial Fund Foundation

chairmanstandupamericaus@gmail.com

Web/Blog: www.standupamericaus.org

Phone (c) : 406 890-4201

Skype: paulvallely

 

Mexico’s new president takes aim at violence during first day in office

Mexico’s new president takes aim at violence during first day in office

By David Alire Garcia, Miguel Gutierrez

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – On his first full day in office, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador defended a plan to end lawlessness with a new national guard, an initiative that risks upsetting some supporters who favor a less militarized approach.

In a Sunday morning speech, Mexico’s first leftist president in decades continued to pivot from an emphasis during the campaign on peaceful reconciliation and even amnesty for some involved in the country’s grueling drug war to a more traditional approach defined by more soldiers and police.

“We must adjust to a new era,” he said, flanked by generals at a military base in the capital, while emphasizing that his security policy will also respect human rights.

In the first phase of his plan, a 60,000-strong national guard force made up of army, navy and other federal police will battle crime while a constitutional reform will be pursued to cement the new strategy.

Lopez Obrador has said the strategy will be put to a public vote, likely in March.

A second phase will add additional military forces to the effort.

“The people of Mexico need their armed forces to address this grave problem of insecurity and violence right now,” said Lopez Obrador, often turning toward the uniformed officers assembled behind him to address them directly.

“We’ve opted for this plan because we trust the armed forces,” he said.

Over the past dozen years, Mexican security forces have toppled some high-profile drug kingpins but more than 200,000 people have been killed and tens of thousands more disappeared since a military-focused approach was initiated in 2006.

The last couple years have seen record numbers of murders, including in some of the country’s most fabled tourist destinations like Acapulco and Los Cabos.

Lopez Obrador’s new security focus has already stirred unease among some human rights activists, who argue the plan ignores past abuses stemming from the “militarization” of public safety.

“We call on the new government to back a civil security model that can create conditions for a gradual withdrawal of the armed forces in public security work,” a coalition of leading human rights groups said in a statement late last month.

In addition to the national guard plan, Lopez Obrador has offered a six-year security blueprint that criticizes drug prohibition as both ineffective and arbitrary. The new president’s allies in Congress have already proposed legislation to decriminalize and regulate the use of marijuana.

During the campaign, his security aides outlined plans to reduce jail time for some crimes, as well as stiffer controls on weapons. The strategy leaned heavily on “transitional justice,” which often involves leniency for those who admit guilt, truth commissions to investigate atrocities and the granting of reparations for victims.

The landslide election winner has not yet detailed how those policies will the implemented.

Article