Staff Reports
In a recent congressional hearing, Rodney Scott, the former chief of the Border Patrol, expressed concerns about the lack of time and resources Border Patrol agents have to properly vet and interview migrants at the US-Mexico border. Scott attributed this problem to the overwhelming surge in illegal immigration under President Biden, which has left agents without the opportunity to access language translation support or thoroughly probe the backstories of migrants. According to Scott, Border Patrol is dealing with a significant number of illegal aliens from countries associated with terrorism, but without timely language translation support, conducting even basic processing or meaningful interviews is a challenge.
https://x.com/WashTimes/status/1703391919030632671?s=20
The issue of illegal immigrant terrorism suspects entering the country has sparked a debate among lawmakers. Democrats have dismissed Scott’s concerns, arguing that the likelihood of terrorists using the southern border to enter the US is slim. They view the focus on terrorism as an attempt to demonize all illegal immigrants, including those seeking better job opportunities or family reunification. Republicans, on the other hand, support Scott’s claims and emphasize the importance of thorough vetting and interviewing processes. Scott’s firsthand experiences as a Border Patrol agent, as well as his work with joint task forces and as the former chief, have led him to believe that there are significant vulnerabilities in border security that need to be addressed.
Scott highlighted the limitations of the current vetting process, which primarily relies on running names and fingerprints against US databases. While this may catch individuals who have been flagged by US authorities in the past, it does little to identify those who haven’t been. Scott stressed the need for trained agents to conduct interviews, assess statements, and look for other signs of potential threats. However, due to the massive flow of migrants, this type of individual assessment has become virtually impossible.
In addition, Scott raised concerns about smuggling cartels exploiting distraction tactics to smuggle potential threats across the border. He argued that the most serious threats often come in the second wave, after agents have been drawn to the initial wave of migrants. To address these challenges, Scott proposed deterrence measures to decrease the number of crossings, thereby reducing distractions for agents.
While some experts argue that there is no reason to be worried based on historical data, citing the fact that zero people have been killed in terrorist attacks by individuals who entered the country as illegal immigrants, Republicans point out that the 9/11 attacks were also carried out by terrorists who entered legally. They emphasize the importance of not underestimating the potential dangers and the need for robust border security measures.
Overall, the issue of illegal immigrant terrorism suspects at the US-Mexico border remains a topic of contention between Democrats and Republicans. As the number of individuals on the terrorism watchlist apprehended at the southern border continues to rise, concerns about border security and the effectiveness of the vetting process persist. The debate surrounding this issue reflects the broader ideological divide on immigration policy and national security.
