Yet border agents Ramos and Campeon sit in prison. Bush refuses to pardon them, saying (in an interview with Neil Cavuto) that he needs approval from the Justice Department. Another lie.

Posted by: Charles Bogle at November 25, 2007 4:53 PM

Whatever it takes to wake American UP.

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 25, 2007 5:04 PM

That's not all the juarez cartel is up to...it serves their own agenda as they're in cahoots with the invasion...ooops, I mean "movement" we know better as RECONQUISTA.
Birds of a feather...again.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 25, 2007 5:05 PM

Let's see... I have the Supreme Court debating if the right to bear arms applies to American Citizens, The Justice Department prosecuting and Boarder Patrol agent that does their job. And treacherous President giving the RECONQUISTA movement winks and nods with the NAU maneuvers he's doing.

I have such warm fuzzy feelings right about now.

Posted by: senor doeboy at November 25, 2007 5:21 PM

I'm am wondering just how many Tom Clancy novels have to played out in real life before this nation comes together against all of the forces at work against her. Pretty soon politicians will be able to use more direct and simple terms to quantify our threats. Silly phrases like "War on Drugs, or War on Terror", will over time sound too idiotic to mention in public. Most of us here know who and what the enemy is.

Posted by: ethoman at November 25, 2007 5:31 PM

This does not suprise me at all, the result of open borders.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at November 25, 2007 5:43 PM

What we should do:

1. Make it clear to the Mexican government that failure to help secure the borders, in light of the threat we face from Islamofascist ideology, is a threat to our national security, and will be treated accordingly.

Systematic laxity on people generally crossing the border illegaly equals laxity on would-be terrorists crossing the border illegally. This is because terrorists are people, and "illegally" implies lack of screening.

2. Decriminalize and regulate drugs. The money that is involved and that will always be involved in the drug trade creates an extremely strong and militarized black market. Once you have that type of infrastructure in place, it can easily be used in ways that threaten national security.

This is a perpetual risk of the prohibition of drugs, in any context in which we face enemies, not just this context facing Islamofascists.

Posted by: hope_and_justice at November 25, 2007 5:47 PM

It's just a matter of time before they pull off one of these attacks ... and succeed. That does not mean they take over the fort; it means they crank off a few rounds and maybe only wound a few infidels.

But to them, that's success; even if they all die in the attack. Read 'Future Jihad' for more insight into that.

And from their 'victory' will flow motivation for others to try again; bigger, badder, better than before.

They're here, unerschrocken.

Posted by: undaunted at November 25, 2007 5:48 PM

Alright now....enough intolerance already!
I'm SURE those poor Mexicans were just "immigrating" into the USA to make a better life for themselves.......

Posted by: skydash at November 25, 2007 6:23 PM

I imagine that an attack like the one envisioned on Fort Huachuca could succeed to the extent that the attacking force might inflict heavy casualties on our personnel. Usually, the guards at such locations are not experienced combat troops - often, they are people who have never fired a shot except at a rifle range. Further, the focus of command is usually upon limiting the guards' access to weapons and ammunition. For example, the guards are probably issued as little as ten or twenty rounds of ammunition per shift - and it is rigorously counted before and after a guard shift. I would also be surprised if the guards have access to hand grenades or the US equivalent of an RPG. The focus is on 'safety', not on repulsing an attack.

It appears that we must suffer a serious attack like one upon Fort Huachuca before our political class will enforce our borders. When such an attack occurs, President Bush should be impeached for dereliction of his duties as Commander-in-Chief.

Posted by: Havoc at November 25, 2007 6:54 PM

I am not buying into this.

There are several things that make me believe this is just badly written propaganda. Among them:

 Arizona is a right to carry state meaning almost everyone has weapons and probably can use them.
 Arabs would stand out in the local populace, which BTW would have zero reason to support them.
 Drug gangs do not need the heat this would bring down on them and would also have zero reason to support this insane idea. The entire border would lock down hurting business for longer than Muslims terrorists could pay them back for, their loses would be staggering. Gangs depend on anonymity not scrutiny.
 It’s an Army base, response would be quick trained and deadly. Training base or not the cadre, support troops, permanent party and those soldiers tdy are all combat vets, accomplished killers. They have both the skill and the home field advantage.
 It’s a freaking Intelligence training base with more assets than anywhere except maybe Iraq. You couldn’t fart and not be detected.
 All military bases have armed guards, roving patrols and quick reaction plans.
 No Arab force has ever won a force on force battle with our military.
 Muslim math 50-60 fighters means 2 or 3 guys with big mouths and dreams but no balls.

Also added into my analysis is who would benefit and who would not?

 Politicians would be answerable as to why our border is still unsecured.
 Politicians who voted against funding or increased resources in either party would be out on their useless asses (a good thing)
 Backlash would be massive among the Muslim communities all over the USA (another good thing), no more support, funds, Islamic schools or loud mouth Imams whining about tolerance.

There are other things to consider but added together we have a bigger chance than Osama would publicly except Baptism and Convert to Catholicism than a cross border attack into a well Armed and defended military base.

Posted by: Ronin at November 25, 2007 7:14 PM

Ronin -

We were well-armed on 911, but unprepared for an attack. We were in a peacetime mindset. I suspect (I do not know) that we are of a similar mindset, today. Even at Fort Huachuca.

My father told me that, after Pearl Harbor, some of our bases in the US were guarded by soldiers who had no ammunition for their rifles! I believe it.

As far as our intelligence capabilities are concerned, they are exaggerated. We see a James Bond movie and tend to assume that it protrays something like CIA reality. Hollywood is pretend; 30,000 CIA agents with their thumbs in their asses is reality.

Posted by: Havoc at November 25, 2007 7:56 PM

Yep, more 'benefits' of having open borders.

I have no idea how many bad guys came across the border, nor how well they are armed, nor how well they are trained. I do work on a large army post on a frequent basis, and it wouldn't take much effort to get on post and cause murder and mahem among the civilian population on the ground. There is no doubt in my mind that the reprisal from such an attack would fall fast and furious- but personally I'd rather not reach that point.
Just secure the damned border. Put up a fence. Use troops and tanks and aircraft if they're needed. Lay mines. I really don't care how it's done, just do it. Otherwise, stop calling it a 'border' because it fundamentally exists only on paper in it's current state. A border that only applies to law-abiding citizens is worse than useless. "Mr. Bush...put up that wall!!"

Posted by: livefreeordie! at November 25, 2007 8:23 PM

Here is some of the information I posted on the first article about a possible threat to Fort Huachuca.

"Interesting points about Fort Huachuca: The major tenant is the US Army Intelligence Center, Its army airbase (Libby Field) is an alternate landing field for the Space Shuttle,It is the headquarters Army Military Affiliate Radio System. It is also The joint Interoperability test Command, and an Electronic proving ground facility. It is also a main facility for Radar-equipped Aerostat which is one of a series that is operated and maintained by the DEA to counter and detect any low flying aircraft".

The Fort is approximately 15 miles from the Mexican Border.

Posted by: Mackie at November 25, 2007 8:23 PM

You know, I think about Beslan about 2-3 times a day--about how bad an attack on a US school would be, and how badly unprepared we are for such an attack. If such an atrocity were to occur on a military base, the impact on troop morale would be devastating.

Here's to the hope that the base commanders at Ft. Huachuca take the threat seriously.

Posted by: Dennis_Mahon at November 25, 2007 8:28 PM

I share Havoc’s low opinion of the CIA and as Mackie pointed out there are some major targets at Fort Huachuca but I stick by my earlier assessment.

There are easier targets and I see no reason to think a bunch of thugs would choice a military base over a soft undefended target. Even in Iraq it is hard to get 60 suicidal Muslims into one group. They are cowards rarely attacking by force of arms. They specialize in long range sneak attacks far more often than suicide attacks and force on force fights.

I do not think an attack like this is possible especially now that the threat has gone public. Livefreeordie has a point any base could be attacked but such an attack would do far more harm to the Muslim community in the US than it would hurt our military. I know what my response would be if this happened at home while I was deployed and I still under arms. I would be painted a monster in the press claim PTSD and walk away laughing at the stupidity of al qaida and military Doctors.

This is simple propaganda we see this every holiday season.

Posted by: Ronin at November 25, 2007 9:10 PM

Thes kind of jokers will have their little Tet Party when things get Hot. Why waste the assets when you know only one confirmed insident will revert the Country back to it's Frontier Herritage.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 25, 2007 9:14 PM

And where, are those 60 terrorists, and those heavy weapons now? Inquiring minds want to know...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 25, 2007 9:40 PM

An attack may have been planned by gang members and jihadists but that doesn't mean it would have been successful. I live near a large military base and after 9-11, everything changed. All but two of the gates were closed and it is not unusual to see traffic logjams at those two. Civilians can still get on the base but the MP's conduct regular stops and searches. I was going to the hospital not long ago to visit a friend and they turned me around because I had a gun under the seat. I forgot it was even there until they asked me if I was "transporting" any weapons. That gun has lived under the front seat of many cars over the years and I've never needed it but I feel better knowing it's there, especially when driving at night. They were very nice about it but they refused to let me though the gate. I asked them to hold it until I came out but regulations forbid that, so I had to get rid of the gun and go back.

I think all military bases are on constant alert and prepared for anything even if they do not appear that way. The base near me is also an intelligence and communications center and an enormous intelligence facility is presently under construction there. I'm an army brat and I've lived on or near dozens of military bases. I realize that we're living in dangerous times, threatened by an elusive, amorphous enemy but I think our bases are well protected. If there are any successful attacks, they will most likely come from jihadist moles that have inflitrated either the military or civilian workforce.

Posted by: Susanp at November 25, 2007 9:48 PM

Ronin,
I was with you until your analysis of who would benefit and who would not.

Politicians would be answerable as to why our border is still unsecured.

We've been asking for a secure border for two decades (since before 1986) and it hasn't happened. Something else that hasn't happened: wholesale defeat of incumbents in both parties. The day they secure the border we (all employers, including homeowners) will be complaining that there aren't enough people to mow our lawns and do the jobs "Americans won't do".

Politicians who voted against funding or increased resources in either party would be out on their useless asses (a good thing)

Sure it would be a good thing but it just won't happen. Too many government programs to protect. The same guys that would secure the border also believe in a smaller government, which is why they won't win. Try getting rid of a few departments or cutting back on a few programs and watch the people go crazy.

Backlash would be massive among the Muslim communities all over the USA (another good thing), no more support, funds, Islamic schools or loud mouth Imams whining about tolerance.

The only backlash we're likely to see is non-Muslims against Muslims. The Muslim community will either keep quiet or complain about discrimination or ethnic profiling. I know there are a lot of peaceful Muslims but they have no critical mass. A determined minority (the Islamists) has kept them down for quite a while now. They should have the numbers, unless they've been lying all this time about how "moderate" they are. Too bad they won't stand up for this country, but they can't. Their religion says that they are members of the umma first and foremost. Country comes later, if at all. I'd like to see them demonstrate against Islamism the way they demonstrate against the US. It will never happen, unless we are about to throw them out. Their silence is absolutely deafening and it will remain that way.

One more thing: whose propaganda is it? If it's Bush's, then it really is bad. Afghans and Iraqis were going to carry it out? The very people we've "liberated" at the cost of American lives? Only Dems would benefit, but not even the DNC would do something so dumb.

Posted by: PMK at November 25, 2007 9:51 PM

A handful of bozos with boxcutters hit the Pentagon and killed 125 personnel inside, including up to a Lt. General, and also slaughtered 64 people on Flight 77 as it was turned into a kamikazi bomb.

This kind of suicide attack on a base could easily succeed.

The propaganda value of hitting the infidel dogs where they live would be a boost to their recruitment.

While such jihadis might only kill a dozen or so soldiers, and be annihilated themselves, the impact would resonate to their cause's benefit, globally.

(Plus, they are guaranteed Paradise for their "martyrdom", so they see it as a win-win.)

There's virtually nothing to stop such terrorists once they have gotten over the (in effect) open borders.

Which is why they should have been sealed on 9/12.

But our demented leaders and their business magnate puppeteers prefer to risk our lives for their prostration to Mammon.

It will hurt us massively in the future.

Either tomorrow... or in a few years.

But it is inevitable, thanks to laughable "controls" at the boundaries of our nation.

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 25, 2007 10:32 PM

"Islamist terrorists with the aid of Mexican drug cartels were planning an attack on the facility."

We shouldn't panic over something like this. We just need patience. We already have five whole miles of a proposed eight hundred mile fence built, and with our ever vigilant government on the job, it should be completed in another 100 years or so.

In the meantime, let's hunt down the terrorists, give them all green cards, and put them on the fast track to citizenship.

Posted by: rational at November 25, 2007 10:33 PM

Islamophobia Watch and Fanonite are salivating over this lame critique of Hitchens and Amis.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2216701,00.html

Not to deny that their affectations are annoying.

Posted by: supercargo at November 25, 2007 10:57 PM

We built a six-foot tall, masonry wall for $80/ft maybe five years ago. A crew of three put up better than a thousand feet in just a few days. Top that fence off with some barbed wire and you’ve pretty much ‘sealed’ a property line. The United States of America could fix 90% of our border problems in a week.

I’ll build 1000 miles of fence for $200/ft, or $1.06 billion. I’ll have it done in six months. We are being lied to. Check out Buchanan’s new book:

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9pb.htm

He would be right except he doesn’t take into account the impending collapse of our credit rating and the social upheaval that will follow when the checks stop showing up. Security begins at home these days.

Posted by: pez at November 25, 2007 11:25 PM

Pez...use broken glass bottles instead of barbed wire. It is something every Mexican intrinsically knows as a harsh, keep-out warning, as cinder block walls with broken, ugly shards of glass are commonplace in Mexico.

We must use psy-ops against all enemies.

Posted by: AmericanTiger at November 26, 2007 12:34 AM

...and treat coyotes as enemy spies in a time of national peril.

Posted by: AmericanTiger at November 26, 2007 12:37 AM

I've linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/11/re-jihadists-planned-attack-on-intel.html

Posted by: Consul-At-Arms at November 26, 2007 12:49 AM

This story smells like another bogus MSM attack on the President. There hasn't been an attack on US soil since 9/11, in large part because Al Queda is busy in Iraq- being killed.

Posted by: Lil Green Lizard at November 26, 2007 12:49 AM

It might be red herring. Muslims tend do avoid direct assaults on hard targets unless they have lots of throw away people.

It just doesn't make sense when there are a plethora of soft targets with high propaganda value that are much easier to take out.

Then again Muslims are not very rational nor stable so anything is possible with them.

Posted by: waltc at November 26, 2007 12:54 AM

Tom Tancredo, before it is too late: http://www.teamtancredo.typepad.com

Posted by: Alert at November 26, 2007 12:55 AM

Thanks for the update Robert. From your friends at http://www.coniglios.com (formerly the MELDT Daily), we appreciate your work as always!

It's amazing how some still refuse to accept the blatent threats we're facing.

Posted by: coniglios at November 26, 2007 1:36 AM

Offered in response to a suggestion at DhimmiWatch:

To: info@saudiembassy.net

Cc: comments@whitehouse.gov; vice_president@whitehouse.gov; rush@eibnet.com; hannity@foxnews.com; me@glennbeck.com; hhewitt@hughhewitt.com

Subject: Your genocidal, murderous, lying, pedophile prophet

*********************************

Sirs,

No decent, rational human being can consider the evil cited below to be the will of a god.

Inexplicably, the President of the United States of America -- a man who claims for himself the title "Christian" -- appeases and calls "ally" some of those who consider such excrement to be "divine." He defends their depravity, even equating such vile filth with the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount in an Inaugural Address!

(Jefferson and Adams -- two men whose Islamic counterparts were much more honest about their "sacred" right to Infidel blood than are today's Muslim leaders -- would be disgusted to see such craven dishonesty from the leader of the nation they helped create.)

No less shamefully, those pretend defenders of Western Civilization -- lions behind microphones except when it comes to telling the truth about Qur'an and Sunnah -- do the same.

This is the will of Allah and the example of Mohammed. This is what you defend:

"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya . . . If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . . " (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah . . . nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

“My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old” (Tabari 9:131).

“Allah’s Apostle told Aisha [his six-year-old bride and nine-year-old sexual "partner"], ‘You were shown to me twice in my dreams. I beheld a man or angel carrying you in a silken cloth. He said to me, “She is yours, so uncover her.” And behold, it was you. I would then say to myself, “If this is from Allah, then it must happen”’” (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 87, Number 139-140).

"War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).

Posted by: Amillennialist at November 26, 2007 2:49 AM

" Arizona is a right to carry state meaning almost everyone has weapons and probably can use them."

They wouldn't use them if they didn't see them, or if it wasn't clear there was something more was happening than a bunch of people who can walking around.

" Arabs would stand out in the local populace, which BTW would have zero reason to support them."

I've known a lot that can pass for Mexican or South American, seriously. In the US that is often the presumption anyway, because people aren't THAT careful about facial features and the odds are higher someone with a brown or tan complexion is Mexican.

" Drug gangs do not need the heat this would bring down on them and would also have zero reason to support this insane idea. The entire border would lock down hurting business for longer than Muslims terrorists could pay them back for, their loses would be staggering. Gangs depend on anonymity not scrutiny."

Good point. But, I'm not convinced that the terrorists' supporters couldn't funnel enough money to make it worth their while, and I'm not covinced the border would be shut down for long enough to make up for that.

I'm also suspicious of the (elite) political will to shut down the border for long. There certainly isn't any political will to take it seriously now, despite hordes of voters angry about illegal immigration and a Republican administration.

" It’s an Army base, response would be quick trained and deadly. Training base or not the cadre, support troops, permanent party and those soldiers tdy are all combat vets, accomplished Muslim killers. They have both the skill and the home field advantage."

So it is a suicide mission. So? They could still get in some significant hits before meeting their virgins.

" It’s a freaking Intelligence training base with more assets than anywhere except maybe Iraq. You couldn’t fart and not be detected.
 All military bases have armed guards, roving patrols and quick reaction plans.
 No Arab force has ever won a force on force battle with our military.
 Muslim math 50-60 fighters means 2 or 3 guys with big mouths and dreams but no balls."

The US is a hotly desired target, and highly protected. Maybe they and their funders figured this long shot was still worth a shot?

"Also added into my analysis is who would benefit and who would not?"

" Politicians would be answerable as to why our border is still unsecured."

Yeah, like they're answerable for it now, or for our trillion dollars and for catching Osama?

" Politicians who voted against funding or increased resources in either party would be out on their useless asses (a good thing)"

Maybe they figure they are safe on this count, having voted for over a trillion in war funding over the past 6 years?

" Backlash would be massive among the Muslim communities all over the USA (another good thing), no more support, funds, Islamic schools or loud mouth Imams whining about tolerance."

Because we got LESS of that after the 9/11 attacks, not more???

Posted by: hope_and_justice at November 26, 2007 3:32 AM

Ronin,

You need to do a little reading about the area. American Jihad would be a great place to start. That part of Arizona is teaming with extermists and jihadis running around Tempe, Tucson and Phoenix. You remember the Flying Imams......all from that area. The ICT (Islamic Center of Tucson) was the first outpost of 'AQ' in the USA in the early to mid-1980's. What better place for those fighters to blend in and work with their other brethern.

JD

Posted by: John_Doe at November 26, 2007 7:43 AM

30,000 CIA agents with their thumbs in their asses is reality.

And that, my friends, answers far more questions than it begs. What in the hell is wrong with my government? They don't defend my border: they fight to keep it open. (And "open borders" makes as much sense as "gay marriage": the modifier destroys the noun.) They are going to "decide" if my God-given right to bear arms is still operative (as someone else has pointed out.) They take my money by force and spend it on first-class tickets to conferences about how to save money. They take more of my money for my own good (retirement), and promptly put it in their own beer fund a p*ss it away.

At what point do we call the social contract breached?

Posted by: HerrMorgenholz at November 26, 2007 8:46 AM

 No Arab force has ever won a force on force battle with our military.

I hate to disagree with you, but a Fadyeen force in 2003 repulsed and basically shreded an invasion force during Baghdad International Airport Battle before being put down by superior fire power. Ambush is a type of warfare that Arabs, the orginal Carvan robbers, excell at. Arabs can fight, make no mistake about it. They will often fight us in the style that most favor them. It is the death of a thousand cut, so they hope.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 26, 2007 11:00 PM

FYI:
FYI:
http://mosquewatch.blogspot.com/2007/09/michael-savage-radical-islam.html

And here is the results of someone speaking the truth:
"OFFICEMAX DROPS MICHAEL SAVAGE ADS OVER ANTI-ISLAM BIAS (WASHINGTON, D.C., 11/15/2007) - The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today announced that OfficeMax, a leading office products retailer, has joined a growing list of companies that have stopped advertising on Michael Savage's nationally-syndicated radio program because of the host's anti-Muslim views."

Please Call OfficeMax As Soon As Possible
www.actforamerica

Posted by: ElizaDoolittle at November 28, 2007 4:20 PM