See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On December 26th, 2008 at 7:08 am, DogBreath said:

   Terrorists will continue to try to evade U.S. border security measures

   What “security measures”?

2. #2
   On December 26th, 2008 at 7:27 am, twiggman said:

   DUH!!!!!

3. #3
   On December 26th, 2008 at 7:36 am, jamesgreenidge said:

   The media laughed at and scorned Edger J. Hoover’s hardball tactics, but that’s just the kind of person we need running the show at DHS now — which is an umbrella agency joke. Put it all back the way it was! The same agency that bags terrorists shouldn’t be in charge of weather preparations!

   James Greenidge
   Queens New York

4. #4
   On December 26th, 2008 at 7:37 am, ACHefty said:

   I wonder what their first clue was. Perhaps they should pay more attention to the conservatives who put them in power and are mad as hornets over the squandered, wasted opportunities to do what is right.

5. #5
   On December 26th, 2008 at 8:36 am, JDinTX said:

   Let’s just open the borders and invite them all in. Oops, I forgot. The borders are already open and anybody walks in. Why does it take a big study to determine all of this when we have been saying this for years?

6. #6
   On December 26th, 2008 at 9:01 am, jjmurphy said:

   I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you.

   You mean our borders are not secure? Our ports are wide open to weapons shipments?

   No worries. I’m told it is OK to be an American again. The world likes us now.

7. #7
   On December 26th, 2008 at 9:03 am, Boomer said:

   With the way drug runners and the Mexican Army have openly invaded our wide open southern border I wouldn’t be surprised to see an entire population center disappear thanks to a nuclear device smuggled in during one of these incursions sometime in the next few months.

   ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE (mo-lone lah-veh) Translation: “Come and Take Them!”

8. #8
   On December 26th, 2008 at 9:07 am, Flyoverman said:

   The borders could be completely sealed and your level of security will be only marginally better.

   If you want to keep out illegals seal the borders. Sealed borders will do little if anything to stp terrorists from getting in. Sorry, it is a myth. If you want to prevent terrorist attacks we need to keep boots on the ground where the bad guys live.

   Tough to plan terrorist attacks when you are unable to communicate electronically and every time you move from A to B you risk encountering the armed Predator.

   People have this illusion they can hide behind the castle walls and be safe. We used to call such thinking the classic DIP maneuver. Die in Place.

9. #9
   On December 26th, 2008 at 9:09 am, TMoney said:

   These idiotic studies cost bucks that would better be spent on the security that it advertises we don’t have.

   Twits.

10. #10
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:16 am, FamilyMan said:

    If this was 1940, we would have the border fences built in three months, but noooo. In 1942 we built the Alcan highway to Alaska in eight months. the total miles of construction was 1543 miles through some of the worst terrain imaginable. Why can’t we get that boarder fence up?

11. #11
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:24 am, FamilyMan said:

    Flyoverman said: If you want to prevent terrorist attacks we need to keep boots on the ground where the bad guys live………behind the castle walls

    We should be doing both.

12. #12
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:34 am, b-cat said:

    Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks are considered the most dangerous threats that could be carried out against the U.S. But those threats are also the most unlikely because it is so difficult for al-Qaida and similar groups to acquire the materials needed to carry out such plots, according to the internal Homeland Security Threat Assessment for the years 2008-2013.

    So the most dangerous threats we can just consider unlikely. Feel safe now? How difficult it must be to find someone infected with a disease and get them across the border. Most unlikely.

13. #13
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:43 am, lottadawg said:

    Sooo, info from the AP. What that means to me is they really don’t know anything. What can I believe from the people that brought me McCain, Hildabeast an the Pelosi. Also managed to give control of my country to many Liberals and Ruler Obama. Nothing has changed. They could have had this same story last year. Just lowering the bar down for Obama. Just in case.
    Happier year to all.

14. #14
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:50 am, Flyoverman said:

    Family Man,

    The short answer unfortunately is you cannot do both effectively. There are not enough resources.

    One of the nine principles of War is Economy of Force. Yes, we need more security on the border, but “sealing” the borders is not attainable. The One can have his 530,000 strong Home Security Force and all he will do is waste lots of money and provide the illusion of Security. NOTHING, REPEAT, NOTHING is worse than thinking you are secure and you are not.

    You can expend the resources trying to seal 7,000 miles of border and coastlines; every port, airport, air strip, potential helicopter LZ, road, trail, farm field, patch of woods, tunnel location, etc. OR…..you can go to where they live, track them down, and kill them.

    I watched 7 years of bombing every road trail and path in SE Asia, while we refused to destroy Haiphong and Vinh where all of the supplies killing 58,000 Americans came in. Yes, we need more border security. However the obessive desire to “seal the borders” is simply a repeat of that stupid strategy.

15. #15
    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:58 am, md1964 said:

    The world is dangerous??? One wouldn’t think our gov’t really beleived that, with the way they have rolled out the red carpet on the southern border and “invited” law breaking, and anyone who wants to come here (for any reason) to just walk in..

16. #16
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:01 am, jjmurphy said:

    Flyoverman – You can add in that a country also has to have the “will” to protect itself, both at its borders AND where the threat originates. Bush focused on half of the battle, to his credit. He ignored the other half. Congress ignored everything.

    Now, with the Messiah in the WH, and the dems in control of congress, I’m not feeling extremely confident in our will to do anything.

17. #17
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:16 am, Mister P said:

    Yet Ramos and Campean rot in jail. Ramos gets beat up by 5 illegal aliens in jail and has to move to solitary for his own protection. Bush lets them rot. Now tell me, why would anybody take the job of border guard, knowing the support you get from the government. And if you are a border guard, why would you do your job. You could end up like Ramos and Campean.

    For me this travesty will always be what I remember most about the Bush administration.

18. #18
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am, Mister P said:

    If you want to keep out illegals seal the borders. Sealed borders will do little if anything to stp terrorists from getting in. Sorry, it is a myth. If you want to prevent terrorist attacks we need to keep boots on the ground where the bad guys live.

    You realize 3 of the 5 terrorist just convicted of plotting to kill US servicemen at Fort Bragg, were in the US ILLEGALLY.

19. #19
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:32 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    It also said that they may pose as refugees or asylum seekers

    The Lost Boys of Sudan? Pitiful stories to be sure–and we have no way of investigating them-Sudan certainly isn’t going to help the Great Satan track terrorist. If Baghdad goes Saigon on us after the Pelosi/Reid defeatist cut off funding expect another big rush of unverifiable refugees.

    Of course there is no sense to build a fence on the border – if we build a 50 foot fence they will build a 51 foot ladder as we are told. If we wake up to three inches of water on the floor because a valve broke there is no sense replacing that valve-it might break too. Let it flow, mop it up and let it flow.

    People have this illusion they can hide behind the castle walls and be safe. We used to call such thinking the classic DIP maneuver. Die in Place.

    For two tours I was the infantry that sought out, closed with and engaged Mr. Charles and his little brother Charlie. We generally lived in the field weeks on end. But our hot and cots, re-supply, artillery, aviation units were in base camps surrounded layers of wire, Claymores, machine guns, mortars and still more infantry.

    Boots on the ground is indeed what wins wars; we won the Viet Nam War several times. It was lost by cowards and traitors who would not do what it took to win. We kept having cease fires that allowed Mr. Charles to regroup-declared the biggest and best targets in North Viet Nam off limits and allowed others to call our game.

    I saw ALL this current mess coming when we stopped short in the first Gulf War–and so did the entire Arab/Muslim world. Never let an enemy get behind you-NEVER.

    It also said that they may pose as refugees or asylum seekers

    All the weapons and boots can not make up for lack of will on the part of elected Cowards and Traitors. We are in for some hard times, Allah be Praised as some would say. I prefer Lock and Load-but I am an extremist-I do not like being killed.

20. #20
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:45 am, mkarnes2007 said:

    But… but… I thought Obama as President would make the world like us more????

    

21. #21
    On December 26th, 2008 at 11:15 am, happyscrapper said:

    On December 26th, 2008 at 9:50 am, Flyoverman said:
    Yes, we need more border security. However the obessive desire to “seal the borders” is simply a repeat of that stupid strategy.

    We can’t totally “seal the borders”, but we can make it so difficult to get through that it will make a huge difference! I think we should use illegal aliens to build the fence. Pay them to do it, and they will! Why not put them to some good use? Then, when they are done, just set them over onto their own side and lock the gate. I know there will always be innovative ways to get across the borders…tunnels, etc. But we can also use more Border Patrols, surveillance cameras, etc. Heck, if we would just pardon the Border Patrols that are in prison for doing their jobs, we might have enough to make a difference!

22. #22
    On December 26th, 2008 at 11:17 am, happyscrapper said:

    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:16 am, Mister P said:
    For me this travesty will always be what I remember most about the Bush administration.

    I agree 100%. To me this issue will negate any good that Bush has done over the past 8 years. He blew it, big time!

23. #23
    On December 26th, 2008 at 12:11 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On December 26th, 2008 at 11:15 am, happyscrapper said:

    I would respond to your comments, but I cannot say it any better than ArizonaNeatherthal did at 10:32 a.m.

    You do not sit and wait to get hit. You close with them and as Arizona said, “Never let an enemy get behind you-NEVER.”

24. #24
    On December 26th, 2008 at 12:26 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Hasn’t the brother-in-hut moved here yet?

    Instead of the high-speed rail from Oakland to LA, can’t we build one from Tijuana to Sacramento? Lots of empty houses for Squatters? Can I say Squatters?

25. #25
    On December 26th, 2008 at 12:28 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    But… but… I thought Obama as President would make the world like us more????

    No, no, Obama as President makes the world happier – and the left missed the “nuance”.

26. #26
    On December 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm, rambler said:

    But, Obama will use his fantastic abilities as a diplomat to convince the terrorists to change their jihadie ways and worship at his feet. Better yet, the terrorists could come pick lettuce, since the illegals have moved on to better jobs. WOW, I feel safer already!

27. #27
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:06 pm, SpeakEasy said:

    There will have to be a tipping point before anything tangible is done with border control. The only sure thing is it is inevitable. I have to hope for a nuclear strike in New York City for a number of reasons. They have been some of the loudest undermining voices on National Security- even after 9/11. Corruption and decay have overtaken the city. It is close to the Canadian border so they will have to wake up too. Finally as a bonus, the loss of all those DARK Blue electoral college votes. If it has to happen, let it be there.

    I’m only half kidding.

28. #28
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:08 pm, SpeakEasy said:

    Okay, I read my post and I have to ammend one thing- I really do not HOPE any Americans to die before we change. Poor choice of words. I just fear it is inevitable. My apologies to New Yorkers for wishing them any harm. I have friends there too.

    Gotta learn to preview.

29. #29
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:18 pm, in_awe said:

    What ever we do, let’s ignore the fact that Iran has been testing the mid-trajectory detonation of sea launched medium range rockets. So what? The Iranians published reports several years ago noting that a high altitude detonation of a nuclear device would generate a EMP effect that could destroy the guts of all electronic devices within a sizable area of the US.

    By perfecting launches from surface ships they will have the ability to load a rocket on a freighter bound to a US port, and launch the weapon while at sea and still do enormous economic damage to the US. No ICBM capability needed. Heck, they could hand one of these off to the al Qaeda navy for deployment and use.

    Every non-hardened electrical device would be fried. All power generation systems would go down, no cars would run, no radios or tv would survive, no computers of any kind would still function, etc. Wouldn’t the Iranians love to hit us with such a weapon?

30. #30
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    Yes, the world is more dangerous. Wasn’t the UN supposed to fix all that?

    We’ll definitely to go fight Al Qaeda in Africa next.

31. #31
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:27 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:18 pm, in_awe said:

    And don’t forget Cuba just 90 miles away from our shores, with Castro’s buddy, V. Putin plotting something right under our noses. Gee, I am feeling so much better now! If you are looking for me, I will be in bed with the covers over my head.

32. #32
    On December 26th, 2008 at 1:39 pm, love2rumba said:

    Bush has only done a half-job with homeland security…I am still waiting for the next bloody shoe to drop…it is only a matter of time before this cheap labor/government handoutapalooza to immigrants and banks busts the U.S.

33. #33
    On December 26th, 2008 at 2:00 pm, love2rumba said:

    Speakeasy…you are not too far off the truth with respect to New York City. They were hit on 9/11 and four years later they voted for John Kerry-talk about a short memory! Bill Clinton never even visited the site until much later and New Yorkers still love Bill and Hillary!

    As I personally said to a liberal relative of mine about 7 years ago (before the rest of Bush’s stupidity came out in full on a variety of issues). Below is a paraphrasing of what ideas I communicated then:

    You should be grateful Bush is going after the Jihadists because if we kept doing the things the way they were done under the Clinton administration, it would only be a matter of time before someone got to nuke NYC or some other US city, and if they did the balance of political power easily tip in favor of red-state policies (especially when the blue state voters aren’t there anymore to vote in the aftermath of a nuclear attack) after all do you really think Jihadists are going to waste their time trying to nuke Fargo, North Dakota for example? They would want a high value target, and these targets are almost always Blue state concerns politically.

    Bush in reality is keeping millions of blue voters alive-you should have been thanking him (at the time).

    Frankly Bush has p#ssed away his legacy, and has left us economically vulnerable-a source of sure delight to Jihadists and others.

34. #34
    On December 26th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, rightisright said:

    Terrorists will continue to try to evade U.S. border security measures and place operatives inside the mainland to carry out attacks, the 38-page assessment said. It also said that they may pose as refugees or asylum seekers or try to exploit foreign travel channels such as the visa waiver program, which allows citizens of 34 countries to enter the U.S. without visas.

    How many miles of fence could have been built with the money spent on this “assessment” or how about the auto bailout it’s self?
    In these trying, dangerous times the country should be locked up tight in regards to type of invasion that can be envisioned…whether that be closing the boarders and enforcing immigration laws already on the books to stopping all the willy nilly visas being allowwed in.
    Lack of these items being taken care of lead me to wonder just how secure are we after 911, lots of hype and not much domestic action. The reason I’m holding judgment on Bush securing the country since 911. Out enemy is very patient, do not forget.

35. #35
    On December 26th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, jjmurphy said:

    in_awe makes an excellent point regarding EMPs. Just one nuclear device exploded in the upper atmosphere over the USA could ruin you whole day! Iran HAS been practicing this stuff for a while now.

36. #36
    On December 26th, 2008 at 3:26 pm, rightisright said:

    Mr. P said:
    

    For me this travesty will always be what I remember most about the Bush administration.

    Could not agree more, President Andrew Jackson did one hell of a lot of good for this country as it was maturing into a country to be recognized. In my mind I will always remember and never forgive him for “The Trail of Tears”. Another president’s legacy tarnished by a closed mind, stubborn bull headedness.

37. #37
    On December 26th, 2008 at 3:46 pm, Jet Jaguar said:

    The last straw for me regarding Pres. Bush was when he labeled volunteers for the Minuteman Project as “vigilantes”.

38. #38
    On December 26th, 2008 at 4:09 pm, nlebou said:

    Agreed Jet

39. #39
    On December 26th, 2008 at 6:05 pm, Wellsy said:

    Well, I guess if you can’t catch and defeat terrorists, you can always let them spout off on a major network about the true meaning of Christmas. Maybe they can try something like that with illegal immigrants – you know, let some of them talk in an after-school special about the true meaning of the Constitution.

40. #40
    On December 26th, 2008 at 6:08 pm, By Choice said:

    I can personally vouch that the border fence for maybe 6 miles, maybe 10, at the Naco, AZ port of entry as been built. It is solid, 20 feet high and lit up realllll pretty at night. DHS claims 500 miles of fencing but they are counting vehicle barriers which you can walk right through.

    Nothing will work on the border EXCEPT the military, armed and on alert. Let them patrol OUR border like they are in Iraq and Afghanistan, and nothing will get through that isn’t supposed to: Land, sea or air!

    Something bad could have easily already come across north or south I just hope we get ahead of it before any more Americans are harmed.

    Where is that “report”? I want to read it for myself!

    Proud xenophobic vigilante conservative bit—choo!

41. #41
    On December 26th, 2008 at 6:14 pm, Elm Creek Smith said:

    I don’t wish for any of the pestholes we call major cities in the United States to be targeted and obliterated by a terrorist nuke. The local politicians and criminal element (Yes, this is probably redundant.) have already nearly destroyed them, e.g. Chicago. A nuclear detonation would merely put us out of their misery.

    ECS

42. #42
    On December 26th, 2008 at 8:51 pm, jwm said:

    Went to the local Home Depot today and I was shocked. I’m used to seeing a couple dozen men waiting for day labor, but today, I saw at least a hundred men waiting for work. Am I angry that our government did nothing to prevent these men from entering our country? Yes. But, when I think about the people who always have their hand out and want something for nothing, I feel respect for these men who are willing to earn the money they need to feed their family. Now, back to the original post about security and the lack thereof. Do I think there are people of Muslim beliefs that want to come here and kill us infidels? Oh yes, I take that very seriously. Despite the inherent corruption of the Mexican police and military, we still need their help in preventing terrorists from coming over the southern border. That’s the reality and we need to face it and start dealing with them despite the other issues that make us upset-the comic books with maps, the help by the Mexican government in shipping off their poor to us etc. The old style of pointing fingers isn’t going to make us more secure, it makes us less safe.

43. #43
    On December 26th, 2008 at 10:39 pm, teachem2 said:

    Chertoff = Captain Obvious

44. #44
    On December 27th, 2008 at 1:38 pm, TK-421 said:

    Honestly, I don’t see the threat in the NBC Relm. All those sources are closely watched and even if you gain them baring you are a nation state, you couldn’t do more than one or two major attacks. In all honesty I would be more worried of smaller unknown attacks at random and in public areas.

    That actully in a terroist campaing would be more effective, as it sows fear doubt and worry nation wide. One large attack tends to just piss people off (9/11, 12/7)and drains resources with little gain, might be something to boast about and get CNN’s Attention, but in the end it gets an ass kicking. Luckly it seems no one in the terrorist networks thinks like I do.

    As to all the claims of needing to do something with mexico, I came across a little Jem that in Canada many of the airport jobs are in gang hands, including Security, which has lead to a goverment shake up.

    Word of the wise to the Weary.

    A wall is only as strong as its weakest Brick.

45. #45
    On December 28th, 2008 at 3:55 am, Mark Jaquith said:

    Maybe fewer pardons for convicted immigration law-breakers would help send a message that we’re serious about homeland security. But, hey, that’s just me.

    To terrorists? Doubtful that it’ll have a real effect. They could just use another means of getting into the country if they’re on a watchlist. And remember: all the 9/11 hijackers entered the country legally. Terrorists are expendable, as I think the entire idea of a suicide bombing should underline. It’s not a big deal if one of their guys get caught. There’s no way we’re going to catch them all. The strategy of immigration control as some magic bullet against terrorism is destined to fail.