There has been a lot of talk about the border with Mexico lately in political circles. Our President Bush, Senators Kyl and McCain, and Congressman Hayworth among many others have come forth with plans to shore it up. There even a lot of talk of building a wall (or more likely a fence or fences) along the entire border. I have no beef with these plans and am not even convinced that a wall is beyond the fray, but I do object to some of the rationale given lately.
Since 9/11 a large focus has been put on the border due to the possibility of Islamist terrorists using it to gain access to U.S. soil. Now, I recognize that possibility and obviously believe that we should take strides to limit the possibility. But many have glommed onto the possibility in order to advance the agenda of border security when the real goal is to protect America not from terrorists, but from Mexicans. Now, here too I don't deny the right the U.S. has to control it's own immigration, but I think to use terrorism to persuade support for immigration reform is a scare tactic and is wrong.
According to the Border Patrol, in the three years following 9/11, some 946 people from seven Muslim countries (Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iran, Lebanon, Pakistan, Sudan and Syria) were apprehended trying to enter the country illegally. Of those only 320 of those were caught at the Mexican border, 472 were apprehended at the Canadian border, and 154 were apprehended in the Miami, New Orleans and Puerto Rico regions of the Border Patrol. If we decide to build a wall to protect ourselves from terrorism then we must recognize that doing so will only deter, not eclipse the likelihood that happening.
I don't oppose border control. I don't oppose protecting ourselves from terrorism. But I do think we need to avoid intellectual dishonesty when advocating, or opposing, either.
