# Gaping security gaps found along U.S.-Canada border



## GAP (27 Sep 2007)

Gaping security gaps found along U.S.-Canada border
Article Link

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A smuggler could easily carry radioactive material or other contraband across the northern border into the United States, government investigators have found.

The Government Accountability Office sent out investigators to test how easily they could transfer large red duffel bags at unguarded and unmonitored spots along the more than 5,000 miles of U.S.-Canadian border.

The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, described in a 13-page report to be delivered to Congress on Thursday how easily investigators were able to penetrate the border at several spots. A copy of the report was obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

"Our work shows that a determined cross-border violator would likely be able to bring radioactive materials or other contraband undetected into the United States by crossing the U.S.-Canada border at any of the locations we investigated," the GAO report concluded.

The investigators tested four northern border states, which they did not identify, and conducted a 10-minute exercise at one site where they set up an exchange of a red duffel bag from one side of the border to another. Some investigators took video and pictures of the exercise.

In that instance, an alert citizen notified border officials, but authorities called to the scene were unable to find the GAO investigators.

It is illegal to cross the border at any place other than an official port of entry.

Investigators said that for security reasons they did not conduct similar tests at the southern border, but they also found gaps there. Investigators who examined the U.S.-Mexico border said they observed a significant number of National Guard troops and Border Patrol personnel while driving on state roads, but found little law enforcement presence on federally managed land.

Customs and Border Protection officials told the GAO "the northern border presents more of a challenge than the southern border."

The report notes that, as of May, there were 972 Border Patrol agents on the northern border, and 11,986 agents on the southern border
end


----------



## geo (27 Sep 2007)

Saw the story on the news last night.
I was stunned to see the staffing disparity between the US/Can & US/Mex borders 972 VS 11986 = this is HUGE!

Now, the US/Mex border agents are there to control the flow of illegal Immigrants from Mex, Central & South America while the US/Can ones provide +/-lip service to international security... a little bit like border guards of member states belonging to the European Union.  There the border posts are pert much empty & EU citzen drive thru without a second glance.


----------



## Journeyman (27 Sep 2007)

Gee, and it took 13 pages...and I wonder how much $$.....to document what has been universally called "the world's longest undefended border." 

Rocket science at its finest  :


----------



## 2 Cdo (27 Sep 2007)

And some half-wit will try to blame Canada for not securing the American border, like Liberals blaming the US for illegal weapons entering Canada! :


----------



## Greymatters (27 Sep 2007)

Didnt we just see a story like this earlier - the one about how a study was done on whether men are more likely to click on internet porn than women?

This information has been known for a long time, doing a study on the border and acting as if its a new discovery because we now have 'proof' is ridiculous...


----------



## GUNS (28 Sep 2007)

Its not Canada's responsibility to keep people from entering the US. Our (Armed) Border Guards are there to prevent unwanted people and illegal goods from entering Canada. 

Its America's problem. They allowed millions of illegal aliens to enter from Mexico, and if that's the case then who's to say that terrorist and bomb making components are not entering as well.

This is a no win situation for the US. The people they try to protect themselves from wear no uniform, have no rules of engagement and are totally devoted to their cause.


----------



## GK .Dundas (29 Sep 2007)

The sad thing is most of these senators until their chance to be a 3 minute story on CNN probably couldn't have found Canada on a map without help. I see this as "Let scare the bejezus out of my constitutes so come election day they'll vote for the guy who's seen to be protecting them"
 You ever notice almost all these guys who are screaming the loudest represent districts  that are at least  500- 800 klicks from the border? And mean while the Global War On Tourism....err...I mean Terror continues. 
 This is not to say that this is not a serious situation but cheap sideshow theatrics help no but the bad guys.
.


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (29 Sep 2007)

The only sure way to protect our borders, is to build a reinforced concrete wall, 40 feet high, stretching from the east to the west coast. Hire and army of border guards 50,000 or so should do nicely. Erect a 200,000 volt electric fence on the top of the wall, place machine gun pill boxes every few thousand feet. Have every checkpoint point armed by machine gun totin special guards. Anybody ever seen "Checkpoint Charlie" in it's hayday in Berlin during the cold war? If so you know what I mean.

 Anything short of this is just lip service, but it's never going to happen, at least not in my lifetime.


----------



## geo (29 Sep 2007)

Heh....
Hydro Quebec would be happy to sell the 200 000 volts to it's american clients 
50 000 guards.... that's almost 5 times the number of guards they have on the Mexico border
Are you suggesting that they keep the americans in or everyone else out? (jk)

American politicans are .... politicians - and you can always smell them coming (serious)


----------



## TCBF (29 Sep 2007)

I sense an opportunity here.



Naturally, having 'secured' our far north and mid north with Canadian Rangers, it seems only logiocal to expand the Ranger program into our frontier with the USA.  We could expand the Reserves and their regimental system where warranted (i.e.: bring back the Halifax Rifles, The Yukon Regt, etc) and re-role them as 'Border Regiments', tasked with patrolling the border and training and supporting new CRPGs in the less populated areas.

Of course thiose reservists in the 'border' regiments could also be available for tours, courses, taskings and so on.

This would expand our footprint in our communities (Canada's Army) and provide opportunities for more of our non-urban youth.

A win-win situation.

Comments?


----------



## Greymatters (29 Sep 2007)

A border-based 'Canadian Pioneers' unit?


----------



## GK .Dundas (30 Sep 2007)

I seem to recall a Manitoba based  militia regiment "The Border Horse" circa the 20's.Perhaps it's time for them to ride again!


----------



## TCBF (30 Sep 2007)

GK .Dundas said:
			
		

> I seem to recall a Manitoba based  militia regiment "The Border Horse" circa the 20's.Perhaps it's time for them to ride again!



- ... and with today's state of the art NVGs, they could ride at night as well!  We could call them "The Manitoba Night Riders"...   wait...   bad idea.

 8)


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Sep 2007)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Naturally, having 'secured' our far north and mid north with Canadian Rangers, it seems only logical to expand the Ranger program into our frontier with the USA.  We could expand the Reserves and their regimental system where warranted (i.e.: bring back the Halifax Rifles, The Yukon Regt, etc) and re-role them as 'Border Regiments', tasked with patrolling the border and training and supporting new CRPGs in the less populated areas.  Of course those reservists in the 'border' regiments could also be available for tours, courses, taskings and so on.  This would expand our footprint in our communities (Canada's Army) and provide opportunities for more of our non-urban youth.  A win-win situation.



Interesting concept....

How about a variation on this theme - instead of Reservists, why not "up-agency" what we have in place now?

We have a "Canada Border *Services* Agency", in the process of becoming (at least somewhat) more heavily armed - why not take the NEXT step and make them a paramilitary "Canada Border SECURITY Agency"?  Same mandate as now, only expanded, with "field units" (those driving/boating/snowmobiling/flying along the border to physically/electronically watch it) , as well as the nice folks we see taking our passports as we cross back into Canada.

A sorta-similar-but-exactly-so example:  Italy's Guardia della Finanza (GdiF), or Finance Police - they do treasury cop stuff and they have a military-paramilitary component (including an air and naval branch) for any heavy lifting needed in said treasury cop stuff.  According to this news release (Google English alrert), the GdiF is treated as a branch of the Italian military, like the paramilitary Carabineri national police force.

If you like this idea, the policy questions for greater minds than my own (mostly those we elect) then become:
1)  do we need more protection at our border?
2)  if so, how do we ensure more such protection?
3)  if para-militarizing the CBSA is the answer, what are the implications of having an increasingly militarized staff presence at our entry points?
4)  where will the funding for such an expansion come from?
5)  where do we put these units, considering Canada's pretty damned long border with the US?

I'm not for or against, but I think these are the LEAST of the questions needing answers before anyone advocating more robust border protection (no matter what the option) would have to deal with.

Comments?  Answers?  Digs because the idea sucks?


----------



## tomahawk6 (30 Sep 2007)

Frankly the border is wide open if you dont mind a hike through the woods. We just dont want the bad guys to be able to drive a truck bomb across the border. But I think coming across through Mexico would be more attractive to an arab terrorist than coming across the northern border. Its easier to blend in. If you get caught you will be released so you just try again. At least until a border fence is built.


----------



## GK .Dundas (30 Sep 2007)

During the early eighties a Senate Sub committee ask the GSA  to conduct a study on how effective using the U.S. Army to patrol the United States / Mexican border.
 In due time the report came back stating that the Army could be used very effectively  they're was just a small matter of raising the necessary troops  to do it .The GSA  based on the Pentagons own numbers said it would take 16 more active divisions to do it .At the time U.S. Ground Forces were worldwide ......16 divisions.


----------



## c_canuk (3 Oct 2007)

it's more fake security to make middle class people feel safer...

The biggest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbour was from students who crossed the American border right from Saudi Arabia legally with student visas...

This is more closing the barn door after the horse is gone... no strike that. This is adding new locks to the house after the horse is gone from the barn.

If the US really wanted to make an impact, they should have rebuilt the WTC exactly the way it was and gone to business as usual. Adding all this pointless and ineffective security that isn't going to stop anyone determined to attack them, taking away the rights and freedoms of it's citizens and filling everyone with fear is showing terrorists that they can have a big lasting effect on their victims.

Not only would reverting back to business as usual provide a satisfying FU to the terrorists along with the invasion of Afghanistan to remove their safe haven, by the event happening with little to no effect on North America it would have seen to be a very ineffective tactic were as right now it's been 5 years and we can't shut up about it? In stead of seeming unflappable we are acting like paniced children.

They want attention, don't let them have it unless they go through civilized means.


----------



## old medic (3 Oct 2007)

I'm off topic....

The title kills me.  Gaping Gaps.  Really ?
Could Wet Water or Snowing Snow pass through the Gaping Gaps?
 ;D


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Oct 2007)

GK .Dundas said:
			
		

> During the early eighties a Senate Sub committee ask the GSA  to conduct a study on how effective using the U.S. Army to patrol the United States / Mexican border.
> In due time the report came back stating that the Army could be used very effectively  they're was just a small matter of raising the necessary troops  to do it .The GSA  based on the Pentagons own numbers said it would take 16 more active divisions to do it .At the time U.S. Ground Forces were worldwide ......16 divisions.



Doing that, albeit with National Guard troops since last year:


> WASHINGTON, May 15, 2006 – Southwestern border states will deploy up to 6,000 National Guardsmen to provide support to border patrol missions, President Bush said this evening in a nationally televised speech. For decades the United States has not been in complete control of its borders," Bush said from the White House.  He said he intends to see that an additional 6,000 Border Patrol agents are trained to join the existing 12,000 by the end of 2008. The National Guardsmen will act as an immediate stopgap measure in the interim.  Bush stressed that National Guardsmen will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities, but will help exclusively in support functions. "The Border Patrol will remain in the lead," he said. "The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training."   The initial commitment of Guard troops would last one year, Bush said. "After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online," he added....



A bit more on OP Jump Start


> Under Operation Jump Start, About 6,000 National Guard Members Have Deployed To Help The Border Patrol Secure The Southern Border. In May, the President pledged that we would have up to 6,000 National Guard members in Southern Border States. Today, the President announced that we have met that pledge....



Some successes reported.....


> More than 2,000 miles from his home in Michigan City, Ind., and nearly 100 miles into the Arizona desert, Sgt. Brian Rogers, an Indiana National Guard member with the 938th Military Police Detachment, scans the brush and rugged terrain for anything worthy of a radio call to Tucson Sector Border Patrol.  He knows why he and 43 other Indiana Guard members are there, and after weeks of watching the desert for activity, understands the impact.  "Most people don't realize what's going on, how much we're helping, but when you're here, you get it," said Rogers. "We're (the Border Patrol's) eyes and ears." .....



....while some were underwhelmed, though:


> National Guard troops deployed along the U.S.-Mexico border as part of President Bush's plan to free U.S. Border Patrol agents have been assigned bodyguards -- some of the same agents the soldiers were sent to relieve.  Several veteran Border Patrol agents in Arizona told The Washington Times they were issued standing orders to be within five minutes of National Guard troops along the border and that Border Patrol units were pulled from other regions to protect the Guard units -- leaving their own areas short-handed.   The agents, who refer to the assignment as "the nanny patrol," said most of the Guard troops are not allowed to carry loaded weapons, despite a significant increase in border violence directed at Border Patrol agents and other law-enforcement personnel over the past year.  The National Border Patrol Council (NBPC), which represents all 10,000 of the agency's nonsupervisory agents, said the presence of more than 6,000 Guard troops on the border has allowed a few hundred agents to be reassigned from administrative to field duties, but that "about the same number are now assigned to guard the National Guard troops."   "Other agents are being assigned to supervise the National Guard troops, who are performing different administrative tasks," said NBPC President T.J. Bonner, a 28-year Border Patrol veteran....



As of January of this year, "at least 5,670 National Guard forces were deployed for this border security operation."

Most recently, we're starting to see reports of troop numbers dropping in this task:


> Half of the 6,000 National Guard troops sent to help secure the Mexico border are gone.  The rest will be gone by next summer, as planned, even though the federal government may not be ready to fill the void left by the troops' departure.  Senators from Arizona, California and New Mexico all have urged President Bush not to reduce the Guard's border presence and instead to extend Operation Jump Start, the troop deployment that began in June 2006. All Guard troops are scheduled to leave by July 15 ....


----------



## GK .Dundas (3 Oct 2007)

Deploying the National Guard in the manner in which it was done was 'nt an secuirty exercise it was an exerecise in Public Relations.
This was done in order to be seen by the public with out actually doing some as messy as actully doing something!


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Oct 2007)

old medic said:
			
		

> I'm off topic....
> 
> The title kills me.  Gaping Gaps.  Really ?
> Could Wet Water or Snowing Snow pass through the Gaping Gaps?



That's exactly what I was thinking!  ;D Too funny.....


----------

