Posted on 05/10/2006 1:48:26 AM PDT by M. Thatcher
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is refuting a Daily Bulletin report that the U.S. Border Patrol provided information to the Mexican government about the whereabouts of civilian border watch groups.
Read the disputed article: U.S. tipping Mexico to Minuteman patrols
See the Mexican Government Web page: www.sre.gob.mx/eventos/minuteman/reporte3
"Today's report by the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, `U.S. tipping Mexico to Minuteman patrols,' is inaccurate," read the statement issued Tuesday evening. "Border Patrol does not report activity by civilian, non-law enforcement groups to the government of Mexico."
Kristi Clemens, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection, would not elaborate on the agency's statement other than to say the U.S. gives information to Mexican officials under the rules of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963, which provides foreign nationals being detained by a government the right to consular access.
"This is the same agreement that protects United States citizens when they travel to foreign countries," according to the statement.
An August 2005 document, "Third Report on the Activities of Vigilantes" -- posted on Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Relations Web site -- suggests U.S. officials were giving out more details than required by the Vienna Convention. Part of that information was the location of U.S. citizens participating in volunteer border patrols.
The Daily Bulletin reported on the contents of that document and two others on the Mexican Web site in a story published in Tuesday's editions.
Mexican consulates also went beyond the boundaries of the Vienna Convention, asking U.S. Border Patrol officials to provide them with information on "vigilantes" operating along the U.S. border, according to the August 2005 document.
Some of the information cited in the Mexican document originally was given only to U.S. Border Patrol and law enforcement officials, border watch organizers said.
"Nobody but law enforcement and Border Patrol knew where we were at," said Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Chino-based nonprofit group Friends of the Border Patrol. "So how is our base address on a Mexican government document dated last August? Nobody, not even media, had this information."
Ramirez said he revealed the location of his base camp only to local and federal officials. The Mexican document gives the exact location of his group's site, which was on private property near San Diego.
According to Ramirez, the group had no encounters at that site with undocumented migrants, which would have been the only cause for that information to be revealed under the Vienna Convention.
On Monday, Mario Martinez, a U.S. Customs and Border spokesman, told the Daily Bulletin that when illegal immigrants are apprehended in the U.S., they have the right, under the Convention, to be represented by their country's consulate office and to information regarding their apprehension.
Information contained in a Border Patrol agent's field report, which is filed when a person is caught, would reveal the location of the detainee and therefore the area where the volunteer group is operating, Martinez said.
Martinez did not deny that information on the border volunteers was being shared with the Mexican government. He added that the group's whereabouts also were identified by numerous media outlets.
However, the Mexican report also contains specific information on civilian groups operating much farther inside the United States.
For example, the document notes that 50 Minuteman volunteers work in Chicago, focusing mainly on employers who hire illegal immigrants.
Minuteman volunteers said specific information -- such as the number of volunteers and their plans -- could have been provided only by law enforcement officials at that time. The document credits the various Mexican consul general offices in the U.S. with providing the information to the Mexican Foreign Secretary for the reports.
"How did they know the number of volunteers in Chicago? And why should the Mexican government care?" asked Connie Hair, spokeswoman for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in Washington, D.C.
The three reports on the Mexican Web site documented the activities of the civilian groups based on concerns the Mexican government had about volunteer patrols on the border in 2005, said Rafael Laveaga, spokesman for the Mexican Embassy in Washington, D.C.
"The Border Patrol does not report activity of the Minutemen to the Mexican consulate," Laveaga said. "But it's all a matter of perception. If a migrant requests to have counsel, which is their right under the Vienna Convention, then the information is provided to the counsel."
Throughout the Mexican government's reports on "vigilantes," it is noted that Mexican consulates in the U.S. contacted Border Patrol officials seeking U.S. cooperation in reporting instances of civilians monitoring the border. Among such requests:
The Mexican consul in Presidio, Texas, asked the Marfa Sector's Border Patrol chief to alert them if the U.S. detected any volunteer activity.
In Phoenix, consulate officials asked the Border Patrol to notify them if civilian groups apprehended any undocumented migrants so consulate representatives could interview them.
In San Diego, the document referred to a meeting with Border Patrol Chief Darryl Griffen stating that "Mr. Griffen reiterated to the undersecretary his promise to notify the General Consul right away when the vigilantes detain or participate in the detention of any undocumented migrant."
"It appears the border reports are the tip of the iceberg," said Chris Simcox, founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, which began patrolling the border last April.
Such requests from Mexico, and U.S. officials acquiescing to them, are not new, say Border Patrol agents.
Scott James, a former Tucson agent, resigned after eight years of service in February, citing a lack of support for agents by the Department of Homeland Security.
He said that U.S. Border Patrol officials provided office space inside their headquarters to Mexican consulate officials, allowed the consulate to dictate the agents' activities, and gave the consulate information on ongoing investigations.
Such courtesies were not extended to consulate offices of other countries, James said.
Sara A. Carter can be reached by e-mail at sara.carteror by phone at (909) 483-8552.
I read the threads. People on both sides gave as good as they got. Your loving comment is a case in point.
You really should. They are corrupted, racist and dirty as heck. So bad that there's a good chance they could go socialist/communist in the near future. To have a government like that right next to us could be a major concern.
And an unintended consequence of completely shutting off the flow of workers from there to here might well be to start the requisite revolution.
As it stands now, we're a safety valve for those Mexicans who happen to have the gumption to do something to better their conditions. You can be sure that Vincente Fox knows that....
There's a lot more to this debate than the "build a wall" types are willing to admit.
bump for publicity
No, more like the different stories that came every day from the Schindler family re: Terri Schiavo.
I've heard those reports too. ACLU/leftist types may be passing the MM locations on to the Mexican consuls in LA and elsewhere who in turn pass it to their bosses in Mexico. The USBP has deniability but their upper echelons are probably not unhappy with whoever is passing the info to the Mexicans.
Me, too ... I'm not sure why immediately believing the charge is "knee-jerk" but immediately believing the denial is not.
In other words, the Border Patrol does not report directly to the Mexican government, but another department of the U.S. government DOES.
Could you post that in Japanese?
:>)
I disagree. I think the "build a wall" crowd is the only one looking at the big picture. Yes, we can have a guest worker program that benefits both us and the immigrants, but unless we have a sealed border, it won't work. The border must be secured first.
>>Scott James, a former Tucson agent, resigned after eight years of service in February, citing a lack of support for agents by the Department of Homeland Security.
He said that U.S. Border Patrol officials provided office space inside their headquarters to Mexican consulate officials, allowed the consulate to dictate the agents' activities, and gave the consulate information on ongoing investigations. <<
An allegation like that should warrent investigation.
Doesn't mean the Border Patrol, or the Feds gave Mexican officials the info. Could have been a local person who might have mentioned it to someone else who got the info the the Mexican govt.
My point exactly. Stories that change with the days. We all participate in them, even you. This story is no different.
Well there are two kinds of denials in government.
#1 a real total denial because it didn't happen.
#2 a word game where it happened, but they call it another name.
Helluva point there Ollie!
What do you think, Howlin?
As long as those changes reinforce the preconceived biases of the single-issue folks, the internal contradictions are ignored.
As I found out, trying to point out what the article was really talking about is not particularly welcome.
As it stands now, we're a safety valve for those Mexicans who happen to have the gumption to do something to better their conditions. You can be sure that Vincente Fox knows that....
Frankly, I wonder if some brainiac on our side hasn't crunched the numbers and determined at least some sectors of our economy are dependent on skirting laws that govern hiring American citizens.
I think it's because most of us were willing to wait for the OTHER side of the story before jumping to conclusions.
Of course, we're not pushing agenda, so we don't have a vested interest in one side being true to the exclusion of the other.
No kidding.
Can you give any reason why your vetting process is superior to Michelle Malkin's? She seems to be running with this on her new endeavor "vent" which is less than two weeks old. I'd think she'd be kind of cautious with her credibility at this point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.