Mr. Speaker, on May 12, 2005, I made the following statement during a hearing in the House Committee on Government Reform on ``Securing Our Borders: What We Have Learned from Government Initiatives and Citizen Patrols'': Good afternoon.…
Mr. Speaker, on May 12, 2005, I made the following statement during a hearing in the House Committee on Government Reform on ``Securing Our Borders: What We Have Learned from Government Initiatives and Citizen Patrols'':
Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman Davis, for holding this
important hearing and thank you to the witnesses. We can all
agree on the tremendous importance of securing our border.
But frankly, I am not confident in how our government has
been handling border security one bit. I have two concrete
examples of deficiencies on the part of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection that my office has been investigating that
I'd like to highlight--that I think are representative of a
much greater problem.
The first case involves how U.S. Customs has handled an
investigation into slave labor allegations regarding a
product that we import into the U.S.--as you know, importing
products made with slave labor has been illegal since 1930.
Allegations of slave labor used in the production of pig
iron, in the Para state of Brazil, came out in the summer of
2004. As the United States reportedly imports 92 percent of
the pig iron produced in Brazil, most of which is produced in
Para, it is highly probable that this importation violates
section 1307 of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930, which states,
``All goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined,
produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign
country by convict labor or/land forced labor or land
indentured labor under penal sanctions shall not be entitled
to entry at any of the ports of the United States, and the
importation thereof is hereby prohibited.''
I sent a letter to U.S. Customs to ascertain what actions
had been taken in response to this violation of law. After
six months, I finally got a response, which said that Customs
had opened a file on the case in July 2004, and had
referred it to the FBI Attache Brasilia for further
investigation. The rest of the letter explained how
logistical difficulties had prevented even a single
investigator from visiting Para for a site visit. One
excuse: ``The Amazon Basin in Brazil is in a remote area
where the majority of the roads to this area are only
accessible via 4-wheel drive vehicles.'' The Trans-Amazon
highway, an important route for the economic development
in that area, runs right through Para. It can carry the
pig iron out of Para, but can't take our investigators
into Para. And frankly I would be surprised if none of our
FBI investigators in Brazil had access to a 4-wheel drive
vehicle.
The inaction of the investigators in this case is highly
unsatisfactory, and I am deeply disturbed by the broader
implications of such inadequacies. U.S. Customs and Border
Patrol, along with FBI Attache offices, are responsible not
only for investigating violations of tariff law, but they are
also responsible for keeping terrorists out of our country. I
believe the inefficiencies highlighted in this case reflect
the greater threat to the national security interests of the
United States. Furthermore, I am disturbed to think of the
possibility that trade motivations are hidden behind the
inadequate investigation in this case. I can assure you that
all the American miners forced to compete with slave labor
would also be disturbed by that possibility.
The second case involves the presence of an international
terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, in the United States, and
his recent application for asylum. Posada, a CIA- trained
Cuban exile, was responsible for organizing the bombing of a
Cuban civilian airliner flying from Bermuda to Venezuela. The
bombing killed all 73 people on the plane on October 6, 1976.
In addition to the civilian airline bombing, Posada
was implicated in the 1976 Washington, DC assassination of
former Chilean government minister Orlando Letelier.
Letelier, a prominent opponent of the Pinochet
dictatorship, was killed along with the American Ronni
Moffit in a car bombing, which was at the time, one of the
worst acts of foreign terrorism on American soil. Carter
Cornick, a retired counterterrorism specialist for the FBI
who worked on the Letelier case, said in an interview that
both bombings were planned at a June 1976 meeting in Santo
Domingo attended by Posada in addition to others. Mr.
Cornick said that Posada was involved ``up to his
eyeballs'' in planning the attack. A newly declassified
1976 F.B.I. document has confirmed this. Furthermore, at
the time of the bombings, Venezuelan police found maps and
other evidence in Posada's Venezuelan home that tied him
to the terrorist killings.
Posada was imprisoned in Venezuela, but escaped while
waiting for an appeal in 1985. In 1998, he admitted to the
New York Times that he was responsible for organizing a
number of bombings in tourist locations in Cuba, including
hotels, department stores and other civilian targets during
the summer of 1997. The bombings killed an Italian tourist
and injured 11 other people. In November 2000, Posada was
arrested in Panama for preparing a bomb explosion in the
University of Panama's Conference Hall where Fidel Castro was
going to speak. Hundreds of people were expected to attend
the event there, and had intelligence not uncovered the plot
beforehand there would have been massive civilian casualties.
Our nation's policy against terrorism is unequivocally
clear. President Bush defined this policy when he said on
September 19, 2001, ``anybody who harbors a terrorist,
encourages terrorism, will be held accountable. I would
strongly urge any nation in the world to reject terrorism,
expel terrorists.'' The National Security Strategy, released
in 2002, further defined this policy with, ``no cause
justifies terror. The United States will make no
concessions to terrorist demands and strike no deals with
them. We make no distinction between terrorists and those
who knowingly harbor or provide aid to them.'' Back in
1989; when the Justice Department was considering the
deportation of Orlando Bosch, one of Posada's associates,
Joe D. Whitley, then-Associate U.S. Attorney General said,
``The United States cannot tolerate the inherent
inhumanity of terrorism as a way of settling disputes.
Appeasement of those who would use force will only breed
more terrorists. We must look on terrorism as a universal
evil, even if it is directed toward those with whom we
have no political sympathy.'' Mr. Whitley, now General
Counsel for the Department of Homeland Security has
declined to comment on the Posada case.
Posada supposedly crossed the U.S. border six weeks ago,
and is presently here. His Miami lawyer, Eduardo Soto,
confirmed at a news conference last month that he had arrived
clandestinely into the United States. Orlando Bosch said in a
recent interview broadcast in Miami that he had spoken by
telephone with Posada, who, ``as everybody knows, is here.''
Yet the U.S. government has not even acknowledged it. Roger
F. Noriega, Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere
Affairs in the State Department said he did not even know
whether Posada was in the country. State Department spokesman
Tom Casey said in a recent press conference, ``In terms of
where he presently is, I think it's fair to say we don't
know.''
The U.S. government has not sent teams of investigators
into South Florida to find Posada--or if they have, the
investigators haven't done a very good job of finding him. No
bounties have been offered to recover Posada. U.S. Customs
and Border Patrol is responsible for securing our border, and
preventing terrorists from crossing it, yet a known
international terrorist--who committed an act of terrorism on
U.S. soil that killed an American citizen--crossed it, and
the U.S. government hasn't done a thing. It just isn't a
political priority.
I hope this hearing and the series of hearings on border
security that this Committee intends to hold will shed some
light not only on the two cases I described, but on the
larger problem that those cases represent: major deficiencies
on the part of the U.S. government to investigate Customs and
Border violations, when it frankly isn't in the political
interest of the United States. That is unacceptable. We
cannot pick and choose when to apply our laws and our
policies; they must be applied in universal situations. And
when they aren't, it compromises our national security. Thank
you.