Illegal Immigration, Part 4

And the last part, I hope. It's a topic that has me pretty conflicted.

In Part 1, I discussed my general stand on illegals. Most of them are good people, and I have little problem seeing them do well at jobs that most Americans either disdain or do poorly. In Part 2, I spoke of the importance of our relationship with Mexico, and what would happen to our economy if we ticked them off. In Part 3, I talked about crime issues, and ate some crow for having played those issues down earlier.

Now I'd like to talk about national security.

Michelle Malkin (follow me here) is my favorite blogger. And I'm glad she has a whole separate site devoted to her crusade against illegal immigration, because that is the one issue where I disagree with her. She expends most of her energy on this issue giving examples either of lax enforcement, facilitation of illegals by our government, or crimes committed by illegals. One question she doesn't address is why all this happens.

Why does President Bush, solidly conservative on most other issues, basically roll out the red carpet for Mexican Illegals? I keep waiting for Malkin to answer that question, but the most she or anybody else offer is that it is an attempt to pander either to small businesses who hire illegals as cheap labor or to secure the Hispanic vote in the southwestern states.

I don't believe either of those answers really explain it. How can the pacification of two voting blocks which are already solidly sympathetic (small business owners) or opposed (southwest Hispanics) to Republican candidates possibly compensate for the influx of a population which supposedly drives up American unemployment, crime, healthcare and education spending, and creates a major breach in national security?

But what if the national security breach didn't exist? In fact, what if the thing which looked like a breach was actually a strongpoint?

Consider this point: there is no rule against racial profiling in Mexico. Rules concerning probable cause searches, surveillance, and interrogation are also more lax.

Here is what I imagine. (Wild Speculation Alert: On!) I'll bet the NSA has agents coordinating with Mexican authorities at every single point of entry in Mexico. I wouldn't be surprised if the NSA has a regional headquarters at the American Embassy in Mexico City with the knowledge and consent of Vincente Fox's government. Finally, I'd wager that the NSA has a better handle on stopping terrorists in Mexico than they ever possibly could have had on the U.S./Mexican border.

Bottom line: If we ever really tried to close the border with Mexico, I suspect the number of international terrorists coming to the United States through Mexico would increase rather than decrease.