Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

espionage

Former ICE chief: Biden-Harris created greatest national security threat since 9/11

Published

7 minute read

From The Center Square

Former Border Patrol agent asks 23 years after 9/11: What does ‘safe’ mean?

Twenty-three years after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Americans are not any safer than they were before because of a border crisis facilitated by the Biden-Harris administration, national security experts argue.

One U.S. Army veteran who later served as a Border Patrol agent for 10 years but left citing Biden-Harris policies told The Center Square that Americans’ safety and security means something different depending on the administration in charge.

Since fiscal 2021, more than 12.5 million foreign nationals have illegally entered the country under Vice President Kamala Harris, designated the “border czar” by President Joe Biden. That’s by far the greatest number of any administration in U.S. history.

The illegal entries include two million who evaded capture, known as gotaways, alarming those in law enforcement because they say they don’t know who or where they are or how many are connected to countries of foreign concern or state sponsors of terrorism. Several hundred with connections to the Islamic terrorist organization, ISIS, have illegally entered the country, authorities confirmed this year.

Those who’ve been apprehended by U.S. authorities attempting to enter the U.S. include a record number of known or suspected terrorists – more than 1,700 since fiscal 2021. This is the greatest number in U.S. history, and equivalent to nearly two U.S. Army battalions.

The majority of those on the terrorist watch list apprehended by Americans came from Canada, nearly 1,100. They total the equivalent of one U.S. Army battalion.

The administration has “unsecured the border on purpose” and “created the greatest national security threat since 9/11,” Tom Homan, former director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told The Center Square.

The total number of illegal border crossers under Biden-Harris total more than the individual populations of 45 U.S. states, The Center Square reported.

The record number parallels Biden’s stated goal at a North American Summit in Washington, D.C., in 2021 to facilitate more foreign nationals coming to the U.S., The Center Square reported. He also formalized a Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection in 2022 with roughly two dozen countries to facilitate the “safe, orderly migration” of foreign nationals into the U.S. and in other countries.

The terminology has been repeatedly used by Harris and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. It’s also been embraced by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, whose agents have been ordered to release illegal foreign nationals into the country through new parole programs and a CBP One app. The programs and app are illegal, multiple states who sued to stop them, argue. Mayorkas was also impeached over them.

Despite Biden, Harris and Mayorkas claims that the border is secure and those being released into the country are being vetted, DHS Office of Inspector General audits prove otherwise. Federal agents can’t find foreign nationals released into U.S. as terrorism threats are heightened, The Center Square reported.

Despite this, Canadian officials have told The Center Square, “The Canada-U.S. border is the best-managed and most secure border in the world.” Mexico’s outgoing president said Mexico doesn’t have a cartel problem, the U.S. “drug problem” isn’t Mexico’s problem and “we are not going to act as any policemen for any foreign government.”

“The record number of people on the terrorist watchlist coming across the northern border” disproves the “most secure border in the world” claim, Homan said. “What they won’t tell you are the unknown gotaways coming through the northern border.”

Former Border Patrol chief Mark Morgan agrees, adding, “To say that our borders are secure is simply not a factual statement,” he said. “It’s just not. What level of threat is coming across is unknown.”

Morgan, also a retired FBI chief, was among several officials who warned Congress that the volume of single military age men illegally entering the U.S. equates to a “soft invasion” and a terrorist attack is likely imminent but preventable if security measures were put in place.

Ammon Blair, former Border Patrol agent and U.S. Army officer and senior fellow with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, said if the border were secure, the number of illegal border crossers would be zero.

He also pushed back on Biden-Harris administration claims about “safe, orderly migration,” saying, “Who would it be safe for? According to Mayorkas, safety means the safe, orderly, humane migration for illegal aliens into the country.”

“What does safe mean, and who are safe?” he asks. “Where are the protection protocols to protect Americans? There aren’t any. The only agency that has a protective order to secure a border is the U.S. military.”

Multiple officials have said there aren’t enough agents to patrol the northern or southwest borders, not to mention other ports of entry along the U.S. coast.

“We don’t have the resources to patrol the border, the technology or manpower,” Blair said. “The capacity to have 100% awareness of the border is astronomical and doesn’t happen with the current system under Department of Homeland Security.”

During Tuesday’s presidential debate, Harris deflected from answering questions about her role as border czar and didn’t say how she’d protect Americans from terrorist threats.

espionage

“Suitcase of Cash” and Secret Meeting Deepen Britain’s Beijing Espionage Crisis

Published on

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

Britain’s most consequential espionage scandal in a generation has narrowed on Keir Starmer’s inner cabinet after The Sunday Times revealed that alleged Chinese agent Christopher Berry was intercepted at Heathrow Airport with a “suitcase full of cash” — and that senior officials, including National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell and Cabinet Secretary Christopher Wormald, held a closed-door meeting, allegedly discussing that advancing the case would harm relations with Beijing, weeks before prosecutors abandoned the insider-threat file.

The revelations, combined with an explosive Opposition letter from Kemi Badenoch and a rare diplomatic intervention from Washington, have plunged Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government into the most serious national-security controversy of its tenure — one now shaking both Westminster and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. Not since the Kim Philby affair and the exposure of the Cambridge Spy Ring has a British government been so roiled by allegations of insider compromise and appeasement toward a hostile foreign state.

As The Sunday Times reported, Christopher Berry — a 33-year-old academic from Oxfordshire — was stopped under the Terrorism and Border Security Act after a February 2023 flight from China. Police seized £4,000 in cash, believed to have been supplied by his Chinese handler, codenamed “Alex,” linked to the Ministry of State Security.

A witness statement tabled in Parliament last week indicated that Berry funnelled real-time political intelligence through his MSS handler to one of Beijing’s senior leaders, all collected from a former Chinese teaching colleague — a Parliamentary researcher with deep access to senior Conservative MPs. Beijing reportedly viewed those MPs as a strategic threat, fearing that if they rose to higher office they would adopt a far stricter stance toward China’s geopolitical ambitions.

Though Berry was not detained at the time, the incident became central to the espionage case later dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service when the Starmer government declined to certify that China posed an “ongoing threat to national security” — a legal requirement under the Official Secrets Act.

The Sunday Times also revealed that Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Collins, the government’s sole witness, privately acknowledged that the decision not to describe China as an “ongoing threat” was “political.” The paper further disclosed that Jonathan Powell — a former banking executive who rose to become Starmer’s National Security Adviser — chaired a meeting on September 1 attended by Cabinet Secretary Christopher Wormald and MI5 Director-General Sir Ken McCallum, in which “the general theme of discussion was how the UK’s relationship with China was going to be damaged by this case.”

If accurate, that account directly contradicts Starmer’s assurance to Parliament that “no minister or special adviser was involved.” The implication — that Britain’s most senior national-security officials were weighing diplomatic consequences while an active espionage prosecution was still underway — has intensified accusations that the case was derailed by political interference rather than evidentiary weakness.

Within hours of the Sunday Times story, Opposition Leader Kemi Badenoch posted a letter to X accusing Keir Starmer of misleading Parliament and concealing ministerial involvement in the case’s collapse.

Framing the letter, Badenoch sought to explain the rapidly evolving affair to a wider audience. “I don’t blame you if you’ve struggled to follow the China spying case engulfing Parliament. Even MPs are finding it hard to keep up with a story that seems to change by the hour,” she wrote. “I suspect many fair-minded people have assumed this story can’t contain much. It seems too implausible for the government to have deliberately let off people who were accused of spying on MPs. But the story is truly astonishing. The layers of it have unravelled over the past few weeks like something from a spy novel.”

In the letter itself, Badenoch demands full disclosure of all correspondence, meetings, and witness-statement revisions involving Jonathan Powell, the Attorney General, or the Cabinet Office. She references the Sunday Times account directly, noting that “Powell left attendees with the understanding that Deputy National Security Adviser Collins’s witness statement would operate within the language of the report,” implying foreknowledge and coordination between Downing Street and prosecutors. She further alleges that Starmer’s ministers “softened” later witness statements to downplay Chinese espionage, replacing hard intelligence assessments with diplomatic phrasing designed to reassure Beijing. Her conclusion is cutting: “You have shown Britain is weak in the face of espionage, and have emboldened our enemies to believe they can spy on us with impunity.”

As reported previously by The Bureau, the controversy has now drawn international concern. The Chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, John Moolenaar, has issued an extraordinary public rebuke on the court matter — a move almost without precedent between close allies. In a two-page letter dated October 16, 2025, addressed to James Roscoe, chargé d’affaires at the British Embassy in Washington, Moolenaar warned that Britain’s decision to abandon the prosecution risked setting “a dangerous precedent that foreign adversaries can target democratically elected legislators with impunity.” He wrote that the decision “deeply troubles” U.S. lawmakers and “undermines Five Eyes security coordination,” given the substantial amount of evidence against Berry and Christopher Cash, who were accused of funnelling parliamentary intelligence to the Chinese Communist Party.

“I hope the UK government will not allow this case to falter,” Moolenaar said, “and will instead take the steps necessary to ensure that both justice and due process are served.”

The letter, co-signed by senior members of the Committee and publicly released by Congress, marks an exceptional public intervention in a live national-security case involving a Five Eyes partner. Moolenaar added that the decision to drop the prosecution — despite evidence confirming a direct intelligence channel from Westminster to Beijing — “paints a concerning picture,” noting the resumption of high-level UK–China trade talks, negotiations over China’s proposed “super embassy” in London, and London’s ongoing review of its diplomatic posture toward Beijing. “Allowing this PRC aggression to go unchecked,” he warned, “would only incentivize the CCP to further interfere in Western democracies.”

As The Bureau previously detailed, Matthew Collins’s witness statement traced an intelligence pipeline connecting Westminster directly to Beijing’s leadership. Berry, via his handler “Alex,” transmitted reports obtained from Christopher Cash, a parliamentary aide with access to Conservative MPs critical of Beijing. Collins confirmed that some of the same intelligence later appeared in the possession of a senior CCP Politburo Standing Committee member — reportedly Cai Qi, one of Xi Jinping’s closest allies. Collins also documented Beijing’s targeted inquiries into the 2022 Conservative leadership race, focusing on Tom Tugendhat and Neil O’Brien, both members of the China Research Group (CRG) and long-standing critics of the CCP.

Taken together, the Heathrow cash seizure, the Powell-chaired meeting, the Badenoch letter, and the U.S. congressional intervention point to a modern Cold War crisis — a confrontation that has now moved beyond Westminster to test the cohesion of the Western alliance itself.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

espionage

Breaking: P.E.I. Urges RCMP Probe of Alleged Foreign Interference, Money Laundering

Published on

The Great Enlightment Buddhist Academy, PEI

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

Prince Edward Island’s government has formally asked the RCMP to investigate allegations of foreign interference and money laundering tied to Buddhist-affiliated organizations operating in the province — an escalation that follows The Bureau’s reporting and last week’s press conference on Parliament Hill calling for a federal public inquiry.

In a letter sent today to RCMP Commissioner Michael Duheme, Premier Rob Lantz and Minister of Housing Cory Deagle urge federal authorities to “review any evidence available, engage with the individuals who have made these claims, and conduct an investigation into any wrongdoing.” A companion letter was sent to FINTRAC, asking Canada’s financial intelligence unit to assess whether regulatory action is warranted.

The government move comes a week after The Bureau reported on findings presented at an October 8 news conference tied to the book Canada Under Siege: How P.E.I. Became a Forward Operating Base for the Chinese Communist Party.

In a following op-ed, co-author Garry Clement said the press conference had “set down a marker: Canada has entered a new era of contestation — over influence, sovereignty, and the integrity of its democratic institutions.” In related coverage by CBC, representatives of the religious groups have denied any links to the Chinese Communist Party or any improper dealings.

Clement and co-authors argued that the allegations demand “action, reform, and reckoning,” and called for a federal public inquiry with full powers — an appeal joined by former Solicitor General and long-time P.E.I. MP Wayne Easter, who urged an inquiry capable of compelling testimony and documents.

The Bureau also revealed a development that stunned Islanders: a response subpoenaed by P.E.I. lawmakers showed that an anticipated 2016–2018 Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (IRAC) investigation into Buddhist-linked land holdings was never completed. A January 26, 2018 letter from IRAC’s appointed counsel notified firms representing the groups that the section 15 probe “has ended,” without public findings or any explanation of who ordered the closure or why. The disclosure raised fresh questions about oversight and potential conflicts, and now forms part of the backdrop to the province’s formal request for federal action.

The Bureau contacted IRAC last week with questions related to the agency’s management, including counsel relationships and prior positions within P.E.I. legal networks. New developments on this breaking story will be reported.

Today’s letter to RCMP Commissioner Duheme from the P.E.I. government explicitly references the October 8 statements by a former Solicitor General of Canada and a former RCMP Superintendent, noting it was “suggested that information exists that could provide grounds for a criminal investigation.” The Premier further flags assertions that P.E.I. has been used as “a forward operating base for the Chinese Communist Party,” calling the claim “serious” and stating it must be examined by federal agencies to determine whether any factual basis exists.

The province also points to what it describes as a newly mandated and ongoing investigation by IRAC into land holdings “associated with some of the same entities referenced in the public allegations,” using powers expanded in 2022 under the Lands Protection Act. Any findings with criminal or national-security implications, the letter says, will be referred to federal authorities.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

X