Amazingly the United States public and most politicians still appear clueless about the war going on south of the U.S. border.
There seems to be a feeling that the violence and corruption will not spill over into the U.S. Unfortunately they are deeply mistaken. National Geographic Explorer recently did a show on the problems of Mexico’s failed drug war and how it affects the U.S.
It is widely accepted fact that corruption permeates through the Mexican government at all levels. To believe that it can’t happen here is simply ignorant. The money at stake is high. Already there have been cases of police and sheriffs prosecuted for aiding drug shipments across South Texas.
MSNBC.com reports that the Mexican drug cartels are stepping up efforts to recruit and infiltrate U.S. customs and border law enforcement agencies.
The case of Luis F. Alarid highlights a battle within the war. Alarid on the surface appeared on the straight path and headed on career in law enforcement. He served in the military, in the Army and Marines, did two tours in Iraq and returned home to pursue his dreams of law enforcement. An investigation into his activities revealed within in months of becoming a border agent, he earned $200,000 for waving trucks through with drugs and illegal immigrants. Alarid received seven years in federal prison.
The article states a few more cases. In one, another agent received 15 years for her crimes. A friend with connections to the cartels enticed her to turncoat while she was still in the academy. A former customs inspector received 20 years for her crimes.
In all cases, the convicted agents knew or were related to drug smugglers. With the need for increased numbers after September 11th, 2001, not every recruit could be scrutinized closely. Even if they had, who was going to disqualify Luis Alarid? He had a clean criminal and military service record. No matter how tight requirements tighten up, someone will always slip through or corrupted. There is no easy solution.
The sentences for all three agents strike me as light given the degree of the crimes. Corruption, breaches of security, betrayal of public trust and allowing illegal drugs and immigrants into the country should carry heavier sentences. In Texas, a corrupt public servant convicted of first degree felony can face 2-99 years or life imprisonment. With the threat of drugs and national security, I see know reason the laws aren’t toughened up and heavier sentences handed out. Drug lords pay large amounts of ransom for cooperation so it should be fitting that the U.S. extract a heavy sum too for breaking the public trust and allowing criminals to breach our borders.
Chaos doesn’t rule the border completely but politicians and the general public need to wake up and take action soon. Once the system breaks down completely then it will take many more years, if ever, to fix it.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Military, CIA and Blackwater used in Some Ops
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34372364/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/
The New York Times reports that Blackwater Worldwide security forces worked side by side with the CIA on some raids and special operations in Iraq. They also allege that Blackwater security helped transport detainees to the CIA's secret prison program. The article states that originally Blackwater personnel were hired to provide security to CIA agents and their bases.
Sources from former Blackwater and CIA operatives confirm that Blackwater forces did more that provide security.
Back when the war started in Afghanistan, I commented to a friend about the outsourcing of the war to the Northern Alliance. I had made an analogy to the Romans hiring mercenary armies toward the end of the Empire. Rome no longer used citizen soldiers for its army. My friend corrected me in my analysis. He said it was an interesting point but off the mark. Instead he believed it was a different scenario. The U.S. was aiding a local army fight its rebellion against a ruling regime. The U.S. wasn't really outsourcing the war but only aiding an ally. It just so happened that the ally's goals served the U.S.'s purpose. The U.S. ousted the Taliban with aid from the Northern Alliance. No mercenary army was hired. The Northern Alliance had a vested interest in ousting the Taliban.
After that point of view, I agreed with him for the most part. Still something bothered me about what I viewed as outsourcing.
On the surface, I don't see a problem with using a contractor for security. The CIA doesn't have a force to protect them in the field and the military is stretched around the world. I also don't see a problem using third parties for prisoner security and transportation.
According the Times article, former Blackwater employees said that "their involvement in the operations became so routine that the lines supposedly dividing the Central Intelligence Agency, the military and Blackwater became blurred."
The line blurring is what bothers me. Military, CIA and Special Ops forces
are trained specifically for the tasks at hand. Involving third party contractors into operations opens a whole can of worms. First of all, who do the contractors answer to? The military, CIA or corporate headquarters? How much influence do they have in planning missions? Sources are quoted saying that since Blackwater was involved with security they became involved in planning routes.
Another controversial point has been who are under whose legal system do they fall under? U.S, law or Iraqi or Afghan law? The military falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The CIA falls under U.S. laws for the most part. Third parties are civilian contractors. They aren't afforded the same legal protections that military and other government officials are. Even CIA agents don't fall under complete U.S. protection. If they are caught as spies in another country, that country can legal prosecute them and punish them. Similarly armed third party security aren't afforded rights under the Geneva Convention. Technically they could
be held and prosecuted as mercenaries. Mercenaries are generally prohibited by the Geneva Convention.
On the other hand, it is not so cut and dry as some critics would like.
After 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government had to act quick. In an instant the U.S. fight against terrorism changed. The intelligence community needed to expand rapidly. Translators, analysts and other technical experts were needed. It's not like the U.S. government had a stockpile of Pashtun speakers on staff. So while a plan was put in place to recruit for intelligence agencies for the long term, many slots needed to be field immediately. Thus came in the third party contractors.
The other part is we aren't on the ground with CIA and Special Ops. Who knows how bad the security situation is? Maybe occasionally it is permissible to use contractors to help in a mission. I prefer that they weren't but sometimes a situation may dictate that they are needed that way. Honestly we just don't know nor should we know everything that happens in the field.
The bottom line is that lives are at stake both on the frontlines and maybe here at home. Used wisely, third party contractors can be an asset. Steps must be taken though that the U.S. agencies and military don't become to dependant on them. If not careful, then maybe we are hiring mercenaries to fight our wars and starting to slip into a Roman like decline.
The New York Times reports that Blackwater Worldwide security forces worked side by side with the CIA on some raids and special operations in Iraq. They also allege that Blackwater security helped transport detainees to the CIA's secret prison program. The article states that originally Blackwater personnel were hired to provide security to CIA agents and their bases.
Sources from former Blackwater and CIA operatives confirm that Blackwater forces did more that provide security.
Back when the war started in Afghanistan, I commented to a friend about the outsourcing of the war to the Northern Alliance. I had made an analogy to the Romans hiring mercenary armies toward the end of the Empire. Rome no longer used citizen soldiers for its army. My friend corrected me in my analysis. He said it was an interesting point but off the mark. Instead he believed it was a different scenario. The U.S. was aiding a local army fight its rebellion against a ruling regime. The U.S. wasn't really outsourcing the war but only aiding an ally. It just so happened that the ally's goals served the U.S.'s purpose. The U.S. ousted the Taliban with aid from the Northern Alliance. No mercenary army was hired. The Northern Alliance had a vested interest in ousting the Taliban.
After that point of view, I agreed with him for the most part. Still something bothered me about what I viewed as outsourcing.
On the surface, I don't see a problem with using a contractor for security. The CIA doesn't have a force to protect them in the field and the military is stretched around the world. I also don't see a problem using third parties for prisoner security and transportation.
According the Times article, former Blackwater employees said that "their involvement in the operations became so routine that the lines supposedly dividing the Central Intelligence Agency, the military and Blackwater became blurred."
The line blurring is what bothers me. Military, CIA and Special Ops forces
are trained specifically for the tasks at hand. Involving third party contractors into operations opens a whole can of worms. First of all, who do the contractors answer to? The military, CIA or corporate headquarters? How much influence do they have in planning missions? Sources are quoted saying that since Blackwater was involved with security they became involved in planning routes.
Another controversial point has been who are under whose legal system do they fall under? U.S, law or Iraqi or Afghan law? The military falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The CIA falls under U.S. laws for the most part. Third parties are civilian contractors. They aren't afforded the same legal protections that military and other government officials are. Even CIA agents don't fall under complete U.S. protection. If they are caught as spies in another country, that country can legal prosecute them and punish them. Similarly armed third party security aren't afforded rights under the Geneva Convention. Technically they could
be held and prosecuted as mercenaries. Mercenaries are generally prohibited by the Geneva Convention.
On the other hand, it is not so cut and dry as some critics would like.
After 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government had to act quick. In an instant the U.S. fight against terrorism changed. The intelligence community needed to expand rapidly. Translators, analysts and other technical experts were needed. It's not like the U.S. government had a stockpile of Pashtun speakers on staff. So while a plan was put in place to recruit for intelligence agencies for the long term, many slots needed to be field immediately. Thus came in the third party contractors.
The other part is we aren't on the ground with CIA and Special Ops. Who knows how bad the security situation is? Maybe occasionally it is permissible to use contractors to help in a mission. I prefer that they weren't but sometimes a situation may dictate that they are needed that way. Honestly we just don't know nor should we know everything that happens in the field.
The bottom line is that lives are at stake both on the frontlines and maybe here at home. Used wisely, third party contractors can be an asset. Steps must be taken though that the U.S. agencies and military don't become to dependant on them. If not careful, then maybe we are hiring mercenaries to fight our wars and starting to slip into a Roman like decline.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Prison Escapee Caught, Mom Turns in Murder Suspect Son
The Escapee and the Gun
On December 1, 2009, convict Arcade Joseph Comeaux, Jr. escaped from a prison van while in transport from one prison unit to another one. He allegedly pulled a gun on the two officers transporting. He then stripped the officers and took the clothes for his disguise and weapons for his use.
Officials suspect a prison guard may have sneaked the gun into the prison for Comeaux.
He was finally caught by some workers at a flange factory.
Comeaux fooled prison officials he was wheelchair bound for ten years. Yet he was able to walk off during his escape.
One trouble spot seems to recur with in the Texas Correctional Department. Some prison guards supply contraband to inmates. Last year there was a scandal about cell phones smuggled into death row. In light of the cell phone smuggling, cries are starting to call for a shake up.
Both cases of smuggling are serious issues. Inmates are put in prison to not only punish but to protect society. When the jailers and guards are bringing contraband, the lives the public are a danger. One cell phone was used to threaten a family of a state Senator. Not only the inmates are responsible but so are the ones who facilitate life and smuggle items in for prisoners.
The only way to help remedy the situation is to come on down hard on those that receive the contraband but also on those that facilitate the smuggling harshly. When a prison guard takes the position he becomes a public servant of trust. The guard is entrusted to keep those on the inside locked up but also charged to keep the inmates influence outside to a minimum. Governments should just fire the guards but prosecute to the maximum the law allows. If for nothing else but betraying the public trust.
Scrupulous Mom
Over the week, a Galena Park teacher was stabbed, beaten and mutilated to death.
The amazing thing is the mother of the alleged suspect heard he was involved and called the police.
From the Houston Chronicle article linked above:
Good for Mom. She made a choice and decision over the nature of her son's alleged behavior. Maybe empathizing with the murdered teach and his family she called him in. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to do at all but she had the moral strength and judgment to do it. Congrats, Mom!
On December 1, 2009, convict Arcade Joseph Comeaux, Jr. escaped from a prison van while in transport from one prison unit to another one. He allegedly pulled a gun on the two officers transporting. He then stripped the officers and took the clothes for his disguise and weapons for his use.
Officials suspect a prison guard may have sneaked the gun into the prison for Comeaux.
He was finally caught by some workers at a flange factory.
Comeaux fooled prison officials he was wheelchair bound for ten years. Yet he was able to walk off during his escape.
One trouble spot seems to recur with in the Texas Correctional Department. Some prison guards supply contraband to inmates. Last year there was a scandal about cell phones smuggled into death row. In light of the cell phone smuggling, cries are starting to call for a shake up.
Both cases of smuggling are serious issues. Inmates are put in prison to not only punish but to protect society. When the jailers and guards are bringing contraband, the lives the public are a danger. One cell phone was used to threaten a family of a state Senator. Not only the inmates are responsible but so are the ones who facilitate life and smuggle items in for prisoners.
The only way to help remedy the situation is to come on down hard on those that receive the contraband but also on those that facilitate the smuggling harshly. When a prison guard takes the position he becomes a public servant of trust. The guard is entrusted to keep those on the inside locked up but also charged to keep the inmates influence outside to a minimum. Governments should just fire the guards but prosecute to the maximum the law allows. If for nothing else but betraying the public trust.
Scrupulous Mom
Over the week, a Galena Park teacher was stabbed, beaten and mutilated to death.
The amazing thing is the mother of the alleged suspect heard he was involved and called the police.
From the Houston Chronicle article linked above:
Vega, a Mexican citizen, is believed to be in Mexico, said a source close to the investigation who asked not to be identified. Vega called his mother from Mexico and told her what he had done, and his mother then called police, the source said.
Good for Mom. She made a choice and decision over the nature of her son's alleged behavior. Maybe empathizing with the murdered teach and his family she called him in. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to do at all but she had the moral strength and judgment to do it. Congrats, Mom!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
