Last week the White House Summit between Canada, Mexico and U.S. or the “Three Amigos” drew little scrutiny from the media. Instead, the Rose Garden coverage centered on President Obama’s remarks cautioning the Supreme Court to forego judicial activism when deciding the fate of Obama care (the decision is expected sometime in June). The weeklong controversy focused on the president’s lack of respect for members of the Supreme Court and sparked outrage from both political parties, forcing Obama’s aides to reinvent the statement.
Meanwhile, America’s northern and southern neighbors quietly suggested the Obama Administration has relegated the once robust partnership into a “frenemies-like” relationship.
While this allegation failed to make headlines in America, Canada and Mexico’s hometown news agencies reported that America’s largest trading partners are suffering through a deteriorating relationship.
Fortunately for Americans, the Canadian and Mexican press told the real story. Canada's National Post quoted former Canadian diplomat Colin Robertson as saying the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the three-nation alliance it has fostered since 1994 have been so neglected they're "on life support." Under NAFTA Canada closely aligned itself with America providing a positive trade rapport for both countries.
“NAFTA gave us a serious relationship with Mexico but, as Monday’s summit illustrated, we continue to be a somewhat reluctant partner,” Robertson said. “Taking advantage of our shared continent is a good idea, but it requires vision and boldness if we’re to realize the advantage of resources, market and labor.”
Robertson further explains that last week’s summit only highlighted a weakened American partnership. “These meetings are essentially ‘dual bilaterals’ between Mexico and the U.S. and then, time permitting, between Canada and the U.S. We have to await the outcome of this year’s elections in Mexico and the U.S. before we can revive the North American idea.”
Canada also had strong words for American officials regarding Mexico’s battle with the powerful drug cartels. “(They) deserve our support in combatting the drug menace... If we can wage war in Afghanistan and Libya, then surely we can lend a helping hand in our neighborhood.”
When it comes to trade and other business interests, Canada points to Mexico’s relaxed regulations as another attractive reason for Ottawa to create or invest in businesses. “We also have increasing commercial interests. The World Bank says Mexico is the easiest place in Latin America to run a business and, by mid-century, Goldman Sachs reckons the country will be the world’s fifth-largest economy, bigger than that of Germany, Russia and Japan,” Robertson concluded.
With the fragile American economy teetering, the Obama Administration must address the nation’s soaring energy costs. Yet, the White House just axed the Keystone XL pipeline that would have created American jobs and provided lower oil prices.
According to the Winnipeg Free Press, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper “warned Obama the U.S. will have to pay market prices for its Canadian oil after Obama's de facto veto of the Keystone XL pipeline. Canada is (now) preparing to sell its oil to China.”
Under NAFTA, the American consumers enjoy lower oil prices and are risking the favorable trade status with their northern neighbor. During the Canadian Prime Minister’s visit, he warned the Obama Administration that the costs are “about to change.”
Meanwhile, Canadians said they have been waiting patiently for U.S. support to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) composed of free-trade members including the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Peru, Chile, and Singapore.
However, Canadian diplomats have accused the U.S. of blocking their entry into Trans-Pacific Partnership.
President Obama tacitly conceded Canada’s complaint and told the Rose Garden press pool “every country that is participating is going to have to make some modifications.”
Canada's dissatisfaction reflected a far different tone. “Our strong sense is that most of the members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would like to see Canada join,” Prime Minister Harper said.
The Prime Minister also suggested that it was the “Obama administration alone” that blocked Canada’s entrance into the profitable Trans-Pacific Partnership. Canada made it crystal clear that Obama’s recent rebuke for TPP and the Keystone XL oil pipeline (reports say Canada holds a third of the World’s oil supply with 175 billion barrels according to the CIA Fact book) will result in higher energy prices for American’s already struggling with record-setting fuel prices.
Mexico has also expressed its interest in joining the TPP.
“I'd like to reiterate the interest of my country to join forces as soon as possible to the TPP and its negotiations,” Mexican President Felipe Calderon said at the White House meeting. “We are convinced that the experience and participation of Mexico will enrich this free-trade project of the latest generation that encompasses countries in Asia, Oceania and America.”
However, negotiations remain stalled as Obama launches his bid to retain power, and claims that adding new countries to the negotiation table will only hinder the process.
“Consultations with our Trans-Pacific partners are now under way on how new members can meet the high standards of this trade agreement, which could be a real model for the world,” Obama explained.
"With respect to the TPP, as is true of any process of arriving at a trade agreement, every country that's participating is going to have to make some modifications," Obama said. “That's inherent in the process, because each of our countries have their idiosyncrasies, certain industries that have in the past been protected… certain practices that may be unique to that country but end up creating disadvantages for businesses from other countries. And so it’s a process of everybody making adjustments.”
In the mean time America’s relationship with Mexico continues to deteriorate under the Obama Administration. Topping the list for Mexico’s complaint is “Operation Fast and Furious” (a program that let 2,000 firearms “walk” across the border and into the hands of ruthless drug cartels). The botched Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) program has left hundreds of Mexican citizens, law enforcement agents and government officials dead. President Felipe Calderon told U.S. officials that America’s lack of arrests associated with the failed gunwalking program showed a flagrant disregard for the Mexican people who have been killed with “Fast and Furious” firearms.
The Mexico City newspaper the Excelsior reported that President Calderon “bitterly brought up Operation Fast and Furious,” a program that Mexico claims is responsible for the loss of thousands of lives.
The lack of clarity from U.S. leaders investigating the Fast and Furious fiasco has not only strained the U.S./Mexico relationship, but insiders say it is shifting America’s strong alliance with Mexico toward “frenemy” status.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Border Patrol takes $1.2 million in illicit drugs off the streets
In separate drug smuggling incidents, Border Patrol agents working at the Interstate 8 and 5 checkpoints thwarted a pair of marijuana and cocaine smuggling attempts. The agents confirmed the seizure of cocaine and marijuana had an estimated street value of $1,196,445.
Yesterday, Border Patrol agents encountered a female 59-year-old U.S. citizen driving a BMW passing through the I-8 checkpoint just east of San Diego. The woman’s anxious and jumpy behavior concerned agents and they referred her to the checkpoint’s secondary inspection zone.
“A Border Patrol K-9 team performed a cursory inspection of the vehicle resulting in a positive alert,” according to Scott Simon, of the San Diego Border Patrol. “Agents searched the vehicle and discovered 40 bundles of cocaine in a non-factory compartment under the front floorboard. The cocaine weighed 117.55 pounds and had an estimated street value of $1,175,500.”
A second incident unfolded at the I-5 checkpoint north of San Diego near Camp Pendleton Marine base. A 22-year-old male Mexican national arrived at the checkpoint shortly after noon driving a Ford Windstar. After the Border Patrol K-9 team inspected the minivan, agents were alerted to a concealed compartment that stored 11 bundles of marijuana.
Advertisement
Border Patrol agents searched the minivan, “and discovered six bundles of marijuana in the passenger-side, rear-quarter panel and five bundles in the spare tire located under the vehicle. The marijuana weighed a total of 41.89 pounds and had an estimated street value of $20,945.”
The U.S. Border Patrol seized both vehicles used in the narcotic smuggling incidents. The suspected smugglers, and their narcotics in both incidents were turned over to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for further investigation,” according to a CBP statement.
To report suspicious activity call the San Diego Border Patrol at (619) 498-9900.
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
Continue reading on Examiner.com Border Patrol takes $1.2 million in illicit drugs off the streets - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/border-patrol-takes-1-2-million-illicit-drugs-off-the-streets#ixzz1r8HdAZtY
Yesterday, Border Patrol agents encountered a female 59-year-old U.S. citizen driving a BMW passing through the I-8 checkpoint just east of San Diego. The woman’s anxious and jumpy behavior concerned agents and they referred her to the checkpoint’s secondary inspection zone.
“A Border Patrol K-9 team performed a cursory inspection of the vehicle resulting in a positive alert,” according to Scott Simon, of the San Diego Border Patrol. “Agents searched the vehicle and discovered 40 bundles of cocaine in a non-factory compartment under the front floorboard. The cocaine weighed 117.55 pounds and had an estimated street value of $1,175,500.”
A second incident unfolded at the I-5 checkpoint north of San Diego near Camp Pendleton Marine base. A 22-year-old male Mexican national arrived at the checkpoint shortly after noon driving a Ford Windstar. After the Border Patrol K-9 team inspected the minivan, agents were alerted to a concealed compartment that stored 11 bundles of marijuana.
Advertisement
Border Patrol agents searched the minivan, “and discovered six bundles of marijuana in the passenger-side, rear-quarter panel and five bundles in the spare tire located under the vehicle. The marijuana weighed a total of 41.89 pounds and had an estimated street value of $20,945.”
The U.S. Border Patrol seized both vehicles used in the narcotic smuggling incidents. The suspected smugglers, and their narcotics in both incidents were turned over to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for further investigation,” according to a CBP statement.
To report suspicious activity call the San Diego Border Patrol at (619) 498-9900.
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
Continue reading on Examiner.com Border Patrol takes $1.2 million in illicit drugs off the streets - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/border-patrol-takes-1-2-million-illicit-drugs-off-the-streets#ixzz1r8HdAZtY
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Tijuana drug lord sentenced to 25 years in prison
When a San Diego judge slammed his gavel down, notorious drug cartel leader of the Tijuana Arellano-Felix Organization (AFO), Benjamin Arellano-Felix received 25 years in a federal prison.
U.S. District Court Judge Larry A. Burns ordered the 60-year-old to serve what will most likely be the rest of his life behind bars for his role in racketeering and money laundering crimes. Judge Burns also required the kingpin to forfeit $100 million dollars.
“The Tijuana Cartel was one of the world’s most brutal drug trafficking networks, but has now met its demise with leader Benjamin Arellano-Felix’s sentencing today,” said DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart. “It is a major victory for DEA and Mexico’s Calderon Administration. Together, we will continue our pressure on the Mexican cartels whose leaders, members, and facilitators will be prosecuted and face the justice they fear.”
Once Arellano-Felix was led out of the courtroom, U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy said this was the perfect ending for the drug cartel leader who’s responsible for murder and mayhem often associated with drug cartels.
Advertisement
“Today’s prison sentence virtually ensures that Arellano-Felix will spend the remainder of his life in custody. Following this sentence, he will be deported to Mexico to finish a 22-year sentence,” Duffy said. She went on to say the landmark achievement of bringing down a powerful cartel in the United States, proves that Mexico’s joint effort to dismantle international cartels operating on both sides of the border can work.
Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales also lauded the conviction of Arellano-Felix and said, “this defendant has finally been held accountable for his crimes. Today’s sentence, together with what remains of his sentence in Mexico, will go a long way in ensuring that Arellano Felix spends his remaining years in prison.”
The international drug trafficking AFO organization controlled the flow of cocaine, marijuana as well as other illicit drugs across the Mexican/U.S. border cities of Tijuana and Mexicali. AFO’s reach also extended into southern Mexico and Colombia.
The kingpin's reign of terror ended when Mexican authorities captured him on March of 2002 upon which the U.S. government began the extradition process that was granted in 2007. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) finally saw justice served after Arellano-Felix’s years of unsuccessful appeals finally lead to the drug lord’s transfer to a U.S. prison on April 2011.
San Diego’s new Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Acting Special Agent in Charge Eric Birnbaum said, “Today's sentencing marks the end of Mr. Arellano-Felix's reign as the leader of one of the most dangerous drug and organized crime organizations our agencies have ever investigated. While there is still much work to do, it is particularly noteworthy that this culmination would not have been possible without the cumulative efforts of law enforcement on both sides of the border. We are pleased to stand united against the violence brought forth by the AFO and see this individual brought to justice.”
Authorities said the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) special agents were ultimately responsible for dismantling the AFO’s money laundering scheme.
"Today’s sentencing is further evidence of the successful partnership that IRS Criminal Investigation has with other law enforcement agencies by using our financial expertise to unravel the money laundering component of this multinational drug-trafficking organization,” said Leslie P. DeMarco, Special Agent in Charge of IRS Criminal Investigation Los Angeles Field Office.
Court records and the defendant’s confession confirmed, Arellano-Felix lead the AFO drug cartel from 1986 to March 2002. Prosecutors provided evidence that the cartel’s decision maker Arellano-Felix, ordered numerous crimes against Mexican and Americans who were involved in the drug trade.
Attorneys for the government said under Arellano-Felix’s leadership the CEO ordered directives to top AFO organization lieutenants, including his brothers, Ramon, Eduardo, and Francisco Javier Arellano-Felix.
According to court testimony, “Arellano-Felix and other AFO members conspired to import and distribute within the United States hundreds of tons of cocaine and marijuana, for which the AFO profits reached hundreds of millions in U.S. dollars. At Arellano-Felix’s direction, members of the AFO kidnapped, physically restrained and murdered numerous persons in furtherance of the AFO's illegal activities.”
Other crimes committed by Arellano-Felix include bribing law enforcement officials, military personnel, as well as murdering informants and potential witnesses that could obstruct or impede any official investigation.
An integral component of a successful cartel centers on money laundry and the Arellano-Felix AFO organization conspired with other members of the narco trade to laundered millions of dollars of drug trafficking profits. The illicit drug-trafficking activities extended to transport, transmit, and transfer hundreds of millions in U.S. dollars from the United States to Mexico, according to a statement by the DEA.
The multi-agency investigation included DEA, FBI, and the IRS Criminal Investigation division. Assistant United States Attorneys Joseph Green, James Melendres, Daniel Zipp and U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy prosecuted the AFO case in the Southern District of California. The U.S. Attorney explained the Criminal Division Office of International Affairs delivered meaningful assistance in the extradition of the drug lord.
The U.S. government mandates that all international investigations must receive a green light from the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF). The OCDETF program was formed to consolidate and coordinate all law enforcement resources to ensure federal, state and foreign agencies share case details as part of the “connecting to dots” strategy after the 9/11 hearings highlighted the lack of information sharing between agencies.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Tijuana drug lord, Arellano-Felix sentenced to 25 years in U.S. prison - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/tijuana-drug-lord-arellano-felix-sentenced-to-25-years-u-s-prison#ixzz1qzzzqSfr
U.S. District Court Judge Larry A. Burns ordered the 60-year-old to serve what will most likely be the rest of his life behind bars for his role in racketeering and money laundering crimes. Judge Burns also required the kingpin to forfeit $100 million dollars.
“The Tijuana Cartel was one of the world’s most brutal drug trafficking networks, but has now met its demise with leader Benjamin Arellano-Felix’s sentencing today,” said DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart. “It is a major victory for DEA and Mexico’s Calderon Administration. Together, we will continue our pressure on the Mexican cartels whose leaders, members, and facilitators will be prosecuted and face the justice they fear.”
Once Arellano-Felix was led out of the courtroom, U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy said this was the perfect ending for the drug cartel leader who’s responsible for murder and mayhem often associated with drug cartels.
Advertisement
“Today’s prison sentence virtually ensures that Arellano-Felix will spend the remainder of his life in custody. Following this sentence, he will be deported to Mexico to finish a 22-year sentence,” Duffy said. She went on to say the landmark achievement of bringing down a powerful cartel in the United States, proves that Mexico’s joint effort to dismantle international cartels operating on both sides of the border can work.
Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales also lauded the conviction of Arellano-Felix and said, “this defendant has finally been held accountable for his crimes. Today’s sentence, together with what remains of his sentence in Mexico, will go a long way in ensuring that Arellano Felix spends his remaining years in prison.”
The international drug trafficking AFO organization controlled the flow of cocaine, marijuana as well as other illicit drugs across the Mexican/U.S. border cities of Tijuana and Mexicali. AFO’s reach also extended into southern Mexico and Colombia.
The kingpin's reign of terror ended when Mexican authorities captured him on March of 2002 upon which the U.S. government began the extradition process that was granted in 2007. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) finally saw justice served after Arellano-Felix’s years of unsuccessful appeals finally lead to the drug lord’s transfer to a U.S. prison on April 2011.
San Diego’s new Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Acting Special Agent in Charge Eric Birnbaum said, “Today's sentencing marks the end of Mr. Arellano-Felix's reign as the leader of one of the most dangerous drug and organized crime organizations our agencies have ever investigated. While there is still much work to do, it is particularly noteworthy that this culmination would not have been possible without the cumulative efforts of law enforcement on both sides of the border. We are pleased to stand united against the violence brought forth by the AFO and see this individual brought to justice.”
Authorities said the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) special agents were ultimately responsible for dismantling the AFO’s money laundering scheme.
"Today’s sentencing is further evidence of the successful partnership that IRS Criminal Investigation has with other law enforcement agencies by using our financial expertise to unravel the money laundering component of this multinational drug-trafficking organization,” said Leslie P. DeMarco, Special Agent in Charge of IRS Criminal Investigation Los Angeles Field Office.
Court records and the defendant’s confession confirmed, Arellano-Felix lead the AFO drug cartel from 1986 to March 2002. Prosecutors provided evidence that the cartel’s decision maker Arellano-Felix, ordered numerous crimes against Mexican and Americans who were involved in the drug trade.
Attorneys for the government said under Arellano-Felix’s leadership the CEO ordered directives to top AFO organization lieutenants, including his brothers, Ramon, Eduardo, and Francisco Javier Arellano-Felix.
According to court testimony, “Arellano-Felix and other AFO members conspired to import and distribute within the United States hundreds of tons of cocaine and marijuana, for which the AFO profits reached hundreds of millions in U.S. dollars. At Arellano-Felix’s direction, members of the AFO kidnapped, physically restrained and murdered numerous persons in furtherance of the AFO's illegal activities.”
Other crimes committed by Arellano-Felix include bribing law enforcement officials, military personnel, as well as murdering informants and potential witnesses that could obstruct or impede any official investigation.
An integral component of a successful cartel centers on money laundry and the Arellano-Felix AFO organization conspired with other members of the narco trade to laundered millions of dollars of drug trafficking profits. The illicit drug-trafficking activities extended to transport, transmit, and transfer hundreds of millions in U.S. dollars from the United States to Mexico, according to a statement by the DEA.
The multi-agency investigation included DEA, FBI, and the IRS Criminal Investigation division. Assistant United States Attorneys Joseph Green, James Melendres, Daniel Zipp and U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy prosecuted the AFO case in the Southern District of California. The U.S. Attorney explained the Criminal Division Office of International Affairs delivered meaningful assistance in the extradition of the drug lord.
The U.S. government mandates that all international investigations must receive a green light from the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF). The OCDETF program was formed to consolidate and coordinate all law enforcement resources to ensure federal, state and foreign agencies share case details as part of the “connecting to dots” strategy after the 9/11 hearings highlighted the lack of information sharing between agencies.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Tijuana drug lord, Arellano-Felix sentenced to 25 years in U.S. prison - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/tijuana-drug-lord-arellano-felix-sentenced-to-25-years-u-s-prison#ixzz1qzzzqSfr
Afghan War ain’t about hearts and minds - 'just win, baby' Continue reading on Examiner.com Afghan War ain’t about hearts and minds - 'just win, baby
Following the U.S. Army’s Counterinsurgency Manual, U.S. and NATO forces have sought to win the “hearts and minds” of the Afghani populace as the cornerstone to winning the war against al Qaeda and the Taliban. However, as Americans learned with prior counterinsurgencies in Vietnam and Iraq, the “hearts and minds” strategy is unwinnable when employed by a third party intervener (US and NATO). When the host populace distains its own government they turn their displeasure to the occupier and mar any chance at victory. Unfortunately for Americans, that is precisely what is unfolding in Afghanistan.
“Even when the U.S. and allied militaries are able, together with Afghan forces, to wrest control of an area away [sic] from the Taliban, violence continues as Afghans frustrated by the absence of accountable government and rule of law rebel against the civilian authorities,” (Hearts and Minds in Afghanistan: Explaining the Absence of Victory, Andrew M. Exum (2011) p.7).
Advertisement
Warring nations date back to the oldest civilizations and historians have written volumes of wisdom about the brutality of war. Regrettably, Afghanistan has been embroiled in war throughout most of its turbulent history.
Prussian militarist, von Clausewitz wrote that war is the final act of diplomacy in that its purpose is to break the will of the enemy to resist (aka destroy his means of resistance) and force your will upon him. And of course Sun Tzu says, war must not be entered lightly but requires deliberation and that “victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.”
With these resounding words of historic wisdom, modern day military thinkers claim a kinder- gentler- war is possible. The Geneva Conventions (1864-1949) have attempted to make war more civilized theorizing nations could reduce civilian casualties and property damage in the quest to fight a more humane war.
It hasn’t worked. War is still brutal. Soldiers and civilians are killed, and property is damaged. The bitter, enduring 10-year Middle East War has claimed nearly 8,000 U.S. military lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. Perhaps more importantly, it's the war’s elusive and amorphous goals that have lost American "hearts and minds."
Many Americans would rather follow the words of football great, Al Davis, and “just win, baby.”
A recent CNN poll reflects 75 percent of the American people do not support a sustained war effort in Afghanistan. “We cannot fight wars by polls,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta implored. “If we do that we're in deep trouble. We have to operate based on what we believe is the best strategy to achieve the mission that we are embarked on. And the mission here is to safeguard our country by ensuring that the Taliban and al Qaeda never again find a safe haven in Afghanistan.”
This argument is markedly harder to defend with only 25 percent of Americans supporting the decade-long wars. However, the commitment to further military action takes more twisted turns since the recent Quran burnings and the alleged Afghan massacre by a U.S. soldier. Now, U.S. appointed Afghan President Hamid Karzai called American warriors murderers, demons, and demanded American soldiers return to their bases.
Another aspect of concern for war-weary Americans is the capital cost caused by worn equipment (the fine dust-like sand speeds up the deterioration of all equipment) coupled with fatigue on soldiers who serve multiple-tours spurring the beating of the “peace” drums.
Russia knows best?
Perhaps the American military should be wary of Russia’s Afghanistan recommendations. (Their protracted 10-year war in Afghanistan during the 70-80s, bankrupted their country, creating internal political turmoil that resulted in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.)
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently said, “there are still security threats to be eliminated in Afghanistan, stressing that the U.S. troops must fulfill their UN mandate in the region before they pull out in 2014,” according to the Voice of Russia. “Moreover, the U.S. can’t just slip out of Afghanistan now, because otherwise Taliban would triumphantly return and topple the Karzai government, turning the country into another Vietnam for Washington. The only difference is that in 1975 Vietnam was taken over by a force, controlled by the USSR and operating under the agreed rules. The ‘Taliban Renaissance’ would mean the rise of a force, totally alien to all sides of the conflict, and an unpredictable outcome for the region.”
Considering all these facts, it’s no wonder the American population is questioning President Obama’s 2014 exit strategy from the “Right War.” Behind the scenes, some Pentagon insiders are quietly voicing their concerns regarding the Administration’s 2014 troop withdrawal and theorize that the extraction of military personnel will beat the 2014 timeline.
What is America’s end game strategy?
Any successful war effort requires substantial planning, strategizing and many contingency plans. The heartbeat for America’s national security takes place at the Pentagon. The “end-state” is always the first act of planning military operations. It is here the military leaders plan and set goals for generals and admirals to implement, and weigh any resource or territorial constraints.
When the Administration’s leadership is asked about the end-state for the Middle East Wars, a myriad of conflicting answers spring forth.
Before becoming the CIA’s top-spook, Gen. David Petraeus was commander of NATO in Afghanistan. Even Gen. Petraeus has trouble explaining to Congress what the end of the war would look like. Suggesting “we are after what is, in a sense, good enough for Afghanistan.” Gen. Patraeus’ testimonial to Washington double-speak is even more extraordinary since he wrote the U.S. Army manual on Counterinsurgency (COIN) warfare and spent most of his career in special operations. Surely he must know what the objectives are, how we seek to attain them, and when they will be attained.
Another problem with Gen. Patraeus' COIN strategy of winning “hearts and minds” are the problems associated with a government trying to retain power or prevent an insurgent coup d’état. Once a host nation invites foreign troops (read: American forces) to suppress the insurgency, the new focus becomes the foreign occupiers.
So, any foreign military campaign that chooses the "hearts and minds" war model is doomed at the outset. As von Clausewitz observed, war is about killing the enemy and destroying his will to resist.
Furthermore, Andrew M. Exum of the Institute of France Relations International wrote specifically about Amerca's “hearts and minds” strategy. “Abstract: The counterinsurgency campaign seeks to create a space for the development of political solutions leading to peace. The means granted to Afghanistan have been weakened by the priority given to Iraq. Pakistani support for Afghan insurgents continues. The weakness of the Afghan government prevents it from distributing and fully exploiting international aid effectively. All these problems largely explain the failure of creating circumstances conducive to ending the war.”
The “hearts and minds” strategy also carries a hefty price tag.
According to the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development in Afghanistan, the foreign aid dispensed last year to Afghanistan amounted to $320 million each month, and the monthly military tab is approximately $10 billion. Other money earmarked for the corrupt Karzai government is a $19 billion slush fund that is included in the U.S. aid package most of it coming under the Obama Administration for its counterinsurgency operations.
Last week Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC), asked the International Security Assistance Forces Commander in Afghanistan, Lieutenant General John Allen, at a House Armed Services hearing when Americans and the Congress can expect an end to the increasingly unpopular war.
“As we are spending $10 billion a month that we can’t even pay for, the Chinese, Uncle Chang is lending us the money to pay for (what) we’re spending in Afghanistan,” Jones asked. “What’s the metric? When does Congress have the testimony that someone will say, we have done all we can do? Bin Laden is dead. There are hundreds of tribes in Afghanistan and everyone has their own mission.”
Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. Allen did not have an answer for the Congressman.
“I wish I could tell you that this war was simple and that progress could easily be measured, but that's not the way of counterinsurgencies,” Allen responded. “They are fraught with both successes and setbacks which can exist in the same space and in the same time. But each must be seen in the larger context of the overall campaign. And I believe the campaign is on track.”
However, 75 percent of Americans and many military theorists disagree and believe the Karzai government has provided the American military with a quicker exit strategy.
Even the Taliban seeks a NATO/U.S. exit strategy; “The Islamic Emirate has decided to suspend all talks with Americans taking place in Qatar onwards until the Americans clarify their stance on the issues concerned and until they show willingness in carrying out their promises instead of wasting time," A Taliban statement read. The group also referred to the Karzai government as an American “stooge.” The Taliban further stated “it was due to their (Americans) alternating and ever changing position that the Islamic Emirate was compelled to suspend all dialogue with the Americans.”
WHY?
Afghanistan is of no strategic or tactical importance to America. Its only export is poppies that are used to manufacture heroin and America already imports heroin from the Mexican drug cartels through the porous southern U.S. border.
Are Americans’ concerned about the "soft-underbelly" of Russia a cold war adversary and future hegemonic threat? Are Americans’ so concerned the Sunni/Wahhabi Muslim fundamentalists will expand into the Shia Crescent and threaten our dear friends in Iran? Or are we worried the stability of America's great ally Pakistan may be threatened by Afghani incursions from the lawless areas of Waziristan?
Last year this reporter published a five part series highlighting the corruption of Afghanistan’s President “Karzai's cronies,” American implementation of a Sharia Constitution for the tribes of Afghanistan and protection money that America pays its (Taliban/al Qaeda) enemies for the “safe passage” of U.S. convoys. The money these war-profiteers shakedown from the U.S. military is then used to arm and enrich the terrorists’ coffers and produce “bumper crops” of poppies to sell to drug cartels that destroy America’s youth through addiction. (Click on link Part one--Part two-- Part three--Part four--Part five)
When will President Obama and members of Congress set aside the politicization of everything Washington for a moment and make the right MORAL judgment in an effort to end the loss of American lives? Ending the war is as easy as, stopping future deployments of troops to Afghanistan, ending the combat operations, bringing the soldiers home and giving them the parades, respect and honor their personal sacrifice deserves.
History often provides a suitable barometer for predictions of future events. With that in mind, President Ronald Reagan might have said these wise words regarding the Afghanistan War, “Mr. Obama, tear down this façade.”
Part one-http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
”Part one-http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
Part two- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/us-payments-to-taliban-afghan-warlords-threaten-american-nato-troops
Part three- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/billion-dollar-corruption-within-the-u-s-picked-afghan-regime
Part four- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/terrorism-s-down-payment-the-form-drugs-and-u-s-aid-money-part-4
Part five -http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-begins-to-wind-down-the-costly-war-afghanistan-final-a-series
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Afghan War ain’t about hearts and minds - 'just win, baby' - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/75-percent-disapprove-of-afghanistan-war-it-ain-t-about-hearts-and-minds#ixzz1qzzaySo9
“Even when the U.S. and allied militaries are able, together with Afghan forces, to wrest control of an area away [sic] from the Taliban, violence continues as Afghans frustrated by the absence of accountable government and rule of law rebel against the civilian authorities,” (Hearts and Minds in Afghanistan: Explaining the Absence of Victory, Andrew M. Exum (2011) p.7).
Advertisement
Warring nations date back to the oldest civilizations and historians have written volumes of wisdom about the brutality of war. Regrettably, Afghanistan has been embroiled in war throughout most of its turbulent history.
Prussian militarist, von Clausewitz wrote that war is the final act of diplomacy in that its purpose is to break the will of the enemy to resist (aka destroy his means of resistance) and force your will upon him. And of course Sun Tzu says, war must not be entered lightly but requires deliberation and that “victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.”
With these resounding words of historic wisdom, modern day military thinkers claim a kinder- gentler- war is possible. The Geneva Conventions (1864-1949) have attempted to make war more civilized theorizing nations could reduce civilian casualties and property damage in the quest to fight a more humane war.
It hasn’t worked. War is still brutal. Soldiers and civilians are killed, and property is damaged. The bitter, enduring 10-year Middle East War has claimed nearly 8,000 U.S. military lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. Perhaps more importantly, it's the war’s elusive and amorphous goals that have lost American "hearts and minds."
Many Americans would rather follow the words of football great, Al Davis, and “just win, baby.”
A recent CNN poll reflects 75 percent of the American people do not support a sustained war effort in Afghanistan. “We cannot fight wars by polls,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta implored. “If we do that we're in deep trouble. We have to operate based on what we believe is the best strategy to achieve the mission that we are embarked on. And the mission here is to safeguard our country by ensuring that the Taliban and al Qaeda never again find a safe haven in Afghanistan.”
This argument is markedly harder to defend with only 25 percent of Americans supporting the decade-long wars. However, the commitment to further military action takes more twisted turns since the recent Quran burnings and the alleged Afghan massacre by a U.S. soldier. Now, U.S. appointed Afghan President Hamid Karzai called American warriors murderers, demons, and demanded American soldiers return to their bases.
Another aspect of concern for war-weary Americans is the capital cost caused by worn equipment (the fine dust-like sand speeds up the deterioration of all equipment) coupled with fatigue on soldiers who serve multiple-tours spurring the beating of the “peace” drums.
Russia knows best?
Perhaps the American military should be wary of Russia’s Afghanistan recommendations. (Their protracted 10-year war in Afghanistan during the 70-80s, bankrupted their country, creating internal political turmoil that resulted in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.)
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently said, “there are still security threats to be eliminated in Afghanistan, stressing that the U.S. troops must fulfill their UN mandate in the region before they pull out in 2014,” according to the Voice of Russia. “Moreover, the U.S. can’t just slip out of Afghanistan now, because otherwise Taliban would triumphantly return and topple the Karzai government, turning the country into another Vietnam for Washington. The only difference is that in 1975 Vietnam was taken over by a force, controlled by the USSR and operating under the agreed rules. The ‘Taliban Renaissance’ would mean the rise of a force, totally alien to all sides of the conflict, and an unpredictable outcome for the region.”
Considering all these facts, it’s no wonder the American population is questioning President Obama’s 2014 exit strategy from the “Right War.” Behind the scenes, some Pentagon insiders are quietly voicing their concerns regarding the Administration’s 2014 troop withdrawal and theorize that the extraction of military personnel will beat the 2014 timeline.
What is America’s end game strategy?
Any successful war effort requires substantial planning, strategizing and many contingency plans. The heartbeat for America’s national security takes place at the Pentagon. The “end-state” is always the first act of planning military operations. It is here the military leaders plan and set goals for generals and admirals to implement, and weigh any resource or territorial constraints.
When the Administration’s leadership is asked about the end-state for the Middle East Wars, a myriad of conflicting answers spring forth.
Before becoming the CIA’s top-spook, Gen. David Petraeus was commander of NATO in Afghanistan. Even Gen. Petraeus has trouble explaining to Congress what the end of the war would look like. Suggesting “we are after what is, in a sense, good enough for Afghanistan.” Gen. Patraeus’ testimonial to Washington double-speak is even more extraordinary since he wrote the U.S. Army manual on Counterinsurgency (COIN) warfare and spent most of his career in special operations. Surely he must know what the objectives are, how we seek to attain them, and when they will be attained.
Another problem with Gen. Patraeus' COIN strategy of winning “hearts and minds” are the problems associated with a government trying to retain power or prevent an insurgent coup d’état. Once a host nation invites foreign troops (read: American forces) to suppress the insurgency, the new focus becomes the foreign occupiers.
So, any foreign military campaign that chooses the "hearts and minds" war model is doomed at the outset. As von Clausewitz observed, war is about killing the enemy and destroying his will to resist.
Furthermore, Andrew M. Exum of the Institute of France Relations International wrote specifically about Amerca's “hearts and minds” strategy. “Abstract: The counterinsurgency campaign seeks to create a space for the development of political solutions leading to peace. The means granted to Afghanistan have been weakened by the priority given to Iraq. Pakistani support for Afghan insurgents continues. The weakness of the Afghan government prevents it from distributing and fully exploiting international aid effectively. All these problems largely explain the failure of creating circumstances conducive to ending the war.”
The “hearts and minds” strategy also carries a hefty price tag.
According to the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development in Afghanistan, the foreign aid dispensed last year to Afghanistan amounted to $320 million each month, and the monthly military tab is approximately $10 billion. Other money earmarked for the corrupt Karzai government is a $19 billion slush fund that is included in the U.S. aid package most of it coming under the Obama Administration for its counterinsurgency operations.
Last week Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC), asked the International Security Assistance Forces Commander in Afghanistan, Lieutenant General John Allen, at a House Armed Services hearing when Americans and the Congress can expect an end to the increasingly unpopular war.
“As we are spending $10 billion a month that we can’t even pay for, the Chinese, Uncle Chang is lending us the money to pay for (what) we’re spending in Afghanistan,” Jones asked. “What’s the metric? When does Congress have the testimony that someone will say, we have done all we can do? Bin Laden is dead. There are hundreds of tribes in Afghanistan and everyone has their own mission.”
Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. Allen did not have an answer for the Congressman.
“I wish I could tell you that this war was simple and that progress could easily be measured, but that's not the way of counterinsurgencies,” Allen responded. “They are fraught with both successes and setbacks which can exist in the same space and in the same time. But each must be seen in the larger context of the overall campaign. And I believe the campaign is on track.”
However, 75 percent of Americans and many military theorists disagree and believe the Karzai government has provided the American military with a quicker exit strategy.
Even the Taliban seeks a NATO/U.S. exit strategy; “The Islamic Emirate has decided to suspend all talks with Americans taking place in Qatar onwards until the Americans clarify their stance on the issues concerned and until they show willingness in carrying out their promises instead of wasting time," A Taliban statement read. The group also referred to the Karzai government as an American “stooge.” The Taliban further stated “it was due to their (Americans) alternating and ever changing position that the Islamic Emirate was compelled to suspend all dialogue with the Americans.”
WHY?
Afghanistan is of no strategic or tactical importance to America. Its only export is poppies that are used to manufacture heroin and America already imports heroin from the Mexican drug cartels through the porous southern U.S. border.
Are Americans’ concerned about the "soft-underbelly" of Russia a cold war adversary and future hegemonic threat? Are Americans’ so concerned the Sunni/Wahhabi Muslim fundamentalists will expand into the Shia Crescent and threaten our dear friends in Iran? Or are we worried the stability of America's great ally Pakistan may be threatened by Afghani incursions from the lawless areas of Waziristan?
Last year this reporter published a five part series highlighting the corruption of Afghanistan’s President “Karzai's cronies,” American implementation of a Sharia Constitution for the tribes of Afghanistan and protection money that America pays its (Taliban/al Qaeda) enemies for the “safe passage” of U.S. convoys. The money these war-profiteers shakedown from the U.S. military is then used to arm and enrich the terrorists’ coffers and produce “bumper crops” of poppies to sell to drug cartels that destroy America’s youth through addiction. (Click on link Part one--Part two-- Part three--Part four--Part five)
When will President Obama and members of Congress set aside the politicization of everything Washington for a moment and make the right MORAL judgment in an effort to end the loss of American lives? Ending the war is as easy as, stopping future deployments of troops to Afghanistan, ending the combat operations, bringing the soldiers home and giving them the parades, respect and honor their personal sacrifice deserves.
History often provides a suitable barometer for predictions of future events. With that in mind, President Ronald Reagan might have said these wise words regarding the Afghanistan War, “Mr. Obama, tear down this façade.”
Part one-http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
”Part one-http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
Part two- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/us-payments-to-taliban-afghan-warlords-threaten-american-nato-troops
Part three- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/billion-dollar-corruption-within-the-u-s-picked-afghan-regime
Part four- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/terrorism-s-down-payment-the-form-drugs-and-u-s-aid-money-part-4
Part five -http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-begins-to-wind-down-the-costly-war-afghanistan-final-a-series
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Afghan War ain’t about hearts and minds - 'just win, baby' - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/75-percent-disapprove-of-afghanistan-war-it-ain-t-about-hearts-and-minds#ixzz1qzzaySo9
Thursday, March 29, 2012
NYCLU challenges Constitutionality of NYC’s “stop-and-frisk” program
The New York Police Department’s (NYPD) controversial stop-and-frisk program, Operation Clean Halls, is once again under fire.
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of residents that were subjected to questionable police frisking that oftentimes resulted in an arrest for trespassing.
Under the program, the City police patrol thousands of buildings in high-crime residential neighborhoods in an effort to prevent drug use and sales. Landlords can request that the police conduct patrols in the hallways and stairwells to remove non-residents who may be trespassing. Because the NYPD has access to the privately owned buildings through written contracts with landlords (landlords often give police officers keys to the buildings), the NYCLU says those agreements could be rescinded.
This program sets up an argument for the “Rule of Law” standard that the U.S. Constitution employs verses the “Law and Order” standard that can be the modus operandi for placing too much authority into the hands of discretionary leaders, according to the NYCLU.While many residents are grateful their buildings are safer, many civil liberty union activists say some officers have allegedly abused the law’s stop-and-frisk intention and turned it into an “arrest-and-jail” of innocent residents.
While the line between keeping the peace and maintaining civil liberties is a delicate balancing act, the NYCLU lawsuit wants the City’s stop-and-frisk program to follow a written protocol with which all parties agree.
Some judges have labeled the exercise of unlawful trespassing arrests as a “dreadful practice,” and it’s simply a trap to ensnare “innocent individuals” trying to live their normal lives.
A growing number of civil liberties organizations have voiced their concern and say the heavy-handed program violates the rights’ of residents and their guests.
“Operation Clean Halls has placed hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, mostly black and Latino, under siege in their own homes,” Donna Lieberman, NYCLU Executive Director explained. “For residents of Clean Halls buildings, taking the garbage out or checking the mail can result in being thrown against the wall and humiliated by police. Untold numbers of people have been wrongly arrested for trespassing because they had the audacity to leave their apartments without IDs or visit friends and family who live in ‘Clean Halls’ buildings. This aggressive assault on people’s constitutional rights must be stopped.”
New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly couldn’t disagree more.
"I would suspect that the attorneys in this case live in buildings with doormen and they have a level of safety that people who live in tenements, which most of those buildings are, don't have," Kelly said. The purpose of the program is to provide Landlords and Tenants with a safe environment in some of NYC’s worst crime and drug riddled areas pursuant to a contractual relationship between the Police and Landlords.
But civil liberties groups contend that the police department continues to blur the lines of personal safety and police state tactics. The NYCLU believes that the NYPD’s enforcement of Operation Clean Halls is a violation of the U.S. Constitution, the New York State Constitution and the Federal Fair Housing regulations.
The lawsuit also alleges that the citywide practice unfairly targets lower-income minorities who tend to live in those higher risk neighborhoods.
“The NYPD uses Clean Halls as a license to stop anybody, at any time, on suspicion of trespassing,” said lead NYCLU attorney Alexis Karteron. “As a result, people who live in Clean Halls buildings are under constant threat of being stopped, frisked, harassed and even arrested by police officers. This type of activity has no place in a free society, and we’re confident the courts will put a stop to it.”
One of the plaintiffs, Jacqueline Yates, lives in a Bronx apartment complex that is enrolled in the contentious frisking program. Yates’ said NYPD officers harass her teenage sons while they socialize in the buildings’ stairwells, lobby and courtyard. She also complained that friends and family are reluctant to visit her home because they are afraid of being arrested for trespassing.
“My children shouldn’t be treated like criminal suspects in their home. They shouldn’t expect to be bothered by police officers every time they leave our apartment,” Yates said. “I believe the NYPD has a role to play in our community. But right now, they don’t make us feel safe. We feel under attack in our homes.”
In an effort to combat illegal activity in high-crime areas, the NYPD introduced the controversial stop-and-frisk program in 1991. Now, 20 years later the small program has grown into a labyrinth of 3,895 buildings that condones stop-and-frisk arrest practices.
The NYCLU criticizes the harsh tactics and says the police department does not employ any meaningful standards or oversight.
The stop-and-frisk practice even ensnares minors. Another plaintiff A.O., who cannot be identified by his full name because he is 17, says he was unlawfully stopped and arrested for trespassing last year shortly after exiting a Clean Halls building with two friends in Queens where he was visiting. Once the boy was arrested, he was taken to a local police precinct and charged with trespassing. However, the Queens County District Attorney’s office declined to prosecute the minor.
“They arrested me even though I was doing nothing wrong – just walking with some friends, minding our own business,” he said.
According to NYPD data, NYPD officers made 329,446 stops on suspicion of trespassing between 2006 and 2010, representing 12 percent of all stops. Civil liberties groups suggest those numbers do not represent all the stops. The statistics also show that only 7.5 percent of reported trespass stops ended in arrests. “The 10 precincts with the most trespassing stops in 2010 – at least 28,209 stops – accounted for nearly as many stops as reported in the remaining 66 precincts combined. More than 5,000 people were stopped for suspicion of trespassing in the Bronx’s 40thPrecinct alone,” according to the NYCLU.
Residents of the affected communities complain that the NYPD is dictating the rules outside the Constitution and undermining the community’s relationship with law enforcement, yet the contracting Landlords have not been named in any legal proceedings thus far.
“The NYPD’s Clean Halls program impacts the entire community – mothers, fathers, neighbors and friends – not only those arrested,” said civil rights attorney Chris Fabricant, director of the Criminal Justice Clinic at Pace University Law School. “This practice has steadily eroded the community’s faith in the police, and undermined the legitimacy of our criminal justice system. For every one of the plaintiffs who spent months fighting their wrongful arrests, there are hundreds of others who were forced to plead guilty to crimes that they did not commit because they did not have the resources to attend countless court appearances contesting the charges. Any faith in our justice system is destroyed by this process.”
Fabricant explains that, “rookie police officers do not know who belongs in the buildings. They do not know the difference between the trouble -makers and the regular kids who live in the buildings, many of who lack government-issued identification, virtually assuring arrest if police stops them. This creates resentment and fear of the police amongst young people, which is counter-productive to effective policing.”
“These officers do not have tenant rosters; they do not know the residents. Put simply, they do not know who is trespassing and who is simply going about their life in a perfectly legally way,” according to testimony from Professor Fabricant.
He further reveals, “As recently reported by The New York Times, in one eight-block section of Brownsville, Brooklyn, police stopped-and-frisked 52,000 people in a four year period, over ninety percent of whom had committed no offense.”
“But those criticizing the policy say that this has nothing to do with the privacy of landlords -- especially since landlords participating in the program are required to post information that informs tenants that the building is a part of TAP (Operation Clean Halls),” Karteron said.
The NYCLU lawsuit seeks a declaration that the NYPD’s practices are unlawful and seeks an injunction against the department that requires the NYPD and the City to:
Stop asking people inside and around Clean Halls buildings for their IDs or about their destination without suspicion that they are trespassing or engaged in other wrongdoing;
Stop arresting people for trespassing in Clean Halls buildings without establishing whether or not the person is authorized to be there;
Establish citywide standards for enrollment of buildings in Operation Clean halls;
Establish policies concerning the authority of NYPD officers to enter Clean Halls buildings;
Implement training for officers who patrol Clean Halls buildings;
Submit for review a protocol to significantly reduce the number of unjustified stops and arrests of people in Clean Halls buildings; and
Award compensatory damages to named plaintiffs.
The federal class-action lawsuit filed by the NYCLU, Latino Justice and The Bronx Defenders and names the City of New York, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly as well as individual police officers as its defendants.
To watch a video of the plaintiffs, to see photos of them or to read the full complaint, visit; http://www.nyclu.org/news/class-action-lawsuit-challenges-nypd-patrols-of-private-apartment-buildings.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com NYCLU challenges Constitutionality of NYC’s “stop-and-frisk” program - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nyclu-challenges-constitutionality-of-nyc-s-stop-and-frisk-program#ixzz1qXHtEOv8
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of residents that were subjected to questionable police frisking that oftentimes resulted in an arrest for trespassing.
Under the program, the City police patrol thousands of buildings in high-crime residential neighborhoods in an effort to prevent drug use and sales. Landlords can request that the police conduct patrols in the hallways and stairwells to remove non-residents who may be trespassing. Because the NYPD has access to the privately owned buildings through written contracts with landlords (landlords often give police officers keys to the buildings), the NYCLU says those agreements could be rescinded.
This program sets up an argument for the “Rule of Law” standard that the U.S. Constitution employs verses the “Law and Order” standard that can be the modus operandi for placing too much authority into the hands of discretionary leaders, according to the NYCLU.While many residents are grateful their buildings are safer, many civil liberty union activists say some officers have allegedly abused the law’s stop-and-frisk intention and turned it into an “arrest-and-jail” of innocent residents.
While the line between keeping the peace and maintaining civil liberties is a delicate balancing act, the NYCLU lawsuit wants the City’s stop-and-frisk program to follow a written protocol with which all parties agree.
Some judges have labeled the exercise of unlawful trespassing arrests as a “dreadful practice,” and it’s simply a trap to ensnare “innocent individuals” trying to live their normal lives.
A growing number of civil liberties organizations have voiced their concern and say the heavy-handed program violates the rights’ of residents and their guests.
“Operation Clean Halls has placed hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, mostly black and Latino, under siege in their own homes,” Donna Lieberman, NYCLU Executive Director explained. “For residents of Clean Halls buildings, taking the garbage out or checking the mail can result in being thrown against the wall and humiliated by police. Untold numbers of people have been wrongly arrested for trespassing because they had the audacity to leave their apartments without IDs or visit friends and family who live in ‘Clean Halls’ buildings. This aggressive assault on people’s constitutional rights must be stopped.”
New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly couldn’t disagree more.
"I would suspect that the attorneys in this case live in buildings with doormen and they have a level of safety that people who live in tenements, which most of those buildings are, don't have," Kelly said. The purpose of the program is to provide Landlords and Tenants with a safe environment in some of NYC’s worst crime and drug riddled areas pursuant to a contractual relationship between the Police and Landlords.
But civil liberties groups contend that the police department continues to blur the lines of personal safety and police state tactics. The NYCLU believes that the NYPD’s enforcement of Operation Clean Halls is a violation of the U.S. Constitution, the New York State Constitution and the Federal Fair Housing regulations.
The lawsuit also alleges that the citywide practice unfairly targets lower-income minorities who tend to live in those higher risk neighborhoods.
“The NYPD uses Clean Halls as a license to stop anybody, at any time, on suspicion of trespassing,” said lead NYCLU attorney Alexis Karteron. “As a result, people who live in Clean Halls buildings are under constant threat of being stopped, frisked, harassed and even arrested by police officers. This type of activity has no place in a free society, and we’re confident the courts will put a stop to it.”
One of the plaintiffs, Jacqueline Yates, lives in a Bronx apartment complex that is enrolled in the contentious frisking program. Yates’ said NYPD officers harass her teenage sons while they socialize in the buildings’ stairwells, lobby and courtyard. She also complained that friends and family are reluctant to visit her home because they are afraid of being arrested for trespassing.
“My children shouldn’t be treated like criminal suspects in their home. They shouldn’t expect to be bothered by police officers every time they leave our apartment,” Yates said. “I believe the NYPD has a role to play in our community. But right now, they don’t make us feel safe. We feel under attack in our homes.”
In an effort to combat illegal activity in high-crime areas, the NYPD introduced the controversial stop-and-frisk program in 1991. Now, 20 years later the small program has grown into a labyrinth of 3,895 buildings that condones stop-and-frisk arrest practices.
The NYCLU criticizes the harsh tactics and says the police department does not employ any meaningful standards or oversight.
The stop-and-frisk practice even ensnares minors. Another plaintiff A.O., who cannot be identified by his full name because he is 17, says he was unlawfully stopped and arrested for trespassing last year shortly after exiting a Clean Halls building with two friends in Queens where he was visiting. Once the boy was arrested, he was taken to a local police precinct and charged with trespassing. However, the Queens County District Attorney’s office declined to prosecute the minor.
“They arrested me even though I was doing nothing wrong – just walking with some friends, minding our own business,” he said.
According to NYPD data, NYPD officers made 329,446 stops on suspicion of trespassing between 2006 and 2010, representing 12 percent of all stops. Civil liberties groups suggest those numbers do not represent all the stops. The statistics also show that only 7.5 percent of reported trespass stops ended in arrests. “The 10 precincts with the most trespassing stops in 2010 – at least 28,209 stops – accounted for nearly as many stops as reported in the remaining 66 precincts combined. More than 5,000 people were stopped for suspicion of trespassing in the Bronx’s 40thPrecinct alone,” according to the NYCLU.
Residents of the affected communities complain that the NYPD is dictating the rules outside the Constitution and undermining the community’s relationship with law enforcement, yet the contracting Landlords have not been named in any legal proceedings thus far.
“The NYPD’s Clean Halls program impacts the entire community – mothers, fathers, neighbors and friends – not only those arrested,” said civil rights attorney Chris Fabricant, director of the Criminal Justice Clinic at Pace University Law School. “This practice has steadily eroded the community’s faith in the police, and undermined the legitimacy of our criminal justice system. For every one of the plaintiffs who spent months fighting their wrongful arrests, there are hundreds of others who were forced to plead guilty to crimes that they did not commit because they did not have the resources to attend countless court appearances contesting the charges. Any faith in our justice system is destroyed by this process.”
Fabricant explains that, “rookie police officers do not know who belongs in the buildings. They do not know the difference between the trouble -makers and the regular kids who live in the buildings, many of who lack government-issued identification, virtually assuring arrest if police stops them. This creates resentment and fear of the police amongst young people, which is counter-productive to effective policing.”
“These officers do not have tenant rosters; they do not know the residents. Put simply, they do not know who is trespassing and who is simply going about their life in a perfectly legally way,” according to testimony from Professor Fabricant.
He further reveals, “As recently reported by The New York Times, in one eight-block section of Brownsville, Brooklyn, police stopped-and-frisked 52,000 people in a four year period, over ninety percent of whom had committed no offense.”
“But those criticizing the policy say that this has nothing to do with the privacy of landlords -- especially since landlords participating in the program are required to post information that informs tenants that the building is a part of TAP (Operation Clean Halls),” Karteron said.
The NYCLU lawsuit seeks a declaration that the NYPD’s practices are unlawful and seeks an injunction against the department that requires the NYPD and the City to:
Stop asking people inside and around Clean Halls buildings for their IDs or about their destination without suspicion that they are trespassing or engaged in other wrongdoing;
Stop arresting people for trespassing in Clean Halls buildings without establishing whether or not the person is authorized to be there;
Establish citywide standards for enrollment of buildings in Operation Clean halls;
Establish policies concerning the authority of NYPD officers to enter Clean Halls buildings;
Implement training for officers who patrol Clean Halls buildings;
Submit for review a protocol to significantly reduce the number of unjustified stops and arrests of people in Clean Halls buildings; and
Award compensatory damages to named plaintiffs.
The federal class-action lawsuit filed by the NYCLU, Latino Justice and The Bronx Defenders and names the City of New York, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly as well as individual police officers as its defendants.
To watch a video of the plaintiffs, to see photos of them or to read the full complaint, visit; http://www.nyclu.org/news/class-action-lawsuit-challenges-nypd-patrols-of-private-apartment-buildings.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com NYCLU challenges Constitutionality of NYC’s “stop-and-frisk” program - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nyclu-challenges-constitutionality-of-nyc-s-stop-and-frisk-program#ixzz1qXHtEOv8
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Border Patrol takes another $1 million of illicit drugs off the streets
Border Patrol agents at the Interstate 8 checkpoint east of San Diego hauled in more than $1 million in cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, and heroin in separate incidents over the weekend.
Both narcotics busts yielded an estimated street value of $1,085,800.
The first encounter involved a 43-year-old male United States citizen driving a Volvo. The man’s nervous demeanor prompted agents to direct the vehicle to the secondary inspection area.
“A Border Patrol K-9 team performed a cursory inspection of the vehicle resulting in a positive alert to the driver’s side door. Agents searched the vehicle and discovered two non-factory compartments beneath the driver and front passenger seats,” said Scott Simon, Border Patrol San Diego Sector Information and Communication Division. “The hidden compartments contained 22 bundles of crystal methamphetamine that weighed 34 pounds and had an estimated street value of $510,000. Agents also discovered two bundles of heroin that weighed 5.2 pounds and were worth an estimated $67,600.”
The second drug bust involved a 46-year-old male Mexican national driving a Dodge Ram. Again, agents sent the vehicle to the secondary inspection area and requested the Border Patrol K-9 team to inspect the truck for illegal drugs. The K-9’s alerted Border Patrol agents to a positive drug scent behind the truck’s front bumper and detained the driver.
“Agents searched the truck and discovered 22 packages of cocaine in the frame rails with a total weight of 50.82 pounds and an estimated street value of $508,200,” according to Simon.
The suspected drug smugglers and all the narcotics were seized and turned over to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for further investigation. Border Patrol impounded both vehicles.
Border Patrol encourages anyone to report suspicious activity to the San Diego Border Patrol Sector at (619) 498-9900.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Both narcotics busts yielded an estimated street value of $1,085,800.
The first encounter involved a 43-year-old male United States citizen driving a Volvo. The man’s nervous demeanor prompted agents to direct the vehicle to the secondary inspection area.
“A Border Patrol K-9 team performed a cursory inspection of the vehicle resulting in a positive alert to the driver’s side door. Agents searched the vehicle and discovered two non-factory compartments beneath the driver and front passenger seats,” said Scott Simon, Border Patrol San Diego Sector Information and Communication Division. “The hidden compartments contained 22 bundles of crystal methamphetamine that weighed 34 pounds and had an estimated street value of $510,000. Agents also discovered two bundles of heroin that weighed 5.2 pounds and were worth an estimated $67,600.”
The second drug bust involved a 46-year-old male Mexican national driving a Dodge Ram. Again, agents sent the vehicle to the secondary inspection area and requested the Border Patrol K-9 team to inspect the truck for illegal drugs. The K-9’s alerted Border Patrol agents to a positive drug scent behind the truck’s front bumper and detained the driver.
“Agents searched the truck and discovered 22 packages of cocaine in the frame rails with a total weight of 50.82 pounds and an estimated street value of $508,200,” according to Simon.
The suspected drug smugglers and all the narcotics were seized and turned over to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for further investigation. Border Patrol impounded both vehicles.
Border Patrol encourages anyone to report suspicious activity to the San Diego Border Patrol Sector at (619) 498-9900.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Monday, March 26, 2012
NYC courts continue to “shakedown” legal gun owners at airports
Only in New York City could three separate law enforcement agencies obfuscate responsibility for upholding gun laws and resort to finger pointing as their defense to shamelessly robbing the public under color of the “rule of law.” Not surprisingly, the Second Amendment receives an inordinate amount of attention, but not much legal scrutiny from self-serving New Yorkers and the entities they represent.
New York authorities rely on the honesty of air travelers transiting through the state with lawfully owned firearms, who become victims upon disclosure under Federal law of their weapon possession, to create a well-oiled, gun-eating, revenue-raising machine. New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg’s interpretation of the Second Amendment nabs unsuspecting airline passengers (hundreds have been ensnared the past few years) jails and fines them.
New York City is a gun-free zone, and one requires permission from Bloomberg’s administration to carry a weapon within the city-- and that permission rarely happens. For security purposes the City often relies on the service of off-duty or retired NYPD to keep the peace in the bustling metropolis of the Big Apple. However, unsuspecting travelers at area airports are apprehended for simply passing through this City to their final destination where it is lawful to have a firearm in their possession.
Advertisement
Combine these heavy-handed tactics with the Department of Justice (DOJ) policy of suing states for laws it favors and Americans have a new recipe for dictatorial leadership. Lately, Attorney General Eric Holder has been in the business of suing individual states for allegedly trumping federal law, most notably illegal immigration and voting laws. While the DOJ picks and chooses its causes, they have chosen to let New York’s Port Authority Police seize lawfully owned firearms from travelers at its airports.
After 9/11, the U.S. government set up a number of safety measures to protect air travelers, and as a result they created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as the federal overseer of airport security. TSA is in charge of security at most major U.S. airports—except New York, which has hijacked control from local TSA agents.
New York City’s firearms interdiction and enforcement interferes with the airport security chain of command. It is here the finger pointing starts and the doubletalk reigns supreme.
The responsibility and non- responsibility approach
This reporter’s recent visit to TSA’s Washington DC headquarters seeking a resolution of this jurisdictional conflict yielded no answers. A phone conversation in the lobby went something like this; “Hi, I’m the reporter from California who has been talking to you via the phone regarding the security measures at LaGuardia Airport and wanted to clarify a few things. Do you have a minute?”
TSA spokesperson Greg Soule then replies; “Sure.”
This reporter answers; “Great, I’m in the lobby can you come down and meet me, I only need 5 minutes?”
Mr. Soule replies; “Aaa… well… actually I can’t come down, but I can refer you to our website.”
Wow, it’s an interesting strategy the TSA employs at their DC headquarters. Another phone call to TSA spokesperson Mike McCarthy confirms TSA is indeed in charge of airport security. Great news. Finally someone can explain why New York City’s Port Authority Police shows up at the ticket counter and arrests travelers when they attempt to check in their TSA-approved locked and unloaded firearm’s cases into checked baggage. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and Mr. McCarthy says there must be a “special agreement” to supersede TSA’s authority.
A “special agreement” explanation leads to the New York Port Authority Police. A call to Port Authority’s Press Officer Al Della Fave yields a similar response, and he explains the officers at the airports are only doing what they are told. And it is Mr. Della Fave’s understanding that Port Authority Police have some sort of “special agreement” with New York’s legal community (Bloomberg and/or District Attorneys) and Port Authority officers are only following orders.
Fair enough, rank-and-file officers are pretty good about following orders, and there is no indication that this case is any different in New York.
The next phone call is to the Queen’s County District Attorneys office that prosecutes the lawful firearm owners, travelling with their guns locked up and stored as per federal law and TSA requirements.
So far, the common denominator with all the agencies is the explicit “special agreement” and if there were a document out there, surely the District Attorney’s office would have a copy of the document.
“I have checked with our executive staff and there is no Memorandum of Understanding between the District Attorney's Office and either the TSA or Port Authority Police Department,” said Kevin R. Ryan, director of communications for the Queens County District Attorney’s office.
So, the DA admits that there is no “memo” or “special agreement” between the Queen’s County District Attorney’s office, New York Port Authority Police and the TSA that justifies Port Authority Police supersede federal law at their airports. Normally, Federal law requires some sort of Memo of Understanding (MOU) between states and municipalities as currently TSA regulates the interstate transportation of firearms.
Knowing New York City has the nation’s toughest gun laws (after a ton of research) it appears New York City is serious about keeping the city a gun-free zone. Again, fair enough, but if New Yorkers are so concerned about firearms entering their jurisdiction, then why aren’t they apprehending the lawful gun owners as they leave the airport with their firearms in their luggage? TSA keeps a record of all firearms that passengers carry in their “checked” luggage. One would assume law enforcement wouldn’t want those firearms on the city sidewalks, right?
“While I cannot speak on behalf of the TSA, I can tell you that we have never been notified by the TSA of somebody traveling to New York with a weapon. The most likely reason is that the TSA would not be aware of the person's licensing status in New York,” Ryan went on to explain.
However, TSA confirms they keep a record of all firearms and haven’t been asked by the DA’s office for notification.
The frustration continues, and nobody is taking responsibility or providing constructive answers for those who travel through New York.
Determined to get to the bottom of this issue this reporter called the airline ticket counter at LaGuardia Airport to set the record straight. The call goes something like; “Hi there I’m calling to find out what process I can expect when I get to the airport today. I left California and traveled to New Jersey through LaGuardia with my firearm, which I’m licensed to carry and is stored in the TSA-approved case. I’m headed back later today and wanted to know if there was anything I should be aware of or if I need extra time at the ticket counter?” The American Airline representative, Ty (no last name, security she says), replies; “Nope, it’s the same process in all airports.”
Except it’s not. Had a lawful gun owner followed that due diligence they’d be facing felony gun charges in the City of New York. It seems odd that the airline employees don’t know the rules because once a traveler presents a locked-up firearm at an airport ticket counter in New York for check in, as required by TSA, LaGuardia airline personnel call Port Authority NOT TSA, who immediately arrests the unsuspecting traveler.
Ryan explains that his boss, District Attorney Richard Brown; “has called upon the airlines to warn travelers of their responsibility to check local gun laws. Many airlines when asked by a passenger about transporting a weapon will only inform them of federal regulations with no mention of the need to check local laws. It is therefore incumbent upon passengers to acquaint themselves with the weapon laws of the jurisdiction that they are visiting and to comply with any and all legal requirements if they choose to travel with a weapon.”
Yet, nobody this reporter called mentioned anything about arresting travelers as they try to leave from a New York airport. It’s also worth noting that there is nothing mentioned on the airlines' or TSA’s websites indicating that if travelers pass through New York they need to make alternate plans for checking in a firearm upon departure.
Consequences of due diligence
For the hundreds of passengers ensnared in New York City’s harsh firearm rules, there is little recourse for an individual. However, several attorneys, including Dick Heller (who was successful in taking on the Washington DC politicos and eventually won a Supreme Court case regarding the right to own a firearm) said at a Washington DC dinner that a class-action lawsuit might be in order to reign in New York’s firearm laws.
As far as the New York legal community is concerned, the law is the law, and until somebody challenges the legal standing, the arrests will continue to take place at the airports.
Ryan explained the law in a matter-of-fact tone that “when a visitor to our city is arrested, particularly at our airports, for possessing a weapon, there are several factors we consider in fashioning an appropriate disposition -- including, but not limited to, was the weapon legally obtained, does the individual possess a valid permit in their home state, the duration of their stay in our city and, in airport cases, whether the individual voluntarily disclosed the weapon to authorities. In adjudicating such cases, there must be a balance between our obligation to protect our citizens and an individual's error in judgment. Over the years, we have struck that balance well in ensuring that justice is served and maintaining our state's tough, successful gun laws.”
Fairness in New York requires the defendant to pay a fine, court fees and let authorities destroy their legally owned firearm. If defendants follow this sage advice, the judge’s gavel will fall, and they will not serve any jail time. For the court’s trouble, the defendants will pay approximately $10-15 thousand in fees/fines.
One last fact for New Yorkers to consider with their so-called successful “tough gun laws.” is that while New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his District Attorney offices praise their “toughest in the nation” firearm laws, firearm crime statistics portray a different picture.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the most recent handgun crime statistics indicates New York has witnessed an increase of firearm related crimes despite the state’s tougher laws.
Keeping this in mind 2nd Amendment groups, like Calguns, say New York may be infringing on gun rights. “Look if you are staying in New York City, gun owners must comply with the City's gun laws, but if you are simply passing through it would seem NYC is over-stepping the Second Amendment,” Jason Davis an attorney for Calguns said.
Davis along with other citizens who have been charged with felonies, suffered the wrath of New York’s tough gun laws, contend the entire process is nothing more than a money-making business for the Port Authority Police, New York courts and area lawyers that represent those ensnared at airport ticket counters.
Criminal-defense lawyer Martin D. Kane points out on Lawyers.com; “What New York does is not helping matters. It’s pretty unreasonable, and it’s great fuel.” He goes on to explain that attorneys should not try to ‘defend’ these cases and claims there is a legal process in place.
Nevertheless, Kane claims the specific law is clear and there is no room for negotiation (18 USC §926A Interstate Transportation of Firearms, notwithstanding the clear conflict between NYC and TSA regulations regarding the transportation of weapons.
Other NYC gun-related cases
Two more NYC gun cases settled this week involving a medical student, Meredith Graves of Tennessee and a retired U.S. Marine Ryan Jerome of Indiana.
Graves attorney, Daniel Horwitz spoke to media after he successfully reduced the felony gun charge to a misdemeanor. “She’s happy that this ordeal is over, and she’s looking forward to getting on with her life and her career as a doctor,” he told The New York Post.
The former Marine, Jerome’s case also settled this week. After his arrest, Jerome decided to fight the Manhattan District Attorney’s office and beat the felony gun charge, but changed his mind midway through the battle and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor weapons-possession charge in an effort to avoid a three and a half year jail sentence, according to a New York Times story.
While New York City continues to enforce its over-reaching gun laws, it’s up to gun owners to follow the rules, recognize a problem exists in NYC and use legal channels afforded to them to change the Big Apple’s anti-Second Amendment seizures. When a state impedes on Constitutional rights, it has a chilling effect on law-abiding citizens and the last resort necessary is for Lady Justice (Supreme Court) to return the rights’ to the people, just as the founders intended.
To read three other NYC gun-related stories link here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/unwitting-airline-passengers-robbed-of-their-second-amendment-rights-nyc
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nypd-frisks-searches-and-violates-civil-liberties-daily
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/new-york-city-1-us-constitution-0-nyc-profits-from-seizures-of-legal-guns
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com NYC courts continue to “shakedown” legal gun owners at airports - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nyc-continues-to-shakedown-legal-gun-owners#ixzz1qETz5MuZ
New York authorities rely on the honesty of air travelers transiting through the state with lawfully owned firearms, who become victims upon disclosure under Federal law of their weapon possession, to create a well-oiled, gun-eating, revenue-raising machine. New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg’s interpretation of the Second Amendment nabs unsuspecting airline passengers (hundreds have been ensnared the past few years) jails and fines them.
New York City is a gun-free zone, and one requires permission from Bloomberg’s administration to carry a weapon within the city-- and that permission rarely happens. For security purposes the City often relies on the service of off-duty or retired NYPD to keep the peace in the bustling metropolis of the Big Apple. However, unsuspecting travelers at area airports are apprehended for simply passing through this City to their final destination where it is lawful to have a firearm in their possession.
Advertisement
Combine these heavy-handed tactics with the Department of Justice (DOJ) policy of suing states for laws it favors and Americans have a new recipe for dictatorial leadership. Lately, Attorney General Eric Holder has been in the business of suing individual states for allegedly trumping federal law, most notably illegal immigration and voting laws. While the DOJ picks and chooses its causes, they have chosen to let New York’s Port Authority Police seize lawfully owned firearms from travelers at its airports.
After 9/11, the U.S. government set up a number of safety measures to protect air travelers, and as a result they created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as the federal overseer of airport security. TSA is in charge of security at most major U.S. airports—except New York, which has hijacked control from local TSA agents.
New York City’s firearms interdiction and enforcement interferes with the airport security chain of command. It is here the finger pointing starts and the doubletalk reigns supreme.
The responsibility and non- responsibility approach
This reporter’s recent visit to TSA’s Washington DC headquarters seeking a resolution of this jurisdictional conflict yielded no answers. A phone conversation in the lobby went something like this; “Hi, I’m the reporter from California who has been talking to you via the phone regarding the security measures at LaGuardia Airport and wanted to clarify a few things. Do you have a minute?”
TSA spokesperson Greg Soule then replies; “Sure.”
This reporter answers; “Great, I’m in the lobby can you come down and meet me, I only need 5 minutes?”
Mr. Soule replies; “Aaa… well… actually I can’t come down, but I can refer you to our website.”
Wow, it’s an interesting strategy the TSA employs at their DC headquarters. Another phone call to TSA spokesperson Mike McCarthy confirms TSA is indeed in charge of airport security. Great news. Finally someone can explain why New York City’s Port Authority Police shows up at the ticket counter and arrests travelers when they attempt to check in their TSA-approved locked and unloaded firearm’s cases into checked baggage. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and Mr. McCarthy says there must be a “special agreement” to supersede TSA’s authority.
A “special agreement” explanation leads to the New York Port Authority Police. A call to Port Authority’s Press Officer Al Della Fave yields a similar response, and he explains the officers at the airports are only doing what they are told. And it is Mr. Della Fave’s understanding that Port Authority Police have some sort of “special agreement” with New York’s legal community (Bloomberg and/or District Attorneys) and Port Authority officers are only following orders.
Fair enough, rank-and-file officers are pretty good about following orders, and there is no indication that this case is any different in New York.
The next phone call is to the Queen’s County District Attorneys office that prosecutes the lawful firearm owners, travelling with their guns locked up and stored as per federal law and TSA requirements.
So far, the common denominator with all the agencies is the explicit “special agreement” and if there were a document out there, surely the District Attorney’s office would have a copy of the document.
“I have checked with our executive staff and there is no Memorandum of Understanding between the District Attorney's Office and either the TSA or Port Authority Police Department,” said Kevin R. Ryan, director of communications for the Queens County District Attorney’s office.
So, the DA admits that there is no “memo” or “special agreement” between the Queen’s County District Attorney’s office, New York Port Authority Police and the TSA that justifies Port Authority Police supersede federal law at their airports. Normally, Federal law requires some sort of Memo of Understanding (MOU) between states and municipalities as currently TSA regulates the interstate transportation of firearms.
Knowing New York City has the nation’s toughest gun laws (after a ton of research) it appears New York City is serious about keeping the city a gun-free zone. Again, fair enough, but if New Yorkers are so concerned about firearms entering their jurisdiction, then why aren’t they apprehending the lawful gun owners as they leave the airport with their firearms in their luggage? TSA keeps a record of all firearms that passengers carry in their “checked” luggage. One would assume law enforcement wouldn’t want those firearms on the city sidewalks, right?
“While I cannot speak on behalf of the TSA, I can tell you that we have never been notified by the TSA of somebody traveling to New York with a weapon. The most likely reason is that the TSA would not be aware of the person's licensing status in New York,” Ryan went on to explain.
However, TSA confirms they keep a record of all firearms and haven’t been asked by the DA’s office for notification.
The frustration continues, and nobody is taking responsibility or providing constructive answers for those who travel through New York.
Determined to get to the bottom of this issue this reporter called the airline ticket counter at LaGuardia Airport to set the record straight. The call goes something like; “Hi there I’m calling to find out what process I can expect when I get to the airport today. I left California and traveled to New Jersey through LaGuardia with my firearm, which I’m licensed to carry and is stored in the TSA-approved case. I’m headed back later today and wanted to know if there was anything I should be aware of or if I need extra time at the ticket counter?” The American Airline representative, Ty (no last name, security she says), replies; “Nope, it’s the same process in all airports.”
Except it’s not. Had a lawful gun owner followed that due diligence they’d be facing felony gun charges in the City of New York. It seems odd that the airline employees don’t know the rules because once a traveler presents a locked-up firearm at an airport ticket counter in New York for check in, as required by TSA, LaGuardia airline personnel call Port Authority NOT TSA, who immediately arrests the unsuspecting traveler.
Ryan explains that his boss, District Attorney Richard Brown; “has called upon the airlines to warn travelers of their responsibility to check local gun laws. Many airlines when asked by a passenger about transporting a weapon will only inform them of federal regulations with no mention of the need to check local laws. It is therefore incumbent upon passengers to acquaint themselves with the weapon laws of the jurisdiction that they are visiting and to comply with any and all legal requirements if they choose to travel with a weapon.”
Yet, nobody this reporter called mentioned anything about arresting travelers as they try to leave from a New York airport. It’s also worth noting that there is nothing mentioned on the airlines' or TSA’s websites indicating that if travelers pass through New York they need to make alternate plans for checking in a firearm upon departure.
Consequences of due diligence
For the hundreds of passengers ensnared in New York City’s harsh firearm rules, there is little recourse for an individual. However, several attorneys, including Dick Heller (who was successful in taking on the Washington DC politicos and eventually won a Supreme Court case regarding the right to own a firearm) said at a Washington DC dinner that a class-action lawsuit might be in order to reign in New York’s firearm laws.
As far as the New York legal community is concerned, the law is the law, and until somebody challenges the legal standing, the arrests will continue to take place at the airports.
Ryan explained the law in a matter-of-fact tone that “when a visitor to our city is arrested, particularly at our airports, for possessing a weapon, there are several factors we consider in fashioning an appropriate disposition -- including, but not limited to, was the weapon legally obtained, does the individual possess a valid permit in their home state, the duration of their stay in our city and, in airport cases, whether the individual voluntarily disclosed the weapon to authorities. In adjudicating such cases, there must be a balance between our obligation to protect our citizens and an individual's error in judgment. Over the years, we have struck that balance well in ensuring that justice is served and maintaining our state's tough, successful gun laws.”
Fairness in New York requires the defendant to pay a fine, court fees and let authorities destroy their legally owned firearm. If defendants follow this sage advice, the judge’s gavel will fall, and they will not serve any jail time. For the court’s trouble, the defendants will pay approximately $10-15 thousand in fees/fines.
One last fact for New Yorkers to consider with their so-called successful “tough gun laws.” is that while New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his District Attorney offices praise their “toughest in the nation” firearm laws, firearm crime statistics portray a different picture.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the most recent handgun crime statistics indicates New York has witnessed an increase of firearm related crimes despite the state’s tougher laws.
Keeping this in mind 2nd Amendment groups, like Calguns, say New York may be infringing on gun rights. “Look if you are staying in New York City, gun owners must comply with the City's gun laws, but if you are simply passing through it would seem NYC is over-stepping the Second Amendment,” Jason Davis an attorney for Calguns said.
Davis along with other citizens who have been charged with felonies, suffered the wrath of New York’s tough gun laws, contend the entire process is nothing more than a money-making business for the Port Authority Police, New York courts and area lawyers that represent those ensnared at airport ticket counters.
Criminal-defense lawyer Martin D. Kane points out on Lawyers.com; “What New York does is not helping matters. It’s pretty unreasonable, and it’s great fuel.” He goes on to explain that attorneys should not try to ‘defend’ these cases and claims there is a legal process in place.
Nevertheless, Kane claims the specific law is clear and there is no room for negotiation (18 USC §926A Interstate Transportation of Firearms, notwithstanding the clear conflict between NYC and TSA regulations regarding the transportation of weapons.
Other NYC gun-related cases
Two more NYC gun cases settled this week involving a medical student, Meredith Graves of Tennessee and a retired U.S. Marine Ryan Jerome of Indiana.
Graves attorney, Daniel Horwitz spoke to media after he successfully reduced the felony gun charge to a misdemeanor. “She’s happy that this ordeal is over, and she’s looking forward to getting on with her life and her career as a doctor,” he told The New York Post.
The former Marine, Jerome’s case also settled this week. After his arrest, Jerome decided to fight the Manhattan District Attorney’s office and beat the felony gun charge, but changed his mind midway through the battle and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor weapons-possession charge in an effort to avoid a three and a half year jail sentence, according to a New York Times story.
While New York City continues to enforce its over-reaching gun laws, it’s up to gun owners to follow the rules, recognize a problem exists in NYC and use legal channels afforded to them to change the Big Apple’s anti-Second Amendment seizures. When a state impedes on Constitutional rights, it has a chilling effect on law-abiding citizens and the last resort necessary is for Lady Justice (Supreme Court) to return the rights’ to the people, just as the founders intended.
To read three other NYC gun-related stories link here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/unwitting-airline-passengers-robbed-of-their-second-amendment-rights-nyc
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nypd-frisks-searches-and-violates-civil-liberties-daily
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/new-york-city-1-us-constitution-0-nyc-profits-from-seizures-of-legal-guns
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com NYC courts continue to “shakedown” legal gun owners at airports - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nyc-continues-to-shakedown-legal-gun-owners#ixzz1qETz5MuZ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
