0 comment Tuesday, July 8, 2014 | admin
Homeland Security won't release papers on border agents' case
Sara A. Carter, of the Inland Daily Bulletin in California, deserves credit for doing yeoman's work on border issues and immigration. She does consistently good work on these issues; it's a shame that she doesn't receive wider attention. Truth and honesty on the borders/immigration issue are in short supply, as the media drones just crank out endless sob stories and template stories on the poor fearful immigrants.
I post the article linked above not just because I admire Sara Carter's writing, but because she is putting some facts out there which need to be read.
Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the Daily Bulletin on Wednesday that Homeland Security Inspector General Richard Skinner has refused to deliver documents confirming his office's claims that Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean admitted they "were out to shoot Mexicans," and knowingly shot Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a drug smuggler, in a border incident nearly two years ago.
McCaul and three other House members met with Skinner on Sept. 26, 2006, to discuss the agents' case.
The Daily Bulletin obtained a confidential Office of Inspector General memo from an interview Compean gave to investigators on March 18, 2005.
The memo, dated April 4, 2005, supports the agent's claim that he believed his life was in danger when he tried to apprehend the Mexican drug smuggler on Feb. 17, 2005.'' [Emphasis mine]
The article notes that McCaul and his colleagues are demanding the documents supporting the Homeland Security department's version of events.
I want to weigh the facts and the evidence in this case," McCaul said. "Either it is total arrogance or gross incompetence on the part of the Inspector General's office. If what (the DHS) told us was a lie, or if they misrepresented the facts on this case to members of Congress, we are going to hold them accountable."
Full transcripts from Ramos and Compean's trial last spring still have not been made available to Congress or the public. According to McCaul, repeated requests for the transcripts since November have been answered with excuses.
[...]According to the memorandum, seven other agents were on the scene at the time of the shooting, including two supervisors whom Ramos and Compean both stated knew about the incident.
No other agents at the scene that day were prosecuted, and some were given immunity to testify against Ramos and Compean.
Agents and supervisors are required to file a written report if they participate in or know of an incident, according to TJ Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents nearly 11,000 Border Patrol agents.
"The steadfast refusal of the departments of Justice and Homeland Security to provide relevant information to Congress and the public about why Border Patrol agents Compean and Ramos were prosecuted causes people to wonder what they are trying to hide," Bonner said. ''
If the official version of what happened is true, then why the stonewalling and the reluctance to cooperate with the House members who are investigating? These are questions I would like to see answered by the legions of GOP loyalists on the internet forums and blogs, who are trashing Ramos and Compean, and defending the administration's actions.
I've noticed that in discussing the Ramos-Compean story lately, many people are spreading the DOJ's version of events, which paints Ramos and Compean as rogue agents who broke rules and laws and then covered up their wrongdoing. I am dismayed that so many people, especially Republicans, are eager to buy into the spin. Of course, given that many Republicans are blind party loyalists who think that their leaders can absolutely do no wrong, and given that many of these faux conservatives are open-borders partisans, it isn't so surprising. For some people, their party loyalty and their loyalty to the administration is very much on the level of religious faith; it's an unquestioning, blind, passive faith, and they are angered by anyone who commits the heresy of criticizing anything 'their guy' does.
The blogosphere can play a part in getting both sides of the story out there, since the national media have not given this case the scrutiny it demands.
For a detailed account, here's a link to a letter by Joe Loya, father-in-law of Ignacio Ramos. He gives a detailed account of what happened, from Ramos' point of view. It's worth reading.
Let's not let the spinmeisters and party hacks dominate the discussion on this story.
Sara A. Carter, of the Inland Daily Bulletin in California, deserves credit for doing yeoman's work on border issues and immigration. She does consistently good work on these issues; it's a shame that she doesn't receive wider attention. Truth and honesty on the borders/immigration issue are in short supply, as the media drones just crank out endless sob stories and template stories on the poor fearful immigrants.
I post the article linked above not just because I admire Sara Carter's writing, but because she is putting some facts out there which need to be read.
Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the Daily Bulletin on Wednesday that Homeland Security Inspector General Richard Skinner has refused to deliver documents confirming his office's claims that Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean admitted they "were out to shoot Mexicans," and knowingly shot Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a drug smuggler, in a border incident nearly two years ago.
McCaul and three other House members met with Skinner on Sept. 26, 2006, to discuss the agents' case.
The Daily Bulletin obtained a confidential Office of Inspector General memo from an interview Compean gave to investigators on March 18, 2005.
The memo, dated April 4, 2005, supports the agent's claim that he believed his life was in danger when he tried to apprehend the Mexican drug smuggler on Feb. 17, 2005.'' [Emphasis mine]
The article notes that McCaul and his colleagues are demanding the documents supporting the Homeland Security department's version of events.
I want to weigh the facts and the evidence in this case," McCaul said. "Either it is total arrogance or gross incompetence on the part of the Inspector General's office. If what (the DHS) told us was a lie, or if they misrepresented the facts on this case to members of Congress, we are going to hold them accountable."
Full transcripts from Ramos and Compean's trial last spring still have not been made available to Congress or the public. According to McCaul, repeated requests for the transcripts since November have been answered with excuses.
[...]According to the memorandum, seven other agents were on the scene at the time of the shooting, including two supervisors whom Ramos and Compean both stated knew about the incident.
No other agents at the scene that day were prosecuted, and some were given immunity to testify against Ramos and Compean.
Agents and supervisors are required to file a written report if they participate in or know of an incident, according to TJ Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents nearly 11,000 Border Patrol agents.
"The steadfast refusal of the departments of Justice and Homeland Security to provide relevant information to Congress and the public about why Border Patrol agents Compean and Ramos were prosecuted causes people to wonder what they are trying to hide," Bonner said. ''
If the official version of what happened is true, then why the stonewalling and the reluctance to cooperate with the House members who are investigating? These are questions I would like to see answered by the legions of GOP loyalists on the internet forums and blogs, who are trashing Ramos and Compean, and defending the administration's actions.
I've noticed that in discussing the Ramos-Compean story lately, many people are spreading the DOJ's version of events, which paints Ramos and Compean as rogue agents who broke rules and laws and then covered up their wrongdoing. I am dismayed that so many people, especially Republicans, are eager to buy into the spin. Of course, given that many Republicans are blind party loyalists who think that their leaders can absolutely do no wrong, and given that many of these faux conservatives are open-borders partisans, it isn't so surprising. For some people, their party loyalty and their loyalty to the administration is very much on the level of religious faith; it's an unquestioning, blind, passive faith, and they are angered by anyone who commits the heresy of criticizing anything 'their guy' does.
The blogosphere can play a part in getting both sides of the story out there, since the national media have not given this case the scrutiny it demands.
For a detailed account, here's a link to a letter by Joe Loya, father-in-law of Ignacio Ramos. He gives a detailed account of what happened, from Ramos' point of view. It's worth reading.
Let's not let the spinmeisters and party hacks dominate the discussion on this story.
Labels: Border Patrol, Media