Another victory in the war on drugs...

[Tallpine]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/04/rep-hoekstra-says-justice-denied-shootdown-innocent-americans/

Killing American missionaries in the air :(

[Grandpa Shooter]

And you are surprised by this?  I don't think so!

[Perd Hapley]

How is this the fault of drug laws, or the enforcement thereof? 

[zahc]

The use of force in this case was authorized on the basis of drug laws. It seems pretty obvious to me, but maybe I'm not rightthinking.

[Perd Hapley]

This couldn't have happened on the basis of some other law? 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

we made the bad call in conjunction with the locals  the coverup proves they knew they screwed the pooch. we don't provide miltary assets for anything other than losing the war on drugs

[MicroBalrog]

This couldn't have happened on the basis of some other law? 

So what is your point?


It's natural that, in the general course of law enforcement, SOME innocent people get hurt. Especially if your means of law enforcement includes fighter aircraft.

Which is why the answer is to ban as little different activities as possible. And not to use fighter aircraft.

[S. Williamson]

Which is why the answer is to ... not to use fighter aircraft.

Indeed.  Flak would have sufficed. 

Does anyone else find it funny that a thread involving the CIA pops up, and Dick Cheney quickly makes an appearance? 

Yes, I know it's Fisty.

[Hawkmoon]

Does anyone else find it funny that a thread involving the CIA pops up, and Dick Cheney quickly makes an appearance? 

No.

Your point?

[Perd Hapley]

So what is your point?


It's natural that, in the general course of law enforcement, SOME innocent people get hurt. Especially if your means of law enforcement includes fighter aircraft.

Which is why the answer is to ban as little different activities as possible. And not to use fighter aircraft.

The latter is my point.  The former is the point the original poster was trying to make, with the thread title.  Unfortunately, an investigation gone horribly wrong doesn't tell us which activities should be banned, or how few activities we could possibly ban. 

[jackdanson]

The more laws you have, and the more rabidly you enforce them, the more likely this is to happen.  The only other way this mistake may have been made is in the prevention of a terrorist attack.  I can't think of any other reason our LE would ok downing a plane.

Unfortunately, an investigation gone horribly wrong doesn't tell us which activities should be banned, or how few activities we could possibly ban. 

It does call into question just how important said laws are.  Personally I'm more concerned with federal law enforcement using military equipment on civilians than I am some addicts getting their drugs.  These enforcement techniques don't stop anyone, I could have any drug I want within 2 hours of now.  All this enforcement does is increase the cost of drugs, and therefore the side effects.. Burglaries, prostitution, etc.

[slugcatcher]

The program was canceled in 2001. CIA agents that tried to cover up their involvement and delay the investigation are being held accountable. I think they should do some time in club fed and be banned from civil service for life but that's just me. I did notice this happened in Peru. What US laws were violated? As for rabidly enforcing laws. I don't see US anti-drug laws being enforced worth a flying flip much less rabidly enforced considering the amount of illegal drugs being walking across the border into this country.

[Seenterman]

The CIA was playing fast and loose and didn't even follow the one guideline to identify the aircraft, checking the tail number. I can see why it wasn't checked immediately, if the CIA plane was spotted the target aircraft could just turn around out of Peruvian airspace, but why would it not be checked once fighters are within gun range of the aircraft? A Cessna isn't going to outrun fighter jet.  From the article it seems like the CIA plane's "investigation" just went,

Pilot
"Oh look its a Cessna."

Co Pilot
"Arn't Cessna's and other small aircraft like that typically used for drug smuggling?

Pilot
"By gum your right. Lets get em!"

Why are CIA assets even being used in a drug interdiction role? Is that in there mandate to? I thought the DEA was lead agency in charge of coordinating foreign drug interdiction missions.

"CIA personnel had no authority either to direct or prohibit actions by that government.

Yea but they were there point out targets, you think it would help if they actually identified the targets.

In the case of the tragic downing of April 21, 2001, [sic] CIA personnel protested the identification of the missionary plane as a suspect drug trafficker.

Obviously not strongly enough, as they were shot down. And according to the article not that strongly to the Peruvians either.

"This was a tragic episode that the Agency has dealt with in a professional and thorough manner. Unfortunately, some have been willing to twist facts to imply otherwise. In so doing, they do a tremendous disservice to CIA officers, serving and retired, who have risked their lives for America's national security."

I don't know if I should either laugh or cry at that statement. How has the Agency dealt with this matter? Swept it under the rug counts as dealing with it? I love it how the obligatory "risked their lives for America's national security" gets thrown in there as this incident had absolutely nothing to do with American's national security. That spokesman is like a bad magician, Don't pay attention to the dead missionaries in this hand, while I wave around Patriotism in this hand.

[Tallpine]

As everyone knows, (some) drugs are just so bad that we need to arbitrarily kill anyone even suspected of having them.

[DenaliPark]

How is this the fault of drug laws, or the enforcement thereof? 

 Several other interesting results from the "war on drugs,"
 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/6844536.html
 http://bitterqueen.typepad.com/friends_of_ours/18th_street/
 http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.html

 The "war on drugs" is a a spectacular failure, it has created an industry with the manpower & the cash to challenge virtually any central government authority in either central or south America, and "uber mega-supermassive" corruption in both Mexico & the USA!
 The war has morphed into an Orwellian totalitarian game of chess between the only two party's benefiting from it, the cartels, and the federal bureaucracy(including it's military & para-military machines).
 Everyone & everything else is caught directly between them, including your fast fading liberty....
 

[zahc]

As everyone knows, (some) drugs are just so bad that we need to arbitrarily kill anyone even suspected of having them.

The part I missed is how they were even suspected. You see a Cessna plane flying, and therefore that Cessna plane has drugs in it? How did they even have suspician? They didn't search the interior of the plane. Clearly they didn't identify the plane and where it came from and who owned it. Were they shot down for not responding to radio contact? Is one even required to maintain radio contact on a certain frequency? Even if they were violating that rule, do you shoot down people from breaking the rules? What if the radio was broken?

[RevDisk]

Ok, the CIA tasked a foreign military aircraft to kill US citizens.  Simple solution.  Charge the agents and their supervisors with murder, same with the folks that approved the mission.  Ordinarily I'd say bomb the folks responsible for shooting down the aircraft, but as they were acting on official or unofficial orders from the CIA, I can't blame them too much.   

Heck, I'm tempted to say bomb them anyways to send two messages.  Don't listen to folks from the CIA and don't clip Americans unless they really deserve it.  If we did so, then the next time a US agency says "Hey, can you kill some Americans for us?", the answer will be "Are you [bleep] insane, you retarded [bleep]!  [bleep], No and [bleep] you!  Last time we did that, we got hit with napalm and white phosphorous for a week."

[Perd Hapley]

I tend to agree with the legalizers.  That said, I guess I just have this rational refusal to conflate the problem of out-of-control crazy law enforcement/CIA with the question of which laws they ought to enforce. 

[DenaliPark]

I tend to agree with the legalizers.  That said, I guess I just have this rational refusal to conflate the problem of out-of-control crazy law enforcement/CIA with the question of which laws they ought to enforce. 

 But thats the problem!
 It cannot be hoped to be won, thats why it is out of control craziness, it is an ever expanding downward spiral, and frankly speaking, if we really wished to impact the illicit flow of narcotics from south of the border, we could just seal the border itself, which our totally "out of control" federal bureaucracy(in direct violation of it's constitutional mandate)refuses to do!

[Doggy Daddy]

If we can't seal drugs out of a school, a neighborhood, or a prison how the heck are we gonna seal them at a border?

DD

[RevDisk]

If we can't seal drugs out of a school, a neighborhood, or a prison how the heck are we gonna seal them at a border?

DD

Set up a corridor, clearly mark it as a free fire zone, add landmines.  Then a set of decent walls (not the intentionally badly constructed wall we currently have) with sensors monitoring that strip.   Roving helicopters with "shoot on sight" orders for anyone they see in the open in the DMZ. 

Not that I think it's a necessarily a good idea, but it is certainly possible.

[Doggy Daddy]

I'm picturing Escape From New York. 

DD

[Tallpine]

The part I missed is how they were even suspected. You see a Cessna plane flying, and therefore that Cessna plane has drugs in it? How did they even have suspician? They didn't search the interior of the plane. Clearly they didn't identify the plane and where it came from and who owned it. Were they shot down for not responding to radio contact? Is one even required to maintain radio contact on a certain frequency? Even if they were violating that rule, do you shoot down people from breaking the rules? What if the radio was broken?

Why would anyone be flying a private plane in South America unless they were smuggling drugs?

I mean, that's just like driving a red car on I-10 

[roo_ster]

I tend to agree with the legalizers.  That said, I guess I just have this rational refusal to conflate the problem of out-of-control crazy law enforcement/CIA with the question of which laws they ought to enforce. 

I agree to some extent, but in (theoretical) absence of laws or a a regime with few laws, hte opportunity for mischief is attenuated.

If we can't seal drugs out of a school, a neighborhood, or a prison how the heck are we gonna seal them at a border?
DD

The border is a much easier problem.  As has been noted elsewhere, border crossings maximize a gov'ts power and minimize a person's liberty.  All your examples are domestic with liberty implications.

RevDisk's solution will work, but it need not be quite so dramatic.  The Izzies managed to seal off the Gaza border tighter than a drum.  Only a handful of suicide bombers have made it through their relatively undramatic obstacles.

(This is part of the problem,not a comprehensive solution.)

[MicroBalrog]

RevDisk's solution will work, but it need not be quite so dramatic.  The Izzies managed to seal off the Gaza border tighter than a drum.  Only a handful of suicide bombers have made it through their relatively undramatic obstacles.

The last suicide bomber who made it through was in early 2008, I think.