The Merida Initiative
February 24th, 2008 by jack
(posted for Marjorie)
I KNOW THIS DOES NOT BELONG ON THIS BLOG BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ALL AMERICANS: IT IS AS FOLLOWS:
The Merida Initiative is a new foreign assistance program designed to combat drug trafficking, transnational crime, and terrorism in Mexico and Central America . President Bush’s proposed fiscal year 2009 (FY09) Budget includes $550 million as a part of a multi-year, $1.4 billion program.
Specifically, this program would provide training, technologies, and equipment to help Mexican authorities fight the war on drugs and organized crime. Some of the equipment includes helicopters, surveillance aircraft, ion scanners, secure communications systems, and other technologies. It is important that we continue to fight the war on drugs not only at home but abroad as well. We must work to ensure that drugs and criminals do not reach our soil.
CONTACT OUR SENATORS, CONGRESS PERSON AND OUR PRESIDENT NOT TO HAVE THIS PASSED. KEEP IN MIND HOW MUCH MONEY IS SENT TO MEXICO BY ILLEGALS EVERY YEAR, KEEP IN MIND WE TRAIN , WE LOOSE OUR NATION…. FUEL FOR THOUGHT. USE THE MONEY TO BUILD OUR BORDER WALL SOONER THAN LATER.
This entry was posted on Sunday, February 24th, 2008 at 2:21 pm and is filed under Homeland Security, immigration. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 24th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Now that I have posted this, I am going to disagree with it!
I agree that we need better border security, but it is not enough to protect one’s home from crime — it is also beneficial to reduce crime in one’s neighborhood.
February 24th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Isn’t this to help Mexico defend its southern border? Why can’t we put 1 billion dollars into our OWN borders and real border security????
February 24th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Yes, it does include funding for Mexico to increase the security of her border with Guatemala.
This just as the Bush administration has announced an end to the federal program which assisted states (U.S. states, that is) with the cost of incarcerating illegals.
So we can afford to help Mexico maintain its sovereignty, but cannot afford to do so for ourselves. Absolutely disgraceful. We should begin taxing remittances sent back to Mexico by its migrant laborers here and from these taxes a portion could go to Mexican aid. Not a penny more. They need to get their own house in order.
Or else, as I’ve noted before, lets just consider annexing Mexico.
February 24th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
There are a couple of things that could be thought of here.
1) Do we have the resources to be helping Mexico or others to do what they ought to be doing themselves? Probably not.
2) So far, we have not been able to reliably stop drugs from entering the country — we can’t even keep people from entering the country — so would “building a fence” do any better at keeping out drugs? Hard to answer, but I don’t think so.
3) Should we be in the business of restricting the import (or distribution) or drugs? In some senses, the idea of stopping people from using certain drugs is a fairly recent idea. The arguments for are centered around the damage to society and the possible abuse by someone to the point of endangering others. A much lesser argument is protecting people from themselves, but that is also a point brought up with these things. Arguments against are that adults should not be controlled in their private lives — the argument against is along the lines of “What business does the government have in protect a people from themselves?”
4) Now if you answer 3 with it is the job of the government from themselves — or that the proliferation of drugs attacks those who are to young to decide for themselves — then you have to ask what is the most productive method of accomplishing the goal. Most quality programs state (and have had many years of study that support the position) that the closer to the source of a problem you are when you fix it, the better you are in terms of cost. Putting money into stopping drugs at their point of origin may have a much better rate of success.
Now to the question … do I think this should be done? The real issue is question 3 above. If we totally legalized drugs, it would eliminate the need, drive down drug prices, and lower crime rates. It would also likely decimate families in which the bread winner would become unproductive, require other to support their family, and possibly pay for burial costs as they poison themselves. I don’t have a hard fast answer to that question, even though I come from a conservative Christian background. The role of government is to contain evil — punish those who do evil and encourage those that do good. While drinking can be evil, it need not be (at least from a Christian Bible perspective — the Bible states that the Lord’s table includes wine, and the church has no authority to change that; therefore at least in that instance, we are commanded to drink). It is personal responsibility to do what is right, the government is to punish those who do evil, not prevent them from doing evil.
That may sound very libertarian, it is not. I do believe the government should in fact punish those who do evil — especially those that do evil within their own family (a spouse that abandons their family is “worse than an infidel”). Those that practice immorality such that others know about it should be punished (i.e., doing what is evil should be punished). but those things that are not inherently evil should be left alone, regardless of whether people sometimes do evil by means of them. Punish after the evil occurs, do not limit good people from doing what is right because we are “afraid” someone might do evil.
But that still leaves the question. Do we want to support this effort? Once you answer question 3 by saying we are going to suppress drug use, then do that with the most effect methods. That would be by stopping at the supply.
February 24th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
THANK YOU JACK.
February 25th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Brian,
You’re close with your understanding. A major factor that you have left out of the equation is the medical profession. Not unlike what tobacco is going thru today, do you believe that self-poisoning won’t get called on the carpet for being a substantial monetary impediment on the people? And then, not unlike tobaaco, we will drive a revenue source right into the ground so as to find something new to tax and replace it.
I say, government controlled sources to be used by medical facilities for making pharmacuticals and enhancing life (inclusive of relieving suffering thru ailment). Everything else is fair game for eradication. I just don’t think by paying other countries we will solve the problem since, in general, it is OUR countries’ populace that are the biggest customers. Hence kick-backs and protection of the “cartels”.
I believe, with the monetary figure listed above, that we just BUY Mexico. We will have enough chump change left over to build a fence on the southern border with guaquemoolia and keep that rif-raf out. Then we purge the corrupt politicos and replace them with our own corrupt politicos. We force builders D.B. Horton and Toll Brothers to start building resorts and golf courses all over our new country-south. This will act like a giant Hoover upon the once illegal workforce which will gravitate to the building jobs. While they are all down there working, we take the money that would have been used on the old border fence and trench a new “Rio Grande Canal”. The United States of Mexico will be under our control but we get to keep them south of us. Kinda like the U.S. Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico. Sure, they would be citizens but if they like it where they are at, why go north to the otherside of the canal? Do you see a mass influx of Virgin Islanders or Puerto Ricans? I’m telling you, this would work. The nation would be busy at work, stocks would go up and people would be happy. It’s a win-win-when situation here!
February 25th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
ANOTHER FYI FOR ALL: BEHIND THE COUNTRY’S BACK
North American Army created without OK by Congress
U.S., Canada military ink deal to fight domestic emergencies
________________________________________
Posted: February 24, 2008
1:45 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
In a ceremony that received virtually no attention in the American media, the United States and Canada signed a military agreement Feb. 14 allowing the armed forces from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even one that does not involve a cross-border crisis.
The agreement, defined as a Civil Assistance Plan, was not submitted to Congress for approval, nor did Congress pass any law or treaty specifically authorizing this military agreement to combine the operations of the armed forces of the United States and Canada in the event of a wide range of domestic civil disturbances ranging from violent storms, to health epidemics, to civil riots or terrorist attacks.
In Canada, the agreement paving the way for the militaries of the U.S. and Canada to cross each other’s borders to fight domestic emergencies was not announced either by the Harper government or the Canadian military, prompting sharp protest.
“It’s kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-U.S. relations and contentious issues like military integration,” Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians told the Canwest News Service. “We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites.”
The military Civil Assistance Plan can be seen as a further incremental step being taken toward creating a North American armed forces available to be deployed in domestic North American emergency situations.
The agreement was signed at U.S. Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, by U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of NORAD and U.S. Northern Command, or USNORTHCOM, and by Canadian Air Force Lt. Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command.
“This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation’s requests for military support of civil authorities,” Renuart said in a statement published on the USNORTHCOM website.
“In discussing the new bilateral Civil Assistance Plan established by USNORTHCOM and Canada Command, Renuart stressed, “Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack, in order to save lives, prevent human suffering an mitigate damage to property, is of the highest importance, and we need to be able to have forces that are flexible and adaptive to support rapid decision-making in a collaborative environment.”
Lt. Gen. Dumais seconded Renuart’s sentiments, stating, “The signing of this plan is an important symbol of the already strong working relationship between Canada Command and U.S. Northern Command.”
“Our commands were created by our respective governments to respond to the defense and security challenges of the twenty-first century,” he stressed, “and we both realize that these and other challenges are best met through cooperation between friends.”
The statement on the USNORTHCOM website emphasized the plan recognizes the role of each nation’s lead federal agency for emergency preparedness, which in the United States is the Department of Homeland Security and in Canada is Public Safety Canada.
The statement then noted the newly signed plan was designed to facilitate the military-to-military support of civil authorities once government authorities have agreed on an appropriate response.
As WND has previously reported, U.S. Northern Command was established on Oct. 1, 2002, as a military command tasked with anticipating and conducting homeland defense and civil support operations where U.S. armed forces are used in domestic emergencies.
Similarly, Canada Command was established on Feb. 1, 2006, to focus on domestic operations and offer a single point of contact for all domestic and continental defense and securities partners.
In Nov. 2007, WND published a six-part exclusive series, detailing WND’s on-site presence during the NORAD-USNORTHCOM Vigilant Shield 2008, an exercise which involved Canada Command as a participant.
In an exclusive interview with WND during Vigilant Shield 2008, Gen. Renuart affirmed USNORTHCOM would deploy U.S. troops on U.S. soil should the president declare a domestic emergency in which the Department of Defense ordered USNORTHCOM involvement.
In May 2007, WND reported President Bush, on his own authority, signed National Security Presidential Directive 51, also known as Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20, authorizing the president to declare a national emergency and take over all functions of federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, without necessarily obtaining the approval of Congress to do so.
February 26th, 2008 at 10:26 am
That will stop the rebellion! Another act where state government is left to the federal authority. And this is between the militaries? Isn’t that why there is civilian authority? Another bad idea waiting to go wrong.
March 25th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
contact congress today!
************Immediate Release March 21, 2008**************
Secret Documents Released
Murdered Journalist Network Denounces Military Reward for Impunity
CONTACT AND MEET WITH YOUR CONGRESS REP. SOON!!!
Contacts: http://friendsofbradwill.org
The international network demanding accountability for the murder of
US journalist Brad Will released secret documents detailing proposed
military support for Mexican security forces implicated in murder,
torture and continuing arbitrary detentions.
“Finally we were able to obtain these documents, which even Members of
Congress have yet to see. We hope that by releasing them to the public
we will be able to better make our case for withholding hundreds of
millions of dollars in military subsidies to the Mexican military. The
murderers of Brad and many others in Oaxaca and Atenco and Chiapas
must be brought to justice if U.S. support for human rights is to mean
anything.” said Harry Bubbins, of Friends of Brad Will. Over 70% of
the proposed $1.5 billion would entail lethal aid analysts revealed.
Friends of Brad Will is with a widespread coalition of labor and human
rights advocates urging House Speaker Pelosi and Eliot Engels, the
Chair of the Western Hemispheric affairs subcommittee to oppose U.S.
support for Mexican military and police forces. Mr. Will, the 36 year
old reporter, was murdered in Oaxaca, Mexico on October 27th, 2006.
Witnesses and photographic evidence implicate members of the Mexican
government, including a police chief in his death that day.
President Bush announced a $1.5 billion dollar “security cooperation
initiative” proposal for Mexico that the President is trying to bury
into the Iraq supplemental spending package submitted to Congress. The
initiative allows sharing of U.S. military intelligence information
with Mexican military counterparts and provides weaponry and training
with the notoriously corrupt and brutal Mexican military and police.
Brad Will’s family and friends denounced plans to fund a “Plan Mexico”
that would be more costly than the controversial “Plan Colombia”. They
pointed to the lack of any credible investigation into the murder of
the U.S. journalist, who was in Mexico
covering the protests of a popular movement of teachers and their
supporters facing paramilitary violence deployed by the Mexican
government and the governor of Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz.
“We are confident that Congress will not just rubber stamp this
ill-advised military aid package in Bush’s waning days that would lead
to further human rights abuses for decades to come.” stated Robert
Jereski, a Congressional liaison for Friends of Brad Will.
SECRET DOCUMENTS AT:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/protectrandallsislandandmore/sets/72157600222165326/
PARTIAL HELICOPTER OUTLAYS PROPOSED:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/protectrandallsislandandmore/2349516939/in/set-72157600222165326/
SUMMARY SHEET 1 of 4
http://www.flickr.com/photos/protectrandallsislandandmore/2349507881/in/set-72157600222165326/
By Friends of Brad Will
http://friendsofbradwill.org
June 18th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Check this link that just came out. It clearly shows that Initiatives such as merida which just dump monetary and military resources into the drug war simply don’t work. The article just came out today on MSNBC and is titled. “shock rise in Colombian coca production” I think it is quite obvious that going down the same old path will result in the same old BS.
Here is the link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25242986/