E&E Topic--ICE Agent killed

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread on the death of SA Jaime Zapata is an abortion and should be closed immediately. The operational details of this incident are still under investigation. What is being reported in the press and copied and pasted into this thread are partial facts that don’t present a complete picture of the incident. While there are probably a small number of bladeforum members with the military and LEO training and experience to properly evaluate the incident when all the facts are known, the incident report when complete will probably be classified between secret and TS and will never be available to the public. The continued postings of half truths and uniformed “theories” on this tragic incident in this thread do an injustice to the memory of a fine American who gave his life operating in one of the most dangerous locations in the world.
 
I disagree. This thread does not need to be closed. All that is being "reported" here is open source press releases and new stories. The point of the thread is to do our best to learn from what happened. Period. With that said, I'm sure you will get your desired wish of having this thread closed simply because of those who cannot stick to the point of the thread and want to make it to be something more than it is.
 
The situation that you are in a foreign country as a LEO that is unarmed is the biggest problem. You are at the mercy of who is supposed to watch your back. With all the money in Mexico that is generated by the cartels who knows who can be trusted.

U.S. Leo's are a target in Mexico period. Why they left the military convoy is beyond me and may never be put out publicly. If it was a mental lapse and they decided to travel by themselves then it just shows your brain can't be in a white mode. Situational awareness ... I think this is a reminder to all of us not to get complacent anywhere we travel. The scenario in my brain... Agents get a phone call from the Boss ... Boss says "You guys are supposed to be here what is taking so long...." .... Agents.."The convoy isn't ready to move yet"...Boss.... "You guys need to get back here now I'm not shelling out any more extra pay"... Agents" Do you know what the roads are like here?" ... Boss " I don't care get back here....Now". I am hoping that isn't the case and if it is it won't hit the streets .... they will protect the idiot who gave them the order.

There are plainly too many People in the Management sector of Homeland Security that have not done the job... care more about warm and fuzzy political side of protecting our borders....and have the ostrich mentality that it won't happen here.....
 
Striker, I think you are 100 percent right. (Well, I don't know about the scenario you propose one way or the other). But, yeah, forcing agents to work unarmed in countries more dangerous than the US, without the protection of the Constitution and with little to no support is ridiculous.

Like the Brazilian incident with the FAM's. What would have happened if they didn't take matters into their own hands and leave? They'd still be in the jail now with the State Dept "working hard to resolve the situation"

Like many other things in life, no one is going to look out for you other than you. And if you have a partner, you have to watch each other's back.

Oh, and I don't care if this thread is locked or not. But I think it is providing useful information that may just help save someone's life someday. Whether we have the facts 100 percent right about this case or not. People can learn from completely hypothetical situations so a situation at least partly based on fact seems to me has some validity as well, no?
 
I know that the State Department has an E&E or similar program for both diplomats and attached agencies. As a matter of course, do Agents from Federal Law Enforcement receive E&E training prior to entering a foreign assignment. DSS obviously would, but I wonder if all foreign bound law enforcement receive enough training, and if they do, what situation could arise that would override that training or instincts. Keep in mind, I am not asking what the training is - I have an idea based on some friends who have spent time either in the Diplomatic Corps, or attached to it. I am asking if they do indeed receive E&E training - and is it extensive enough to take.
 
Smash05 said:
I know that the State Department has an E&E or similar program for both diplomats and attached agencies. As a matter of course, do Agents from Federal Law Enforcement receive E&E training prior to entering a foreign assignment. DSS obviously would, but I wonder if all foreign bound law enforcement receive enough training, and if they do, what situation could arise that would override that training or instincts. Keep in mind, I am not asking what the training is - I have an idea based on some friends who have spent time either in the Diplomatic Corps, or attached to it. I am asking if they do indeed receive E&E training - and is it extensive enough to take.
Click to expand...

That's a great question. I suspect the answer is no though. With that said, anyone working hostile areas should at least have to go through a basic course, IMO.
 
R.A.T. said:
That's a great question. I suspect the answer is no though. With that said, anyone working hostile areas should at least have to go through a basic course, IMO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would be a common sense skillset to have. Whether or not the mgmt decides it is worth the time or money could be a setback.

Bonnie and Clyde were killed in a similar fashion, but instead of a roadblock it was a broken-down car with someone standing by it. When they approached I think they may have started to slow down, but the LEO's and whoever else was there just started firing insane amounts of rounds at them. I have seen either the real car or a replica used in the movie....not sure....I do know I saw Ted Bundy's yellow bug that he used in the National Museum of Crime & Punishment in DC.

If someone is trying to get you to stop your car, don't. That can happen here in any city in the US....a stranded motorist needs help. You stop and then find out he has a gun and wants you, your wife, your car, your money and anything else. Not a good situation to be in.
 
I was thinking about the current situation of the "Diplomat" that defended himself from an armed robbery in Pakistan by shooting two thugs. Even if you manage to E and E with your life...there are going to be other issues like corrupt governments to deal with.

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/index.php/world-news/4838-diplomat-or-killer-pakistan-court-adjourns-us-immunity-case


Expatriated said:
Striker, I think you are 100 percent right. (Well, I don't know about the scenario you propose one way or the other). But, yeah, forcing agents to work unarmed in countries more dangerous than the US, without the protection of the Constitution and with little to no support is ridiculous.

Like the Brazilian incident with the FAM's. What would have happened if they didn't take matters into their own hands and leave? They'd still be in the jail now with the State Dept "working hard to resolve the situation"

Like many other things in life, no one is going to look out for you other than you. And if you have a partner, you have to watch each other's back.

Oh, and I don't care if this thread is locked or not. But I think it is providing useful information that may just help save someone's life someday. Whether we have the facts 100 percent right about this case or not. People can learn from completely hypothetical situations so a situation at least partly based on fact seems to me has some validity as well, no?
Click to expand...
 
I think more than anything else, when you are dealing with criminals that have this amount of money and you're in a very, very corrupt country, you can never trust your hosts. Ever. Did they split from a convoy or did the convoy split from them and set them up? We don't know and as someone earlier pointed out, we may never know what really happened.

If your hosts are using the same route every day to travel, do you trust them? Knowing that this is the number one way to get kidnapped or assassinated? Repetitive behaviors are, obviously, predictable. And that can lead to disaster. But if your hosts are doing this and they are your only "protection," what to do then?

As far as Escape and Evasion is concerned, this is a tough one, this case. It's not like the Pakistani case I cited earlier this week or last week or the Air Marshal case "Expatriated" cited after that.

You cannot do a whole lot of E&Eing when your partner is dead or dying next to you and you have to plug your own holes, too. Your "E&E" at that point is immediately escaping and evading death due to blood loss and shock, Quicklot and direct pressure with a Trau-Medic Dressing, etc.

You know, all of the preparation in the world doesn't mean squat if you just make one mistake or you just have an unlucky moment. I know some people don't believe in luck, but, hey, what else is it? Fate? The first Special Forces Trooper to be killed in Afghanistan was one of Kelly Worden's students at one time, at Ft. Hood. Here is a guy that the government spent millions on, training, training and even more training. Killed by a kid with an AK-47. Bad luck, whatever you want to call it, doesn't matter. When you encounter it, you will know. Col. Nick Rowe, assassinated in the PIs, either struck in the head fatally through an unarmored portion of the vehicle or another story has it that the AC was out and there was a vent window open and the fatal round went through that area.

Vehicles are a hard thing anyway. They can be a great weapon or a casket, too.
 
It might very well be that nothing short of a high volume of automatic weapons fire would have saved them, the Agents carrying those types of weapons and having them immediately available. Even then, toss the dice. Nothing says "get the fuck away from me" like two guys with submachineguns or (real) assault rifles.
 
You're right, Don. Once you are traveling where everyone knows you and you are unarmed, you're WAY behind the power curve. It's why you have to take so many proactive measures to avoid potential dangerous situations. Once you are in it, it's too late.

Like nature...some animals have great defenses and some animal's defenses are never having to fight at all cause they'd lose.

Hence, back to my original post about E&E--the best E&E plan is one that avoids you having to E&E in the first place.
 
If you and I are in a vehicle and we get sold down the river to the highest bidder, we're doomed. I don't think there is anything that can save you except ramming the ambush, depending on the type of vehicular ambush it is, and just blasting out of there flat out. We both might still die. Might still die if we both have M4s or PDWs or whatever other goodies we might have.

The point being, I don't think you can "E&E" out of something like this, other than what I just listed. There are too many constraints placed on you by your hosts which can save you or kill you depending on their own personal honor or lack of it.

Of course, if they had some gear and a couple rifles or SMGs, they could have bailed depending on how their vehicle was placed in the ambush and then split while putting down some fire on anyone that tried to follow them.
 
Expatriated said:
Mexico is indeed resistant to agents carrying weapons but there are MANY countries that I am personally aware of who's governments have absolutely NO problem with US agents carrying weapons. However, the local US Embassy will NOT allow the agent so the agent arrives unarmed. Colombia, for example, has a very open policy for agents, they are issued military documents and authorized to carry whenever and wherever. Depending on the current feeling within the Embassy however, they may or may not allow agents to carry, or may limit where or when the agents can carry. At one point, agents had to show up on Friday and turn their weapons in to the RSO and retrieve them the following Monday. Horsepucky.

It has been my personal experience that country weapons permits have been authorized at the highest local level of the foreign government and then the US Embassy does not allow the agent to carry (grant weapon country clearance) so the country issues a permit but the agent has no weapon to carry because the US won't let him bring it in.

Sometimes, even if the long standing policy is for agents to carry but you have a Deputy Chief of Mission who is personally anti-firearms and he puts an end to it overnight.

It is absolutely amazing how much US training and money is being spent in Mexico right now. We have every federal agency down there training. We are buying equipment and everything you can think of. All it would take would be the Embassy saying, "You want all of this? Our agents have to be able to defend themselves or everything's on hold." The next day, the Commander General Colonel Supreme Leader of the Armed Forces issues dozens of permits.

As far as the LEGATT is concerned, I can't speak personally to that. I've NEVER in any country I've EVER been in seen the LEGATT emerge from the safety of his/her bunker deep within the Embassy. YMMV but I've never seen a more risk averse group of people on the face of the earth.

Bottom line is if a federal agent can carry his gun in the most crime-free place in the US, how can an Ambassador or whomever say that it's not necessary for him to carry in Mexico of all places? But, if you're working in these countries without your government going to bat for you, all the more reason to be skilled in E&E and have a lot of plans independent of the US government. You can count more on the locals responding to help than you can the US.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not sure where you get your info, but I have been an armed individual in multiple capacities to Colombia since the the early 90's under multiple Ambos and have never had to turn in my weapon. Who do you think the LEGATT is?? Its the senior FBI SA in country. In place like Colombia (really alt throughout L.A.), all throughout SE asia and the ME they are mostly armed and are the interface with local L.E. Very few to none are in Europe, Asia (China, Japan and Kore) or Eurasia are armed because of the lack of need for it. By definition they leave their office almost everyday......and I'm saying this because I have worked in embassies in almost every continent with them, for them and around them. So yes, it can be political, but very rarely does a COM deny firearms, if it is sanctioned by the local gov't, to SA's in a country who need them. Now, do they let anyone carry a firearm? absolutely not.

H
 
Expatriated said:
You're right, Don. Once you are traveling where everyone knows you and you are unarmed, you're WAY behind the power curve. It's why you have to take so many proactive measures to avoid potential dangerous situations. Once you are in it, it's too late.

Like nature...some animals have great defenses and some animal's defenses are never having to fight at all cause they'd lose.

Hence, back to my original post about E&E--the best E&E plan is one that avoids you having to E&E in the first place.
Click to expand...

I agree,in this case, I don't think they had a lot of options once the bad guys had the upper hand.

H
 
Well, I'm going to bow out of this argument for OPSEC reasons on a public forum and so as not to get in a pissing contest but rest assured my information is firsthand. I've worked armed in Colombia under everyone from Patterson to McKinley, although never assigned to the Embassy, always TDY. Without naming names here, there was a DCM who specifically shot down agents carrying down there, even though they already had weapons in country so they had to turn in their weapons to the RSO over the weekend. This was after the BOP guy killed himself down there if you recall that event.

On the other hand, Colombians have always offered weapons to us, with military permisos to carry, irrespective of how supportive our country is or is not at the particular time.

I will also not get into the useful contributions of the FBI, being married to an agent myself. I get in enough trouble for my criticism of them at home :)
 
Expatriated said:
Well, I'm going to bow out of this argument for OPSEC reasons on a public forum and so as not to get in a pissing contest but rest assured my information is firsthand. I've worked armed in Colombia under everyone from Patterson to McKinley, although never assigned to the Embassy, always TDY. Without naming names here, there was a DCM who specifically shot down agents carrying down there, even though they already had weapons in country so they had to turn in their weapons to the RSO over the weekend. This was after the BOP guy killed himself down there if you recall that event.

On the other hand, Colombians have always offered weapons to us, with military permisos to carry, irrespective of how supportive our country is or is not at the particular time.

I will also not get into the useful contributions of the FBI, being married to an agent myself. I get in enough trouble for my criticism of them at home :)
Click to expand...

Fair enough, sounds like we have walked a lot of the same turf. ;)

H
 
Don't you two think that working in different capacities and at different times and under different personalities and Administrations that both of you might be 100% correct in your statements? :D
 
Don Rearic said:
Don't you two think that working in different capacities and at different times and under different personalities and Administrations that both of you might be 100% correct in your statements? :D
Click to expand...

HAHAHA yeah, might be the case, but I think after Expats last post we worked for the same Ambos down there!!! :D I think we just worked for different offices and different COC's etc.

That being said, until the invasion of Iraq Colombia was the largest US Embassy presence in the world, so its easy to get lost in the shuffle down there.

H
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top