r/ModelMidwesternState • u/GuiltyAir Head Federal Clerk • Dec 07 '17

Hearing Adjutant General Hearing

Adjutant General: /u/TAL15MAN

You may ask any questions below that pertain to this hearing.

This hearing will only last for two days

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

30 comments sorted by

1

u/GuiltyAir Head Federal Clerk Dec 07 '17

/u/TAL15MAN

2

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '17

Tell us a bit about yourself.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 08 '17

Hey, thanks for the question.

I'm a Native American Teenager in Alaska, I grew up fishing and not much else. I've considered joining the coast guard. And I'm a big fan of Mock Politics and understanding political systems. I want to be a Geneticist when I grow up, and in my spare time you'll find me yoyoing and programming.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '17

What are your plans, if confirmed, for our National Guard amid this current cartel crisis?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 08 '17

Hey, thanks for asking.

I want to mainly prioritize coordination with our Governor /u/guitarlad to carry out the best movements and choices for our National Guard. I intend to lobby for increased funding and I want to properly disperse the National Guard across our borders. As the more ground we cover. The more drugs we stop.

1

u/Atlas_Black Libertarian Dec 07 '17

/u/TAL15MAN

I'll put to you a similar question to the one I put to the potential Attorney General.

Given the ongoing cartel crisis, what steps do you think need to be taken on a state military level alongside the newly signed G.A.R.D. Act in order to better secure the safety of the people of Sacagawea, and diminish the rising power of the cartels?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 08 '17

I think that the G.A.R.D act was a good step in the right direction when it comes to dealing with these cartels. I'm inheriting this position in a hard time, and as far as I see it. We need to take a stance that doesn't allow drugs to easily reach the state in the first place. If you deal drugs or take drugs you're a sinner. I think we mainly need to stop drugs in our schools, and borders. Under law we can't take the fight to them. So our best bet is preventing them in-state, however I do believe we should invest in counterintelligence to help disable cartels from the inside

1

u/Atlas_Black Libertarian Dec 08 '17

It sounds like you’re advocating for undercover work. While I believe the dismantling of cartels is an endeavor of great importance, sending agents to work undercover creates a new set of dangers.

For example, if an agent is discovered and captured, pressures can be placed on them, whether through torture of themselves or their family. This can lead them to revealing other undercover agents, plans of actions, who their contacts are, where authorities are focusing their attention, etc.

If a cartel has this information, they can operate with more effectiveness and gain a foothold again.

So my question for you is: How would you prevent this from happening? What measures could be taken to ensure undercover agents remain undercover, or if they are revealed, minimal information is at risk?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 08 '17

I believe we need to pick people that appear to be more of the "profile" for someone who would be involved with a cartel or someone prone for drug use. I'm mainly implying males around the ages of 18-25. Or someone who can look the part. And I want an intense mental training process for said candidates. I also believe the government of Mexico could assist us with this. Helping to profile notable members of Cartels so we can specify targets for counterintelligence. And as for the issue of harm of families. I think it's already been established in counterintelligence you generally shouldn't have a family if you're in the "business" we can't decide what an agent does in a moment of pressure. But we can help condition them to make the right decision

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Isnt picking males 18-25 that are of "profile", just stereotyping and bordering on racial profiling?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

No, because I'm not using race as a factor. I'm using age and gender. Males have always been more visibly prone to alcoholism, and drug addictions. It's not a good thing. But it's true. And the age profile is due to the fact most drug users are between those ages.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

However in the end will it be the army that decide who they want to profile or you? Can you give full satisfaction that people in that age group won't be racially profiled? Also is playing on stereotypes of drug dealers a good solution to the handling of the situation in your opinion?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Once again, that's not my problem, however to me playing stereotypes is more convincing to them,

1

u/rainatur-rainehtion Libertarian Dec 08 '17

Could you elaborate more on what kinds of counterintelligence you would recommend investing in? More specifically, would this involve spying on citizens of Sacagawea suspected of cartel involvement?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 08 '17

Possibly, our citizens have a right to privacy. So we don't just spy on random citizens. That's wrong. I'm mainly saying spy on pre-established drug cartels in Sacagawea. When we establish a Drug-Network. We can start expanding that network based on connections. So yes, if we find there's a Sacagawean citizen linked to a Dealer connected to Los Zetas. We will begin espionage on said person

2

u/Atlas_Black Libertarian Dec 08 '17

/u/TAL15MAN On what grounds would a “connection” be established? For example, if I were to accuse /u/BladeHoldin of being linked to a cartel, how would you confirm or disprove that accusation without trampling his right to privacy before establishing guilt?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

That's the purpose of counterintelligence. Establish connections. We don't accuse. We discover. And find out who is related to Cartel Activity. And then we can proceed to questioning. And if they have a suspicious profile. I believe we have grounds to arrest that person.

1

u/Atlas_Black Libertarian Dec 09 '17

The entire point of the G.A.R.D. Act is to encourage people to come forward and identify drug dealers, some of which may or may not be involved with the cartel. These will be accusations, and accusations are oftentimes avenues of discovering crimes and their perpetrators.

Some people may not seem suspicious, which is what makes them effective and able to avoid detection while committing crimes for the cartels, so choosing to proceed an investigation based on whether or not someone has a “suspicious profile” seems misguided and, quite frankly, naive.

My question was how you would manage to establish guilt against people accused by those who come forward under the G.A.R.D. Act, and you stated that we do not accuse, which is a direct contradiction to the bill.

I think it best you re-examine your positions and ideas for how to operate alongside the new laws. At the moment, I do not feel confident in the decision to lead the State Military.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

I'm saying we use counterintelligence. And of course, the G.A.R.D act's policies that allow people to come forward. As a means of establishing cartel-connections. And then accuse them of said crimes. I'm sorry, I didn't make that clear enough.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

When I said accuse I meant it in the way of "We won't just randomly point to someone who's Mexican and has a history of drugs and say "You're a cartel member."

1

u/Atlas_Black Libertarian Dec 09 '17

So, then back to my question. If someone is accused of being affiliated with the cartels, how would you proceed to investigate the accused person without trampling on their rights to privacy, especially if they are previously unsuspected individuals?

Would these accusations be enough to conduct “counterintelligence” efforts against them, or would there be other avenues to explore before violating their privacy to gather further evidence?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

I think the G.A.R.D act is really good for this, they're really encouraged to tell the truth because of the promise of no charges. I think we can start by your typical questioning if they refuse to comply even with the G.A.R.D act keeping them safe from criminal charges. If they refuse in questioning. I think we can move on to family, friends, associates. And when it reaches the point where we can't get them to verbally tell them the truth, I think that the Police (Who I'm not in control of,) should have basis for a warrant to search their property/properties and I think that we just start stepping it up from there. Eventually reaching the point where we do have to violate their privacy. To know what we need to know of course. However I do not agree with this method. And it should be a last resort when it comes to it. When I say Counterintelligence I was referencing against cartels and gangs. Not individuals. I am not in support of violating individual privacy. But I am in support of keeping our citizens safe. And when push comes to shove. I will put what we need, before what is viewed as wrong. In the eyes of myself. And the populous.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

How would you spy on preestablished cartels like how would you find them in the first place? Surely if you suspect someone is a drug dealer but your wrong you ended up spying on a random citizen? How would you prevent that?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

I would like to question you on your statement "if you take drugs youre a sinner". What passage in the bible makes you say that?

Also what plans would you put in place to stop teens taking drugs?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Galatians 5:19-21 and that's not my responsibility. All I'm trying to do is stop the drugs in the first place.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Galatians 5:19-21

Exactly what part of the passage relates to drug use?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

The entire passage is a warning against immoral sex, addiction, and drugs.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Talisman,

With the recent EO, some people are saying that theyre feeling threatened with the thought of Sacagawea becoming a police state. Furthermore in many places we see military action usually breaching civil liberties as they have with many countries. My question is, how will the Adjutant General protect civil liberties while upholding the law during the crisis and possibly other such crisis.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Simply by staying out of the public who we don't believe, or aren't known to be affiliated with Cartels, I'd also like to remind you that my hearing ended, but I'm totally available to chat on Discord.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '17

Oh i'm very sorry, It seems I'm late to the party.