House of Death, sponsored by the "war on drugs"

[Universe Prince]

Over at the Guardian Unlimited website is a story about one small but disgusting and reprehensible chapter in the "war on drugs". I'm not sure if the worst part is that U.S. officials did nothing to stop a series of murders or that they forced to resign the one guy willing to complain about it. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Luis Padilla, 29, father of three, had been kidnapped, driven across the Mexican border from El Paso, Texas, to a house in Ciudad Juarez, the lawless city ruled by drug lords that lies across the Rio Grande. As his wife tried frantically to locate him, he was being stripped, tortured and buried in a mass grave in the garden - what the people of Juarez call a narco-fossa, a narco-smugglers' tomb. Just another casualty of Mexico's drug wars? Perhaps. But Padilla had no connection with the drugs trade; he seems to have been the victim of a case of mistaken identity. Now, as a result of documents disclosed in three separate court cases, it is becoming clear that his murder, along with at least 11 further brutal killings, at the Juarez 'House of Death', is part of a gruesome scandal, a web of connivance and cover-up stretching from the wild Texas borderland to top Washington officials close to President Bush. These documents, which form a dossier several inches thick, are the main source for the facts in this article. They suggest that while the eyes of the world have been largely averted, America's 'war on drugs' has moved to a new phase of cynicism and amorality, in which the loss of human life has lost all importance - especially if the victims are Hispanic. The US agencies and officials in this saga - all of which refused to comment, citing pending lawsuits - appear to have thought it more important to get information about drugs trafficking than to stop its perpetrators killing people. The US media have virtually ignored this story. The Observer is the first newspaper to have spoken to Janet Padilla, and this is the first narrative account to appear in print. The story turns on one extraordinary fact: playing a central role in the House of Death was a US government informant, Guillermo Ramirez Peyro, known as Lalo, who was paid more than $220,000 (£110,000) by US law enforcement bodies to work as a spy inside the Juarez cartel. In August 2003 Lalo bought the quicklime used to dissolve the flesh of the first victim, Mexican lawyer Fernando Reyes, and then helped to kill him; he recorded the murder secretly with a bug supplied by his handlers - agents from the Immigration and Customs Executive (Ice), part of the Department of Homeland Security. That first killing threw the Ice staff in El Paso into a panic. Their informant had helped to commit first-degree murder, and they feared they would have to end his contract and abort the operations for which he was being used. But the Department of Justice told them to proceed.

The House Of Death suddenly seemed set to become a major national scandal. Bill Conroy, a reporter who works for an investigative website, Narconews.com, was about to publish an article about it. On 24 February, Sandy Gonzalez, the Special Agent in Charge of the DEA office in El Paso, one of the most senior and highly decorated Hispanic law enforcement officers in America, wrote to his Ice counterpart, John Gaudioso. 'I am writing to express to you my frustration and outrage at the mishandling of investigation that has resulted in unnecessary loss of human life,' he began, 'and endangered the lives of special agents of the DEA and their immediate families. There is no excuse for the events that culminated during the evening of 14 January... and I have no choice but to hold you responsible.' Ice, Gonzalez wrote, had gone to 'extreme lengths' to protect an informant who was, in reality, a 'homicidal maniac... this situation is so bizarre that, even as I'm writing to you, it is difficult for me to believe it'. But Ice and its allies in the DoJ were covering up their actions, helped by the US media - aside from the Dallas Morning News, not one major newspaper or TV network has covered the story. The first signs came in the response to Gonzalez's letter to Gaudioso - not from Ice, but from Johnny Sutton. He reacted not to the discovery of corpses at Calle Parsonieros, but with concern Gonzalez might talk to the media. He communicated his fears to a senior official in Washington - Catherine O'Neil, director of the DoJ's Organised Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. Describing Gonzalez's letter as 'inflammatory,' she passed on Sutton's fears to the then Attorney General, John Ashcroft, and to Karen Tandy, the head of the DEA, another Texan lawyer. Tandy was horrified by Gonzalez's letter. 'I apologised to Johnny Sutton last night and he and I agreed on a "no comment" to the press,' she replied on 5 March. Gonzalez would have no further involvement with the House of Death case and was ordered to report to Washington for 'performance discussions to further address this officially'. Gonzalez was told that Sutton was 'extremely upset'. Gonzalez, who had enjoyed glittering appraisals throughout his 30-year career, was told he would be downgraded. On 4 May, DEA managers in Washington sent him a letter. It said that, if he quietly retired before 30 June, he would be given a 'positive' reference for future employers. If he refused, a reference would dwell on his 'lapse'. Gonzalez resigned, and launched a lawsuit - part of which is due to come to court tomorrow. 'I've been written off,' he says. 'They dismiss my complaints, saying I'm just a disgruntled employee. But once they knew about the carne asadas, they were legally and morally obligated to do something. They already had a solid case against Santillan for drugs and murder. What the fuck else did they need? As for the DEA, they held my feet to the fire and joined the cover-up.' He had been neutralised, but there remained the danger that details of Ice's relationship with Lalo would surface at Santillan's trial.

This is inexcusable. The other day, I heard some guy on the radio complaining about people wanting to interfere with law enforcement just doing their job. At this point, yes, I do want to interfere with law enforcement just doing their job because apparently just doing their job means not doing their job at all.

The whole article is at the other end of this link.

[domer]

Wanting for facts except as SKETCHED in the article, I ask, Prince, what is your point? That undercover operations in violent criminal enterprises are a bad idea? That the myopic war on drugs blinds officials to evils committed in pursuit of their goals? That government power corrupts generally? That government is flawed? That government is non-responsive? That cover-ups should be expected (but not accepted) in any organization, especially a governmental organization, pursuing a mandate with inadequate oversight?

[Plane]

How hard is it to become a "made" man in a modern gang?


Used to be just killing one or two would do , now the informants can kill too what can a gang do to insure loyalty?

[Universe Prince]

My specific point, Domer, related to the article is that the "war on drugs" is apparently resulting in people being murdered while law enforcement sit by and do nothing about it. My larger point is is that the "war on drugs" is a horrifying sham, ruining the lives of people it is supposed to be protecting. That it happened was shocking to me, and that it seemed to have gone entirely unreported here in the U.S. seemed doubly shocking to me. I certainly hope this case sees a little more light shined upon it. I am not at all sorry if you're offended by the story, but at least you seem to be starting to ask some of the questions that ought to be asked.

[Universe Prince]

Plane, I'm not sure whether or not you're joking.

[Jwmcc]

It is me or is there a tread going on that some of the best investigative reporting on American stories is being done by media services in Europe?
Jw

[domer]

Don't patronize me, Prince. I know better than most, including you, what questions to ask about a situation like this.

[Brassmask]

Don't patronize me, Prince. I know better than most, including you, what questions to ask about a situation like this.

What would some of those questions be?

[Universe Prince]

Don't patronize me, Prince.

I forgot for a moment that you can dish it out but you can't take it. I'm sure it'll never happen again. No, really.

[Universe Prince]

It is me or is there a tread going on that some of the best investigative reporting on American stories is being done by media services in Europe?

I don't know. There may be something to that. But why would that be happening? Does our news media have something holding it back?

[Jwmcc]

 "Does our news media have something holding it back?"

I don't know if that is the case most of the time. My theory is that the media has gotten lazy since it's entertainment and other sap that gives them ratings, and ratings means revenue. But I'm sure there are a few stories that have been held because some gov't official has "suggested" that running something "isn't such a great idea".
Jw

[Universe Prince]

I hope the lazy media idea is the correct one. I'd hate to think we had reached the point of the government telling the media what not to say.

[Amianthus]

I'd hate to think we had reached the point of the government telling the media what not to say.

The government telling the media what to say goes back to at least the 70s.

[Plane]

The way to ensure the loyalty of a new member is to have him do something that  a Policeman can't.


If a killing is no longer enough , something better will have to be thought up.

[Universe Prince]

The government telling the media what to say goes back to at least the 70s.

I'm sure it goes back further than that. And I'm sure the government regularly tells the news media what not to say, it just seems a shame that such would happen here.