|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
Basic Training |
Many of our folks are Ex-LEO, BP and Sworn people from a lot of different areas. We don't have any need to have ANY classified information passed onto us, and that would never happen anyway, as I stated prior, they will not give that type of information to any group. Remember with the government information ONLY flows from the bottom up (STILL). Even after 9-11! Our people undergo background checks and criminal checks, this has been addressed already, but again thanks for asking. Ken This message has been edited. Last edited by: kdreger, |
|||
|
Member |
It appears that "ex-LEO" is now known to include "private side LEO" by this organization. Safe to say that actually means "security guard", correct? Another convenient misrepresentation...
A common term for such misrepresented over-zealous security guards on the firearms forums are known as "mall ninjas".  |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
No, Ex-LEO just means just that, retired Law Enforcement officers, many who have over 20+ years in all areas of law enforcement to drug interdiction, to smuggling to white collar crime. In addition, many of our people have backgrounds in military law enforcement, or special operations areas or Intel officers.
You people know more about us probably than you know about the members here on this forum now. So, it is not safe to say "Security Guard", we have some that have all the necessary requirements, we also have some retired or Ex LEO's who are now in the private sector with their own PI businesses. And we have teachers, doctors, small businessmen, all types of people....Nobody misrepresents themselves, we are who we are...Maybe you need to have a first hand visit? And when you are in the mall sometime and need assistance, you going to call the 18-year-old clerk behind the orange juice counter? It just seems that if you are not a CG-AUX, you aren’t worth anything! Is that a reality around here? Sure seems to be, I would like to see a little more of an openness to groups like ours, after all, are we not doing something that the federal government cannot do without the private person? Now lets put it this way, in the last 2.5 years we have recorded over 135,000 man hours of protecting this dam border with absolutely not one incident, can you say that for your local group? How many actual bad guys, human traffickers, drug smugglers have you reported? I know where we stand with many of you, so get off your soapboxes and go wash down some deck, or go after some drunken crazy wacked out boater! That is what you do best, we do this best, if you want to play in our field, you are more than welcome, if not then you have to earn your credits by knowing what it takes to our job, and my guess is you are just to busy to actually care about any type of border enforcement, and want or encourage the fall of the nation to a 3rd world country! And yes, if I seem a little upset (Pissed off) I am, I really find it unbelievable that grown adult men can behave like this in public no less, and in a public forum! OMG... this is getting crazy...... |
|||
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
Ken,
Calm down. You were warned about this. Having failed to win the arguement they are resorting to personal attacks, maybe to drive you off. But that can backfire. It appears that they question your backgroud, which does seem impressive, and how that relates to the BP Aux. Well since the Auxies put that in play then maybe they can answer why it is proper to question your background but they never question how an Insurance Agent is qualified by background to be NACO (National Commodore) of the Auxiliary. We could make this real interesting by looking into his background in that business but I don't think we need to go there (yet). To answer your earlier question - No, the Auxiliary has never released any detailed financial documents, despite many member requests thru the proper 'chain' over the years. To answer another question, no NACO has appeared on any National forum to answer any questions directly from the membership since early 2001. In that year, the then NACO made one post to the public Member Forum. He got a key part of the relationship between the USPS (US Power Squadrons) and the Aux wrong. I corrected him in public. He came back with a response, which I also corrected. He was not heard from again nor has any other NACO dared face the members in a 'no holds barred' open forum like you have. A related question - the "Chain", ie Chain of Leadership and Management aka COL is a standing or is it running joke in the Auxiliary. Despite another poster's comment the "Chain" is widely known as the Black Hole, the Rusty Chain, the Broken Chain and Mushroom Management. Questions are almost never answered and the few answers you do get are likely to be wrong. That explains the appearance on this board and the ChDirAux Knowledge Base of questions that should be addressed to the chain but are not. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Thanks for the kind words.
I cannot take any credit for my background, I did what I had to do and am just glad I have the oppertunity to do it. My military background is nothing to rave about, I was in the Navy for 3 years on a Kiddie cruise 64-67, got sent to "A" school for sonar and could not stand that Pinging crap, so asked to be transferred out and to computers, they said NO, so they sent me out to HI. to chip paint! i did that and 2 tours at Nam, worked with the recovery team as a swimmer but never had to use that, chipped a lot of paint, shot lots of rounds at the bad guys and a lot of really crappy stuff, but never complained. I went into I/T when I got out and worked there for some 35 years until the company lost its clients to India and others so I got laid off. My best friend needed some help so I helped him up until last June when we closed down our PI business. During that time we got HSPIG going and I did some border stuff. In the last year I managed www.patriotjobs.net and 25+ child sites for Veterans around the country to help them find jobs. My son is an EX-Swat cop here who had his hand blown apart in a training excersize 14 months ago and is being retired. I hate having to go to the border to do this crap, but until our stupid elected government officials wake up and start doing what the people who elected them to do I guess I will continue to do this. I would much rather be out fishing someplace. I am taking a deep breath! Thanks for all that information, it sure makes other postings a lot clearer. Ken |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I am Active Duty and have been for a number of years. Our Station could not function without our dedicated Auxiliary volunteers. They almost match us hour for hour and do not receive a dime for it. That is why we treat them very special. Want to know why four of our deck force got Christmas off? Because four Auxiliarists came in and ran the Station on Christmas day. They did more paper work and cleaning than we would ever do and handled all the radio traffic with outstanding ability. BZ |
|||
|
|
Member |
Quite emotional... people usually display such emotion when they are the most defensive. Yes, it was a test -- and yes, the response was as I expected.
Your group is what it is and nothing you can say at this point will add any credibility given the misrepresentations in the name, logos/uniforms, and the images you feed to the public on your websites in hopes they will "believe in you". Time will tell regarding the success or failure of the group. As I said earlier, the desire you have for assisting in a citizen border watch is admirable -- it is simply the way in which you've chosen to misrepresent yourself (the group as the auxiliary of the border patrol) to the public and on the forum here that is the problem. Continue to feel good about yourself and your activities -- whether or not the U.S. Border Patrol considers you an asset, or simply another unwanted distraction to deal with in the course of their duties with limited resources. Nothing you can say or offer at this point will change the perception of many members on this forum. As far as the LE support missions I conduct as a member of the USCG Auxiliary and the AUXAIR program -- yes, they do exist -- but because of OPSEC requirements, no details can be provided to you or in a public forum. The Public Affairs officers for the USCG Sectors may or may not offer some insight should you choose to inquire. You are on the CG Auxiliary forum -- so yes, the CG Auxiliary will be the focus of the discussions. Remember, you could view the forums here without any form of registration (something we can't do on the "BPAUX" forum). But you chose to register, post and participate. You certainly can't expect that all will receive and share your opinion or point of view -- can you? If you don't like the responses you get from current CG Auxiliary members who are enjoying their "auxiliary experience"-- or the discussions pertaining to the CG Auxiliary or the USCG, you certainly are not required to continue with your participation. But, at least you can view and read our forum as a guest -- something we can't do with yours... This forum is managed and controlled by an entity other than our own -- not the case with yours. You maintain editorial control over your forum -- as well as who may or may not be allowed to participate. A very open and upfront format for sure...  Have a good evening and continue the banter if you wish -- this is a public forum...we may just set a new post record with this one. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Only emotionial because I would think people here could come together for a common cause! Some can some cannot.
This seems to be what the American public is doing also, And I just think it is a shame for everything we all do to belittle everyon's work and accomplishments. Don't You? Actually if you look close I have been here since 2005, a little longer than you. I look at it often to see what is going on, and decided to chime in on your subject. And yes our forum is Closed, it is for our members only, not a public forum like this one. We don't have to worry about editorial issues like here because our members don't go down that road like here so there is no need to have "control", it is self controlled by its members. And sorry, there is another posting with 295 posts marked on it, so this is not a record. Ken, and all of you know where to find us.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
....and along comes kdreger with inaccurate observations from the peanut gallery having nothing to do with the conversation:
Originally posted by kdreger:
wannabe BP>: MBA? um, yeah dude. It's called a signature block. Students at university of Phoenix are required to have one, and it's their network and all that jazz, so I do like they ask. I sometimes remember to turn it off, sometimes not, and sometimes don't care. I do like that it automatically appends out website, so it increases it's ranking in search engines. wannabe BP>: Not Allowed means just that not allowed period. try scanning the previous conversation that your butting into. "not allowed" was not even the phrase used. My question (to FL) was whether he stated that the item was "clearly barred" because: 1) no mention is made in the AUXMAN permitting it or 2) a section specifically mentions the item and states it is not allowed. FL has indicated which of the above he was getting at, and cited the relevant section. His post answered my question. Yours merely made me wonder if u should try decaf... wannabe BP>: How long does this thread have to go on? you've gone ten pages when you could have summed up your position and signed off long ago. And now !! you're !! the one asking how long this thread has to go on ??? -- William Baldwin, Jr MBA HCM program Univ of Phoenix Ground below Zero, City of New Orleans, La on the web: www.coastguardauxiliaryslidell8cr.us |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
I'm, glad you put your comments in parentheses, it was a lot easier to read. So let's continue:
No they don't, not like you. They consider themselves a group of homeowners who will call the police if they see someone suspicious. I challenge you to find one instance of a neigborhood watch group who has ever said "we are the auxillary to the (insert agency here)." or even "We are an arm of local law enforcement." Neigborhood watch organizations do not call themselves the auxillary of anything. They are a stand alone group and are never confused with a law enforcement agency.
Remember that double speak that you couldn't find? Here is a shining example, as well as the rest of your comments of course. If you are an "arm" of the of the U.S. Customs And Border Protection Agency which you allowed the press to quote you as then no, you cannot play with whom you want. You are restricted to the madates of your parent agency like the CGAUX must. If you are pure private sector you are not an arm of anything. So again, which is it.
So the training the reporter is referring to is the same training any joe on the street could get. That is a lot different than being trained under DHS as the article states. The implications are vastly different. More double talk.
So you are not an arm of the agency as you state. Because if you were an arm of BP they would want to have you do something. I know the CG uses the CGAUX (an Arm of the CG) to do multiple missions. If they were simply a bunch of civilians running around pretending to be Coasties we wouldn't give them the time of day.
Again, you are making it sound like DHS comes to your camp and provides the training. I will bet that is not the case. I am guessing you are finding some DHS information/training sites copying the material and providing the canned training yourselves. If that isn't the case, when was the last time DHS had an actual DHS instructor provide you training at your camp?
Who's train the trainer programs? "these folks" is pretty vague.
You discussed it but you never explained why you have a uniform that looks like a law enforcement uniform. There are many uniforms that don't look like LE uniforms you could have chosen from. You didn't. You chose logos that look like badges, military/LE pants, and shirts that look like many LE shirts and you even have rank on them. Why not choose a uniform that would distinguish you and could not be mistaken for LE?
So let's get this straight. EVERY time someone looks at you even for a second, you immediately state "we are the private sector and that we are NOT linked to the BP" before any other word comes out of your mouth? Because since you have confusing uniforms, put BP Auxillary on your vehicles, and have logos that look very close to badges, that is what it would take for people not to think you are LEOs. That is why your disclaimer is silly. It only aids the few people who have ever seen your website.
Quite a lot actually and we have recorded way more man hours than your organization "protecting this dam border". It is great that you want to watch the border and I think it is great that you guys put in all that time but your name and implied association with legitimate agencies are deceptive. You know it is, you even noted earlier that you had lawyers look into the words to make sure it was legal for you to use. If you wanted to be a stand alone contingent, that alone would have made a legitimate group look for a different name. You used the name to have implied legitimacy, I simply will not be one that will provide it. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
ok, enough said, I have to leave now, have a daughter in Idaho who broke her ankle and I have to drive there and watch her kids for a couple of weeks, you guys keep it up if you want, I will try to chime in when I get connected there.... Oh, the MBA, got it, that is cool. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I became aware of this thread a few days ago when CGAUX members started applying for membership in BPAUX. The interest in our organization is in stark contrast to the comments on this forum.
Take the "We Got Competition" headline. Not sure where we are competing. For example, I have not seen CGAUX boats patrolling off the coast of San Diego at 4am looking for drug and human traffickers. I've not seen auxiliary members watching post in the high desert either while the Border Patrol changes shifts leaving our borders temporarily unguarded were it not for us. How we are competing escapes me at this point. We have broken no laws and to suggest so is ridiculous. Every member has completed a felony background check and interview. We thoroughly researched the naming conventions before launching the group. If you would like to satisfy your own curiosity you can visit USPTO.gov or just click here to see the last attempt to trademark your own name (it isn't trademarked) by a private company calling itself the Coast Guard Auxiliary Board. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=bqmvp7.7.4 . At least one forum poster suggested we are illegally using the term "Auxiliary" (generic term cannot be trademarked) while another correctly noted that as long as we do not use United States in front of our name we are totally compliant. Auxiliary according to webster is a: offering or providing help or functioning in a subsidiary capacity <an auxiliary branch of the state university> .It doesn't look like CGAUX has exclusive domain over the term though I could be mistaken. We are sponsored by a not for profit organization (HSPIG) that has worked closely with DHS for several years. It is authorized by DHS to use the DHS logo. We have not copied your uniform or your emblem. Ours does not even minutely resemble the DHS or Border Patrol logos. Watching out for human and drug smugglers on the water is one small piece of our activities and frankly we wouldn't be there if there weren't a need. Our uniforms are simple, bought off the rack (511) and also do not resemble anything like the other agencies. We are very specific about our independent status and not being affiliated with DHS or BP as noted numerous times on our website. The unofficial support we receive back from them though is very positive. In fact, with the exception of the comments I have seen here and a couple of "open borders" websites, virtually every other organization we have approached or worked with have viewed us positively. We have the greatest respect for the Coast Guard, CGAUX, BP, DHS, CBP, ICE and the local authorities. We consist of current and former Border Patrol Agents, Law Enforcement Officers, Military veterans (who have served from the Battle of the Bulge to Baghdad), ordinary citizens and now CGAUX members. I'd like to think we are all on the same side here. Our goals would appear to be complementary and not competitive. We may be the news kids on the block on the water but we are hardly new to securing the homeland and providing a safer place for our children and grand children to live. My hope is that once you come to know us, you'll see a much greater advantage to partnering. Perhaps this could even be viewed as an opportunity to expand your mission however taking shots at us on these forums doesn't do either organization much good. Because Homeland Security Begins @Home. Semper Vigilans, Carl Braun Co-Founder Border Patrol Auxiliary www.BPAUX.org |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I will take your word that your lawyers did their homework.
I hope the people who see "BPaux" on your uniform/vessel/vehicle, also have wifi web access, so they can immediately see that disclaimer. What if someone started an organization called the "Secret Service Auxiliary", "DEA Auxiliary", or "Forest Service Auxiliary" ..... and they were not officially connected to the parent? Maybe the lawyers would say its ok, but personally, I think its deceptive. Especially if there was no official connection between the Auxiliary and the LE entity they claim to assist. |
|||
|
|
Member |
That headline was penned by one of your new "members", Skyray... For most of us, there is no concern regarding competition. The issue is the misrepresentations of your organization through the carefully selected name (legal maybe...appropriate, no), fabricated and misleading photos on your website in an effort to appear to be something you're not in order to attract some of the $50 paying members, and selection of logos/uniforms (complete with insignia) that can only lead to confusion and the appearance of being members of a law enforcement organization, the "custom" of encouraging and allowing members to carry firearms during organizational activities, etc.
An organization formed by the same people who formed BPAUX... Possibly a website only entity that coincidently has a similar sounding name to the Homeland Security Policy Institute -- a recognized program associated with George Washington University (another convenient "legal" misrepresentation)
No one claimed that you copied the USCG or CG AUX logos...(the only thing copied was the actual organizational "district" map that has since been removed form your website because you were called on your organization's use of it without the author's permission). Your logo may not resemble the exact CBP or DHS logos, but to the casual public observer who sees a star, shielded eagle and the words "Border Patrol", it is probable to assume confusion and misunderstanding will result (You must agree that it does look like a law enforcement logo). Based upon your "legal" arguments, I contend this was a deliberate and calculated choice on the part the founders - in an effort to imply (inappropriate) authority.
The general public who makes an encounter with you in the field sees no internet disclaimers. Your outward apearance offers nothing to indicate lack of affiliation -- quite the contrary as evidenced by the reporter's assumption that you are an arm of the Border Patrol in the news clip linked in one of Ken's posts (where you happen to be interviewed on camera).
Pure conjecture and opinion with no documented indication of such support or percieved value by the CBP or DHS. In contrast, it seems the name issue has been a problem for quite some time -- as well as the in-fighting amongst border watching groups... http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/06/01/news/top_sto.../11_52_485_31_05.txt Particularly this quote from a San Diego U.S. Border Patrol Official in 2005: "On Tuesday, San Diego sector U.S. Border Patrol spokeswoman Hilary Smith said that Border Patrol attorneys are looking into the legality of Chase using the name of the agency as part of his organization's moniker." "We are concerned that any affiliation may be misrepresented," Smith said. "(We) will take the appropriate steps to ensure that the public understands that this organization is not part of the U.S. Border Patrol and is not a government-sanctioned group." You may say that Chase was part of a different group -- but if the U.S. Border Patrol had a problem with one group using the term "Border Patrol Auxiliary" they would have the same problem with you... As has been indicated previously in these posts, few here would have a problem with your organization's desire to provide a citizen-based "neighborhood watch" of the borders -- just don't do it in a way to misrepresent who or what you are by your appearance in the field, the name chosen for the orgainzation, or through deceptive means on your website (i.e. fabricated photos of police boats, etc.). Rather than acknowledge the probability of confusion by the public -- or the potential for misunderstandings by the misrepresented visuals on your website -- we hear double-talk about what has been checked out legally, etc. That is a convenient avoidance of the true intent of the criticisms you are facing on this public forum. How about opening your forum for guest viewing so the public can get a glimpse of the subject material and personality of your members and organization? That would be very open and upfront -- wouldn't you agree? References of a flood of CG AUX members joining your organization are undocumented hollow statements as well -- given as much weight as the other misrepresentations identified with the "BPAUX" website -- zero. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Nice link Fly&Scuba. Some interesting things mentioned in the article.
BPAUX01 said:
But the article (linked in FLYs post) says the contrary. NORTH COUNTY TIMES article:
and
BPAUX01, it seems like some of your own neighbors, and other border patrol volunteers, have the same concerns as expressed in this forum. |
|||
|
|
We have met the enemy and he is us. Pogo |
And sorry, there is another posting with 295 posts marked on it, so this is not a record.
This thread nor the one you mentioned is even close. The longest running, most posted to, most read thread is still active. It is The end of RBs thread. Its 'vital statitstics': Posts: 715 Reads: 35,476 (somebody must find the topic fascinating) Pages: 36 And come 05 June 2008, a scant 3 months away - the thread will be 3 years old. It is on the second page of the index to this board. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
The organization name Friends of the Border Patrol is better a conveying their connection to the Border Patrol.
|
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Thanks for the follow-up. I'll keep your suggestions in mind.
In the interim, perhaps you can kindly refer to internet posts that are current and not made in 2005. Jim Chase hasn't been on the border since and Andy Ramirez Friends of the Border Patrol is an organization of ONE. He hasn't been on the border in years either. Neither are nor could be, associated with our group. BP had a problem with Chase because he used baseball bats and rifles to make his point. In contrast our leadership has directed over 130,000 hours of border watch duty without one single incident or injury over nearly three years. When you have that kind of record and you provide your members with certified DHS training for citizen watch groups, it tends to smooth things over a bit. I'll check in and find out why the forum isn't open to guests. Wasn't aware of that. Have a great night and thanks for the civility of your comments. These forums tend to be anonymous and as such the comments can get pretty raw. We know who we are and what our goals are. They are admirable. You'll see soon enough but we don't have to prove anything to anyone. We've already done that...where it counts. Semper Vigilans, Carl Braun |
|||
|
