Respsonse to Vaquez's Comments

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Special Reports: March 24, 2004: The House holds Hearings on Safety and Security of Peace Corps Volunteers: March 24, 2004 - PCOL Exclusive: Executive Summary of House International Relations Committee hearings on Safety and Security of Peace Corps Volunteers : Respsonse to Vaquez's Comments

By daniel ( - on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 2:06 pm: Edit Post

Mr. Vasquez,

We realize you have been to alot of countries and now have served Peace Corps in an administrative fashion.

There are many aspects of Peace Corps life that you need to be educated on. For instance, you, nor was Charles Smith or any other Peace Corps representative at my site when I was threatened the night in my safety incident. You would have no idea what that is like. And you don't have the empathy for these type of situations either.

Whatever group these unscruplous individuals worked for or were a part of, they harassed, threaten and demanded I leave Mali or else I would be a political prisoner or worse. That is the fact. The organization I served and you now represent never fully investigated my case. Instead, you turned on me as a volunteer and have set out to destroy my character with your organization's response.

You, as the representative of the Peace Corps have committed obstructive tactics to my case from properly being heard, because your organization has denied me twelve pages under so called national security with my name on it under the FYOI act. Look what you have done in the Dayton case and others. You have done the same. Covered up, concealed and misrepresented the truth. By doing so, you frustrate me and my extended family with intentional infliction of emotional duress. God will judge you for this omission, not me.

By denying me with twelve pages under so called national security. Who are you protecting? Why don't, I as former volunteer have the chance to rebutt what these people have decided? Why? I don't care who they are, I should have the opportunity to view anything with my name on it. I don't care who is challenging my case. I have the right as an individual citizen and former volunteer to get anything with my name on it. If it takes newspapers, court cases, congressional inquiries the truth will be reavealed and the organization you represent will be exposed for these type of cover ups. Remember you could change this situation tommorow for volunteers in these situations but you chose not to.

What the Peace Corps does then in these cases is to assist the perpetrator of violence and validate their interest. I thought we were on the same team, Mr. Vasquez?

Mr. Vasquez, something else you should be aware of is that, you nor anybody can in your organization deny the truth in my case and won't be able to. You have the power to overturn my case but you have not tried to remedy the situation. Your sycophant, Inspector General too, has personally said "when you took it to court, you failed didn't you", in a vindicative manner. What you and Mr. Smith fail to realize is that you can't create public smear campaigns through the use of bogus medical conditions because safety incidents are reported. If my case was one of the reasons Peace Corps changed their policies why haven't you overturned my case?

You say, "Safety and Security issues are fully integrated in all aspects of Volunteers taking personal repsonsibilty at all times and assimilating into communities."

How are these safety and security issues fully integrated in taking full personal responsibility?

For one thing, 86% percent of volunteers who fallen victim to violence in recent years were alone at their site at the time of their attack, rape, harassment or worse. Still, you, who have never served in a village as a Peace Corps volunteer or been attacked as a Peace Corps volunteer feels it is, that particular volunteer's full responsibility in an attack. Responsibility means able to respond. How does a volunteer respond to this Mr. Vasquez? Should we learn Kung Fu? or give them the Doctor Spock hold?

Why haven't you instituted two volunteers serve together in order to reduce violence. Is your intention to send more volunteers out their alone to take on, what you say, is "personal responsibility."?

For the volunteers who are and were victims of violence. Almost all during the ninteen nineties were not warned directly about these dangers in service. It wasn't even in the Peace Corps manual. Perhaps our cases can be re-opened in the federal court area because we have were not properly warned that serving alone and being attacked by a foriegn group reprsenting another government or multi-national groups was not part of our job description.

Here is another quote from your statement that is quite profound. "will not hesitate to take action should the need arise to move our volunteers out of harm's way".

OK, now that you have made that statement. However, do you promise not to separate or punish these volunteers who are in perilous situation. You sure have not done it in my case. You should see how many people call me who were volunteers and have gone through the same. I really shouldn't be taking these calls Mr. Vasquez. We shouldn't have had these hearings. If you had done the right thing in terms of safety and security we would not be having these type of hearings, this goes for your staff too, the ones who oppose us as former volunteer who have not been treated right by your federal emoployee friends at the agency. Another way to put it, we wouldn't having this dialogue if you had handled our cases correctly.

"Protocal on violent Crimes Against Volunteers". You are going to put Charles Smith in charge of this. Let me explain that 2,800 under volunteers have fallen victim to violence during his term. And you are going to put him charge of prosecuting the the unscruplous individuals who came to my site?

Let me know when you get this in place. I am sure Mr. Smith will help us out. Wow?

"We do not believe that it is in the best interest of this agency to pursue any of the legislative changes that we understand the committee plans to consider."

Why not Mr. Vasquez. Though I personally feel we should independent lawyers as a team working on our cases dealing with wrongful separations and FECA claims, the Ombudsman is a step in the right direction. Perhaps, when we get better news coverage we will start to get real legal protection from the lawyers who work in your IG's office representing your "house of cards" that are covering up our cases, when we were and are the victims of violence during service.

You say it is a duplicative on many levels. How is charles smith helping my case Mr. Vasquez?

"We do not see the creation of such an office an appropriate use our agency's funds"

We do Mr. Vasquez, We feel we should get about 7- 10 million in an independent organization as Mr. Poirier has suggested. That would put the agency in check in doing the right thing. A "Watchdog" so to speak. 2800 people Mr. Vasquez since just since the 1990's who served like you didn't and are struggling as you make your six figures.

Department Labor: I will address later. In the next posting.

We want agency funds to go to the victims of violence in service,to separated volunteers and to the families who have lost loved ones. That would be an appropriate use of these funds since you obstruct information, cover up cases, discriminate against us in our career pursuits by holding false records on our true experiences.

Daniel Pailes

Add a Message

This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.