Gunmen block roads after Mexican drug lord killed
Gunmen used buses and trucks to block roads in Reynosa, a Gulf cartel stronghold across the border from McAllen, Texas, and west of Matamoros, where marines on Friday shot dead gang leader Ezequiel “Tony Tormenta” Cardenas.
In an apparent riposte from rivals, gunmen from the Zetas gang hung messages between trees and over bridges in Reynosa and in cities across northeastern Tamaulipas state, mocking Cardenas’ death. “Once again, the Gulf traitors’ destiny is evident … there’s no place for them, not even in hell,” read one banner that was signed by the Zetas.
Try to imagine the response of US authorities if rival armed gangs were blocking roads in, say, Kansas. Or San Diego, for that matter.
Then consider that those gangsters are running free in Mexico, and ask yourself what that means, and what it bodes.
November 7th, 2010 9:22 am
Despite the strong response of US authorities, gangsters ran around free for over a decade in Kansas, and most of the rest of America because of the 18th Amendment. The way to finally stop the bloodshed was the 21st. Are you suggesting Mexican drug cartels will stop killing people in Southwestern North America if we reform our immigration laws?!
November 7th, 2010 4:36 pm
Um, check your history. Gangsters during Prohibition were mostly violent in a “hit and run” way, not a “come and get me” way…. because those who tried the latter were mostly “gotten.” I don’t know for certain… you can look this up, if you’re curious enough… but I strongly suspect that the organized crime, gang-related death toll for ALL of the Prohibition Era was less than THE LAST YEAR in Mexico. Probably a LOT less.
If you look it up, let me know…
In the meantime, I don’t know that changing USA immigration law will have that much effect on conditions in Mexico (if that’s what you meant by “southwestern north america”), but the conditions in Mexico certainly say something about what our immigration laws should be, including a high fence with well armed border patrol people at every gate, checking names and IDs.
November 8th, 2010 9:38 am
Gangster-related death tolls are directly proportionate to weapons development. The Illyrians didn’t own guns, Scarface never held an RPG, and that wasn’t my point.
My point was: we have already learned from the Prohibition Era that no amount of protection will ever be sufficient for a population that strongly demands the goods and services that only blood-thirsty gangsters can provide. And since the morality of it all still hasn’t been settled apparently, today’s dilemma is the same as the 1920’s. If it is not possible to reduce our appetite for mind-altering substances enough to make the casualty-count acceptable, then how should we change our tactics?
It looks like CA continues to struggle with that question. I understand that full-on Amsterdam hash bars will never be tolerated in this country (maybe in Eureka). But neither will another Berlin Wall, as you seem to be suggesting. We ARE NOT quasi-pre/post-modernist Europeans, Nancy! Yet, something’s gotta give at some point before the 26th Regiment has to retake El Paso.
November 8th, 2010 1:19 pm
Ummm… I think the differences ARE the point. The gang warfare bloodbath related to drugs, so far, is not primarily in the USA (read, where the drug consumers are), though there is occasional spillover. It IS primarily in Mexico. It is tolerated in Mexico because of the corruption of the government, which has too many officials who have been co-opted by the cartels in various ways, leaving the cartels largely free to murder as they choose.
Most of the Mexican death toll is done with weapons no more powerful than the tommy guns of the prohibition era.
And the Berlin Wall was to keep people IN, not OUT. Nearly every OTHER nation, including Mexico on its southern border, has significant security on problematic borders, and really significant penalties for illegally bypassing it. So the reference to the Berlin Wall makes no sense in this context.
But better border security to the USA will not fix the corruption in Mexico, though it may reduce the financial rewards for the gangs in Mexico that fund it.
November 8th, 2010 6:36 pm
I trust you don’t mean to say that Mexican authorities could possibly be “tolerating” their horrors. That would be insultingly out of touch. It’s more like they’re being extorted into “tolerating” something more powerful than they could ever defeat. The fact is: Mexico simply doesn’t have enough law enforcement or financial resources (who does?!) to push back one of the fronts of OUR STALEMATED DRUG WAR that has spread into THEIR COUNTRY.
I think it is particularly cruel and ignorant to expect them to accomplish something we haven’t, demonize them when they don’t, stand by smirking as they’re overtaken, and sending in our over-dramatizing news media to generate pity for them afterwards. No wonder so many are joining the drug cartels. At least they’d be treated a little better.
Watching all this repeated cruelty and tragedy makes me wonder: maybe it is ultimately US who seem to be “tolerating.” Nevermind. Go back to our safe homes, maybe smoke a blunt and forget about it. You’re right, thank GOD we don’t see bloody bodies lining OUR streets. That sort of activity is safely facaded behind the billions of $$’s worth of border fencing, Supermax prisons and 420 Medicating Lounges. Just make sure to keep building more and more of them, higher and higher.
November 8th, 2010 11:09 pm
Ummm…. Mexico was corrupt WAY before the drug wars, WAY before the so-called war on drugs, WAY before America discovered weed and coke and whatever. You can’t blame that corruption on the USA, or our drug habits. And if OUR federal government was not corrupt in its pandering to those who want the borders open, we could get control of the drugs that enter the USA over the southern border… which, by your theory on the real cause of Mexico’s problems, should help control the forces in Mexico that profit from easy access to US drug markets. It is the corruption of our political and law enforcement processes BY the open borders crowd that is a large part of our problem. Want more drugs in the USA from Mexico? Vote for Democrats and “moderate” Republicans.
I always see this weird disconnect: people who blame the USA for the problems in Mexico, but don’t want the USA to do anything about it, apparently. It’s as if you enjoy having the USA to blame, but don’t want it do anything about its presumed guilt. Maybe we should imprison all drug users in the USA? Maybe we should legalize all drugs in the USA, open the border to anyone who wants to bring them here? What do you actually want to happen? What do you think would help?
From where I sit, closing the border is mostly possible, and would help enormously, and not just with the drug problem, but with much of what ails the USA economically and politically…. and it would close off quite a bit of the cash that Mexican drug gangs use to terrorize their own people. It would make illegal drugs cost lots more in the USA…. which would reduce usage, if past history is any guide, to true addicts, and discourage new users.
Stop complaining about what you see as my bad attitude and make a positive suggestion, something you actually believe would help. What, exactly, would YOU do if you could make it happen?
November 9th, 2010 6:59 am
My suggestion would be to cut off all financial aid to illegal immigrants. It would solve many drug problems, housing and job problems, and it wouldn’t cost a penny.
BTW, how’s the ‘Interfaith’ Chapel week at APU going?
November 10th, 2010 3:46 pm
My understanding is that the vast majority of drugs are smuggled in via truck, largely enabled by the NAFTA agreement. You can’t eliminate all commerce coming in from Mexico….. or could we? Not an easy problem to solve.
November 11th, 2010 2:37 pm
Rhetoric like “Mexico is corrupt” or “the USA is to blame” is deceptive and childish. No one has the right to predefine someone else’s sovereignty by strawman-ing it into an opinion (even if it’s a fact). Don’t worry, I get this. It deters the touchy among us to take the time to explain that “some in Mexico’s government are corrupt”, or “the unintended consequences of the policies of the USA are to blame.”
If it was me, first I’d fix the conflicting labor laws. Currently, it can be against federal law to deny someone (citizen or not) the right to work in this country. Change that. 2. It should be mandatory to reinstate the draft whenever military action is required to defend our country. If we fight for anything, we must fight united. This would include the defending of our borders. 3. BOTH the enforcement and subversion of our drug laws are becoming ridiculously more lethal than some of the drugs. Upgrade the regulation of these controlled substances and the way the laws are enforced.
If a single cause for all these problems exists, it would be sociopolitical weakness brought on by The Information/Disinformation Age. Nobody can stand and lead strongly anymore. If someone tries, an over-powering “other side” is so quickly assembled that there isn’t time to react. “The cause” evaporates too fast to catch on. Since everybody thinks they know so much now, we may never see strong leadership in this country again.
November 11th, 2010 10:49 pm
Innermore, you said, “Currently, it can be against federal law to deny someone (citizen or not) the right to work in this country. Change that.”
Change it to what? Do you mean to make it legal for illegal aliens to work? Or for it to be illegal? The latter, I hope….
Your opinion on the draft is noted… but impractical, not what the professional military of the USA wants, not what much of anyone wants, except those few who actually want to see that we have no functioning military at all, and use the draft as a smokescreen. Is that you? If not, run your opinion by several serving officers in today’s military…. I think you’ll revise it, if you pay attention to those who know.
You said, “BOTH the enforcement and subversion of our drug laws are becoming ridiculously more lethal than some of the drugs. Upgrade the regulation of these controlled substances and the way the laws are enforced. ”
Upgrade HOW? This doesn’t even qualify as a suggestion, since it is so non-specific, and starts with a false premise in any case. Around 20,000 USA deaths per year result from abuse of illegal drugs, best as I can find out. There aren’t that many homicides or law enforcement involved deaths in the USA in a year, period, let alone those resulting from “the enforcement and subversion of our drug laws”.
What would you consider to be the act of someone who could “stand and lead strongly”? Sounds like you want a strong man style of government.
November 12th, 2010 2:32 pm
Strong leadership examples? How ’bout “…tear down this wall.” Gettysburg Address. New Deal. Guys like that would be torn to shreds and thrown in jail today.
“Change it to what” is exactly the point. Between labor, immigration, trade and probably a host of other international laws, it has become impossible for a cop lawyer judge senator, let alone ordinary entrepreneur, to know which law to apply repeal or amend to what. And all that confusion is just in order to accurately define what an undocumented worker even is! Then, attempts to discover or charge or whatever are so bogged down in layers of gobbledy-goo it takes a decade and costs a fortune to defend or prosecute, legally immigrate or properly deport, anybody. “Change it to what” is impossible to answer. Change that. But do it right. It’s not their fault we screwed it up so bad. Make it just as quick and easy to start getting legal as it is to get the boot.
Yes, I realize we’ve all been given this mental image of the military needing the versatility to deploy at a moments notice, and it would be impractical to go through the hoops required for conscription every time there’s an emergency. I don’t buy it. And yes, the lefty gnats like to annoy us with their petty little ploys. I’m a skeptical Eisenhower guy who believes in establishing and maintaining a critically necessary, lasting check on the acutely corruptible growth of the Military Industrial Complex. Like it or not: full, united support (a draft), in exchange for absolute accountability is the only way to guarantee permanent civilian control of our military. There’s gotta be some smart guys out there that can formulate some kind of a draft system that would satisfy the military’s so-called readiness and mobility needs. Go ask the Israelis.
Sorry about the vagueness in the last suggestion. This is a big pet peeve of mine. I was trying to restrain myself.
Upgrade HOW? You asked for it. Here goes. I was specifically referring to the archaic laws on cannabis use. Don’t tell me that the criminalization of marijuana alone (not including its use) hasn’t for decades been a huge cause of international corruption, mayhem and death. Imagine: an illegal commodity is the largest cash-crop in the wealthiest country on earth, ten years running?! Doesn’t that sound a little odd? For a population of around 115 million we have 42% usage for adults 18+ last time I checked (it’s ILLEGAL!). So how large of a global underground logistical operation do you suppose it takes to supply this kind of demand? It’s gotta be bigger than Burger King! It has long been THE behemoth criminal industry in the Western Hemisphere for heaven’s sake! And what do lots and lots of competing criminals and their employees usually do to one another? How many innocents judges and cops get in the way, not to mention entire governments fortunes and property? Just how much criminal activity-related law enforcement collateral damage American Mexican corruption assassination wherever whoever human suffering is enough for you? We’ve spent more resources trying to ban pot then we have banning our Nukes! This is not demagoguery! Take it out of the world of violent criminality, make it a NON-criminal industry, slap a warning label on it and stick it behind the counter at the 7-11 with the cigs and the chew. Thugs shooting each other can become marketing execs sniping at each other. I know it won’t fix everything overnight and it feels kinda scary, but gee whadduya know, we might actually have small-scale experience doing this sort of thing! It was called
P-r-o-h-i-b-i-t-i-o-n.
You and I can roll our eyes and throw out all the statistics we want, for and against. We’ve heard em all. Bottom line for me is: why does the government feel the need to spoil the fun? I know, you probably don’t think it’s fun. But unlike the bobby soxers in 1946, today I think we adults (21 & over) can make most of these “risky” decisions on our own thank you very much. I don’t currently use the stuff myself. But I might occasionally if the residue in my system for 3 weeks didn’t threaten my employment! It’s strange that the Nanny State leftys want it legal and the Keep-government-out-of-my-whatevers don’t. I know, I won’t persuade anyone; just venting.
BTW in case you might be wondering, both my teenagers have heard my rants about all this, way too many times. My lunacy certainly hasn’t influenced them negatively at all as far as I can tell. We’ve also shared most of our impressive dope smoking stories with each other. They’re never afraid to tell me and my wife about all sorts of vices and what they think about them. At this juncture, I would definitely put them in the “low to no risk” category (I’d smell it on them if they weren’t). They’re pretty much in the same boat as I am about the morality issues on substance abuse and it’s causes and purposes etc. too. I think honest conversation is a lot healthier than scaring my kids or threatening them; causing them to lie and sneak around about it like I did. This is mainly why I get so riled about how my society deals with it. From my perspective, the best way for people to stay away from stuff like drugs is to take the risk and give them the freedom to decide for themselves.