The spillover of violence from Mexico began some time ago in border towns like Laredo and El Paso in Texas, where merchants and wealthy families face extortion and kidnapping threats from Mexican gangs, and where drug dealers who refuse to pay “taxes” to Mexican cartel bosses are gunned down. But now, the threat posed by Mexican criminals is beginning to spread north from the U.S.-Mexican border. One location that has felt this expanding threat most acutely is Phoenix, some 185 miles north of the border. Some sensational cases have highlighted the increased threat in Phoenix, such as a June 2008 armed assault in which a group of heavily armed cartel gunmen dressed like a Phoenix Police Department tactical team fired more than 100 rounds into a residence during the targeted killing of a Jamaican drug dealer who had double-crossed a Mexican cartel. We have also observed cartel-related violence in places like Dallas and Austin, Texas. But Phoenix has been the hardest hit. […]
The kidnapping gangs in Phoenix that target illegal immigrants have found their chosen crime to be lucrative and relatively risk-free. If the flow of illegal immigrants had continued at high levels, there is very little doubt the kidnappers’ operations would have continued as they have for the past few years. The current economic downturn, however, means the flow of illegal immigrants has begun to slow — and by some accounts has even begun to reverse. (Reports suggest many Mexicans are returning home after being unable to find jobs in the United States.)
This reduction in the pool of targets means that we might be fast approaching a point where these groups, which have become accustomed to kidnapping as a source of easy money — and their primary source of income — might be forced to change their method of operating to make a living. While some might pursue other types of criminal activity, some might well decide to diversify their pool of victims. Watching for this shift in targeting is of critical importance. Were some of these gangs to begin targeting U.S. citizens rather than just criminals or illegal immigrants, a tremendous panic would ensue, along with demands to catch the perpetrators.
Nearly 2,000 Mexican soldiers and armed federal police poured into the border town of Ciudad Juarez last weekend. The city – just across from El Paso in Texas – has been ravaged by drug gangs. Just this month 250 people were killed there by hitmen fighting for lucrative smuggling routes.
Mexico is on the brink of becoming a failed state. (link fixed) But never mind that, we have our trusty betters in media alternating national news coverage between developments in the relationship of a hip-hop artist and his punching bag de jour, and envy of the First Lady’s toned arms.
James wrote: “If you have a problem with addiction do not go near the AA. The web site listed will explain why.
Try the link, it works. I tried it six years ago and have not looked back since. ”
I am glad AVRT worked for you all the best in your recovery.
AA is a fellowship of attraction rather then promotion that has worked for millions of its members.
“However if I might be allowed a suggestion, a more fruitful area of endeavor might be to withdraw our lovely social safety net from everybody who tests positive for drugs. That would be easy and cheap. You want your welfare, pee in the cup. You wanna take drugs, go get your own money.”
Sorry Phantom, I have to disagree. I for example twisted my ankle last week playing basket-ball. BB is a high risk activity so perhaps Medicare shouldn’t cover my injury. I’m not arguing that BB and Pot are analogous, but regardless of the criteria, in a country where I MUST pay for Medicare whether I want to or not, makes not covering me criminal. This doesn’t even consider that I cannot purchase Medicare outside the government to ice the cake.
Regardless of the activity, legal or not, as long as I’m forced to pay for Medicare; and I can’t go anywhere else, I am entitled to the CRAPPY COMMIE CARE that I can’t access anyway.
Alain: “They will find another source of revenue, ”
I have to agree Alain. How about kidnapping? It’s working right now as the article points out.
And as for “the war on drugs”; there has never been a war. Just rhetoric.
Also consider the expansion of usage that would occur after legalization.
I would rather stay with the “Devil You Know”. The “Gangs” are not going to disappear. Just as during prohibition in the 30’s, when it ended the gangs went onto something worse.
I was too lazy to post on this earlier – I was going to say – I hope the US nips this – because it’s bad for all North America
Digg this headline:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090303.wgangs0303/BNStory/National/home
Phantom
Oops. I didn’t read your comment properly; I substituted Medicare for “lovely social safety net”. I must have been smoking something, and it must have been good, because I’m hungry, I have a dry mouth and I don’t remember.
Hopefully I can post this retraction/apology before you fly-off the handle and lay a smack-down on me:)
And CRAPPIE COMMIE CARE it is!
It’s like waiting in line at a freakin’ Russian bakery!
I had $80,000 in the bank… and I looked long and hard at being “level one” and then going south… retards. I would have been better off dropping to “level two.”
Seriously. That’s how the system works. If you drop to level three or even four, then WOW! This system works GREEAAT!
And you NDP/Libtards who yap Tommy Douglas… you should go to the hospital and “talk your talk.”
The NDP party, btw, was sponsored by the Rhodes Foundation… who sponsored the Douglas-Collins Foundation in Canada, which launched the NDP.
The purpose of the Rhodes Foundation? To re-unite the world under a Global Governance, under the name of the British Empire… VERY similar to Communism. (Smash the people’s desire, to bring them back to governance).
Clinton went to Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship.
And QUI was a Marxist in the 1940’s and then a member of the NDP before pulling a Stronach in the 1960’s? Why it was TRUDEAU!
And why is the Liberal Party now in the same political spectrum as where the NDP was in the 1960’s?
Because Marxist Trudeau led them there! He moved the libtards to the radical left!
And Hitler said: “I use reason for the few, and emotion for the many.”
Job well done, Trudeau.
You asswhipe.
Re Comments on Legalizing Drugs
I’m prepared to legalize narcotics IF we allow people to fail, i.e. no medical care, welfare, housing and what have you provided with tax dollars (charities may do what they please) for folks who become degenerate addicts (this includes booze). Employers must be permitted to fire addicted employees because of their addictions and landlords must be permitted to deny residence to addicts. If a coke head or junkie is sick in the gutter, we must be prepared to step over them. I don’t think most people are ready to do that yet.
Yes, opiates, cocaine and other currently restricted drugs were legal in the 19th and early 20th centuries. They were also frowned upon by society. Opium addicts and drunks were shunned and avoided. Society did not consider their addictions as “Diseases” but as failures of character.
It is a canard that the post WW1 alcohol prohibition failed. By 1932 rates of alcohol related illness had declined substantially, arrest for drunken brawling were a fraction of pre-Prohibition rates and other beneficial effects were experienced. Did it eliminate all drinking? No, of course not, but our laws against murder and theft do not stop all murder and theft either.
Rob,
There’s no ‘h’ in asswipe. Besides without toilet paper we’d be like Muslims in the desert.
Very useful stuff that toilet tissue; I like the one with the cuddly bear on the package.
[screaming like Kirk] Hoooooooomez!!!!!!
Na, just kidding. ~:D
I should say I’m under no illusions that legalizing drugs is a “good” idea. They -should- be banned from a strictly moral perspective, because they’re just incredibly destructive of lives and social strength.
The problem is, no free country can arrange the total control to stop people trafficking in these drugs. Even the commies can’t do it. It is impossible to do. Same as gun control. It can’t work.
With respect to Norm, if you look at numbers from the Prohibition era you see something interesting. The problems with street crime, drunkenness and etc. peaked before WWI. The decline in these issues started long before the Prohibition. Prohibition did not affect the crime rate substantially, if at all.
What it did do was create the opportunity for people like Al Capone to become wealthy. Also the Kennedy family, let us not forget. We today are STILL paying the piper for allowing those fortunes to be built. When booze was once more allowed in the US these large, wealthy organizations turned to drugs and prostitution. The result was the 1960’s and 1970’s. They got bigger and wealthier.
Fast forward to today, here in the frigid North there are -thousands- of hydroponic grow-ops in the Toronto area alone. These people are the very worst sort of a-holes and they are making really large amounts of money. Millions per year in some cases.
They spend that money and power in ways which are not advantageous to Canadian society.
The end game of that is Mexico, where the dirtbags are running the government and the cops are more dangerous than a street gang. Have a look at ‘biff’s comment on the Mexico City cops and their “mordida”. Can you imagine getting pulled over by the OPP and they hit you for a cash bribe on the spot?
That’s what prohibition does. It sets up a situation where there is a powerful monetary force pushing toward corruption.
So we need to balance the destruction at the level of the individual with the destruction at the emergent level of social function. The “drug war” is the wrong way.
Mexico got it wrong for long enough that their social contract with each other is coming apart. They are breaking up into warring factions, pretty soon warlords are going to be setting up shop. Mogadishu style.
Ours is getting brittle. Every day Kate posts some new outrage or stupidity which indicates this brittleness. Moving in the direction of increased control with its increased corruption as exemplified by the USA right now is not what is going to fix this.
Stopping the imbecile practice of ruining people for defending themselves against criminals, THAT will make a huge, positive difference. -Less- government.
Phan
OT
Apparently you and I share an admiration for James T. In a joking way I often refer to him as my hero. I have also mused about what would have happened if James T. was from a galaxy far far away. Picture the Galactic Maury show:
“Anikin, you are not the father, James you are the father”
Immigration Reform Acts (IRA’s) passed by Congress since 1960.
1960 Bracero Immigration Reform Act.
1965 The Immigration and Nationality Act INA.
1978 The Immigration and Nationality Act INA Revised.
1980 The Refugee Act.
1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).
1987 The Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA).
1990 Mexico/US Immigration Reform Act.
1993 Immigration Reform Package Act.
1996 IIRIRA Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
1999 Revised Immigration Reform Package Act.
2004 No Illegal Immigrant Left Behind Act.
2006 The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act CIRA ; Not gonna work , since all the other IRA’s have failed.
Every Single President since 1960 has passed an Immigration Reform Act to either ; allow more illegal immigrants in , or give amnesty to those already in , or they are courting the immigrant vote.
Bush had the WOT all right, but he failed dramatically when it came to Illegal Immigration, but I ain’t bitter, seeing as how NONE of the Presidents since 1960 have done anything. I rememeber a Peach Grower in Simsboro, Louisi-Yana back in 1970 got 15 years for working Illegals, sure would like to hear his opinion right about now.
Now, as for Legalizing Marijuana, Yea, go for it, and personally, I would have no problem stepping around, on, or over a crackhead lying in the gutter. I have no symphathy for Folks that get canned, drunk, or stoned out of their gord and don’t know how they are gona get home.
,
Posted by: Ratt >>
There it is in a nutshell!!!
Hoooooooomez! I post a big, long @ss serious thing and I get back “The Galactic Maury Show”.
Bwhahaha! Good one.
To James: AA stands for Alcoholics Anonymous. I fail to see why a narcotics addict would seek out AA. Try NA. And remember, you chose to take the first hit, not NA or AA.
AA won’t work down heya in Louisi-Yana, we are still under the barbaric BlueLight Rule where if you are anywhere close to a Christian Bible-Belt Parish they won’t sale alcohol on Sunday.
And, I think, that violates Rule 12 for AA; that you must not plan your drunken-ness. Well, hell’s bell’s if they would sale beer down heya on Sunday I wouldn’t have to plan my drunken-ness, 😉
But, all kidding aside, had a pretty good friend who was the sloppest drunk you ever saw. He finally pushed our friendship to the limit by using my house as a Motel 6 even when I wasn’t there. Plus, I have a curvy 3/4 mile long driveway and while running the dogs early one Sunday Morning found his drunk butt still sleeping in his car (1977 Gran Prix) parked at the Old Donkey Pen about 1/2 way up. No telling how many times he had done that, so hence; I put up a chain at the front entrance, hung a sign on it with a circle and a bar running thru with his name right smack in the middle. He never asked about it.
See what happens when liberal screwballs want a open border? we end up with mexican crinimals comming here WE SHOULD DECLARE WAR ON MEXICO
Suggestion: If Obumnuts wants a Great Project, to “make” some jobs in the Southern statres, he should build a freakin’ big fence to keep the illegal Mexicans out. And then there’s the guards to patrol and maintain it. Plus concentrated sweeps, one city at a time, by immigration cops to identify illegals at least every 6 months.
Sorry, but we’ve gotta look after ourselves first.
Suggestion: If Obumnuts wants a Great Project, to “make” some jobs in the Southern states, he should build a freakin’ big fence to keep the illegal Mexicans out. And then there’s the guards to patrol and maintain it. Plus concentrated sweeps, one city at a time, by immigration cops to identify illegals at least every 6 months.
Sorry, but we’ve gotta look after ourselves first.
Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER>>
“WE SHOULD DECLARE WAR ON MEXICO”
No need. They’ve already declared war on us!