Woman decapitated in Mexico for web posting

reply to post by Greensage


You can speak of blood, guts, and gore. You can zero in on atrocities and describe them in livid detail. But those words you just uttered can get this thread shut down and put in the trash bin quicker than anything else one could talk about here on ATS.

This is not the state of affairs throughout Mexico at this time, some border areas are experiencing a lot of chaos and disruption due to a Drug War that is being conducted to bring about that end. In the US where the petty user is the target and the big guys go untouched, here in Mexico the plan is to cut off the heads of the cartels so that their capos rise up in a struggle for power and new factions continue to be formed and territories fought over. That appears to be the planned strategy. One might be led to believe there is a greater plan involved in conducting the War in this manner.

There appears to be more violence and cartel activity in the US media than there is here in Mexico.

it's more like killed for going public against a drug cartel

admire her courage more than her brains

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


That counterpunch article is quite interesting, to say the least. I'm in NY now..but I lived for 17 years in L.A.(sadly I'm probably going back). remember washington mutual bank? the ones in L.A...a couple of them, anyway. something really odd. the bank managers, all the tellers, people in serious positions of authority..were these late teen-early 20-year old hispanic kids. now, don't trip, not casting aspersions on their ethnicity..but it was strange, because, none of them seemed to know much about banking. It felt like a "front". I'm no ex-criminal or anything, but I grew up in NYC. I'm street-smart, and I know what front businesses feel like, act like..and this fit the bill. It's entirely possible these people were cartel people. if you really look at los angeles, it's not run by law, it's really a cartel city. look beneath the facade, all the city agencies, how they do business, the mayor, city council..it's starting to make sense. can't believe it took me so long to catch on. thanks for the post.

I've been to Mexico a couple of times, and to tell you the truth, what I've seen is beautiful. There are intelligent, sane, educated people there who live their lives and go about their daily business, but their numbers are painfully, sorrowfully few. The flip side of Mexico is ugly. The poverty, crime, and lack of a viable and strong justice and educational code have turned this ecologically rich country into a cesspool of human excrement. I admire anyone who manages to live a good life there, but then I've heard about schools being shaken down for protection money or else the kids would be shot! What kind of government lets this kind of crap go unanswered? One that is in on the racket, thats what. There needs to be another revolution there, one that gets rid of the cancerous drug cartels, the bullies, the crooked cops and soldiers, then a reestablishment of a true government that will actually begin to make use of the country's natural resources in a responsible way, educate its citizens, find new ways of commerce, and build what Mexico should have been in the first place: A source of pride, someplace no one is afraid to visit, where children are educated and not sold on streets, where people don't have to live in fear. It can be done, it should be done, so why hasn't it?

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


Contacts with the Zetas is not surprising. The bulk of the Zetas is made up of Mexican military and Mexican Spec ops who changed sides some years back.

Just another example of how the war on drugs = success

i heard on the bbc that she was a newspaper editor.


can't find any link for that, though.


sorry.

So... let me see if I've got this all now...

Supposedly the citizens of Libya want freedom from their leader. Libya is "supposedly" committing crimes against its people. So we (the US) as members of NATO go in and bomb the hell out of them and supply the rebels (AlQuadia) with weapons and money. Libya is no threat to the United States.

Iraq "supposedly" has WMDs and their people want democracy. So we sent tens of thousands of troops over there to "free the people and keep them safe". Over 3000 US solders die in this war. We spend billions of dollars in munitions, contracts, fees, etc. We virtually destroy the country with the millions of rounds of depleted uranium. Again, Iraq is no threat to the United States.

Afghanistan "supposedly" harbors AQ and Bin Laden. We bomb the living hell out of the country for a decade now. Over a thousand US Solders are killed. We spend billions of dollars just like Iraq. We destroy the country with depleted uranium just like Iraq. And just like Iraq.... Afghanistan poses no threat to the United States.

However.......... to our immediate south, we have a nation in turmoil. The drug cartels are out of control committing mass murder. Drugs pour over our southern border daily. Illegal immigrants flood every single state in our country. So what do we do? What does the United States do?????

We give them weapons via the BATF. We give free medical care, housing incentives, drivers licenses, free education and more to the illegal immigrants. We put barely enough border patrol agents on the border to protect the US. And our government considers granting amnesty.

Am I the only one who sees something terribly wrong with this situation??

Well, I guess that in Mexico, the furnishing of the records belonging to an IP (Internet Protocol) address is no longer limited to the legally alphabet agencies and law enforcement industries, but lawless organized criminal can now have access to these records at will (or maybe for a small fee per IP address looked up), kinds of reminds me of the service ZabaSearch where all my private information is available for a small price of $4.95 to any one strangers interested.

I guess this is even more genuine reasons than ever before to use a high anonymity proxy servers such as HMA (Hide My Ass) when posting anything online that criticizes organized crime/criminals, and if its done in a forum, make sure that you have a secondary account setup on that site that you only access with your HMA anon VPN server and clean your browser's history, all of them before and after each sessions. At least that's what I do, and hey, I am still alive here regardless on how many mouth runs I do.

Mexicans should LEARN how to use these proxy servers.

so does anyone have a proposition as to who would grow, prepare and sell the legalized drugs if not the cartels?
i mean, they are the ones that know how to grow and prepare the stuff. they have the factories and the labor force to cover every part of the operation, including delivery of the product. it's not much different than beer or wine. and since most of us think the gov shouldn't be in the business of telling us what we can and can't put in our bodies (i don't do illegal drugs although i love coffee), the war against the industry was pointless from the outset.

i'm curious who people think would be best qualified to grow and ship the stuff once it's legalized, if not the cartels. obviously the amount of crime surrounding this issue is quite high and devastating. i'm just not sure how it could help anything now, to take away that industry from the cartels (which is most likely the only industry left in mexico, central and south america, besides chocolate and coffee) and give it to some other approved organization. are the posters in this thread of the opinion that it should be government grown and sold?

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by dragonseeker

 

that blog is insane..and it points to how sanitized our news in the US really is. all the people who call those of us who want to stop illegal immigration racist should look at it, because, along with the honest people looking for a new life, come these murderers too. can't separate them, goes hand in hand. gun control laws, really, are just about keeping you defenseless and dependent on the state. I've carried concealed in "non-permissive" environments before; I think it's time I did that regularly again. the world is too crazy, and I'm not interested in getting caught out there defenseless.

I had to slam my eyes shut watching the video of the nephew/uncle. We definitely do not want that stuff up here.

I think I would have rather been decapitated by the chainsaw than the knife. The guy getting the knife took much longer than the guy with the chainsaw. I keep remembering the NDE of Sarah Hoffman about what would happen in the US. I can see the very real possibility of this here. The people don't realize how far they've slipped and what they will do when hunger and thirst sets in.

People are brutal when it comes down to it. The separation between that (brutal) and a civilized person is a paper thin layer of air conditioning, cable tv, and food provided every day.

But yeah, brutal nonetheless.


Sarah Hoffman

"Some of the people seemed to go crazy and went around in gangs killing people just for the sake of killing. Others killed for food or for things but the people who killed just to kill were absolutely terrible. They seemed like beasts, animals completely out of control as they raped, looted, burned and butchered people. I saw them go into people's homes and drag families out who were hiding there and rape them and butcher them."

reply to post by Apollumi


a wave travelling all the way to salt lake city, would also have to be a few thousand feet tall, since salt lake is 4,226 ft above sea level.

Originally posted by Marco0Aurelio
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

Probably not, but instead of dropping bombs we could think why the system works like this after so many years, I think legalization and regularization can be the answer but that would only benefit the citizens.

It's plain and simple it's called terrorism.

I seriously doubt any of the people actually killed for posting things on some the net in mexico were the actual people who did it. Most likely just random people who they could get to, but ya. It's control by terror and it works, fear is a big psychological weapon and can be used by a very small group to control another group a thousand times its size. And so a gang can control hundreds of thousands of people trough fear and intimidation, and the first thing on the agenda of any such group is to get the people who they are trying to control to be defenseless. In some places and countries that comes in the form of gun control.

But its plain and clear cut what is happening. Drugs are big business and big $, and everybody is involved on making a cut on that business, lots in the us government are making $$$ of it, lots in the Mexican government are making $$$ of it, the banks who launder the money are making $$$ of it, the cartels and drug czars all over the world are making $$$$$ of it. And the people on the streets selling it are making $ of it, really it is a pyramid and those who make less in that business would be the lowly drug pushers at least compared to those above them. And the street junkies are there tools on keeping the business flowing, they are like the peons that you sacrifice to move ahead in the game.

And those peons are your average kids, and the lost sheep, who by whatever circumstance end up in the mix, and the laws and institutions are not really there to help them, they are more there to keep them in the system, and the system is for profit.

So here is the deal legalizing drugs wont fix the problem totally and get rid of drugs, because people like drugs and buy them, and as long as that happens then somebody will make and sell them, be they cartels, drug czars or governmental institutions, to corporations, to whatever and whoever else.

But one thing it would do is spreed the profits around and not give so much power in to the hands of the few cartels and degenerate government people and groups ie it would decentralize that power. The war on drugs is so that they would better control the game and the profits into a smaller pool, legalizing it would increase that pool out, and so it would cut into there profits... you dig. That is why you will not see them actually letting go of that tool, not because they would not make money anymore, but because they wont make as much money.

Really drugs is a gold mine for lots of people so don't expect the government to actually do much about it, because they are just protecting there interests and were there interests lie, ie... in $$$, in drug money. Like I said the core problem is that drugs sell, and as long as they sell somebody will be there to sell them and make a profit of it. I mean just look at what happened to the CIA, not that long ago in the they were at war with the mafia and all those that were making $$ of drugs.

And now that they have won against the mafia, well look what happened...A big part of there operations became the new mafia and are just continuing on there business, and not only that, but they are way better at it then the mafia ever was.

But anyways if you people want results you not going to get it by putting the foxes in charge of the hen house. So do you know why the system works the way it does after so many years? It's simple really because it was designed to work like that.

Really if you want people to get of drugs, showing picture of users and abusers is cool and all. But if you really want to scare them, then tell them the truth of what is up. Because there is nothing as scary as the truth of the matter.

Originally posted by DerekJR321
So... let me see if I've got this all now...

Am I the only one who sees something terribly wrong with this situation??

You are not the only one that sees a problem with this. You mention about the US ATF arming the criminal gangs here, ostensibly in order to protect the legitimate government, so they claim That should provide some clue that the US is largely behind the problem. From my perspective they are creating the problem so that they can offer themself as the solution.

Mostly what I see here is that the US media plays up the worst tragedies in their Drug War, plasters it all over the TV, radio, and newpapers with a lot of hype and gory glory so that all you do-gooders think you need to come in and Iraq-ify us for our own good. Please don't. Did Detroit and Los Angeles suddenly become peaceful, crime-free, and law-abiding cities?

Robbery, burglary, extortion, kidnapping, etc., those all take a lot of work, a lot of risk, and the yield not all that good. Criminals really have to work hard to make a living off that. Drugs are easy money, relatively speaking, with a high yield, medium risk, and not a lot of work except that it is very competitive. Lifting Prohibition would certainly make a difference and take the profit out of it for the criminal element. Just bringing the industry out of the shadows would greatly reduce the violence.

People are going to use substances for recreation, just look at the liquor industry. They will do so whatever the risk and that is known and exploited, it will always be so. It would make sense to at least lift the ban on the more popular and less dangerous products which would in-turn make it much easier to control more dangerous substances. This will not happen though. It is not a stretch to understand that your Bilderbergers, CFR's, trilateralists, and so on are up to their ears on the receiving end of profits from this illicit industry.

The banks, the governments, agencies within those entities, they all have been profitting so handsomely for such a long time that they have become dependent on this income. This is part of our global economy, the great undocumented part of the global economy. They will not give this up. It is a growing industry and the competition is fierce to control global drug traffic. Lifting drug prohibition would cast our world into a global economic disaster, so that will never happen. Wars will be fought to protect and expand this illicit industry. This industry will fund those wars, and so will you.