Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
supervike

Mexican Dilemma...

37 posts in this topic

Found this and just wondered about it. Is it really that bad there? What can be done to help?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is some other threads on the whole Mexican situation just incase you haven't seen them.

http://www.unexplain...topic=261129=

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=243404&hl=

Edited by spartan max2
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it really is that bad there. Government corruption at it's worst.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its that bad there, they are finding dozens of bodies all the time in caves/graves they think were murdered by these cartels. The people have had it with them and I don't blame them for fighting back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's really great that these citizens are at least doing something to stop the criminals. Even if they have to stand against the government.

The only way to help this or fix this is weed out the corruption in the government, and then get rid of the criminals going around causing trouble.

All you really need are people who care a lot, and who want to do something. The farmers, engineers, teachers and whoever else formed this civilian defence group obviously care enough to try and put an end to this death and trouble, and protect what they care about.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it a dilemma?? sounds more like the light at the end of a tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been catching up on my Joe Rogan podcasts and he recently interviewed Buck Angel (the FTM transsexual actor and activist). Buck moved to the Yucatan to escape what he called persecution in the US and, according to him, the Yucatan is a virtual paradise with none of the horrible violence in other parts of Mexico.

Anyone know if this is accurate? And if so, why?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been catching up on my Joe Rogan podcasts and he recently interviewed Buck Angel (the FTM transsexual actor and activist). Buck moved to the Yucatan to escape what he called persecution in the US and, according to him, the Yucatan is a virtual paradise with none of the horrible violence in other parts of Mexico.

Anyone know if this is accurate? And if so, why?

The Yucatan is a (relative) haven of peace for four main reasons...(As far as I can see)

1. The vast majority of the people there are Mayan in ancestry (at least in part) and they are a fairly laid back sort in general

2. There is not much in the way of industry or resources there... The ground isn't really suited to growing much, and few businesses have moved into the area - so there is not much 'cover'

for the cartels actions...

3. It is a heavy tourism area and the government (national and local) pull out all the stops to keep the tourists (with money) happy and safe...

4. is not near any national borders, so smuggling drugs in or out is a bit more obvious there (by air or sea - both easily tracked and intercepted)...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long before the US is "forced" to invade an annex this territory, for their own good, of course.

Legalize pot and the cartels will crumble.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long before the US is "forced" to invade an annex this territory, for their own good, of course.

Legalize pot and the cartels will crumble.

The cartels will not crumble - they'll just change tactics of business. No doubt their income would suffer - but cocaine is still the biggest product.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it really is that bad there. Government corruption at it's worst.

Things are definitly bad in SOME areas. Government corruption is certainly bad but I don´t know if it´s at it´s worst.

I have been catching up on my Joe Rogan podcasts and he recently interviewed Buck Angel (the FTM transsexual actor and activist). Buck moved to the Yucatan to escape what he called persecution in the US and, according to him, the Yucatan is a virtual paradise with none of the horrible violence in other parts of Mexico.

Anyone know if this is accurate? And if so, why?

The states that have the major problems are the ones that directly linked to the transportation and manufacture of drugs. Even within staets themselves there are some very dangerous areas with lots of murders and other parts of the same state relatively "peaceful"

I think it's really great that these citizens are at least doing something to stop the criminals. Even if they have to stand against the government.

The only way to help this or fix this is weed out the corruption in the government, and then get rid of the criminals going around causing trouble.

All you really need are people who care a lot, and who want to do something. The farmers, engineers, teachers and whoever else formed this civilian defence group obviously care enough to try and put an end to this death and trouble, and protect what they care about.

I´m not sure how the American media is covering the story but I don´t think this is a case of a bunch of concerned citizens banding together to "clean-up" their areas. The rural areas are a complete disaster with very little policing. In the state where I live there was an article about all of the mountain towns and villages that have been totally abandoned by the population: The "narcos" (for lack of a better term) come into these towns kill a couple of people shoot up the houses and basically frighten the people to abandon their traditional land and lifestyle and move to the cities. I find this very, very sad and the state and federal governments have done a horrible job of protecting these citizens. I certainly would applaud efforts of them banding together to do something.

In this situation, I have spoken with people more knoweledgeable than me and they seem to think of these "vigilantes" being more of a more of a para-military group working with the consent of the government. They claim to have over 20,000 members and the average cost to outfit one "vigilante" is between 1,000$ and 2,000$ US dollars. That´s a ot of cake for your average Mexican and people are asking questions where this money is coming from. I read in the paper yeaterday that the price of an AK-47 has risen to 25,000 pesos in that area. They are highly organized with vehicles and a supply system in place. The Feds have basically taken a hands-off approach which is also interesting. I think another major reason why that is happening in that area is that it is controlled by the Knights Templar and not the Pacific (formerly Sinaloa) cartel. Ever since Calderon sent in the Army in 2006 to battle the cartels, they have overwhelming focused on other cartels such as the Zetas etc. Numerous articles can be found suggesting favouratism towards the Pacific Cartel with statistics to back it up. For years there has been a lot of speculation between the PRI party (currently in office) and the Pacific cartel

I´m sure there are many good people with good intentions involved with this movement. I just wonder what the real situation is at the top and what the end game is.

That´s my limited take on it anyway. I wasn´t able to watch the video in case I´m missing something.

Edited by jugoso
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's really that bad there. After 100 years of being at the center of the transit corridors for black market drug operations, who would expect otherwise?

Milton Friedman the Nobel Economist has been predicting such for at least decades. Just as such activity became endemic in the US during alcohol prohibition, so too does it happen with drug prohibition.

Old news and predictable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long before the US is "forced" to invade an annex this territory, for their own good, of course.

Legalize pot and the cartels will crumble.

Make Mexico the 51st state and get all the jobs back. That used to be the joke. Now, more of the jobs are over seas.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long before the US is "forced" to invade an annex this territory, for their own good, of course.

Legalize pot and the cartels will crumble.

For whose own good? Mexico´s?? Your track record of Ilegally invading other countries with money you don´t have and leaving a big mess on departure will be of no benefit to either country. Cartels will not crumble with pot legalization as they will increase supply and production of other drugs and turn towards extortion, kidnappings etc. to offset their losses. As long as there is a high demand in the US, there will be suppliers.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been catching up on my Joe Rogan podcasts and he recently interviewed Buck Angel (the FTM transsexual actor and activist). Buck moved to the Yucatan to escape what he called persecution in the US and, according to him, the Yucatan is a virtual paradise with none of the horrible violence in other parts of Mexico.

Anyone know if this is accurate? And if so, why?

I didn't know you listened to the JRE, Rafter. I usually have it going while I drive out to job sites...I noticed he's gotten a lot more down to Earth lately which is refreshing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as there is a high demand in the US, there will be suppliers.

than no point to do anything, cuz there will ALWAYS be a demand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For whose own good? Mexico´s??

I'm not really in favor of annexing Mexico, but to be fair - Almost anything done to change the current rule in Mexico would be for the positive.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really in favor of annexing Mexico, but to be fair - Almost anything done to change the current rule in Mexico would be for the positive.

Agreed. However, the same could be said for the US government.

Here are some interesting numbers

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/27-shocking-numbers-that-reveal-the-true-state-of-the-union-20140128

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. However, the same could be said for the US government.

Here are some interesting numbers

http://www.rollingst...-union-20140128

Not quite the same. The bottom 20 percent in the US are still living much better than the bottom 20 percent in Mexico.

I would agree that a change in US government would be for the positive in many cases.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the stats in that link are obviously an attempt to be biased.

18. Number of Americans disenfranchised from voting for felony convictions: 5.9 million - What's the point? Too many convictions? Too many felons caught?

19. Share of those disenfranchised voters who are African-American: 37 percent - I know this is meant to point a racist finger. I don't see it. Since most blacks live in urban areas which are prone to much higher crime rates, this number is reasonable. From the 2012 number I've seen, 69.3% of arrests were of white people. 28.1% black. That is higher than then % of those races in the states, but factoring in the higher crime rates in urban areas, it is not as far off as some would make you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite the same. The bottom 20 percent in the US are still living much better than the bottom 20 percent in Mexico.

I would agree that a change in US government would be for the positive in many cases.

  • In 2012, the official poverty rate was 15.0 percent. There were 46.5 million people in poverty.

And I´m sure the other 5% weren´t much above it. Living in poverty sucks whichever country you live in. Not sure what you mean by "better"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I´m sure the other 5% weren´t much above it. Living in poverty sucks whichever country you live in. Not sure what you mean by "better"

Living in poverty does suck wherever you are. I was just pointing out that nearly all people would rather live in poverty in the USA as opposed to Mexico. This is backed up by the number of people who attempt to gain access to the USA illegally.

I will stand by my comment " The bottom 20 percent in the US are still living much better than the bottom 20 percent in Mexico".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the stats in that link are obviously an attempt to be biased.

18. Number of Americans disenfranchised from voting for felony convictions: 5.9 million - What's the point? Too many convictions? Too many felons caught?

How is this number biased? It is a statistic

The problem IMO is too many non-violent crimes considered felonies. Like # 1,6,9 & 12

http://felonyguide.com/List-of-felony-crimes.php?cmpage=4

Many of the stats in that link are obviously an attempt to be biased.

19. Share of those disenfranchised voters who are African-American: 37 percent - I know this is meant to point a racist finger. I don't see it. Since most blacks live in urban areas which are prone to much higher crime rates, this number is reasonable. From the 2012 number I've seen, 69.3% of arrests were of white people. 28.1% black. That is higher than then % of those races in the states, but factoring in the higher crime rates in urban areas, it is not as far off as some would make you think.

http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States

If you want to think blacks/minorities are treated the same as whites by the police and judicial system that is your choice. You may want to have a look at this

The process of gathering and analyzing statistics on an incarcerated African-American male has been taken by several studies on a specific age group, geographical location, causes of incarceration or simply the upbringing of a child over a course of years. Approximately 12%-13% of the American population is African-American, but they make up 80.1% of the almost 2.1 million male inmates in jail or prison (U.S. Department of Justice, 2009).[1] Census data for 2000 of the number and race of all individuals incarcerated in the United States revealed a wide racial disproportion of the incarcerated population in each state: the proportion of blacks in prison populations exceeded the proportion among state residents in twenty states; the percent of blacks incarcerated was five times greater than the resident population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics_of_incarcerated_African-American_males

Getting way off the topic of the thread though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the stats in that link are obviously an attempt to be biased.

18. Number of Americans disenfranchised from voting for felony convictions: 5.9 million - What's the point? Too many convictions? Too many felons caught?

19. Share of those disenfranchised voters who are African-American: 37 percent - I know this is meant to point a racist finger. I don't see it. Since most blacks live in urban areas which are prone to much higher crime rates, this number is reasonable. From the 2012 number I've seen, 69.3% of arrests were of white people. 28.1% black. That is higher than then % of those races in the states, but factoring in the higher crime rates in urban areas, it is not as far off as some would make you think.

http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States

I would say too many felons CREATED. Martha Stewart is a perfect example. She tells white lies to the FBI and gets sent to prison.

Clapper and others including George W. Bush lie to Congress and the world, and they receive commendations.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say too many felons CREATED. Martha Stewart is a perfect example. She tells white lies to the FBI and gets sent to prison.

Clapper and others including George W. Bush lie to Congress and the world, and they receive commendations.

I think what Martha did warranted jail time. We cannot let people manipulate trading.

I'm not sure we have enough jail space for all the politicians who lie (all of them).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.