Mormon family 'massacred' in Mexico attack

[Dark_Grey]

2 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

These were people with dual citizenship, they were living in Mexico by choice because they did not want to abide by the laws governing the United States.

Dual citizenship sure, but they were American citizens nonetheless.

Quote

The argument seems a little selective when another American citizen, Jamal Khashoggi was murdered by Saudi Arabia and not only did we not take military action but sold them additional weapons.

Khashoggi was part of a tangled web of Saudi royal family beefs and gun running. It was a very political murder that sent ripples in to the high ranks of Government. Some wanted it avenged, some wanted it buried. I see your point, though.

Quote

That aside, the cartels need to be stopped.  You make a good point about cartels moving into America.  I would not limit it to the south or think of it in the future.  They are here now and likely have distribution centers in all major cities.  If we want to stick with America first, then let the President be a hero by eliminating them in our own country where we already have jurisdiction and suffer from their depredations.

To his credit, he has been trying but bleeding hearts on the far left have declared open war on ICE. Whether or not they know it, those heart bleeders are aiding criminals by preventing law enforcement from doing their jobs.

Quote

In this case, I am not being cynical, I would give President Trump a lot of credit if he did just that.

Some issues transcend binary politics. The cartel doesn't stop to ask who you voted for before they skin you alive with box cutters. Everyone should be coming together on this.

[Dark_Grey]

4 hours ago, skliss said:

They'd refuse for a few reasons imo. There is so much national and local corruption in Mexico it would be almost impossible to rid the country of cartels at this point. Anyone even suggesting such a course or worse helping in anyway would be a cartel target. Not to mention all those officials who either turn a blind eye or make tons of money working actively with them. They have no desire to stop the money flow into their own coffers. I think it's probably gone too far to correct at this point.

It has to be systematic. They need a leader with a "drain the swamp" mentality who also follows through. Cull the corrupt leaders while attacking the cartels revenue sources. It easy to say as an anonymous user on a message board but it has to start somewhere. Turning a blind eye is not an option any more - this is quickly becoming an American issue.

[skliss]

13 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

The way you describe it sounds like a much more violent version of our own government.

Just have to throw in your passive/aggressive, America bad comment wherever you can.....sad....

[skliss]

10 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

It has to be systematic. They need a leader with a "drain the swamp" mentality who also follows through. Cull the corrupt leaders while attacking the cartels revenue sources. It easy to say as an anonymous user on a message board but it has to start somewhere. Turning a blind eye is not an option any more - this is quickly becoming an American issue.

I agree, but who's gonna do it and how do you find enough people to trust in that atmosphere that aren't going to literally stab the guy in the back, induced by either big wads of cash or threats to their families. Years of groundwork would have to be done BEFORE the years of conflict and violence it would take to accomplish those goals.

Edited November 6, 2019 by skliss

[Dark_Grey]

18 minutes ago, skliss said:

I agree, but who's gonna do it and how do you find enough people to trust in that atmosphere that aren't going to literally stab the guy in the back, induced by either big wads of cash or threats to their families. Years of groundwork would have to be done BEFORE the years of conflict and violence it would take to accomplish those goals.

At this point, you almost need a Duerte (sp?) type dude who's going to turn the country in to a Military dictatorship. Convincing him to hand over the keys after the job is done is 10 years will be it's own challenge. It will be a long and bloody fight. I really feel bad for the citizens of Mexico...

[Dark_Grey]

This is a VICE piece they did 7 years ago on the secret war between Mormons and the cartel (40min):

 

 

[Tatetopa]

28 minutes ago, skliss said:

Just have to throw in your passive/aggressive, America bad comment wherever you can.....sad....

Come on, I have been reading the same things from you about Congress.  Are we not beset by corruption that seems almost impossible to rid ourselves of?  Sad. In this case I am not criticizing the President.

There is little wrong with America that a clean sweep of corruption out of our government would not  greatly improve.

.

[Tatetopa]

51 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Some issues transcend binary politics. The cartel doesn't stop to ask who you voted for before they skin you alive with box cutters. Everyone should be coming together on this.

Absolutely.

They are here now in our own country.  They are in Los Angeles, Kansas City, Atlanta, New York ,Chicago, Portland, Seattle and a host of other cities.

We may differ in opinion, I don't like the attacks on ICE, my long time friend who is a very good, dedicated, and honest man is a regional commander.  But I think relying on ICE is too simplistic.  We need more that finding illegals and sending them back to Mexico to fix this.  Drugs flow across the border.  Money has no national boundaries.  The cartels can buy plenty of native born American citizens to run their operations here.  It needs more than lip service.  It needs national resources.  In many cases local law enforcement is overwhelmed by the magnitude of the problem.  Some cartel organizations may be beyond the local police to deal with.  National guard may be willing but does not have the qualifications to help.  It is going to take as sophisticated a counterintelligence operation as we can muster. to defeat them. 

It means cutting off supplies, cutting off distribution networks, and cutting off customers. 

That might take aggressive efforts at treatment and rehabilitation as well as law enforcement.  If there are always desperate customers willing to pay for drugs, somebody will find a way to supply them.  We have tended to think of addicts as a problem to themselves and living with the choices they made.  But they also hurt their communities and all of us by being a source of cartel funding. 

Will we come together to take action?

[Dark_Grey]

8 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Absolutely.
[...]
That might take aggressive efforts at treatment and rehabilitation as well as law enforcement.  If there are always desperate customers willing to pay for drugs, somebody will find a way to supply them.  We have tended to think of addicts as a problem to themselves and living with the choices they made.  But they also hurt their communities and all of us by being a source of cartel funding. 

All true. We haven't even touched on the "alleged" involvement of corrupt Feds helping to traffic those drugs. All that fentanyl being made in China is being smuggled right through Mexico. 

Quote

Will we come together to take action?

Mexican and American lives depend on it. I sure hope so.

[aztek]

that money would be gone next day.  no politician in mexico who wants to live would move against cartel. the only way is, to fully occupy, hunt down and exterminate anyone who even remotely connected, including most politicians, but it'll never happen. 

we could legalize drugs, and make cartels a lot weaker with no so much money coming in,  cuz now they can buy anyone and anything

Edited November 6, 2019 by aztek

[Dark_Grey]

5 minutes ago, aztek said:

that money would be gone next day.  no politician in mexico who wants to live would move against cartel. the only way is, to fully occupy, hunt down and exterminate anyone who even remotely connected, including most politicians, but it'll never happen. 

we could legalize drugs, and make cartels a lot weaker with no so much money coming in,  cuz now they can buy anyone and anything

Is that why Mexico decriminalized most drugs? I never connected the two before but now I wonder if the cartel is part of their reason for doing it

[skliss]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Come on, I have been reading the same things from you about Congress.  Are we not beset by corruption that seems almost impossible to rid ourselves of?  Sad. In this case I am not criticizing the President.

There is little wrong with America that a clean sweep of corruption out of our government would not  greatly improve.

.

I actually think it's so ingrained in you that you may not realize you're doing it anymore to be honest. That's why I point it out every once in a while, but it's in just about every post.

Do I think we need to shine a bigger spotlight on us...yeah, do I think we are anywhere near the blatant in-your-face corruption of Mexico...no.

[skliss]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

But I think relying on ICE is too simplistic

We could at least quit hampering and demonizing them and their efforts.  That has caused many good officers to quit or choose other careers just when we need them most. How do we implement these big plans of yours while we tie their hands and make the job less and less safe for them to do. 

[skliss]

9 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Is that why Mexico decriminalized most drugs? I never connected the two before but now I wonder if the cartel is part of their reason for doing it

We can see how they just disappeared afterwards...right? I think decriminalization will just create more addicts and more demand.

Edited November 6, 2019 by skliss
Typo

[aztek]

9 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Is that why Mexico decriminalized most drugs? I never connected the two before but now I wonder if the cartel is part of their reason for doing it

yea, that was the idea, but they did not do nearly enough, just decriminalized to carry over 5g of weed, and 0.5g or coke, sale, manufacturing, dealing, and larger quantities are still illegal.  unless they fully legalize it, regulate and tax it, illegal drugs will still be in demand,  and more importantly we need to do same here, then demand for cartels will drop overnight dramatically. 

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, Dark_Grey said:

All true. We haven't even touched on the "alleged" involvement of corrupt Feds helping to traffic those drugs. All that fentanyl being made in China is being smuggled right through Mexico. 

Quote

Will we come together to take action?

Mexican and American lives depend on it. I sure hope so.

It would be nice to help the Mexican government, and I do care about their citizens, but I would like to focus here where we have jurisdiction.  I think some portion of the violence in Chicago by American gangs and kids has its roots in drug distribution and money.  Most cities have that problem.  Getting rid of the drug connections may not end all violence, but I bet it will reduce it.  Then you have all of the addicts breaking into our cars and our houses and robbing us.  It has gotta cost citizens and insurance companies billions of dollars for all the damage they do and sell for pennies on the dollar.  We saw how easy it is for a couple of national guardsmen to give somebody a ride for a few hundred bucks.  Border patrol agents must be under constant pressure of bribery and threats, they need help.  If the FBI has corrupt agents, we have to address that too.  This sure ought to be a thing we can all agree on.  As you say the loss of life is huge on both sides of the border.

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, skliss said:

I actually think it's so ingrained in you that you may not realize you're doing it anymore to be honest. That's why I point it out every once in a while, but it's in just about every post.

Do I think we need to shine a bigger spotlight on us...yeah, do I think we are anywhere near the blatant in-your-face corruption of Mexico...no.

Well then thanks.  You may be right I don;t always notice that I am doing it.  I hope it is not in every post, I thought some of my posts in this thread have been constructive, but maybe I need more therapy. 

In my defense, I have been hearing how corrupt and stop-at-nothing the Democrats are in this impeachment proceedings, even up to calling it a coup, I am starting to believe it.  As I said, we are not violent, but we may have a corrupt government,  Even our intelligence agencies which are supposed to protect us have come under question.

[BrooklynGuy]

2 hours ago, skliss said:

We can see how they just disappeared afterwards...right? I think decriminalization will just create more addicts and more demand.

I agree with you skliss that it will create more addicts and more demand. At the same time I think it would ensure that what people are paying for is what is advertised and we would see a sharp drop in accidental overdoses especially where fentanyl is concerned which seems to be added to more and more drugs that are coming into our country. Another benefit most likely would be a precipitous drop in the spread of HIV and HEP C through free needle exchanges and we should see a drop in property crimes depending on what the government taxed the suppliers and if they also set pricing regulations. Now I'm not advocating for the legalization of all drugs because I don't think there is any such thing as a recreational crack or heroin user, but when you think about it, we already have a drug distribution system in place that is regulated by the government and administered by private contractors in the healthcare system. To get the drugs we want or need simple requires a doctor visit and a prescription. We see Methadone and Suboxone clinics in many strip malls around the country and they have become an accepted and widely use treatment for opioid addiction. Folks know which doctor to go to get the most pills whether they need them or not and way too many doctors are willing to supply them for the right price. Maybe we could look at how to improve the system we currently have with a focus on which pieces provide the most benefits with the least amount of harm, develop better coordinated nation wide monitoring of doctor prescribing habits and develop pricing policies that make the illegal drug trade unprofitable or at the very least less profitable and less attractive here in America. Certainly there are no easy answers but the current system is broken imo and we need to try something different. Many thanks to Tatetopa, aztek, Dark_Grey et al for there posts as well. 

[skliss]

1 hour ago, BrooklynGuy said:

I agree with you skliss that it will create more addicts and more demand. At the same time I think it would ensure that what people are paying for is what is advertised and we would see a sharp drop in accidental overdoses especially where fentanyl is concerned which seems to be added to more and more drugs that are coming into our country. Another benefit most likely would be a precipitous drop in the spread of HIV and HEP C through free needle exchanges and we should see a drop in property crimes depending on what the government taxed the suppliers and if they also set pricing regulations. Now I'm not advocating for the legalization of all drugs because I don't think there is any such thing as a recreational crack or heroin user, but when you think about it, we already have a drug distribution system in place that is regulated by the government and administered by private contractors in the healthcare system. To get the drugs we want or need simple requires a doctor visit and a prescription. We see Methadone and Suboxone clinics in many strip malls around the country and they have become an accepted and widely use treatment for opioid addiction. Folks know which doctor to go to get the most pills whether they need them or not and way too many doctors are willing to supply them for the right price. Maybe we could look at how to improve the system we currently have with a focus on which pieces provide the most benefits with the least amount of harm, develop better coordinated nation wide monitoring of doctor prescribing habits and develop pricing policies that make the illegal drug trade unprofitable or at the very least less profitable and less attractive here in America. Certainly there are no easy answers but the current system is broken imo and we need to try something different. Many thanks to Tatetopa, aztek, Dark_Grey et al for there posts as well. 

I see a whole host of problems in what you posted. Why do you think that people will go to the government for their drugs? Why leave a paper trail your employer or future employer can find? The cartels will still be doing business they may under cut prices briefly but i cant imagine government substances will give the same kind of high. None of the stuff they talked about for Colorado has come to pass. They haven't gotten the revenue they imagined, they have a huge uptick in DUI drivers including those that come in from out of state. I'm not sure why you think people would commit less crimes to get money for drugs...they are still jobless and addicted. I think giving more people access will create more addicts. How's the quality of life for those who frequent the methadone clinics? They haven't seemed to make a dent in the opioid crisis to date. With more users we'd just need more and more clinics but now you've given a level of legitimacy to being an addict. I think it sounds like a nightmare.

[+OverSword]

10 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

The way you describe it sounds like a much more violent version of our own government.

How dare you 

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

How dare you 

Well skliss did give me what for over that one.  I do tend to get a little snarky sometimes.  Still it might be passed time for a third party to do a little house claening.

[Bed of chaos]

Most pharmacies in u.s. are getting (pdm) drug monitoring computer/systems. If someone's trying to get script filled early (even if pharm shoppers pay cash thinking drug history won't show up in insurance profile, it does) as former pharm tech, we'd try to keep this secret from customers (id assume most pharmacies do) past date of fill, quantity, dose, other drugs, multiple mds..we'd see everything. Some doctors will still fill high volume of narcotics however if certain pharmacies catch on..they could very well get reported (or pharmacies get audited) . Im sure these circumstances vary state to state. In regards to suboxone (mixed feelings, better than heroin?..of course) some take seriously however probably almost half the customers (we filled) abused drug (or had red flags in customer/history profile) one tech mentioned individuals are supposed to stay on 6 months. (barely anyone did this) I'd recommend more attention on tapering off meds (all controlled substances/narcotics) opioids,benzos,ect. And I wouldnt be surprised if almost half of customers dont even read directions on prescription bottle. 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Bed of chaos

[Opus Magnus]

I've actually read the whole Book of Mormon. It's about as long as the Bible, but reads faster. Ironically in the book it is directly opposed to polygamy. It says something along the lines of, "King David and others took multiple wives, and this was not the will of God and he doesn't like it." This is paraphrased, but that's the basic idea and I think it is repeated multiple times. In the law of Moses it does say not to take rival wives. The Book of Mormon itself is against more than one wife, and it doesn't have much examples of polygamy in it.

However, personally I don't like the Mormon philosophy because it is adamant about enforcing the Trinity and that Jesus is God. The only way I can believe is that Jesus is the son of God and not actually God. 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Opus Magnus

[BrooklynGuy]

9 hours ago, skliss said:

I see a whole host of problems in what you posted. Why do you think that people will go to the government for their drugs? Why leave a paper trail your employer or future employer can find? The cartels will still be doing business they may under cut prices briefly but i cant imagine government substances will give the same kind of high. None of the stuff they talked about for Colorado has come to pass. They haven't gotten the revenue they imagined, they have a huge uptick in DUI drivers including those that come in from out of state. I'm not sure why you think people would commit less crimes to get money for drugs...they are still jobless and addicted. I think giving more people access will create more addicts. How's the quality of life for those who frequent the methadone clinics? They haven't seemed to make a dent in the opioid crisis to date. With more users we'd just need more and more clinics but now you've given a level of legitimacy to being an addict. I think it sounds like a nightmare.

Thank you for the reply and your excellent points that highlight this very complicated issue that is plaguing America and the need for some new strategies to better manage it. Like all folks my views on subjects are shaped by my personal life experiences and that is why I have a soft spot for these lost souls battling their addictions and their families who are suffering as well. To give you a little insight on what shapes my thinking here let me give you a little family history. My oldest sister died from a accidental heroin overdose at the age of 44 leaving behind 2 children and 6 grandchildren. As we would later find out the heroin she used that day was laced with fentanyl. I'm sure my sister had no idea that after a car accident 4 years earlier and being given pain medication for the first time in her life she would one day die this way. My sister was brain dead but kept alive by a ventilator for four days for the sole purpose of allowing my niece and nephew to get used to the idea that their, Mother who was successful in all other areas of her life except this one, had tragically died at the age of 44.  Also my Father who liked his beer way too much probably died 15 years before his time but thankfully there was treatment available for his alcoholism and after spending a 6 weeks in a hospital for treatment he never touched another drop. I can't tell you how happy we all were to have our Father and Grandfather back and how grateful were to the people at that hospital that literally saved his life. Let me say that I believe that addiction is an illness of sorts that should be treated from a medical perspective and not stigmatized nor should these sick folks be ridiculed or ostracize for having it. I completely understand why some folks might dislike people who struggle with substance abuse as the behavior associated with it could easily make the most loving Mother disown their son or daughter. Let me make a comparison. Let's look at the disease of Type 2 Diabetes that effects millions of people around the world that often leads to limb amputations, blindness and premature deaths. I don't know anyone personally that ridicules these folks but one could argue that this illness is self inflicted based on a poor diet and a lack of exercise. I can't recall any instance where the media belittles these folks for their poor choices in life but I can give you thousands of examples where they have done just that to people who struggle with Substance abuse and here is an example from two days ago below. The same argument could be made for the individual who has heart disease and eats a lot of fast foods and doesn't follow the diet given to him by his Physician and winds up having a heart attack or stroke and leaves behind another grieving family because he couldn't muster up the will to stop eating french fries or cake even though he knew full well that one day that behavior might kill him. Shaming any or all of these obviously medically ill folks does not motivate them to change or to seek treatment, it only serves to drive them further underground, picture nice lady sneaking a piece of cake when no one is looking, and away from treatment and their families to deal with the already enormous amount of guilt and shame they feel everyday over their own poor choices and an illness that appears to have few solutions other than the treatment they so desperately need but are often to embarrassed to seek. 

The AMA view on Addiction, and in my Sister's case they couldn't have been more accurate.

The Definition of Alcoholism

Therefore, the committee agreed to define alcoholism as a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. The disease is often progressive and fatal. It is characterized by impaired control over drinking, preoccupation with the drug alcohol, use of alcohol despite adverse consequences, and distortions in thinking, most notably denial. Each of these symptoms may be continuous or periodic.

Read more: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/399449

 

 

How Matthew Perry went from ‘90s heartthrob to shambling wreck

For a decade, he was the handsome, quirky boy next door on the hit sitcom, “Friends.” But now Matthew Perry is making fans wonder what’s become of the lovable 90s heartthrob, as photos have emerged of the troubled actor wandering around Los Angeles looking like a slovenly, slack-jawed hobo. The alarming new images show the 50-year-old staggering out of a restaurant Sunday in a state of disarray and sucking on a cigarette with a mystery woman. They immediately raised questions about whether Perry, who has been candid about his years of substance abuse issues, had again fallen off the wagon.

Read more: https://pagesix.com/2019/11/05/matthew-perrys-addiction-struggles-inside-his-long-road-of-recovery-and-relapse/

[BrooklynGuy]

And just to add to all the nice folks on here stop watching the Fake news, especially CNN, because it really is a disease which ails all of us.