The publication of the report, days before the swearing-in of President-elect Barack Obama, obviously will set guidelines in the initial discussions between both governments. And although this document focuses on the activities of the Mexican mafias inside American territory, it would be difficult for the Mexican government to question the assertions made in the report and about the danger of the Mexican mafias, for the simple reason of what Mexico is experiencing these days: the violent death of more than 5,400 people in this year alone, and the infiltrations of even the highest levels of agencies that administer justice in this country.I've been asking myself that same question for a while, and this report makes it all the more pertinent.
Why wouldn't you think that these Mexican groups would seek to export the sam form of dong business to other lands? And given the porousness of the border with the United States, what's to stop them?
Saturday, December 20, 2008
More on Mexico's Mafia Threat
Ana María Salazar weighs in on the Justice Department report that named Mexican cartels as the most significant criminal threat to the United States:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Yes, and you can anticipate a US version of officials on the take when Obama's crowd moves in. Don't forget the huge piles of drug money coming from his home town. Don't expect his low-price crony, Eric Holder, to take responsible action from the US. Never in recent history has a new administration been so clouded by so many sleazy scandals a-borning before ever setting foot in office. The best we can hope for is the elections in two years when we can vote some of them out of office.
Hi Charlie,
I didn't intend either of today's posts to have anything to do with Obama, but in any event...I'm kind of confused as to what your argument. As far as Chicago, its drug problem is not very different from a lot of other American cities, and since Obama was never an elected official there, it seems unfair to blame him for the drug and gang problems that do exist. As far as Holder being "low-price", I don't know what you mean by that. Holder's career has been one of a very hard-line figure toward drugs. If your idea of responsibility is harsher policies against drugs, than Holder is your man. If your idea of responsibility is a different approach on drugs, well Holder probably isn't your guy, but nor are most Republicans, and in any case Obama might just be.
As far as the scandals, I just don't agree. I think you could make a pretty good case that no incoming president since Reagan had a less scandalous past (H. W. Bush and Iran Contra, Clinton and Flowers and Whitewater, Bush and how he won) than Obama. Blago isn't Obama, I lived in Chicago until 2005, there was never a whole lot connecting them, they occupied about as separate circles as possible given that both them were from Chicago. Maybe the list of contacts between Obama and Blago will show us otherwise, but I doubt it. What else is there? Rezko? Jeremiah Wright? Compared with the three above, those both seem not at all shrouded in doubt nor of much consequence.
Post a Comment