Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 25, 2017, 12:15:02 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
100485 Posts in 2360 Topics by 1085 Members
Latest Member: Why We Fight
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Mexico-US matters
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] Print
Author Topic: Mexico-US matters  (Read 174824 times)
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #600 on: February 19, 2017, 04:06:53 PM »

or , , , desaparecido , , ,
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #601 on: February 20, 2017, 10:15:30 AM »

Both. It's Mexico and there is a full on drug war here. Everything goes.

Edit: There are several public cases of both. No rumors.... mass graves.... all kinds of things.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2017, 10:18:06 AM by DDF » Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #602 on: February 20, 2017, 10:50:26 AM »

And two dead Secretarias de Gobernacion (the #2 post in the country, and quite commonly the next president) from odd plane/helicopter crashes during the previous administration , , ,
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #603 on: February 20, 2017, 03:00:40 PM »

And two dead Secretarias de Gobernacion (the #2 post in the country, and quite commonly the next president) from odd plane/helicopter crashes during the previous administration , , ,

Indeed.

It's Mexico.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #604 on: February 20, 2017, 04:25:35 PM »

I might add that the third one passed on trying for the presidency and went back to being governor of BCN or BCS where he was reputed to have gotten quite wealthy while governor there previously-- presumably working in concert with local cartel(s).  (Working from memory here based on an article I read in Proceso the last time I was in Mexico.

Do I have this right DDF?
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #605 on: February 20, 2017, 09:52:56 PM »

I might add that the third one passed on trying for the presidency and went back to being governor of BCN or BCS where he was reputed to have gotten quite wealthy while governor there previously-- presumably working in concert with local cartel(s).  (Working from memory here based on an article I read in Proceso the last time I was in Mexico.

Do I have this right DDF?

You do.

With the last administration here, they approved a federal loan of billions and billions of pesos. In order to pass the measure, there are many that say the votes to pass the measure, were purchased. The population was clearly against it. They have now issued a criminal case against him - http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2016/12/21/1135536

Now... with the new administration, things like seat belt tickets are appearing....a new state tax levied at the Canadian mine owners... that the Federal government just shot down... and the outgoing governor now in hot water for mismanagement of funds (he was #3 favored to be future president).... due to my status here...I cannot speak to politics without being in danger of being expelled from the country.... but I can say, there are lots and lots of stories covered publicly in the media, with proof of corruption, and all other manners of misbehavior or worse.
One of the worst case scenarios, is the case of the Monreal Family.... almost all of whom, work in the government industry, come from farms.... and have grown so rich, that one of them (David Monreal IIRC), now has mansions in Malibu and other places in the US. His relative Ricardo is now a senator here...and had written a book (Escuadras de la Muerte) . . . http://imagendelgolfo.mx/resumen.php?id=395521 .... where he describes even the age and gender on average... of sicarios.... even info that we don't have... and is said to run with the Zeta cartel, as well as is blamed for their presence here where I am at.

In my personal experience, I can say that there are almost certainly agreements between the cartels and high level politicians, because when there are not (and there have been times when this is readily apparent - administration changes, etc...)... the body counts, public executions, narcomantras and firefights spike notably.

I'm almost done with my degree in law here... and have gotten to a point, where I tire of the whole deal.... and am just looking to bring my wife back and see what we will do from there. I have possibilities in the works... haven't really heard anything from any of them.. but that's where I'm at with all of it... Had I been born Mexican, I may feel differently, but I wasn't... and that is made clear here to me daily...

Be fighting you all again in gatherings shortly I imagine. My wife sends her regards.

Edited to include the source on the charges against Miguel Alonso Reyes.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2017, 09:57:14 PM by DDF » Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #606 on: February 22, 2017, 01:30:08 PM »

An unusually well informed Mexican friend responds to this thread:

Well I could only read trough some of it.

There are a few points I don't agree with. Specifically:

Governor Osunas cartel ties. He was the governor I work with directly... He is as clean as they come. He has the distinction of being the only governor in the history of Baja to pick military forces as bodyguards instead of police for his final 4 years of being in office. 

This is very telling.

He lives in the same house he did before he started and if you are ever so inclined I can make the introductions and you can  meet him yourself. He manages his small businesses in Baja directly. You can find him at his office most days.

Proceso is a leftist publication... And has a slant towards the PRI at times.

I take most of the stuff I read in it with a bit of scepticism.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #607 on: February 22, 2017, 01:42:41 PM »

I'm an unusually well informed, Mexican friend too.

Osuna has his detractors in the news, but then again, so does everyone. I don't know the guy personally. He left office here in 2013.... I had only started in 2012.

The governor here on the other hand.... I have more than a few photos with and know him well. Monreal... does have knowledge that he probably shouldn't have.

If you want me to admit whether there are clean politicians or not, who's to say? There are plenty of stories concerning almost every one of them floating around in the news... even Peña Nieto goes from being corrupt to being "the best president in the world" (they literally said that), in the course of a week.

The police here, with anything above municipal and penitentiary police, are almost all former military and especially escoltas.

Not sure what the point is. I know what I've seen being here, working here and living here, for years.

Then again... soon to be none of my business.

Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #608 on: February 22, 2017, 01:51:47 PM »

Regarding Osuna....

"En el que capturaron a unos de los lugartenientes del \”Teo\” mas mencionados, el “Kaibil”, junto con otros de sus colaboradores, además también se capturaron a unos escoltas o ex-escoltas del gobernador Osuna Milán, a ministeriales, policías estatales y policías municipales de Rosarito."

http://mexablog.com/2009/03/12/la-misma-corrupcion-en-todo-mexico/

Not getting into a tit for tat deal with anyone else you know Guru.... I have nothing but respect for you and anyone else you know.

My point is merely... the news and other sources do in fact say "things."

Then again... I have always stated.... "what happens in Vegas... stays in Vegas. What happens in Mexico... never even happened."There is a lot of truth in that.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #609 on: February 23, 2017, 08:24:41 AM »

Mexico's central bank will offer up to $20 billion in currency hedges to calm the peso's volatile exchange rate relative to the dollar. The money would come from Mexico's considerable foreign currency reserves, which stand at around $179 billion. By injecting foreign currency from its reserves into circulation, Mexico City hopes to prevent the peso's value from dropping further. The decision is a clear and significant reaction to the pressures of U.S. economic and social policies.

A stronger dollar and the possibility of interest rate hikes by the U.S. Federal Reserve have for several years been driving down the value of the peso relative to the dollar, which is in turn driving up inflation. Between February 2014 and February 2017, the peso lost around 35 percent of its value, alarming the Mexican government, which is now attempting to limit fluctuations in the value of the peso to ensure social stability. If the peso depreciates more, it would push up food prices — including staples such as corn — hurting Mexico's poorer citizens and increasing the probability of protest. Opposition parties would capitalize on any such discontent to challenge the ruling party for presidential, legislative and gubernatorial positions.

Mexico is severely constrained when it comes to managing its domestic economy. Though it is hedging the value of the peso, it cannot prop it up forever. Moreover, Mexico has been hiking interest rates (currently at around 6.25 percent) to limit inflation but any further hikes will curb lending and further slow the economy. Regardless, Mexico will continue trying to limit inflation and promote growth. Whether it is successful, however, depends a great deal on outside factors, such as U.S. decisions on interest rates and renegotiating the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14352


« Reply #610 on: February 23, 2017, 10:12:01 PM »

http://www.thediplomad.com/2017/02/the-new-mexican-war.html

Saturday, February 11, 2017
The New Mexican War

Much has been written, including in this blog, of the threat to America posed by radical Islamic terrorism. Not so much has been written about another threat, perhaps an even greater one. I refer to the threat posed by Mexico to the United States; it is multi-faceted and persistent, and forms a long established core component of Mexico's foreign policy.

Before I get into the subject let me engage in the usual disclaimer required in our snowflake culture. I have been in Mexico many times both on vacation and for work as a US diplomat. I know Mexico well, am fascinated by its history, and consider Mexico City one of the great cities in the world. If you want outstanding restaurants and, above all, world class museums and other cultural institutions, go to Mexico City.

That said, I also have long considered Mexico a major threat to America. I have dealt with Mexican diplomats at the UN, the OAS, and in Central and South America. They are first rate. They are patriotic, well-trained, dedicated, and hard working. They, almost to a man and a woman, are also possessed with a deep, deep animus towards the United States. At the UN and the OAS, for example, Mexico, in my experience, played the role of opponent to whatever we sought to do. They not only consistently voted against us, they collaborated with our opponents on resolutions and projects antithetical to our interests, and, for example, refused to oppose Cuban and Venezuelan human rights violations. They rarely passed on an opportunity to stick it in our eye.

Mexico had a major role in fostering guerrilla groups in Central America during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, backing off only when it became a hindrance to the NAFTA deal with the United States, and when some of the groups began operating in Mexico. Mexico is feared and resented throughout Central America as a bully and for its mistreatment of Central American migrants. The horror stories these migrants tell of their passage through Mexico are hair-raising and heartbreaking.

I wrote during the recent hysteria over Russian hacking and interference in our  2016 elections that,

    Is there foreign interference in our elections? You bet.

    The biggest offender? Not Russia, but Mexico. Mexican officials publicly called on Mexicans in the US to oppose Trump; Mexico's over fifty--yes, fifty--consulates in the US (here) are hot beds of political activity and activism. Millions of illegal and legal aliens largely from Mexico and Central America vote, yes vote. We need to have an in-depth investigation into Mexico's interference in our elections, an interference that goes well beyond revealing embarrassing DNC texts.

    There. That's an investigation the GOP should endorse, and the new SecState should take up the issue of Mexican interference in our elections.

That interference in our politics has not ceased since the elections. It, in fact, has increased. Some years ago, I mentioned to a senior colleague in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs at State, my concern over the openly political activity engaged in by Mexico's consulates and diplomatic personnel in the U.S. She acknowledged it was a problem but not one anybody wanted to take up.  Well, it is now at a stage when it must be taken up. If the Trump administration is serious about protecting our borders and sovereignty the time has come for tough action on Mexico.

We see this story in the Wall Street Journal (and here) in which Mexican officials, including their diplomats in the US, are seeking to "jam" US courts with contested deportations. The Mexican government has set aside millions of dollars to help illegal Mexican migrants in the US fight efforts to deport them. In addition, Mexico, apparently, is contemplating the grotesque tactic of demanding that we PROVE that deportees are Mexican citizens before Mexico will accept them. In other words, we have to provide the documentation that Mexico failed to provide its own citizens. Mexican officials are holding meetings in Arizona with US politicians warning them about the harm to US-Mexico relations if illegal aliens are deported or prevented from coming to the US. Mexican officials are openly encouraging activists to block deportations. I find this nothing short of outrageous, but, nevertheless, a clear manifestation of the hostility that has long existed in Mexican officialdom for the USA.

We must not only defend our border but, in my view, it is well past the time for the US to begin shutting down most of these Mexican consulates. There is no justification for Mexico to have over fifty consulates in the US. Had I the power, we would give Mexico one week to close 25-30 consulates. In addition, we would work out a plan to close additional consulates depending on how Mexico behaves. If Mexico, in fact, refuses to take back deportees, then we would need to take additional actions such as shutting down our visa issuance in Mexico, kicking out their ambassador from Washington, closing down the border crossing for periods of time, and even halting remittances to Mexico--just to let Mexico feel the pain. As part, of course, of any comprehensive reform of our immigration laws, no federal money should go to supporting illegal aliens in the US.

The Southwest USA does not "belong" to Mexico. Mexico, please note, held California for about 25 years; they had Texas for even less time. Spain held the area for a couple hundred years, and we've had it for some 170 years. So enough with that argument. It is tiresome.

The USA has the right to defend its sovereignty and borders. Mexicans have no right of access to the US any more than anybody else does.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #611 on: February 24, 2017, 01:33:44 AM »

If people in the States for the most part, knew what is published in the news here, and said in the streets, whilst having a firm grasp on what Mexican law states about foreigners speaking their political opinions...

Trump, and the people that support him aren't just hated.... they are LOATHED, which is odd coming from a country and people that will boot any foreigner from the country for saying anything about politics.... almost ten years here... and number of American flags I've seen being waved here? Not even one.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #612 on: February 24, 2017, 10:16:51 AM »

Strong article there GM.

Note the temporary visas granted Haitians so they can get to US border mentioned in this article:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/23/mexico-chides-us-on-trump-immigration-policies-adm/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTURFd1pUZzJZekl3T1RZeiIsInQiOiJwXC8rZ2FCd2s5R1lxbFBqVzAycnY3NGJjWGY1VW5sREVocCtDbGdvcjFKR2JrNnlaVzNMZUxxeHhkeDZZMERTTnF2dktzM243bDlsaFRMNHRCVFJrcGl6WG1mekVxOEFUR3NmUThzbzZ2QlZFVHh5MWRyc1VsU3dRVFRcL2dcL3hsQiJ9
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 689


« Reply #613 on: February 24, 2017, 05:21:25 PM »

Strong article there GM.

Note the temporary visas granted Haitians so they can get to US border mentioned in this article:


It's important to note... the Mexican Constitution specifcally allows for anyone having the right to pass through the national territory. Article 11:

"Article 11. Everyone has the right to enter and leave the Republic, to travel through its
territory and to change his residence without necessity of a letter of security, passport,
safe-conduct or any other similar requirement. The exercise of this right shall be
subordinated to the powers of the judiciary, in cases of civil or criminal liability, and to
those of the administrative authorities insofar as concerns the limitations imposed by the
laws regarding emigration, immigration and public health of the country, or in regard to
undesirable aliens resident in the country."
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #614 on: February 24, 2017, 09:13:35 PM »

I did not know that.  Point taken.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39110


« Reply #615 on: Today at 10:30:36 AM »



The acrid political atmosphere between the United States and Mexico created by the issue of immigrant deportation dominated the visit to Mexico City by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and John Kelly, secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The shifting U.S. stance toward immigration enforcement will play a significant part in shaping Mexico's domestic political landscape and will affect future relations between the two countries.

The most recent dispute between Mexico City and Washington revolves around memos written by Kelly to his department and made public Monday concerning how to implement executive orders issued by President Donald Trump that give authorities greater latitude to deport foreigners who break U.S. immigration law. Under Kelly's instructions, the United States could send those people to the contiguous country nearest to their point of detention — meaning Mexico in tens of thousands of cases — until their immigration hearings were resolved, although he said people whose cases were decided would be transported directly back to their home countries.

What is a Geopolitical Diary?

The policy outlined by Kelly, who at a press conference Thursday promised to prioritize the deportation of criminals and take a cooperative approach with Mexico in the matter, opens the door to increased deportation of Mexican-born migrants. This will create a number of headaches for authorities in Mexico City. Adding thousands of deportees to the ranks of the unemployed is certainly an unappealing prospect for Mexican officials, who are already dealing with federal budget cutbacks spurred by slumping oil prices. But increased deportations of Mexican citizens also could damage the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) ahead of the 2018 presidential race by creating the impression among voters that the PRI's leaders are weak in the face of unfavorable U.S. policy. This could drive up support for opposition parties such as the PRI's traditional foe, the National Action Party (PAN), or the upstart National Regeneration Movement (Morena), founded by Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador.

The prospect of voters flocking to Morena is a major concern for Mexico's business and political elite. The private sector knows what to expect from PRI or PAN, but Morena has never held power. Lopez Obrador is not exactly a political outsider: He was previously mayor of Mexico City under the Party of the Democratic Revolution and twice ran unsuccessfully for president. But 2018 could produce a different result for him; polls indicate that he has the support of around a third of the electorate, and the current tussle with the United States could add to his popularity. But even as Lopez Obrador has publicly signaled a shift to the center by meeting with business leaders, economic and regulatory risks abound concerning his election. For example, he has repeatedly vowed to slow the pace of the country's 2013 energy reforms, which opened exploration and production in Mexico's oil and natural gas sectors to private foreign investment. Most recently, a Lopez Obrador spokesman said that if elected, the Moreno leader would halt Mexico City's oil and gas licensing rounds and review existing agreements. Lopez Obrador most likely made the promise in the hopes of bolstering support in areas hit hard by the downsizing of state oil company Petroleos Mexicanos and then riding a wave of nationalism to the presidency.

While his shot at the energy reforms may merely represent populist rhetoric intended to appeal to voters already angry with the government, it suggests that if Lopez Obrador assumes office, he would use his presidential powers to slow the pace of private capital entering Mexico's energy sector. This in turn raises the specter of political gridlock and infighting at a time when Mexico can ill afford it. With the United States pushing the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), such a divisive energy issue could be in front of Mexico's congress at the same time it might need to address changes in the trade status with the United States, a priority that congressional infighting could delay.

But aside from the political difficulties that changes in U.S. immigration policy could create, another angle of the issue has raised concerns in Mexico City. Accepting deported migrants from other countries (mostly those from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras) without any promise of assistance from the United States would put Mexico in a difficult position. Though Mexico would accept its own citizens, the establishment of communities of largely jobless, sometimes criminal migrants from other nations (many of whom would never leave Mexico) would create long-term difficulties for the country. The number of Central Americans attempting to enter the United States illegally has surged, and the economic pressures that influence them to cross Mexico's southern border are not diminishing. That, combined with the Mexican administration's fears of a voter backlash if it acquiesces to the DHS directive, makes it no surprise that Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray said Mexico would not entertain cooperating on that portion of the new orders, although Mexico could face U.S. pressure to give in.

Discussions on security issues, particularly on ways to counter illegal migration and organized crime, will continue parallel to the NAFTA discussions, slated to begin in June. Before then, one of the main tools Mexico will use to shape negotiations on security and economic matters will be the threat of refusing to help the United States rein in illegal migration. Mexico has already suggested that it would reduce security cooperation if the United States pushes for changes to NAFTA that are unfavorable to Mexico. But putting that threat into practice will be a risky proposition for Mexico. The Trump administration can retaliate by cutting off most U.S. government assistance, a threat set up by the language of the DHS memos instructing agencies to identify any sources of aid to Mexico.

The ultimate intent of such a policy seems to be to pressure Mexico to accept U.S. demands, whether to agree to the suggestion that Mexico fund a border wall between the countries or to concede points in NAFTA negotiations. A reduction in Mexico's security cooperation with the United States, whether on intelligence gathering or migrant interdiction, could lead to retaliation from Washington, which could replace NAFTA with a bilateral trade agreement. The demise of NAFTA would result in more uncertainty for Mexico, which would find itself in the difficult position of negotiating a bilateral trade deal at a time when political relations with the United States are at an ebb.

Mexico's government would probably want to divorce security cooperation from the economic talks, but doing so may no longer be possible. As the negotiations go on, long-standing security issues such as migration and drug trafficking (and Mexican cooperation on those issues) will intersect with the purely economic aspects of Mexico's relationship with the United States. Mexico would clearly be at a disadvantage in NAFTA negotiations, but for now, Mexico City will wait to see what constraints limiting the White House's ability to act on NAFTA present themselves. The future of NAFTA is uncertain, even among Washington policymakers, and Mexican leaders likely hope that uncertainty will give way to a renegotiation of the pact, rather than to a rapid deterioration in economic and political ties.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!