Everything Southern Humboldt and more
Got this link from Woods. Some very graphic and disturbing photographs of the aftermath of a shootout between rival drug gangs in the Sonora province of Mexico near the US border. My Spanish is a bit rusty, but the blog entry notes 21 deaths in the fight, and I think 9 arrests.
Found an account in English.
 | "Henchman Of Justice… on March against Monsanto this… |
| "Henchman Of Justice… on March against Monsanto this… |
| "Henchman Of Justice… on March against Monsanto this… |
| "Henchman Of Justice… on March against Monsanto this… |
| "Henchman Of Justice… on March against Monsanto this… |
 | moviedad on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
 | That Other Anonymous on March against Monsanto this… |
 | Forest Queen on March against Monsanto this… |
 | Anonymous on March against Monsanto this… |
 | Cookie on March against Monsanto this… |
 | bolithio on March against Monsanto this… |
| Forest Queen on March against Monsanto this… |
 | Mitch on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
| moviedad on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
| Mitch on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 26, 2010 at 7:34 am
Jim Buoy
I’ll repeat this from the Reagan Day celebrations thread: It’s not as if there isn’t an American connection to this profitable drug war besides the guns and the insatiable appetite. Notice how corporate personhood and the rule of law works in the article. SCOTUS should really amend that to corporate supra-personhood.
Still, 21 less drug traffickers is a plus.
July 26, 2010 at 10:24 am
anonymous
I saw nothing in this lengthy article that touched on “corporate personhood” — are you imagining something?
July 26, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Joe Blow
All that high-powered weaponry and fancy protective paraphernalia didn’t do them much good did it?
July 26, 2010 at 2:07 pm
j
Really! anon 10:24,
No big U.S. bank — Wells Fargo included — has ever been indicted for violating the Bank Secrecy Act or any other federal law. Instead, the Justice Department settles criminal charges by using deferred-prosecution agreements, in which a bank pays a fine and promises not to break the law again.
You may recall that there was a business up in the Meadows Business Park some time back that was laundering local drug money in the purchases of large expensive diesel generators. The owner person got into some serious trouble with the Feds over that. Not sure if jail time was involved, but certainly way more than a tap-on-the-pinky fine which these corporate banks continually get away with. While the article doesn’t specifically mention corporate personhood, how else do you explain how this banking phenom continues over and over, which is directly linked to an industry that violently kills thousands of people, and no one is ever prosecuted for diddly? Especially in this day and age of terrorism and anti-terrorism measures? Since most of the deaths happen in Mexico, it isn’t our problem, is that it?
As the article makes very clear without the banks laundering billions in illegal drug money these drug cartels couldn’t function as they do and with only laughable penalties at risk, why would the banks stop? They make money on these transactions. It’s a pretty nifty collective and effective corporate immunity scheme from any prosecution for violating the rule of law,[The Bank Secrecy Act] – Hey, we can’t possibly know or be responsible for figuring out where all this cash coming into our bank is coming from. It’s a software problem. – corporate supra-personhood. Same thing.
July 26, 2010 at 3:33 pm
anonymous
Corporate personhood didn’t keep Ken Lay and his cronies out of prison, and the absence of corporate personhood (which, in today’s world, you’ll find only in countries such as N. Korea) would not change a thing. I know that what I say flies in the face of neo-Left mythology, and it’s unfortunate (from a debater’s perspective) that we won’t be able to test my ideas — corporate personhood is not about to disappear. — There is a very good reason that the article did not mention c.p. — it’s irrelevant (in the real world).
July 26, 2010 at 6:23 pm
Anonymous
The weapons I saw in the photos were AK-47′s, most likely not from the U.S.
The photo’s depict the very violent ambush of a convoy of vehicles.
July 26, 2010 at 8:28 pm
the reasonable anonymous
Ken Lay avoided prison by having the good sense to have a well-timed heart attack…of course maybe he didn’t really croak with such amazing timing and instead, he’s actually hanging out at Shrub’s estate in Paraguay. Wouldn’t surprise me one bit.
July 26, 2010 at 9:29 pm
Jim Buoy
anon 3:33,
In a sense I agree with you. Corporate personhood means absolutely nothing as far as individual responsibility for ones own actions goes. That’s my point. If you’re a corporate biggie you are treated differently. Your examples of Enron are quite a different matter as overwhelming public reaction to, and overwhelming proof of, fraud, compelled prosecution in that debacle. Even that took 4 1/2 years. These drug laundering banks, and their fluctuating BoDs with mergers, buy-outs, etc., are well under the public radar and therefor receive no such equal attention. And so they receive different treatment They are above mere personhood, they are supra-persons – below the radar and above the law.
Incidentally, Ken Lay never went to prison. He had a convenient heart attack several months before sentencing while on vacation in a rural Colorado area and the body was cremated 4 days later. The judge abated his conviction because he could not exhaust his appeals. No one could go after the money he left his heirs under the circumstances. Justice prevails. Not.
The conduct of Goldman Sachs in the recent financial meltdown presents another interesting twist in the rewards for corporate unaccountability. There once was a time when a scandal like that associated with any investment firm would be enough to bring it down. Who would trust their money with a company involved with such practices, “legal” under deregulation, or not? Well, apparently those days of ultimate customer regulatory action have also vanished without a trace. GS is one of the hottest stocks around, especially after their pinky tap fine from the SEC. The new investment strategy must be; fooled me once, then you can do it again, because it’s all irrelevant in the real world.
anon 6:23- If the weapons involved in this latest gun battle are not American made or purchased here, then that is indeed, good news for Obama.
July 27, 2010 at 7:29 am
anonymous
“Below the radar and above the law” — I can’t disagree with the thrust of that formulation. And it makes me think of the hundreds of SoHum residents who fit that description………..
July 27, 2010 at 8:17 am
Jim Buoy
No argument from me. Which leaves us with only a few unanswered questions: How many more prisons will we need to build? How much will that cost? Where will the money come from? And, the most important; in *whose back yard will they be built?
*I think I got that who’s/whose thingy right now.
July 27, 2010 at 9:26 am
Anonymous
I’ll repeat this from the Reagan Day celebrations thread: It’s not as if there isn’t an American connection to this profitable drug war besides the guns and the insatiable appetite.
I knew this gang shootout was America’s fault somehow!
July 27, 2010 at 10:50 am
Bunny
It’s so simple….LEGALIZE IT!
July 27, 2010 at 11:22 am
anonymous
The current issue of “The Economist” has a cover story on America’s excessive incarceration rate, well worth reading. — Bunny’s point should be step #1 in the process of de-jailing our society (up to a point).
July 27, 2010 at 12:31 pm
Jim Buoy
I knew this gang shootout was America’s fault somehow!
Well, duh, who do you think the Mexican drugs are bound for right next to the US border, France? And if that damn Saddam hadn’t forced all that oil down our young teenagers throats we never would have had to invade Iraq.
“Legalizing” pot could be one of those seemingly simple, instant panaceas that more often than not turns out to be anything but and creates more and bigger problems then the one we thought we were solving. Think of Prohibition ending, but only for beer. Or the deregulation of just about anything. The better approach would be the regulating of pot such as some are trying to figure out now. It’s not so simple, is it?
July 27, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Mr. Nice
You do realize that is exactly how history went down, right?
July 28, 2010 at 8:07 am
Jim Buoy
Yup.
But first you’ll have to devise a 3.2 THC pot prototype.