I am finally in my final resting place (for a few months, anyway), having moved into my own apartment and out of Child B's apartment. It is strange, the circumstances in which we often find ourselves. We always hear of children moving back home...but not so often about able-bodied, working parents moving into their children's homes. Now, granted, I hope that (if I am still in the quick and not the dead) if I get so old that I set out on the front porch and snap at people all day, my Child A or Child B will see fit to shelter me in my old age. Of course there is always the possibility that they would simply deposit me into the nearest rest home.
What's that? Sweetie is yelling at me. It seems you are not supposed to call those places REST HOMES! THEY ARE NURSING HOMES, HONEY! I like to think she yelled at me because I am hard of hearing, not because she is upset but is seated on the next cushion over. I could have heard a whisper just as well at that distance. But I digress...
So Sweetie and I have our own apartment again. It brings back memories of the first little honeymoon cottage. We had no real furniture, although someone had donated to us the two essentials, a large evaporative cooler, and a bed. I guess, in retrospect, the cooler was really not an essential. Anyway, so now we have only three pieces of furniture: an entertainment center, a dresser, and a roll top desk. I forgot to mention the two camp chairs, but in the event of company, the visitors will not have ANY furniture. I have a sneaking feeling that Sweetie is about to demand...er, request that trip to the local furniture stores where we can leave the last of our earthly wealth. Moving really drains the bank account, you know. Nonetheless, I am SO happy that we are finally in our semi-final home. Of course there will be the move from the apartment to the house, but since we have not bought the house yet, there is still a little time to recover from the move.
I am so thankful for the help we had last night. Both Child A and Child B participated, as did my ever helpful brother-in-law. My sweet and beautiful sister-in-law told us, however, that we would need to HIRE SOME HELP (I think from the yellow-pages) NEXT @#$!&*%!!^#%% YOU DECIDE TO MOVE!! She did not, at that moment, sound like the dear sister-in-law I have come to know and love. Not to despair, folks. She was herself again after we stopped for victuals at Rosa's. For your trivia pleasure, there do not appear to be any Rosa's Cantinas anywhere near the Houston area. So there is a point in favor of the Permian Basin!
As I sit here, I am slowly becoming more and more aware of the ever-growing number of sore places over my poor and aging sack of bones. Indeed, as I was assisting in moving the entertainment center last night, my muscles literally gave out, and Child A had to take over my end of the furniture. I thanked him profusely as I lay spasming on the living room carpet. But a few minutes later, and with the help of a stick and a spoon, they were able to pour me into the Tahoe for the much anticipated trip to Rosa's. I did not possess the strength to drive to the restaurant. No, my friends, I simply lay puddled in one of the rear seats. By the time we arrived at said eatery, I was able to stumble and crawl under my own power to the order line.
Yes, was truly great to be settle once again...again, and to have all the loved ones there for help and support; and to tote me back to the Tahoe at the conclusion of our evening meal.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
Mexicans Retake Their Town
In a spectacular, but not surprising, turn of events many citizens of the town of Ascension, just south of the New Mexico border, took justice into their own hands. Police had just arrested two kidnapping suspects when they were surrounded by large number of local citizens demanding the police "kill" the suspects. The officers placed the two men an a patrol vehicle and took shelter there themselves, but were unable to leave the area due to the crowd. A helicopter bringing military help was not able to land after other people congregated under it. Ultimately the two suspects died in the heat of the patrol car. But the news reporter noted that many of the people had broken fingers and hands beating these suspects, and that the suspects were bloody and weak-looking when they were first placed in the police car.
As it turns out, the above incident is just one of many that have taken place over the past few months but have gone largely unreported in the United States. More stories like this have been covered in the British, Irish, and even Australian press. The citizens of several Mexican cities have created sophisticated systems of town protection such as armed groups assigned to certain blocks, and others assigned to create road blocks as soon as a kidnapping or other crime is reported. Some incidents have included severed heads left in prominent locations, and notes with the heads warning the DRUG CARTELS "this is what happens to those who kill women and children." One person told reporters that the security committees were not out to interfere with the drug trade, which is none of their business, but only to stop the gang members from terrorizing citizens, extorting from businesses, and kidnapping and killing local residents.
The return to vigilantism was probably inevitable since legal authorities were either helpless to do anything or were part of the cartels. Unfortunately, while the intention of the security committees were noble, the reality is that some of the vigilantes have begun a program of "social cleansing" meaning that people perceived as "criminals," whether associated with the cartels or not, have been harassed, forced to leave their homes, or even "lynched" by the vigilantes. Victims of this social cleansing include pickpockets, burglars, and other petty criminals who have nothing to do with the drug cartels.
From the outside looking in, it is very easy to understand the feelings of the people. There is no sense of security and trust for the police and military, and the weekly, even daily atrocities of the drug cartels go unabated. No wonder citizens have taken the initiative to protect themselves and their property. It appears on the whole that these people are not concerned with "winning the war on drugs" but just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace and (relative) security, the same things you and I desire here in the United States. It is unfortunate that some of the actions of these vigilantes have gone beyond self-protection, but I for one applaud their initiative and their bravery in taking action to protect themselves. Remember, even the legal authorities we know and respect are only "legal authorities" because "we the people" have set these authorities in place.
May God bless the Mexican people and keep the innocent safe as this terrible war goes on.
As it turns out, the above incident is just one of many that have taken place over the past few months but have gone largely unreported in the United States. More stories like this have been covered in the British, Irish, and even Australian press. The citizens of several Mexican cities have created sophisticated systems of town protection such as armed groups assigned to certain blocks, and others assigned to create road blocks as soon as a kidnapping or other crime is reported. Some incidents have included severed heads left in prominent locations, and notes with the heads warning the DRUG CARTELS "this is what happens to those who kill women and children." One person told reporters that the security committees were not out to interfere with the drug trade, which is none of their business, but only to stop the gang members from terrorizing citizens, extorting from businesses, and kidnapping and killing local residents.
The return to vigilantism was probably inevitable since legal authorities were either helpless to do anything or were part of the cartels. Unfortunately, while the intention of the security committees were noble, the reality is that some of the vigilantes have begun a program of "social cleansing" meaning that people perceived as "criminals," whether associated with the cartels or not, have been harassed, forced to leave their homes, or even "lynched" by the vigilantes. Victims of this social cleansing include pickpockets, burglars, and other petty criminals who have nothing to do with the drug cartels.
From the outside looking in, it is very easy to understand the feelings of the people. There is no sense of security and trust for the police and military, and the weekly, even daily atrocities of the drug cartels go unabated. No wonder citizens have taken the initiative to protect themselves and their property. It appears on the whole that these people are not concerned with "winning the war on drugs" but just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace and (relative) security, the same things you and I desire here in the United States. It is unfortunate that some of the actions of these vigilantes have gone beyond self-protection, but I for one applaud their initiative and their bravery in taking action to protect themselves. Remember, even the legal authorities we know and respect are only "legal authorities" because "we the people" have set these authorities in place.
May God bless the Mexican people and keep the innocent safe as this terrible war goes on.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Small Business Falls Victim To The War In Mexico
As the War for the Existence of Mexico continues, there is a group of victims that so far has gone unsung. That is the small businesses trying to grow, or even to simply remain "in business" in the face of the this war. According to Bloomberg Business Magazine http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-06/mexico-s-boom-obscures-harm-done-to-small-companies-by-narcotics-violence.html many small businesses are having to pay the cartels "protection" money simply to keep their doors open. In cities where more than one cartel operates, it is possible that business owners must pay protection to two or more cartels. This of course cuts into the profits of these small businesses. The amount of profit loss cannot be accurately appraised due to lack of statistics on this kind of thing. On top of profit loss, small businesses are losing customers due to the perceived (and ACTUAL) risk of being caught in the sudden gun battles that frequently erupt on the street. For the same reason, it is difficult for some of these businesses to maintain adequate numbers of employees or to protect them at work. In fact, company owners are dressing like employees so that they themselves are not targets of kidnappings for ransom.
On the other hand, large businesses continue to thrive in this unhealthy climate. For one thing, large concerns have the ability to hire security and to fortify their property. Larger businesses are also able to install video systems to curtail illegal activity on or near their property. The resources available to these companies allow them to pressure the police and government to solve crimes involving these businesses or to make sure their properties are adequately patrolled, while the remainder of these cities go virtually without police protection. In fact, according to Bloomberg, several American businesses are actually building new facilities in these war-torn areas, or expanding their existing facilities. Workers in these businesses earn over twice as much as the average municipal officer. It is actually little wonder that many police officers do not want to risk their lives for this kind of pay.
President Calderon, in one of his more lucid moments, has called for the establishment of "unified state police forces" to replace local police. His reasoning is that higher paid, better trained, and better equipped police officers who answer to a central state authority would be more motivated to bring order to Mexican cities and less pressured to look the other way as criminals terrorize the nation. Also, the Mexican people would possibly have more trust and confidence in state police. As it stands, many citizens are afraid to report crime or supply information because they cannot be certain that the very officers they confide in are not working for the cartels. This is a very valid concern, as has been borne out by the arrest of police officers for their involvement with the cartels.
In the meantime, small businesses continue their struggle to survive as the war in Mexico rages on. In Monterrey and its suburbs, as only one example, there have been 954 drug war-related homicides as of October of this year. Over the entire nation the death toll was around 10,000 in the same time period. Small businesses are losing both customers and profits in this war, with many small businesses ultimately closing. Others, though, continue to keep on keeping on in spite of, and possibly in defiance of, the drug cartels' demands for "protection" fees and the constant danger these business owners face, not just in keeping their businesses open, but simply existing, as their cities and their nation fall apart around them.
On the other hand, large businesses continue to thrive in this unhealthy climate. For one thing, large concerns have the ability to hire security and to fortify their property. Larger businesses are also able to install video systems to curtail illegal activity on or near their property. The resources available to these companies allow them to pressure the police and government to solve crimes involving these businesses or to make sure their properties are adequately patrolled, while the remainder of these cities go virtually without police protection. In fact, according to Bloomberg, several American businesses are actually building new facilities in these war-torn areas, or expanding their existing facilities. Workers in these businesses earn over twice as much as the average municipal officer. It is actually little wonder that many police officers do not want to risk their lives for this kind of pay.
President Calderon, in one of his more lucid moments, has called for the establishment of "unified state police forces" to replace local police. His reasoning is that higher paid, better trained, and better equipped police officers who answer to a central state authority would be more motivated to bring order to Mexican cities and less pressured to look the other way as criminals terrorize the nation. Also, the Mexican people would possibly have more trust and confidence in state police. As it stands, many citizens are afraid to report crime or supply information because they cannot be certain that the very officers they confide in are not working for the cartels. This is a very valid concern, as has been borne out by the arrest of police officers for their involvement with the cartels.
In the meantime, small businesses continue their struggle to survive as the war in Mexico rages on. In Monterrey and its suburbs, as only one example, there have been 954 drug war-related homicides as of October of this year. Over the entire nation the death toll was around 10,000 in the same time period. Small businesses are losing both customers and profits in this war, with many small businesses ultimately closing. Others, though, continue to keep on keeping on in spite of, and possibly in defiance of, the drug cartels' demands for "protection" fees and the constant danger these business owners face, not just in keeping their businesses open, but simply existing, as their cities and their nation fall apart around them.
New (To Me) Gizmos Put Bailey Black In "E-Print"
In the process of getting my book, Bailey Black, through the publishing process, I have not only learned that many people like to use Kendle products instead of buying and reading books, but I also learned that there are several other venues for electronic books, such as Literati and Google e-books. My publisher (PublishAmerica) also offers books in e-book form. I am just assuming, from a non-computer geek standpoint, that a person simply purchases an e-book and downloads it to his or her computer. In the interest of those who use these media, Bailey Black will soon be available in the e-format. I love the computer age.
For me, though, I remain a dinosaur as far as new ways to read. I like to curl up in a nice easy chair (a borrowed one as I don't own one yet) and read my books. I much prefer the old fashioned paper books to the electronic ones. The books lined up on bookshelves give me a homey, comfortable feeling that no e-thing could offer. Yes, I know, this is old fashioned. Someone reminded me of all the trees that could be saved if we went to electronic "books" instead of the printed kind. I know that is true. Perhaps my connection to books also reflects my desire to keep the foresters and the paper industry (as well as my publisher) in business. It is a sad fact that "progress" or advancing technology sometimes dooms entire industries. Many times certain segments of industries fall prey to technological innovation. So the printing and publishing business is going.
Actually I will be a very happy person if anyone buys my book in one of its several e-forms. Royalties are royalties after all. I can see the advantages offered buy such things as Kendle and Literati. For instance, many books can be stored on one's reading machine. When traveling, how much more convenient it would be to have all the books you wanted in a device smaller than a single book. It hardly takes any space at all in a person's carry on bag. No doubt as time goes on, the e-readers will become more advanced and offer more features, perhaps eventually merging with I-pads or similar instruments to create fully loaded computers that will be smaller than the one-gig jobs now available.
Technology is always changing, but one constant remains. In a crowd of readers, you will always be able to find me. I am the gray headed guy wearing glasses and reading the only paper book in the room.
For me, though, I remain a dinosaur as far as new ways to read. I like to curl up in a nice easy chair (a borrowed one as I don't own one yet) and read my books. I much prefer the old fashioned paper books to the electronic ones. The books lined up on bookshelves give me a homey, comfortable feeling that no e-thing could offer. Yes, I know, this is old fashioned. Someone reminded me of all the trees that could be saved if we went to electronic "books" instead of the printed kind. I know that is true. Perhaps my connection to books also reflects my desire to keep the foresters and the paper industry (as well as my publisher) in business. It is a sad fact that "progress" or advancing technology sometimes dooms entire industries. Many times certain segments of industries fall prey to technological innovation. So the printing and publishing business is going.
Actually I will be a very happy person if anyone buys my book in one of its several e-forms. Royalties are royalties after all. I can see the advantages offered buy such things as Kendle and Literati. For instance, many books can be stored on one's reading machine. When traveling, how much more convenient it would be to have all the books you wanted in a device smaller than a single book. It hardly takes any space at all in a person's carry on bag. No doubt as time goes on, the e-readers will become more advanced and offer more features, perhaps eventually merging with I-pads or similar instruments to create fully loaded computers that will be smaller than the one-gig jobs now available.
Technology is always changing, but one constant remains. In a crowd of readers, you will always be able to find me. I am the gray headed guy wearing glasses and reading the only paper book in the room.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Mexico's War: Why Does It Matter To US?
Someone asked me recently why I blog about Mexico's Civil/Drug/Government war so often. Why do Mexico's troubles matter to someone in the United States? Who cares? These are good questions, and I will give my version of reasons that "their" war matters to us and has implications for Texas and the other border states.
First, I blog about the war in Mexico because I have a great deal of sympathy for the people that are living through the carnage and watching their loved-ones die day by day. From the time I first heard the story of the Alamo siege, I have had a leaning toward the justified underdog in a fight. It seems that the authorities and civilians in many Mexican cities across many states are at the mercy of whichever cartel(s) may be in control at the time. The people are left almost defenseless against the outrages of the dopers because many police departments are undermanned if not outright abandoned. One citizen against one criminal, maybe that would be an equal match. But usually it is several criminals acting together, terrorizing a town, then escaping to one of the rancherias in the countryside. Anyone who acts against these criminals or aids the authorities is sooner or later dealt with by the cartels. The citizens are at the disadvantage...they are the underdogs at the moment. I hope legal authorities will regroup and retake their nation. In the meantime, I can only look on from a distance and pray for the best for those people caught in the crossfire. And one other thing I can do; I can blog about it and let readers from Mexico know that someone cares about them. I know that is little enough, but it is a morale booster just the same.
Second, why do Mexico's troubles matter to us here in the United States? Actually they matter to anyone who lives close to Mexico or who travels to Mexico. Just ask one unfortunate Canadian family if the Mexico War matters to THEM! If you or I were to travel to the usual border towns, we would face the possibility of crime brought on by the drug dealers crossing back and forth over the border. But even more dangerous, we would be faced with the very real possibility of being struck by stray bullets from the shootouts happening south of the border. It is literally just across the river. Several residents in American border towns have had this very thing happen. So from a safety standpoint, the war in Mexico poses a threat of life and limb for anyone near the border. People traveling along border highways face similar risks. If your loved-ones frequent the border towns, they are constantly in danger.
Another aspect of the Mexican war that concerns us is a selfish angle, I admit, but we can no longer feel safe in crossing the border to visit the Mexican border towns for shopping or to see relatives, and we are not safe when traveling to "safe" places like Cancun or Acapulco. The war has made these tourist attractions just as dangerous as the border towns.
Finally, who cares about Mexico's war? That one is harder to answer. Obviously I care about it. Probably at one level or another you care about it as well. I assure you that if we had to spend a few days there we would probably be more concerned. Bur one thing that should be appalling to us is the death toll since 2006. It has steadily climbed and now stands at nearly thirty thousand, with the count growing daily. I believe that as the war in Mexico goes on and becomes more fierce, as the government allows the situation to get further and further out of control, and as more and more people are murdered, the occasional events that take place in Texas and the other border states will become more common, so that people traveling on the southern highways will no longer be safe. In fact, even Texas law enforcement officers will no longer be safe. Many deputies, policemen, and state troopers patrol lonely, isolated areas where help may be miles away instead of minutes. Game wardens and border patrolmen may inadvertently encounter these criminals. Right now it seems that the drug barons have the advantage even in rural Texas.
So I have ranted on for several lines. What is my solution, you ask? For the troubles in Mexico, I really don't have one. The people must decide to stand with authorities and take on the drug lords, running them out of the towns and the countryside, even killing some if necessary. The criminals are, after all, engaged in a war to take over drug routes. Part of that war means terrorising local citizens into cooperation or at least scaring them so that they look the other way and do not cooperate with the police or military. Mexico's history is one of mistrust of authority, with state governments pitted against the central government, and cities often opposing state and federal rule. Haciendas and rancherias may have their own private armies. In this situation, chaos will continue until the people grant some respect and authority to the government. In return, the Mexican government, at all levels, must operate according to the letter and spirit of the law, and throw off the long history of bribery and corruption that bred mistrust of the government in the first place. So the future of Mexico as a federation of states is entirely in the hands of its citizens.
I do not advocate an American intervention (invasion) of Mexico as our nation has done numerous times in the past. One problem is that American soldiers could not distinguish between law-abiding citizens and the criminals just by looking at the people. Ambush and entrapment would be rampant just like it is currently in Afghanistan and Iraq. I doubt if the "success" rate would be any better in Mexico under those circumstances. On top of that, Mexican citizens would more than likely resent another American occupation of their nation, even if the intention were well-placed.
What I do advocate is an immediate withdrawal of American forces from all the un-winnable wars they are engaged in at the moment. Our forces need to leave Iraq, Afghanistan, the Baltic region, Japan, Guam, to name the ones I actually know about. I read that American forces are stationed in over one hundred nations. I am sure many of these forces could be returned to the United States. These forces could then be deployed along the border with the mission of sealing the border and keeping criminal forces south of the Rio Grande. The Border Patrol could then man its check points and carry out its non-military mission of preventing illegal aliens from entering this country. Our policemen and deputies would be free to pursue their legal responsibilities in the relative safety they did before the drug wars got out of hand. Incidentally, the United States armed forces would be ordered to deal with any incursions with deadly force, not with observe and report orders like the national guard has at the moment. Maybe United States forces, if INVITED into Mexico, could secure pacified areas so that Mexican forces could prosecute the war without fear of losing gains made in combat. Citizens could return to those cities and live their lives again. Instead of training militant Arabs and Muslims, our forces could train Mexicans to establish local defense groups to defend their homes against new incursions by the drug lords.
We, as the United States, have an interest in seeing the Mexican war concluded, for our safety, and for the safety of the Mexican people as well. While an armed invasion of Mexico may not be in order, I believe that United States forces should seal our borders and protect our own citizens. Perhaps with support available from the United States, it may be that the Mexican federal government will take the initiative to regain control of their nation, and protect the lives and property of their people.
First, I blog about the war in Mexico because I have a great deal of sympathy for the people that are living through the carnage and watching their loved-ones die day by day. From the time I first heard the story of the Alamo siege, I have had a leaning toward the justified underdog in a fight. It seems that the authorities and civilians in many Mexican cities across many states are at the mercy of whichever cartel(s) may be in control at the time. The people are left almost defenseless against the outrages of the dopers because many police departments are undermanned if not outright abandoned. One citizen against one criminal, maybe that would be an equal match. But usually it is several criminals acting together, terrorizing a town, then escaping to one of the rancherias in the countryside. Anyone who acts against these criminals or aids the authorities is sooner or later dealt with by the cartels. The citizens are at the disadvantage...they are the underdogs at the moment. I hope legal authorities will regroup and retake their nation. In the meantime, I can only look on from a distance and pray for the best for those people caught in the crossfire. And one other thing I can do; I can blog about it and let readers from Mexico know that someone cares about them. I know that is little enough, but it is a morale booster just the same.
Second, why do Mexico's troubles matter to us here in the United States? Actually they matter to anyone who lives close to Mexico or who travels to Mexico. Just ask one unfortunate Canadian family if the Mexico War matters to THEM! If you or I were to travel to the usual border towns, we would face the possibility of crime brought on by the drug dealers crossing back and forth over the border. But even more dangerous, we would be faced with the very real possibility of being struck by stray bullets from the shootouts happening south of the border. It is literally just across the river. Several residents in American border towns have had this very thing happen. So from a safety standpoint, the war in Mexico poses a threat of life and limb for anyone near the border. People traveling along border highways face similar risks. If your loved-ones frequent the border towns, they are constantly in danger.
Another aspect of the Mexican war that concerns us is a selfish angle, I admit, but we can no longer feel safe in crossing the border to visit the Mexican border towns for shopping or to see relatives, and we are not safe when traveling to "safe" places like Cancun or Acapulco. The war has made these tourist attractions just as dangerous as the border towns.
Finally, who cares about Mexico's war? That one is harder to answer. Obviously I care about it. Probably at one level or another you care about it as well. I assure you that if we had to spend a few days there we would probably be more concerned. Bur one thing that should be appalling to us is the death toll since 2006. It has steadily climbed and now stands at nearly thirty thousand, with the count growing daily. I believe that as the war in Mexico goes on and becomes more fierce, as the government allows the situation to get further and further out of control, and as more and more people are murdered, the occasional events that take place in Texas and the other border states will become more common, so that people traveling on the southern highways will no longer be safe. In fact, even Texas law enforcement officers will no longer be safe. Many deputies, policemen, and state troopers patrol lonely, isolated areas where help may be miles away instead of minutes. Game wardens and border patrolmen may inadvertently encounter these criminals. Right now it seems that the drug barons have the advantage even in rural Texas.
So I have ranted on for several lines. What is my solution, you ask? For the troubles in Mexico, I really don't have one. The people must decide to stand with authorities and take on the drug lords, running them out of the towns and the countryside, even killing some if necessary. The criminals are, after all, engaged in a war to take over drug routes. Part of that war means terrorising local citizens into cooperation or at least scaring them so that they look the other way and do not cooperate with the police or military. Mexico's history is one of mistrust of authority, with state governments pitted against the central government, and cities often opposing state and federal rule. Haciendas and rancherias may have their own private armies. In this situation, chaos will continue until the people grant some respect and authority to the government. In return, the Mexican government, at all levels, must operate according to the letter and spirit of the law, and throw off the long history of bribery and corruption that bred mistrust of the government in the first place. So the future of Mexico as a federation of states is entirely in the hands of its citizens.
I do not advocate an American intervention (invasion) of Mexico as our nation has done numerous times in the past. One problem is that American soldiers could not distinguish between law-abiding citizens and the criminals just by looking at the people. Ambush and entrapment would be rampant just like it is currently in Afghanistan and Iraq. I doubt if the "success" rate would be any better in Mexico under those circumstances. On top of that, Mexican citizens would more than likely resent another American occupation of their nation, even if the intention were well-placed.
What I do advocate is an immediate withdrawal of American forces from all the un-winnable wars they are engaged in at the moment. Our forces need to leave Iraq, Afghanistan, the Baltic region, Japan, Guam, to name the ones I actually know about. I read that American forces are stationed in over one hundred nations. I am sure many of these forces could be returned to the United States. These forces could then be deployed along the border with the mission of sealing the border and keeping criminal forces south of the Rio Grande. The Border Patrol could then man its check points and carry out its non-military mission of preventing illegal aliens from entering this country. Our policemen and deputies would be free to pursue their legal responsibilities in the relative safety they did before the drug wars got out of hand. Incidentally, the United States armed forces would be ordered to deal with any incursions with deadly force, not with observe and report orders like the national guard has at the moment. Maybe United States forces, if INVITED into Mexico, could secure pacified areas so that Mexican forces could prosecute the war without fear of losing gains made in combat. Citizens could return to those cities and live their lives again. Instead of training militant Arabs and Muslims, our forces could train Mexicans to establish local defense groups to defend their homes against new incursions by the drug lords.
We, as the United States, have an interest in seeing the Mexican war concluded, for our safety, and for the safety of the Mexican people as well. While an armed invasion of Mexico may not be in order, I believe that United States forces should seal our borders and protect our own citizens. Perhaps with support available from the United States, it may be that the Mexican federal government will take the initiative to regain control of their nation, and protect the lives and property of their people.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
A Tribute To Hermila Garcia Quinones
Miss Garcia was a brave woman who took a job no one else would. On October 9, 2010 she was appointed police chief of Meoqui, in Chihuahua. She, for her own reasons, elected not to carry weapons as the other officers did. Nonetheless, she was a target just because she stood in the way of the drug cartels. She was assassinated yesterday on her way to work. Two carloads of gunmen against an unarmed woman. She took a post that had been vacant for nearly two years, and that several male officers had refused to take. Being chief of police is a particularly dangerous job in Mexico. The decision she made to be unarmed is beyond me, but she nonetheless willingly took that risk because she wanted to help control the cartels' operations in her town. I have to admire her bravery and her devotion to a task so dangerous and nearly impossible to accomplish. Incidentally, there are three other ladies who have become police chiefs in Mexico cities as no one else would take the "top cop" positions.
I hope Miss Garcia is honored as a hero in her city and nation. She left behind her parents whom she was supporting. She was a lawyer prior to becoming chief of police. Rest In Peace, Chief Garcia
I hope Miss Garcia is honored as a hero in her city and nation. She left behind her parents whom she was supporting. She was a lawyer prior to becoming chief of police. Rest In Peace, Chief Garcia
Public Comment on Waste Texas
It seems that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has opened a period of public comment on the plan to allow up to thirty-six states to dump their radioactive waste in Texas, specifically in West Texas near the New Mexico border, between Andrews, Texas and Eunice, New Mexico. I am always a little skeptical about "periods of public comment." Why? Because it has been my experience that the decision of whatever agency involved with whatever controversy has already been made prior to any pubic comment. I sincerely hope I am wrong, and that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality can still be swayed by public opinion.
I would like to ask any Texan who may read this, or any person, do you really want RADIOACTIVE WASTE in your back yard? Do you really believe the "assurances" of Waste Control Specialists that your water via the Ogallala Aquifer is "safe" from all chances of contamination from a leaking storage facility? The WCS facility is LEAKING NOW! Do you really think it will leak LESS with MORE nuclear waste? Most important of all, though, is this: Do you really want Texas to become the dumping ground for all the radioactive waste in the United States? Think about it. Thirty-six other states DID NOT ALLOW IT, although they are eager to sign onto the DUMP ON WEST TEXAS DEAL! I don't blame citizens in other states for wanting this hazardous material safely out of their states, away from their homes. Do you?
You may think to yourself, this issue does not concern me. I live in Texas, but not in Waste...I mean West Texas. Well, wake up, people of Dallas, Houston, Austin, Waco, Amarillo, and all points in Texas. The hazardous waste bound for Andrews will pass through your city or county on its way to Andrews. The interstates meet in Dallas and Houston before continuing west. Interstate 35 through Waco is a major corridor and an alternate to connections to West Texas. If you do not live along a transport route, you will sooner or later be exposed to the transport trucks as you drive through Texas. If you live along the lower Ogallala Aquifer, of course your drinking water is in immediate danger of contamination. We are all at risk, every single Texan, as well as the people of Eunice, New Mexico.
I am outraged that the plan to dump radioactive waste in Texas was even considered, for the second time. I am even more outraged that the plan now includes waste from thirty-six states. Remember, we are already bound to accept waste from Vermont.
I am outraged (BUT NOT SURPRISED) that our elected officials did not look out for our (THEIR CONSTITUENTS) interest in ratifying the Texas-Vermont Compact in the first place. There is an easily traced money trail from WCS to several elected officials, as documented by several news sources and environmental groups. Those officials were returned to office, in most cases. We were asleep I guess. The commissioners that control the Pact, as well as other officials that secured the WCS dump site near Andrews, were NOT elected and had nothing to lose (of course much to gain) by approving the dump site over the objections of many citizens and in the face of much scientific evidence indicating the instability and unsuitability of the Andrews -Eunice area for a radioactive waste disposal site. As born out by public record, WCS has been cited numerous times for noncompliance with state and federal regulations. And the facility is leaking now.
I am outraged that Mr. Harold Simmons actually used very little of his money to build the disposal facility. The people of Andrews (a lot of them, anyway) actually voted to finance Mr. Simmons with bonds (read YOUR MONEY - NOT HIS), due I suspect to all the people screaming about how Andrews was a dying town and the sky would fall in on this city if the bond were not approved. Fear works, as we know from the passage of the PATRIOT Act. At this point in time, I wonder how many people would like to rethink their vote. It is too late to undue what has been done, but it is not too late to stop the Thirty-Six Plan yet. But it will take a lot of people standing together in the face of a billionaire and all the resources at his disposal.
Even more so, I am outraged that the license granted to WCS allows Mr. Simmons to walk away from the disposal facility at the end of the fifteen year period from the date it was opened. If WCS simply abandons the operation, as they legally can do, I bet you can't guess who becomes the new owner by default. Oh, wait, you can? That's right, the taxpayers of Texas. Remember the people of Texas who are were not "effected" by the WCS facility in Andrews because they live so far away from West Texas? Guess what? THEY will be paying for the cleanup along with residents of the immediate area. The facility will have to be repaired and maintained ad infinity since the waste stored there will not go away for a long, long, long, time. Taxes will go on just as long, too, right up to the second Gabriel blows his horn.
Mr. Simmons should be (but of course IS NOT) ashamed of what he and his organizations have done for this and other states. But, our elected officials and their UNELECTED friends on the various commissions should be even more ashamed. They could have prevented this catastrophe. But money greases a lot of wheels. This money can even be traced to George W. Bush. Is that a surprise? Actually it was to me, but I guess it should not have been. Campaigns need funds. The fund makers need favors. And they get them. I suppose Harold Simmons is probably the safest person from the wreckage and environmental damage he has caused. He can simply get on his jet and vacate the area when Waste Texas becomes too dangerous a place in which to live.
I would like to ask any Texan who may read this, or any person, do you really want RADIOACTIVE WASTE in your back yard? Do you really believe the "assurances" of Waste Control Specialists that your water via the Ogallala Aquifer is "safe" from all chances of contamination from a leaking storage facility? The WCS facility is LEAKING NOW! Do you really think it will leak LESS with MORE nuclear waste? Most important of all, though, is this: Do you really want Texas to become the dumping ground for all the radioactive waste in the United States? Think about it. Thirty-six other states DID NOT ALLOW IT, although they are eager to sign onto the DUMP ON WEST TEXAS DEAL! I don't blame citizens in other states for wanting this hazardous material safely out of their states, away from their homes. Do you?
You may think to yourself, this issue does not concern me. I live in Texas, but not in Waste...I mean West Texas. Well, wake up, people of Dallas, Houston, Austin, Waco, Amarillo, and all points in Texas. The hazardous waste bound for Andrews will pass through your city or county on its way to Andrews. The interstates meet in Dallas and Houston before continuing west. Interstate 35 through Waco is a major corridor and an alternate to connections to West Texas. If you do not live along a transport route, you will sooner or later be exposed to the transport trucks as you drive through Texas. If you live along the lower Ogallala Aquifer, of course your drinking water is in immediate danger of contamination. We are all at risk, every single Texan, as well as the people of Eunice, New Mexico.
I am outraged that the plan to dump radioactive waste in Texas was even considered, for the second time. I am even more outraged that the plan now includes waste from thirty-six states. Remember, we are already bound to accept waste from Vermont.
I am outraged (BUT NOT SURPRISED) that our elected officials did not look out for our (THEIR CONSTITUENTS) interest in ratifying the Texas-Vermont Compact in the first place. There is an easily traced money trail from WCS to several elected officials, as documented by several news sources and environmental groups. Those officials were returned to office, in most cases. We were asleep I guess. The commissioners that control the Pact, as well as other officials that secured the WCS dump site near Andrews, were NOT elected and had nothing to lose (of course much to gain) by approving the dump site over the objections of many citizens and in the face of much scientific evidence indicating the instability and unsuitability of the Andrews -Eunice area for a radioactive waste disposal site. As born out by public record, WCS has been cited numerous times for noncompliance with state and federal regulations. And the facility is leaking now.
I am outraged that Mr. Harold Simmons actually used very little of his money to build the disposal facility. The people of Andrews (a lot of them, anyway) actually voted to finance Mr. Simmons with bonds (read YOUR MONEY - NOT HIS), due I suspect to all the people screaming about how Andrews was a dying town and the sky would fall in on this city if the bond were not approved. Fear works, as we know from the passage of the PATRIOT Act. At this point in time, I wonder how many people would like to rethink their vote. It is too late to undue what has been done, but it is not too late to stop the Thirty-Six Plan yet. But it will take a lot of people standing together in the face of a billionaire and all the resources at his disposal.
Even more so, I am outraged that the license granted to WCS allows Mr. Simmons to walk away from the disposal facility at the end of the fifteen year period from the date it was opened. If WCS simply abandons the operation, as they legally can do, I bet you can't guess who becomes the new owner by default. Oh, wait, you can? That's right, the taxpayers of Texas. Remember the people of Texas who are were not "effected" by the WCS facility in Andrews because they live so far away from West Texas? Guess what? THEY will be paying for the cleanup along with residents of the immediate area. The facility will have to be repaired and maintained ad infinity since the waste stored there will not go away for a long, long, long, time. Taxes will go on just as long, too, right up to the second Gabriel blows his horn.
Mr. Simmons should be (but of course IS NOT) ashamed of what he and his organizations have done for this and other states. But, our elected officials and their UNELECTED friends on the various commissions should be even more ashamed. They could have prevented this catastrophe. But money greases a lot of wheels. This money can even be traced to George W. Bush. Is that a surprise? Actually it was to me, but I guess it should not have been. Campaigns need funds. The fund makers need favors. And they get them. I suppose Harold Simmons is probably the safest person from the wreckage and environmental damage he has caused. He can simply get on his jet and vacate the area when Waste Texas becomes too dangerous a place in which to live.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)