American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Mexico Drug Gangs Now Entrenched in U.S.

More news stories on Crime

Newsmax, April 23, 2009

{snip}

As violence spirals across the border in Mexico, law enforcement officials on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas say they have not seen significant spillover.

But while American border towns have not seen anything remotely approaching the blood-stained carnage of some north Mexican cities where rival drug cartels are in a high-stakes war that killed over 6,000 people last year, criminal street and prison gangs have long been a way of life in south Texas.

And while the links they may have to the Mexican cartels are often murky there are concerns that the drug lords to the south can tap this ready-made criminal infrastructure for a range of nefarious purposes.

In semi-rural Hidalgo County which lies to the north of the Rio Grande River separating Texas and Mexico, Sheriff Guadalupe Trevino reckons that there are about two dozen hardcore gangs operating—a staggering number for a county with about 750,000 people.

{snip}

The extent of the problem—the gangs often keep their fighting among themselves—is hard to comprehend driving past citrus orchards or down the busy roads leading to the border. Some of the towns here are among the safest in the country.

But driving in poor, run-down neighborhoods in an unmarked SUV, heavily armed members of Trevino’s elite gang enforcement unit point out gang graffiti scrawled on the sides of ramshackle homes. “Brown Pride” and “Tri-City Bombers” are among the many gangs competing for local turf.

The unit pulls over one heavily tattooed and shabbily dressed young man walking with a limp. It transpires that he has a small amount of marijuana on him in violation of his parole and so he is arrested, cuffed and put in the SUV. The limp is from an old gunshot wound.

{snip}

Gangs and their culture of violence, drugs and crime are one of America’s pressing social ills. But in the borderlands the problem has an urgency that has federal investigators worried.

“In the United States the local gangs play a major role in the distribution of the drugs brought in from Mexico. In southern California there has been significant cooperation between the drug cartels and the gangs there,” said Matthew J. Desarno, acting unit chief of the Safe Streets and Gang Unit at Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters.

{snip}

In other small border towns such as Douglas in Arizona, hardened gangs from Los Angeles are carving out turf as part of a scramble to make money from the tons of illegal drugs pouring north from Mexico each month.

NO HONOR AMONG THIEVES

Investigators and police say cross-border links between the cartels and gangs face one obstacle more formidable than the Rio Grande River: trust.

The cartels will deal with the U.S. gangs on some levels but there are clear lines in the sand. Business stays in the family.

“The gangs are a resource for them but not their primary resource. I’ve been working this for 37 years and the Mexican drug dealer is a very parochial individual. He will rather deal with a family member than someone just entering the business,” said Sheriff Trevino.

The FBI’s Desarno says for example that the Mexican drug lords would not entrust an American gang with the task of bringing large quantities of cash—the profits of their trade—back to Mexico.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on April 24, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — Flamethrower wrote at 6:18 PM on April 24:

This is another problem created by stupid self destructive marxist Whites. The solution? Make drugs legal, make mexicans illegal.

Drug money is the life blood of organized crime. The drug war is nothing put a price support system for organized crime and a jobs program for law enforcement. For the American people, it is a shakedown. Stupid marxist Whites learned nothing from the past(Prohibition). They live in an ivory insane asylum.

On top of all this we have a welfare state and affirmative action. Our troops are in foreign countries killing people who are not and have never been a threat to us while leaving our Southern border undefended. Police are forbidden to pick up and detain obvious foreign invaders.

Do Whites even deserve to survive?

2 — Anonymous wrote at 6:31 PM on April 24:

““Brown Pride” and “Tri-City Bombers” are among the many gangs competing for local turf.”

They form gangs, because for thousands of years they’ve
always had them, but the were classified as tribes.

3 — Bobby wrote at 2:47 AM on April 25:

Most Americans have their heads so far up their kazoo’s, that the infestation of Mexican gangs selling drugs in communities throughout the U.S. seems meaningless to them. Afterall, what’s that compared to worrying about whether the SUV might be repossesed? When you consider that you are talking about millions of American citizens who are parents with young children, and none of this bothers them enough to take action in every state they live in—what else is there to argue about on this issue?

4 — mark wrote at 12:00 PM on April 25:

I agree with the critical accuracy of Flamethrower concerning the ironies he has pointed out, but I have one worry: I wonder if it is too late. We may be past the point of no return when it comes to the stimulation of the drug black market via prohibition. I wonder if the drying up of drug money would turn the gangs into outright terrorists who would gain through kidnapping and robbery what had been lost through legalization of drugs. That kind of terrorist would be too much for the constabulary to handle. We would see real losses amongst the police; ten times the number of police killed in action. They don’t want that, for sure.
Here we come across a riddle: that the government will allow certain types of crimes to flourish to a certain point, but will shy away from ending that type of crime for fear of greater crime, even though the government had the power to prevent the crime in the first place. In other words, to a degree crime is a stimulus to government and is permitted to exist. The government knows the costs and benefits calculations of the drug war all too well. They’re pretty smart that way…aren’t they?
Maybe I am cynical; maybe they aren’t smart at all. Maybe the lessons of Prohibition were plainly there and were not heeded. Maybe the war on Drugs is really a war on Dregs; maybe the police just like arresting people they consider immoral regardless of the deteriorating overall situation.

5 — Californian wrote at 1:35 PM on April 25:

One more example of the collapse of the frontiers, ala Rome post 378AD.

Anyway, the US wanted a drug war and it got one. The drug war has been allowed to go on forever without any serious strategy for it, nor consideration of the alternative of decriminalization. It has become a running sore which has returned to haunt us. Oh well, what do Americans care, hey, what’s on “American Idol” this week?

6 — Anonymous wrote at 11:52 PM on April 25:

I live in Atlantic City and the other day while driving to work, I noticed gang grafitti declaring the presence of Los Norteños sprayed on one of the supports for an overpass for the AC Expressway. It was in huge letters more the two feet high and stretched across the entire width of the support. The tag is quite ornate and must have taken quite a while to do.

7 — Anonymous wrote at 10:04 AM on April 26:

This is a “false flag” operation by our “government”. A “false flag” operation is a government sponsored “event” that supports, promotes, or allows a disaster or situation to happen in order to further one’s aims or to defuse political opposition.
By allowing “drug gangs” into the USA, our present “regime” can push “gun control” measures that will eventually attempt to disarm Americans.
If you want to stop the “drug gangs” put our MILITARY at the border. Of course, this would hamper the democrats who need them for “votes and the republicans who need them for “jobs Americans won’t do”.
Why do we need a Department of “homeland security” (kgb)? Isn’t that what the “Department of Defense” is for?

8 — SKIP wrote at 2:05 PM on April 26:

Why do we need a Department of “homeland security” (kgb)? Isn’t that what the “Department of Defense” is for?

Good point, I recall having the words in affect saying “to defend and protect the U.S. from ALL ENEMIES, both FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC!!! I think the U.S. has more DOMESTIC enemies now, how many people are in Congress and Senate now??

9 — SKIP wrote at 2:07 PM on April 26:

The drug war has been allowed to go on forever without any serious strategy for it, nor consideration of the alternative of decriminalization.

We could wage a good war if the military Special Ops people were ungloved. We know WHO, we know WHERE, we know HOW, we know WHEN and we know WHAT. One simply CANNOT ask for a better target illumination than that. No prisoners.

10 — Peejay in Frisco wrote at 6:40 PM on April 26:

The war on drugs is just another prohibition in steroids.There would be a lot less problems with drug use, incarceration, and violence if drugs were simply partly decriminilized.The European countries have a far more realistic approach to them.

11 — Alienated-American wrote at 9:35 PM on April 27:

Why do we need a Department of “homeland security” (kgb)? Isn’t that what the “Department of Defense” is for?

Good question. One possible motive is public relations. The American people do not understand organization. They think simply by creating a department supposedly dedicated to a task, that the task will be accomplished more effectively, for example the DEA, DOE, and the DHS. Anyone who is knowledgeable in management science, knows this is not the case.

Another motive might be the fear that governments have for the police and military. All governments need force to control their enemies, both internal and domestic, but these goon squads also must have the capability of attacking their governments. This has happened many times, and governments are acutely aware of the possiblity. A solution is for governments to divide up police and military capabilities into many separate organizations which can, if necessary, be used against one another.

A good example is the FBI and the BATFE; they are both Federal police organizations connected to different branches of the Federal government, Treasury and Justice. Organizationally, this is inefficient, but keeps the power of the FBI to a reasonable level. Another example is the Marine corps and the Army: if one came under the control of revolutionaries, the other could be used against it. Also, the Navy has its own combat aircraft, under the control of the Navy, not the Air Force. Interservice rivalry is a factor in this duplication, but governmental paranoia is probably another.


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search