Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Takes On a Mexican Drug Cartel
New submitter NarcoTraficante writes "After one of their members was kidnapped in Veracruz, Mexico by the Zetas drug cartel, Mexican Anonymous members have issued an ultimatum to the Zetas in a recently posted YouTube video. The video demands the release of the kidnapped member and threatens to publish information of cartel members and affiliates in Veracruz if the victim is not released by November 5. The Houston Chronicle article warns that there will be bloodshed if Anonymous publishes information on the Zeta's operations, either perpetrated by rival cartels or reprisal attacks by the Zetas themselves."
Politicians cannot stop the war on drugs. Too many votes, I mean jobs depend on it.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
They claim to have the identities of corrupt police officers and journalists. That could prove more useful.
After all of the money spent fighting them, it would be ironic if a bunch of hackers brought the cartels down.
If Anonymous releases info, they will be lucky if they are the only ones that are killed. These cartels don't just go after you. They go after you, your family, and your friends. They are extremely ruthless, and extremely smart. The prisoner they have, if he's not already dead, is getting worked over pretty good right now, and they will get him to talk. Then they'll kill him. Anonymous is in over their heads. It's one thing to deface some websites, or DDOS some banking websites. It's different to go after a group that is well armed and not restrained by morality and laws.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
This is not exactly the first online community that has been victimized by the Mexican drug cartels lately. ...So if Anonymous has the muy macho cajones, and it seems they do... I wish them well in their endeavors.
http://www.npr.org/2011/09/23/140745739/mexican-drug-cartels-now-menace-social-media
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
because the police make a %^&*( ton of money off the drug trade. they don't want to stop it either. a lot of the police districts in the south near the Mexican border when they seize drugs going north they get money from the feds. when they seize cash going south to the cartel's they get to keep it and add it to their budget.
if they solve the problem they will lose money, and they don't want that.
The Zetas will have to worry about the other cartels coming for them and their allies if the names are released.
If there's anything more important than my ego around here, I want it caught and shot immediately.
"Anonymous" isn't a single group, it's whatever the fuck people want it to be. "Anonymous" has been responsible for hacking kiddie porn sites, yet at the same time trolling sites for people with epilepsy by putting flashing images on them. Those two "anonymous" groups are clearly not the same. Anyone can do whatever and say it's anonymous, there are even groups that don't frequent /b/, it's just a free for all and an excuse to do whatever.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
Mexico is a sovereign nation. Did you stop to think how condescending it sounds to say we "let" Mexico do anything? We've already flooded northern Mexico with people from various US government agencies. What's your plan? Shall we send in the army, too? Who will we fight?
The US government sold the cartels thousands of guns, which have been used to kill hundreds of people including police officers and politicians. I'm sure the Mexicans would be just as happy not to have much more "help" from the US.
Are you unfamiliar with the "Mérida Initiative"("Plan Mexico" to skeptics)? For reasons, um, wholly unrelated to that incident where the border between Mexico and the US shifted abruptly some time back, Mexico takes considerable offense at the idea of US troops on its soil. We've settled for rolling out just about all the various instruments of policy-by-proxy we have available there and elsewhere in Latin America(Plan Columbia, Central American Regional Security Initiative, Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, likely the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation in some capacity)
We've carefully avoided doing anything terribly effective; because Prohibition 2.0 is Going Just Fine Thanks For Asking; but unless our plans involve a shooting war with Mexico, an overt military presence in the area seems unlikely(and dubiously productive, most drug production is protected by means other than brute force, which makes soldiers less useful than they might be).
And if Anonymous were primarily operating in or near Mexico, that would be a grave cause for concern. Given that Anonymous is primarily European or from the northern parts of the US, they're less of a physical threat. I highly doubt the Mexican cartels can easily strike at people living in Boston, or Washington, or Vancouver, or London, or Moscow. They're very powerful within their domain, but they don't have much reach.
Additionally, Anonymous is generally pretty good at remaining anonymous. The prisoner they have probably doesn't have much more information on the others than aliases, perhaps vague geographic areas.
Still, I don't think Anonymous has all that much ability to strike at the cartels, either. They're decent at taking down websites, but the cartels don't have any. They're good at digging up embarrassing information, but drug lords aren't public figures that can be shamed out of office. It's a classic stalemate - neither side can seriously affect the other.
You missed the point - anonymous isn't trying to end the drug cartels - they want the release of a certain person or they'll expose all the cartels "partners" - the crooked cops, politicians, newswriters, etc., who are enablers.
Then the other cartels go after that cartels partners-in-crime - either by co-opting them, or eliminating them if they don't play ball. The problem with co-opting them is they're not all that useful once it's known they're crooked.
Another side effect is that's one cartel less to worry about.
So anonymous takes out kiddie porn rings, exposes crooked politicians and cops and drug dealers ... someone want to remind me of how they're supposed to be the bad guys here when they're doing the jobs that the cops and politicians won't touch?
International drug trade is pretty high-tech these days. If Anonymous was able to strike Freedom Hosting for child porn, they'll at least inconvenience places like Silk Road.
The drug lords are sitting unashamed and well-armed in Mexico, but the infrastructure that finances them is all over the world, on the internet, and likely tied to people who can be shamed and arrested.
So why are they getting their panties in a bunch over what a bunch of nerds publish about them? And kidnapping people that they believe to be part of Anon?
Given the PR that they like to generate about themselves, I'd say they are very sensitive about both details concerning their operations and their public image. Perhaps Anon can hurt them in ways that the Mexican authorities cannot. Anon doesn't give a sh*t about which politicians get taken down with the cartels, so that's one factor in their favor. Anon isn't constrained by laws the same way the police are. There are no rules of evidence, court issued warrants, civil rights, etc. that they have to concern themselves about. As long as they can keep themselves physically secure, its game on for the cyber war. Keep in mind that Mexican Anon doesn't necessarily have to be located in Mexico. Its going to be tough for the Zetas to reach out and touch someone posting from Boise, Idaho. Unfortunately, the person they have kidnapped will probably have to be written off as dead.
The other advantage that Anon has is that they can tailor their releases of info to instigate inter-cartel warfare. The Mexican police may be unwilling or unable to act. But the competition next door will be more than happy to take their enemies out.
Have gnu, will travel.
This has nothing to do with the USA (assuming that's what you meant by "we"). The threat is that they will publish a list of police officers, politicians journalists, etc. aligned with the Zetas. The competing cartels then kill them in the hope of weakening the Zetas - I don't think they are strong on needing proof.
Anonymous is threatening the Zetas with exposure to get their member released, they aren't threatening all the cartels.
I don't think you're reading his statement correctly. I'm not sure you can read any justification for sovereign manipulation into his statements. He's simply saying that if we insist on putting troops in other countries to suit our interests (which includes nations we like, by the way, such as Japan, Germany, and Turkey) why do we ignore that option when an immediate neighbor has paramilitary uprisings in border territories?
Asking why we're pursuing the imperial option stupidly and inconsistently doesn't mean he's justifying the imperial option itself.
You can pic any issue of Proceso magazine to read about corruption in Mexico, the Anonymous list will be used or can be used to falsely flag people in the payroll of cartels. We have already big troubles with the anonymous report of innocent people as members of cartels or kidnappers, we don't need a list made by script kiddies. My grandmother was falsely accused of being a kidnapper and had her house stormed by the army, my uncle beaten and my cousin sent to the hospital. In the end, it appeared that the ones doing the tip were the actual kidnappers to make a big fuss in my grandmother's small town were she is a loved and respected citizen, the kidnappers got away. Due process exist for a very good reason, laws were not written by tree hugging hippies, they were wrote by victorious revolutionaries that put their life in the line to make a better society.
Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
Of course there is. The anti-drug establishment is huge. Not only does it employ tons of people in law enforcement, but it allows a lot of otherwise law-abiding people to be incarcerated, which supports the penal system, which is a huge industry and has a lot of influence on our legislature.
Considering modus operandi of Los Zetas, I would fully expect the person in question to be released - as a set of disjoint parts, and probably with a video detailing the process.
Remember, when they call them "ultra-violent", it's not an overstatement. It's a cartel that thrives on violence and terror it begets to control their areas.
Anonymous is already aware of that. So, when doing nothing is going to result in your aforementioned scenario, why not try something different, if only to make them - and everyone else - think twice about jacking a member of Anonymous.
Anonymous is just using the same logic as the Russians did - and if you recall, it worked. And they're in a better position to do it than the Russians were, because it's not like the drug cartel can target other members of Anonymous. So the cartel really has only two choices - release the hostage, or lose a lot more than "an eye for an eye."
You have an interesting definition of "let the Cartels get away with it". A more accurate definition might be "actively aid and abet these activities via material support and large quantities of funding".
A truly ridiculous aspect of the drug traffic issue is that the United States hasn't managed to control the infiltration of people across the border; the illegal immigrant problem has apparently reached epic proportions! Can the US actually expect to be able to control the movements of much smaller packages that drugs and money can be smuggled back and forth in?
As for your "less incentives for the drugs to come here in the first place" plan, I agree wholeheartedly. Legalizing marijuana would be a phenomenal step in social management, as well as reducing the financial support we give to entities we can nearly all agree should not be profiting from us. I don't think it will "drop the value of all those illegal [drug] runs to zero", since we have pharmaceuticals crossing both the Mexican and the Canadian borders on a daily basis - apparently, it's orders of magnitude cheaper to ignore the patent-based monopolies in the US and acquire (supposedly) the exact same chemicals quasi-legally over the border; at least, that's what the spam in my inbox seems to indicate. Not just for "V1@GR@", but a wide array of prescription medications, everything from pain pills to antibiotics.
Marijuana has been clinically proven to be less physically damaging than either tobacco or alcohol (both of which are legal, albeit age-restricted), even with long-term usage. It keeps the (consuming) population docile, and it's incredibly cheap. Taxing it sounds like a great idea, but even just decriminalizing it would hit the drug cartels harder than sending 100,000 troops down to shoot at them, and it would hurt them where it matters: in the wallet. Why import it from Mexico, when it's so much less expensive to get it (literally, even) from your own back yard?
Marijuana grows in just about any conditions, that's part of the reason for the nickname "weed". Outlawing it is akin to outlawing carbon dioxide; how do you stop it? It has taken decades of strenuous effort to get rid of most of the "naturally occurring" cannabis growing alongside our nation's highways, never mind in a planter on someone's back porch. Criminalizing marijuana has simply given the cartels a (in effect, government-granted) monopoly on its production and distribution.
Patty Hearst and the paper industry were responsible for outlawing marijuana in the first place, because it was an economic threat - it's cheaper to make paper from marijuana than from trees. An acre of cannabis produces more paper than an acre of trees, because you can harvest every month instead of every few years. An acre of cannabis also produces more oxygen per year than an acre of trees - and it grows faster than the trees, with much less maintenance required, making it a much more renewable resource with a smaller carbon footprint. Add in the fact that you can grow hemp in a field with other plants, whereas trees pretty much exclude anything except grass, and the hemp seems (from an objective view) to become much more economically viable and environmentally friendly than many other products.
Hemp fiber is extremely versatile, and can be used to make all kinds of things that are currently made from less renewable resources - paper, clothing, rope, and even plastics and bio-fuels have been made from hemp. For example, replacing cotton with hemp would increase production by several orders of magnitude - cotton requires an entire growing season to become usable, whereas hemp is mature and ready for harvest in a much shorter time, allowing multiple "growing seasons" in the same amount of time; in addition, the cotton is confined to boles, whereas nearly the entire hemp plant is useful for its fibers.
As for its use in "self-medicating", it is interesting to note that "industrial" hemp has so little THC in it that it's barely measurable - you could smoke an e
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Uhh, actually, this has a LOT to do with the USA.
The United States' "War on Drugs" is the root cause of all that violence in Mexico. And, NAFTA helped to deprive the common man in Mexico of his livelihood, mostly small farmers, thereby driving more recruits into the cartels. Add to that, the fact that there are now about 20 million lawbreaking illegal aliens in the United States. Some indeterminate number of those illegals are also members of Zeta and other cartels.
Everything drug related has to do with the United States. Everything.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Petty rivalry like this will only keep the machine rolling...it will not change anything.
The most effective way to defeat the Mexican drug cartels is very, very simple.
Take away their money.
No money, no power base, and that's that.
The most effective way to take away their money is equally simple:
Legalize their product. Put it under proper federal quality regulation and have legitimate taxpaying law-abiding businesses sell it.
In one action you simultaneously create millions of legitimate and sorely-needed jobs, and also instantly dis empower the strongest criminal segment of our society.
The war on drugs has empowered the worst of humans, and has utterly failed to restrict the supply of drugs available to our children in their schools. This approach to keeping our kids safe is thoughtless and does far, far more harm than good (which is no good at all). This is always the *inescapable* consequence of making highly-desired commodities illegal. More money wasted on law enforcement will only add fuel to the flames.
Keep kids off drugs by educating them about the dangers, not by ensuring that they must share a world full of extremely wealthy and powerful criminal drug lords who have no qualms about lacing food with drugs to get children addicted, or kidnapping and murdering them to get their own way.
Of course, the two biggest opponents of the clear-and-obvious-right-thing-to-do are:
1) conservative religious types who utterly lack the capacity for basic critical thinking
2) The drug lords themselves, who profit greatly from the fact that drugs are illegal
Honestly, I am not sure which is worse....the evil...or the stupid.
You can pic any issue of Proceso magazine to read about corruption in Mexico, the Anonymous list will be used or can be used to falsely flag people in the payroll of cartels. We have already big troubles with the anonymous report of innocent people as members of cartels or kidnappers, we don't need a list made by script kiddies. My grandmother was falsely accused of being a kidnapper and had her house stormed by the army, my uncle beaten and my cousin sent to the hospital. In the end, it appeared that the ones doing the tip were the actual kidnappers to make a big fuss in my grandmother's small town were she is a loved and respected citizen, the kidnappers got away. Due process exist for a very good reason, laws were not written by tree hugging hippies, they were wrote by victorious revolutionaries that put their life in the line to make a better society.
So, your bitching about anonymous, using an example that has actually nothing to do with what anonymous is doing, but with corrupt or stupid ass police officals, who decided that a "tip" they received was enough proof to terroize your family.
Sounds to me like your just angry.
You know, the police in your grandma's town probably are working with the kidnappers, and used it as an excuse to beat some sense into your family. Because by your post, you need it.
ARMY, ARMY moron. The police in the town was used to deal only with domestic violence and the occasional brawl in the bar, not to face tugs with RPG's, AK-47 and Barret guns. The next door neighbor was kidnapped 7 months ago, a honest hard working man, leader of the real main opposition party in that municipality. His family now only expect to find his body. I can't visit my sick grandmother because the road is too dangerous to do that trip, so please go and fuck yourself. You don't know nothing.
The only proof that Anonymous will show if only they show a list with names will be their word. For less than that people as died at the hands of the army, the police and criminal gangs. The problem in Mexico is systemic, we have a impunity rate in crime of 98-99%, more than half of the population below poverty line and half of the nation's wealth in the hands of less than 40 families that monopolize all the economic life in the country. For a big percentage of our population the only chance to ever improve their lives is to emigrate to the USA or join a crime cartel. The first step is to break the monopolies, end the impunity at the top and send to jail all the corrupt politicians that rule the country, but, since they are allies of the USA like that SOB of Musarraf or Pinochet is hard to make it happen, even more when the DEA and ATF send happily thousands of guns to the criminal gangs and the US DoD even more weapons to the army.
Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
I really think you don't understand 'Anonymous' at all. There is no 'Anonymous', 'Anonymous' is anonymous to itself. You do not join 'Anonymous', you either carry out activities in the name of 'Anonymous' anonymously or you do not.
In any case, when you comes to oppression, you either resist and work to end it or you live in fear and die when others choose to make you a random example anyhow.
The drug war is an insane activity of a corrupted organisation, the US government, designed it seems to promote pharmaceutical profits, allow the CIA a ready source of income, a means by which to destabilise other countries by forcing them to participate in drug war (whilst surreptitiously supporting the drug dealers ie money laundering and of course keeping the drugs illegal), ensure inflated profits for privatised prisons, maintain a massive anti-drug operation to suppress challenges to the status quo, allow intelligence operations to enter foreign countries masquerading as drug enforcement agents or paradoxically as drug dealers and of course the number one to win votes with the 'we're tough on crime' bullshit (of course excluding muggings, house break ins, car thefts, purse snatching, home invasions, crimes that affect the majority because, they are to busy chasing and convicting drug users).
The best war to declare war on violent criminals involved in the drug trade is to legalise drugs, quite simply bankrupt them.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
He does have a point. We declared the war on drugs. No one else. And barring the war drugs, legit pharmaceutical companies would be who provided the dugs (of a much higher quality) - NOT cartels. Cartels wouldn't have a chance at even competing with big business
Add to that both the Netherlands and Portugal who have (basically) stopped the war on drugs, and have found that their drug problems drastically decreased. (You can start here if you aren't already aware of what i'm trying to explain: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html) and it should be clear that we are definitely partly to blame for these problems. i suppose human nature and greed would be where the rest of the blame falls....
Comment removed based on user account deletion