Mexico Connect
Forums  > Areas > Central Pacific Region
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


Poncho32

Apr 14, 2010, 8:03 PM

Post #26 of 34 (5730 views)

Shortcut

Re: [wearechange] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
On both sides of the border we are gradually headed towards a police state.

This is a bunch of bull.
Both the U.S. and Mexico understand to the 10 th degree that both nations have to work together to get the present problem under control.

With out good law enforcement and back up by the government on both sides where does the author of the above statement think we would end up?
Is there any doubt?
Bud Crest


wearechange

Apr 17, 2010, 12:33 PM

Post #27 of 34 (5664 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Bud Crest] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
To get the present problem under control, huh? On the Mexican side the drug cartels have gained power and influence due to corruption at all government levels. In Italy they attacked corruption head on in order to put the mafia in check. Here in Mexico it seems that corruption is not part of the "drug war". In the States I rarely if ever, read about soldiers and police officers dying left and right like here in Mexico. Can you recall the last drug kingpin taken down in the States? You do realize they exist?
Terrorism, drug wars and the like are just a foot in the door towards a police state. Most of the elderly I speak to comment that they perceived more freedom in the past. My parting shot on this day: the Mexican Constitution prohibits roadblocks/checkpoints but as you can see for yourself they can be found very easily. Sorry for taking so long to further expand on my bull but I was too busy fighting/educating people about the New World Order now called Global Governance.

wearechange.org
radioliberty.org
infowars.com


tonyburton


Apr 17, 2010, 12:42 PM

Post #28 of 34 (5664 views)

Shortcut

Re: [wearechange] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
"the Mexican Constitution prohibits roadblocks/checkpoints..."

I learn something every day - can you please provide the details of where this appears?
Thanks, Tony


Rolly


Apr 17, 2010, 2:37 PM

Post #29 of 34 (5649 views)

Shortcut

Re: [tonyburton] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
The Constitution as of 2009 can be found here in English.

A word search did not return any reference of roadblock, checkpoint, or any variation of the words.

I think that myth is Busted.

Rolly Pirate


Reefhound


Apr 17, 2010, 3:50 PM

Post #30 of 34 (5637 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Rolly] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
Unlikely you'll find those specific words. Looks to be a creative interpretation of sections of Article 16:

No order of apprehension and detention can be issued except by the judicial authority

In all search orders, which only the judicial authority has the power to execute, and which will be written, the place to be inspected will be stated, and also the person or persons to be apprehended and the objects to be looked for.


All constitutions and other legal documents are largely a matter of interpretation - why we have courts and lawyers. I know nothing of how the Mexican judiciary has interpreted and ruled on the above (or any other) clauses.


Brian

Apr 17, 2010, 7:34 PM

Post #31 of 34 (5611 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Rolly] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
"A word search did not return any reference of roadblock, checkpoint, or any variation of the words.

I think that myth is Busted. "


I wouldn't look at an English translation for the info. Instead go to Google and enter the search terms "Mexico constitucion reten". It will reveal a whole host of articles about this subject and, from what I can tell, the Human Rights Commission has been complaining for years about this issue. Here is just one example. As far as the retenes are concerned, it is argued that the Army is unlawfully obstructing freedom of movement as outlined in Article 11.

http://www.mizitacuaro.com/...la-constitucion.html

Similarly, Article 16 prevents cateos without a warrant. That first article is a couple of years old and I haven't seen anything to indicate that these constitutional liberties have been suspended either by the Mexican judiciary or the chief executive. I believe that in times of emergency, such suspensions can be effected but only for a brief duration and with respect to specific individuals rather than the citizens at large. I may be misreading this and would welcome any input from those knowledgeable about Mexican jurisprudence.

http://naconius-mexico.blogspot.com/2010/04/algunos-articulos-de-la-constitucion.html

Brian


(This post was edited by Brian on Apr 17, 2010, 8:32 PM)


Brian

Apr 18, 2010, 5:54 AM

Post #32 of 34 (5566 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Brian] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
Today's paper contains an article about the proposed passage of a Mexican Homeland Security Act. It would balance the need to use federal troops with the right of citizens to remain secure in their homes and personal life. The Army would be held accountable for any human rights violations that might occur as a result of actions they take in the course of their duties. This has been lacking in the past and has caused considerable concern especially for those living in the parts of Mexico most affected by the war on drugs.

http://www.correo-gto.com.mx/notas.asp?id=157000

Brian


(This post was edited by Rolly on Apr 18, 2010, 7:26 AM)


Casa

Apr 18, 2010, 8:17 AM

Post #33 of 34 (5541 views)

Shortcut

Re: [Brian] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
Just Google or search Youtube "cateos ilegales militares"................

There are a great many examples of article 16 not being respected.

Here is an excerpt from one example:

El miércoles pasado la ciudadana Ethel Contreras denunció públicamente que presuntos elementos del Ejército Mexicano ingresaron, sin una orden de cateo la noche del pasado martes, a su departamento localizado en el conjunto habitacional Chahué, de donde habrían sustraído dinero en efectivo y tarjetas bancarias.
Operativos similares ocurrieron esa misma noche en dos domicilios ubicados en los sectores V y U, respectivamente, en donde los jefes de familia fueron obligados –una vez que los uniformados comprobaron que no había ilícito alguno– a firmar un documento en el que los moradores supuestamente otorgaron su consentimiento para el ingreso de los soldados.


“Lo hicieron para ocultar o tratar de justificar que fue una acción ilegal”, explicó un abogado penalista residente en esta localidad.


Conforme a informes dados a conocer recientemente por la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH) la mayoría de las mil 602 quejas en contra de efectivos militares que recibió la institución en 2007 y 2008 están vinculadas a cateos ilegales, tratos crueles y degradantes, ejercicio indebido de funciones, detenciones arbitrarias, robos, amenazas e intimidación.



carltmon

Apr 27, 2010, 6:42 PM

Post #34 of 34 (5418 views)

Shortcut

Re: [wearechange] The road north.

Can't Post | Private Reply
My, how things get stirred up here is sort of refreshing. I left out the stuff about my dog and how the military guys just dont want anything to do with her, a chocolate lab, when we get to those pesky search areas the first thing we notice is how they grip there rifles tighter then wave us through. I love my dog and enjoy how she protects the truck. I can leave it running and walk away knowing the truck will be ok.
carltmon
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 
Search for (advanced search) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.4