Watch Yourselves In LAREDO

[chefdennis]

I am sure most of us have heard about the drug cartel wars in Nuevo Laredo Mexico, well it looks like these wars have crosed over into LAREDO TEXAS...but according those suing the state of Arizona, the borders are afer then they ever have been.....

BREAKING: MULTIPLE RANCHES IN LAREDO, TX TAKEN OVER BY LOS ZETAS

Published 07/24/2010 - 2:30 p.m. CST
BREAKING: MULTIPLE RANCHES IN LAREDO, TX TAKEN OVER BY LOS ZETAS - TheCypressTimes

*See the link above for a map of the locations of these ranch

UPDATE: Story is now 100% confirmed by second source within the Laredo Police Department


The bloodbath continues along our southern border and now word is coming in that Los Zetas, the highly trained killers formerly with the Gulf Cartel, have crossed into the United States and taken over at least two ranches in the Laredo, Texas area. I am receiving word that the owners of the ranches have evacuated without being harmed.

Founder of the San Diego Minutemen Jeff Schwilk tipped me off to this story and passes along the following information on the location. The ranches are said to be "near Mines Rd. and Minerales Annex Rd about 10 miles NW of I-35".

Update - Statement from Mr. Schwilk)

I can personally vouch that this info came in late last night from a reliable police source inside the Laredo PD. There is currently a standoff between the unknown size Zeta forces and U.S. Border Patrol and local law enforcement on two ranches on our side of the Rio Grande. The source tells us he considers this an "act of war" and that the military is needed on the border now!

Whether it is lone members or squads is not certain.

Anonymous sources in law enforcement in the Laredo area tonight have passed on word that US law enforcement agencies are in the area and are weighing their options regarding the ranches. The media has been silent on this incident and some law enforcement in the area says that they are furious that the media is not reporting the whole story of the continued violence along the border. Their frustrations are understandable because keeping the truth suppressed continues to hamper law enforcement from receiving the true support they need along the border.

The ranch assaults come on the heels of attacks in Nuevo Laredo that shut the city down as a gun-battle raged in the streets. Los Zetas blocked off intersections with vehicles and used fragmentation grenades to attack Mexican law enforcement. In the end 12 were killed and 21 injured in the assaults. Citizens in the area were told to stay in their homes and bullets whizzed all around.

Cypress Times

The U.S. Consulate in Nuevo Laredo had posted warnings on its website hours before the gunfire was reported by Texas citizens, “We have received credible reports of widespread violence occurring now between narcotics-trafficking organizations and the Mexican army in Nuevo Laredo.”

The U.S. Consulate went on to say, “The consulate confirmed that fragmentation grenades were used in the attacks and that suspected drug-gang members had blocked several roads, adding that it advised ‘all U.S. citizens in Nuevo Laredo to remain indoors until the security situation improves.’”

US Citizens in Laredo called 911 after hearing gunfire and explosions just across the border. Laredo police spokesman Joe Baeza deflected the concerns of citizens with what I see as utter contempt. He said there was no spillover violence onto the US side and "We were getting reports from people who live on the river's edge that they could hear gunfire and explosions from the Mexico side," Baeza said, "We didn't have any incidents on the American side. It's hard for people to understand who don't live here ... They're not Vikings, they're not going to invade us, it doesn't work that way."

This was said just a day before the reported breaking news on the ranches being taken above.

Violence has been on the rise along the border. In April 2010 a Border Patrol agent in Laredo shot and killed an lllegal alien drug smuggler near the Rio Grande

The Los Zetas are highly trained killers initially trained by United States Special Operations forces to combat the drug cartes within Mexico. As the drug war heated up the Zetas saw more money in working for the cartels and joined up with the Gulf Cartel.

In March, 2010 there was a fracture between the Los Zetas and the Gulf Cartel when a Zetas leader was said to have been assassinated by the Gulf Cartel. They demanded that the killer be turned over to them. When the Gulf Cartel refused the Zetas captured 16 Gulf Cartel members.

Since March Los Zetas abandoned their stronghold in Reynosa and moved to Nuevo Laredo, just across from the border with Laredo, Texas. There are estimated to be over 1,000 Zeta members there.


Additional Sources: Houston Chronicle, Borderland Beat

 

[CharlesD]

I'm just staying out of there for now. I have my favorite places to run and I'll keep it that way.

 

[skyraider]

the saga continues,,, a very weak US President with no leadership qualities, just another paper pusher. When will the joint cheifs of staff get a grip on him. Its a matter of time till someone in there overtakes the mess. We cant let Mexico run our country. When the cartels get to Dallas and start taking over ranches, maybe someone will notice.

 

[ATeam]

Reports like this illustrate the difference between what is now called citizen journalism and professional journalism. After looking at it, The Cypress Times earns no standing with me and I will put no faith in its reports without confirmation from more reliable sources.

Yes, there have been times where citizen journalism has risen to laudatory levels of professionalism in breaking news coverage. With every person with a camera-equipped, text-capable cell phone now a potential reporter, people who strive to be credible citizen journalists can make meaningful contributions to the daily news flow. However, this Cypress Times report does not appear to be such a contribution.

"Consider the source" is a good thing to keep in mind when citizen reports are issued as news. They may not be news at all but only cloaked as such to create a story where one does not exist to promote or bolster a particular world, religious or political view that may itself be based in something other than fact.

That is not to say there are not real problems in and around Laredo. There are and they affect right now the decisions Diane and I make about going in and out. But our decisions are made with information from sources that are more credible than a web site that states it's mission as the Cypress Times does ("TheCypressTimes is a 100% interactive daily online multimedia newspaper that works to bring the word of God to the world, while also serving as a connection point between believers and non-believers, and Faith-based organizations of all types who call Christ Lord and Savior." and "The Cypress Times is constantly seeking new writers from all over the world who have something to contribute in the name of Christ and to the Glory of God.")

True professional journalists gather and report the news as objectively as possible regardless of their faith or absence thereof. They do not contribute to glorify a diety. They contribute to provide true and reliable information to their readers. Contrary to popular belief, there are a bunch of them out there that try every day to do just that.

 

[greg334]

Oh lookie there, Phil has deemed it opinion and not journalism. Got to tell the FBI there isn't any crime on the border.

Phil hate to break this to you, the professional journalist seems to be dead since Edward Morrow died. Just because you have to "graduate" from a journalist school, and then be accepted by your journalist peers to become a legitimate journalist does not mean you have to abide by any code of ethics - just ask Dan Rather and his supporters.

Citizen journalism is just as legit as professional journalism today. It actually is about the same when you think about it because outside the fact that citizen journalism seems to thrive because of a lack of trust issue with the professional counterparts, both professional and citizen journalism is opinion journalism.

 

[ConfusedMuse]

Officials dispute reports of ranch takeover by Zetas
Discovered this link in snopes.com
Sensationalism newspapers have been around a long time, not only do they sell papers, they make you think could this really happen? If it could, then people need to take steps to slow it down. This is just another aspect of our troubling times. But, it sure is nice to read what the sensationlists are thinking.

 

[Turtle]

"Consider the source" has always been important, but it's even more critical to know the source now that anyone with a computer can distribute news. There are just a snotload of "news" Websites that are not news Websites at all, but are sites posing as news organizations to further their own agenda. They selectively "report", they skew the truth, they don't confirm their information (often because there's nothing to confirm, since it's all made up). Sure, the mainsteam media is biased, but at least they're predictably biased and you know what you're getting with them.

One of the biggest problems with the Internet is, people believe what they read. Anyone can post anything they want on the Internet, and people will believe it.

To further complicate matters, we have the new generation of journalists, as Greg noted, who don't even know what journalism is. A racially charged video surfaces. It gets posted to the Internet and it goes viral. People see it and believe it. News organizations chocked full of a new generation of journalists pick up on it, and they report the shocking story. Not one journalist picks up the phone and confirms the story. No one called anyone. They just ran with the story, because they saw it on the Internet and believed it. The subject of the story is fired. Battlefields are drawn along racial lines. All because of a video that was edited not only out of context, but edited to mean something massively misleading and entirely untrue.

Guy writes a news story, even sources a legitimate newspaper for it. Says the President's dog has his own plane. He didn't bother to confirm the story, because he made it up. Then others read the story, believe it, and distribute it to others who will read it and believe it. Then, when the truth comes out, many people will choose to believe the lie rather than the truth, because the lie fits better with their own beliefs and wishes.

There's one thing that con men (and politicians) have known for centuries - the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.

The above news story didn't even come from a news reporter or a news organization. It came from a Blogger at DiggersRealm (Dan Amato), who used as his initial source a piece from Kimberly Dvorak, a Blogger from examiner.com, which is another Blog site where the Bloggers make money off page hits. The Cypress Times picked it up without conforming a single fact, and ran it. They now have a disclaimer at the top of the story saying they have been unable to confirm the story, and in fact, despite the statement in the article that it was "now 100% confirmed by second source within the Laredo Police Department," not a single person within the Laredo Police Department was aware of anything related to the story.

The whole story is made up. It's fiction. NBC affiliate KGNS went to the area to check on the story, and in an area that should be just swarming with law enforcement they found nothing other than the standard Border Patrol officers on routine patrol. The Laredo PD and the Webb County Sheriff's Department both publicly stated there is no truth to the story. The FBI Field office in San Antonio said they do not comment on rumors, "especially rumors like this one which has not a shred of truth within it."

Digger initially stuck to his guns, tho, stating that there is a media blackout directed by law enforcement, and that all the law enforcement in Texas, including the FBI field office, as well as local residents who have viewed the area in question, not to mention the ranchers who all say they have not had their ranches taken over by anyone, are all lying. All of 'em. He has since backed down, but only to say that he still stands by the story, and eventually the truth will come out. What a hoot.

Kimber Dvorak was unmercifully ripped a new one by several legitimate news organizations, most notably Diana R. Fuentes, editor of Laredo Morning Times, who Dvorak actually accused of refusing to report the news of the ranch takeovers because the paper and Fuentes personally are sympathetic to illegal aliens. Anyone who's been in Laredo and has read the Laredo Morning Times would know that stories like this are front page news, and the paper itself is very anti-illegal immigration and has no sympathy for illegal aliens at all.

But this is the kind of crap that happens when people make stuff up and others read it and believe it. People all over the country got riled up and all frothy, news organizations and law enforcement agencies were distracted from doing their real job by having to deal with the thousands of phone calls that resulted from an Internet lie. People make this stuff up to further an agenda, to foster hate, and to manipulate others. The people who engage in this sort of thing, both in creating such fiction and those who pass it along without checking its validity, rate up there somewhere between navel lint and the dog poop on Layout's shoe.

 

[RLENT]

The people who engage in this sort of thing, both in creating such fiction and those who pass it along without checking its validity, rate up there somewhere between navel lint and the dog poop on Layout's shoe.

I think you are being way too generous ......

 

[usafk9]

Someone say 'dog poop'?

 

[greg334]

Nonetheless, the point should be we need to watch our surroundings anywhere we go.

Memphis, Laredo, Detroit or New York doesn't matter, many of us are oblivious to our surroundings, the people who may be targeting trucks and those who just don't care but consider us trespassers.

 

[cheri1122]

Disagree on 'the point', Greg. We all know the places where extra caution is called for, [Laredo being one], but some of us are just waaaay too willing to believe whatever we read and/or hear, and then pass it along.
ChefDennis has admitted that he doesn't check the truth of the stuff he posts, and it looks like hardly anyone else [Turtle excepted] does either.
The point is to 'consider the source', IMO.

 

[greg334]

I think I didn't word it right, but who cares because my point is that safety comes first over anything else.

This includes parking for the night anywhere.

Just because many of us seasoned people are habitual worriers, doesn't mean Mr. and Mrs. retiree expediting adventurer know the difference between parking in a safe location or parking in a war zone.

As for Laredo, I would be a bit more cautious there than I would say in San Fransisco. This is an border town and Nuevo Laredo is one that is on the state department's travel advisory because of the spill over of Mexico's drug wars.

 

[Falligator]

Here's something else that's going to slow freight down coming across the border. Geez at this rate us expediters are going to be starving. Snakes, Gangs and Explosions...OH MY!!! Maybe Mexico should be looking at helping their own people have better lives and all this wouldn't be a problem. There wasn't a fence back in the 20's. And in a related story I heard on CNN today the Mexican Government treats their illegal aliens so bad that Amnesty International had to step in to get people coming from South America better treatment. Yet "they" have the nerve to say that we should treat their citizens without prejudice when they are here "illegally" Look what happened when someone crosses into North Korea illegally. They go on trial and hard labor camp for 8 years. When they cross here illegally we treat them better than our own citizens.

 

[witness23]

If you liked that thread starter you really need to come to the Soapbox portion of EO. This story pails in comparison to what you can find in there.

 

[Brisco]

"Consider the source" is a good thing to keep in mind when citizen reports are issued as news. They may not be news at all but only cloaked as such to create a story where one does not exist to promote or bolster a particular world, religious or political view that may itself be based in something other than fact.

"Consider the source" should not only applied in cases such as "citizens" reporting their online stories, but should be heavily considered when catching up on everyday news that covers the concerns and issues within our country itself when viewing 4 of the 5 major network news outlets today.

True professional journalists gather and report the news as objectively as possible regardless of their faith or absence thereof. They do not contribute to glorify a diety. They contribute to provide true and reliable information to their readers. Contrary to popular belief, there are a bunch of them out there that try every day to do just that.

Who's belief???

Mainstream Americas belief??

Phil, I am one of your staunchest blog followers (where's my June Trip Map???? ), but I disagree with you on this. You and Diane seriously need to get a TV in that rig and try to keep up with Americas network news media. Contrary to what your belief is, a very small percentage of America relies on "the internet" or "Sirius & XM" radio for their daily news. Whether it be local, national, or political, the 5 major networks news programs viewership has increased ten fold over the last decade or so. I challenge you to spend 1 month flipping through channels during newscasts taking in and observing what it is you are seeing. After that 1 month, you will realize the statement of "They contribute to provide true and reliable information to their readers", and I am including "viewers" to your statement (the rampant misreporting is blatant in both the print outlets as well as the televised airwaves), is totally wrong and that Edward R Murrow is more active rolling in his grave today than a hamster on meth spinning on his exercise wheel.

 

[Brisco]

And to just add a neat little story to what the intent of this thread is, the Mexican drug cartels taking over this/that, did you guys know the drug cartels are taking over the Texas DOT too???

Drug smugglers using official Texas vehicles

Interesting story.......

So next time one of you are down close to the border and you see one of these "TXDOT" maintenance/highway trucks running down the road, try to judge as to whether that's an actual state employee behind the wheel or a Mexican drug smuggler.

 

[greg334]

After that 1 month, you will realize the statement of "They contribute to provide true and reliable information to their readers", and I am including "viewers" to your statement (the rampant misreporting is blatant in both the print outlets as well as the televised airwaves), is totally wrong and that Edward R Murrow is more active rolling in his grave today than a hamster on meth spinning on his exercise wheel.

Thank you.

 

[Turtle]

Contrary to what your belief is, a very small percentage of America relies on "the internet" or "Sirius & XM" radio for their daily news. Whether it be local, national, or political, the 5 major networks news programs viewership has increased ten fold over the last decade or so.

That's not entirely accurate.

Evening News viewership for the nightly news television shows, both broadcast and cable, has declined by roughly one million viewers per year for the last 30 years.


Television News Viewership, All News Shows,
All Networks Including Cable 1980-2006

Breakdown for the Big Three broadcast networks:

Here's a closer look at roughly the last 20 years:

And while a majority of people still get their news from television, I wouldn't exactly call those who get those from the Internet "a very small percentage". It's actually quite a sizable percentage.

According to The Pew Research Center for the People & The Press (the people who study the interest and attitudes toward politics, the press and public policy issues, including the where people get their news, as well as reporting the News Interest Index which is a weekly survey aimed at gauging the public's interest in and reaction to major news events), the Internet has clearly overtaken newspapers as a news source, and still trails television news, but not by as much as you might think, and for some demographics, the Internet leads or is equal to television.


As of December, 2008, 40% of Americans get most of their news about national and international issues from the Internet, up from just 24% in September 2007. (that number if likely higher today)

For the first time in a Pew survey, more people say they rely mostly on the internet for news than cite newspapers (35%). Television continues to be cited most frequently as a main source for national and international news, at 70%.



For young people, however, the internet now rivals television as a main source of national and international news.

Nearly six-in-ten Americans younger than 30 (59%) say they get most of their national and international news online; an identical percentage cites television. In September 2007, twice as many young people said they relied mostly on television for news than mentioned the Internet (68% vs. 34%).

That's quite a shift, and is one that is almost certainly continuing today. If these trends continue, within 5-7 years more people will be getting their news from the Internet than from television.

 

[witness23]

I for one refudiate the validity of this story.

 

[Brisco]

Honestly Turtle, your little smoke and mirror charts above are a little flawed.

Today, there are over half a dozen "news channels" one can choose from to watch their evening news on. ABC, CBS, NBC, FNC, CNN, MSNBC, and HLN. I'm also going to throw in Comedy Central in the mix because there's a lot of immature "under 29" morons out there that get their daily news from Jon Stewart.

The charts you show above remind of pre-cable days when one only had "3" major networks to choose from. Plus, if you obtained this misinformation from the one source you listed, "The Pew Research Center", then this research center, of which I have never heard of, has a far left liberal agenda.

One thing this center irks me on is this charter they are trying to push in Washington DC:

While in the years immediately following its foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts was conservative in its views, later positions have included moves into environmental advocacy as well as support for "non-incarceration" methods of dealing with criminals.

Pew Research Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That has "Bleeding Liberal" written all over it.

I do not agree with the concept of ONLY obtaining ones daily news from the internet alone. When one goes to the internet to find news, they are basically "targetting" and "seeking out" news stories which will fufill their own beliefs, their own agenda, their idealog.

Example being, you can have a far left Liberal, of which ones who claim to only read the news on the internet alone usual are, or at least they're in the higher percentile bracket, who'll go online and search out news that fits their idealog. And then they get to reading comments from other readers or bloggers, and before you know it, they will have full faith in believing that that news story they just read is factual. Case in point, the Dan Rather scandal involving the falsified documents with concerns to President Bush's military record. Many were mislead by that blatant news story that tried to discredit our President during a re-election campaign.

Killian documents controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Liberal Bloggers were all over this and treated it as a "Gotcha" Mr Bush fiasco, when it fact they were falsified. Did those same bloggers retract their hatred when it was reveiled that these were false? Nope, and there are still quite a few out there that think the verified falsification is false.

Back to Phils belief that "True professional journalists gather and report the news as objectively as possible". What I was trying to relay to Phil is that he has not kept up with what is going in the media today, and ever since Gore tried to steal the Presidency from Bush, due to the fact that him and Diane have chosen to live a life without a TV in their rig and he usually obtains what news he's intersted in via the internet.

If Phil would've kept up with the Obama campaign VIA network or cable news outlets on the TV, it might have sickened him, as it did with millions of Americans, too. With Phils background in Politics, the biased views portrayed on every news organization EXCEPT Fox News Channel, would have probably changed Phils perception of "True professional journalists gather and report the news as objectively as possible". There aren't many "true professional journalists" any more. The majority of them have become commentators pushing their idealog onto their viewers. Plain and Simple. The only time I really have trust in a "journalist" is when one is writing about, or reporting about, a story that involves something local. IE - a story about the local animal shelter seeking funding, or something of that nature. I have no trust with any of the news outlets, either print, cable, or network programming, when it comes to Politics, the Economy, Healthcare, World Affairs, and so on, any longer.

So again Turtle, your charts are flawed, biased, and out of everything we have spoken of in this thread, I can't believe you chose that one statement I made to make a statement. Know what I mean.

Besides, read this one link here:

Bill O’Reilly’s 11pmET Repeat Has More Viewers Than All Non-FNC Shows Wednesday | Mediaite

Now go down the list and ADD UP all the viewers listed under each name in the "TV NEWS RATINGS -(L+SD)" box. It clearly shows that there are still millions of Americans that are getting their news from TV sources. Now if you had a chart from an "unbiased" source that showed the comparison of TV vs Internet news seekers, of which you will not find because the "internet" is a news source for the left leaning seekers, then I might find your charts more viable. But until then, your charts are what they are, biased and misleading.