Mexico's Drug War

"Mexican army captures 'El Loco,' suspect in murder of 49 in Cadereyta, Nuevo León."

Here is the translated excerpt of Ignacio Alzaga's story on Milenio.com:

"In the town of Guadalupe, Nuevo Leon, elements of the Army captured Daniel 'El Loco' Elizondo, a member of the Gulf cartel and alleged perpetrator of the execution of 49 people found in the town of Cadereyta. The Ministry of National Defense (SEDENA) reported that, 'After the discovery of 49 bodies, military personnel conducted ground surveys and other specific actions to identify, locate and arrest the alleged perpetrators of these crimes with positive results, which will be announced soon, as operations continue,' the agency said in a statement. The National Defense said during the arrest on Thursday in China, Nuevo León, of eight alleged members of the Gulf cartel, they secured four rifles, a handgun, three hand grenades, 881 cartridges of different calibers, 34 magazines for different weapons, a kilogram of cocaine, two vehicles, tactical gear and a radio." Link to Full Article

Here is an excerpt from a post about the story on Blog del Narco:

"Daniel de Jesús Elizondo Ramirez, alias "El Loco", who was the leader of "Los Zetas" in the municipality of Cadareyta, Nuevo León, was arrested in a subdivision in the municipality of Guadalupe for his participation in the event. Edgar Villegas Ruiz, the Department of Defense Director of Operations, said 'El Loco' would have received from Heriberto Lazcano, the leader of the criminal organization 'Los Zetas,' the order to transfer human remains to the main square of Cadereyta, but it was Elizondo who decided to leave them on the road... Another eight [people] were arrested in the town of China. Following that arrest, [authorities] located five mass graves, where there were nine bodies." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Based on the information I've received about this over the past two days, I think I have more questions than answers at this point. One of my TCO sources first told me about the arrest on Friday; media outlets are only reporting on it now, which is disappointing, to say the least. You probably noticed that there's a major disparity between the first story, as reported by Milenio, and the second, as reported by Blog del Narco and echoed by Associated Press reports. The initial information on the ground matched up with the first report - that Elizondo was a member of the Gulf cartel, not Los Zetas. But that didn't add up for my source, and wouldn't for anyone who's been following drug war events.

Anyway, assuming the press finally got their act straight, and we're dealing with captured suspects from Los Zetas, let's take a look at the plan (again, according to what the press is telling us from a suspect's confession). El Lazca, head of Los Zetas, ordered the murder of the 49 people. He wanted the bodies on display in the town's main square, but Elizondo took it upon himself to dump the bodies on the side of the road. They left a sign next to the bodies claiming the Zetas did it. Then days later, they hung narcobanners around town accepting responsibility for other mass killings, but denying blame for this one. Huh? If you're scratching your head, then join the party.

While things may have actually happened this way, there are a couple of things that are bugging me. First, Elizondo defied a direct order by El Lazca. No, Los Zetas are not organized hierarchically like an old-school TCO, and work more like a franchise operation. But still, they're rooted in military discipline. To defy the orders of No.1 and make decisions on your own like that, especially in the midst of one of Mexico's biggest narco body dumps? Very odd.

Then there's the blame game. El Loco says the disparate information coming from the sign and banners was meant to cause confusion. Among who? The police and military? Local residents? Rivals? From my view here in the US, it caused more curiosity than anything else, just trying to figure out who killed all those people when TCOs are usually clambering all over each other to take credit. The investigators would have been confused if they had taken Los Zetas at their word, which isn't necessarily the best investigative tactic when you're trying to get to the bottom of things in Mexico.

I'm not sure if the location of the body dump is significant, especially if what Elizondo said is true. Who knows what was going on inside his head when he picked that spot. It's well east of downtown Monterrey, and enough of a distance away from the primary conflict between Los Zetas and the CDG. The other arrests were made in China, which is another appreciable distance east of Cadereyta, somewhat in the middle of nowhere. Honestly, the body dump in the town square would have made a more dramatic impact, if that's even possible.

But we still come back to the real question everyone wants an answer to: Who were the victims? I still believe they're either migrants or innocent locals. If the killers had left any identifiable parts on them, some may have been associated with the CDG or another rival group, lending more credibility and strength to this intimidation campaign. But if any of those people had been traced back to an absence of criminal record or association, it would be another huge black mark on Los Zetas' record - which they haven't really cared about in the past, to make note. This is actually pretty tidy for the Mexican authorities; they can claim the victims were likely whomever they want them to be for convenience - and in most cases, it's better if the victims are "bad guys."

Bottom line, I don't know if they arrested the right people; we never do. I think it was most likely Los Zetas who did the killing, and if their plan was some sort of deception operation to make their rivals look bad or bring heat upon themselves, it was a fail. And, we'll probably never know who those victims were or where they came from. We can only wait to see if, by some miracle, investigators can provide some solid, reliable answers.

"Nuevo Laredo heats up as Sinaloa-Zetas conflict leaves 23 dead."

Normally I provide an excerpt from just one news story, but due to the significance and gravity of incidents on Friday - as well as some disparate details - I'm excerpting three different articles:

"At least 23 people killed in Mexican border city as victims hanged, decapitate," FOX News (via Associated Press) - 

"The bodies of 23 people were found hanging from a bridge or decapitated and dumped near city hall Friday in the border city of Nuevo Laredo, where drug cartels are fighting a bloody and escalating turf war. Authorities found nine of the victims, including four women, hanging from an overpass leading to a main highway, said a Tamaulipas state official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to provide information on the case. Hours later, police found 14 human heads inside coolers outside city hall along with a threatening note. The 14 bodies were found in black plastic bags inside a car abandoned near an international bridge, the official said. The official didn't release the contents of the note, or give a motive for the killings. But the city across the border from Laredo, Texas has recently been torn by a renewed turf war between the Zetas cartel, a gang of former Mexican special-forces soldiers, and the powerful Sinaloa cartel, which has joined forces with the Gulf cartel, former allies of the Zetas... Last month, 14 mutilated bodies were found in a vehicle left in the city center. Some media outlets reported that the Sinaloa cartel took responsibility for those bodies and in a message allegedly signed by its leader, Guzman, said the group was now back in Nuevo Laredo "to clean" the city." Link to Full Article

"New violence in Nuevo Laredo sparks worry over gang wars," Dudley Althaus and Dane Schiller in The Houston Chronicle - 

"Gangland killers hanged nine people side-by-side from an overpass at a busy interchange in Nuevo Laredo on Friday, and stuffed 14 decapitated bodies into a minivan left in the heart of the busiest trade route on the U.S.-Mexico border. 'This is how I am going to finish off all the fools you send to heat up the plaza," read a banner on the overpass addressed to the Gulf Cartel, which is waging war with the Zetas gang that controls the city. "We'll see you around, you bunch of parasites.' It was not immediately clear if the killers who hanged the five men and four women early Friday also decapitated the 14 other victims. Some of those hanged were bloodied and battered, and appeared to have been tortured... The banner left with the bodies on April 18, purportedly signed by Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán, vowed that the gangster - considered Mexico's most powerful crime boss - was taking back Nuevo Laredo from the Zetas, and was now aligned with their Gulf Cartel enemies... Peter Hanna, a retired FBI agent who spent much of his career investigating the Gulf Cartel, speculates that Guzman may be hoping to gain control of Nuevo Laredo before the July 1 presidential elections in Mexico." Link to Full Article

"The Cleansing by El Chapo in Zeta Turf," on the U.S. Open Borders blog (via original source Blog del Narco) - 

"Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman proclaimed his presence in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas and said to be cleaning the region of Zetas when he displayed 14 dismembered bodies of alleged Zeta members. El Chapo, leader of the Sinaloa cartel, demonstrated in this brutal action his presence in this border city along with other criminal groups that fall within the domain of his organization who are said to be working in keeping the area clean of Zetas and sent a message to Zeta leaders by displaying the horrific dismember bodies of several men alleged to have affilliation to Los Zetas. El Chapo Guzman also left a picture to show evidence of their presence in Nuevo Laredo where a large number of members belonging to the Sinaloa cartel pose next to a narco banner. In the narco banner, left next to a pile of dismembered bodies belonging to Los Zetas, El Chapo calls into question the lack of courage of Miguel Ángel Treviño Morales, alias El Z-40, for being afraid to face him personally and sent a message by throwing the bodies of his group in his own turf. The banner appears next to at least fourteen dismembered bodies where El Chapo promises the public that he will continue to cleanup of the area of Los Zetas, so that the people of Nuevo Laredo can live free and in peace." Link to Full Article (CAUTION: Very graphic images)

Analysis: It seems like déja vu, as this isn't the first time control of the Nuevo Laredo plaza has been dramatically contested. Before I get into my analysis of the current situation, I just want to provide a bit of history regarding Nuevo Laredo.

Back in 2004, Nuevo Laredo was one of the hottest narco hot spots in Mexico. Back then, the battle was between the Gulf cartel and the Sinaloa Federation; the irony that these two are allies now in the very same plaza isn't lost. Los Zetas were the enforcement arm of the CDG at the time, but the sands were shifting. Then-head of the CDG, Osiel Cárdenas Guillen, had been arrested the previous year, and was trying (rather successfully) to run the CDG from a Mexican prison. Los Zetas were given the green light to go all out against the Federation, and this was when beheadings and dismemberments began in earnest. Ioan Grillo points out astutely in his book El Narco that Nuevo Laredo in 2004 - not the beginning of President Calderón's term in December 2006 - was the true start of the modern drug war in Mexico.

The Nuevo Laredo-Laredo plaza is very lucrative because of the large volume of trucks that pass through the area, and the multiple (exploitable) ports of entry. It's the same reason why Tijuana-San Ysidro and Ciudad Juárez-El Paso are so valuable to TCOs, and why the cities to the south are often epicenters of violence.

After the battle ended, the Gulf cartel emerged victorious and things in Nuevo Laredo quieted down for several years. Then in 2010, Los Zetas officially split off from the CDG to form their own TCO, and the turf war began again along the Texas-Mexico border. It was originally the most heated in Matamoros and Reynosa, but spread west to Nuevo Laredo. The Gulf cartel is a shadow of its former self, due partly to Mexican government/military actions, but mostly due to these battles with an ever-strenghtening Zetas corps. The CDG has since aligned with its old enemy, El Chapo's Federation, to fight off Los Zetas in Nuevo Laredo and elsewhere.

Speaking of which, the two "megacartels" of the Federation and Los Zetas have several battlefronts open at the moment, including Veracruz and Guadalajara. The Federation could use the CDG's help - as limited as it may be - and both groups have much to gain from the expulsion of Los Zetas from Nuevo Laredo. El Chapo can chalk up a significant victory against Los Zetas and expand his empire further eastward, and the CDG could enter into a potentially lucrative trafficking arrangement with the Federation to move product through the plaza. 

I don't know that I necessarily buy Peter Hanna's speculation that El Chapo may want to win control of Nuevo Laredo before the election in July. I've always contended that the TCOs don't really care who's president, compared to their interest in who sits in the state governors', mayors', and chiefs of police seats. Yes, the president can determine where the army goes and how many soldiers are sent, but military deployments don't always have the intended effect of quieting things down. Also, the newly elected president doesn't take office until December anyway, so both TCOs have some time to carry out their strategies.

Bottom line, this is just one of many major conflicts we can expect between the Federation and Los Zetas, as they've emerged as the two power players of 2012. All the other TCOs have pretty much picked sides and aligned with one or the other, so the narco hot spots in Mexico will shift as one TCO or the other decides where they want to expand - or encroach. El Chapo made a brilliant move by bringing so much media and government attention to Nuevo Laredo with the intention of disrupting Zetas operations there, and I imagine we'll keep seeing more of these gruesome "disruptions." We can also expect Nuevo Laredo to stay hot for the next several months, unless we see something like the death or arrest of major Zetas leaders, like Miguel "Z-40" Treviño Morales.

"3 men with military ties arrested in murder-for-hire sting, DEA says."

Here's an excerpt from Mariano Castillo's article on CNN.com:

"It would have been one of the most audacious plots between a Mexican drug cartel and American conspirators: a murder-for-hire in South Texas. But the men who allegedly were prepared to use their U.S. military training to carry out a mission in Laredo, Texas, for the
Zetas drug cartel were not actually making arrangements with drug traffickers. They had walked into a Drug Enforcement Administration sting operation, and were plotting with undercover agents who recorded their every move for months. Their alleged criminal plans fell apart on Saturday, the day they were to carry out a contract killing. The agents had the evidence they needed and arrested three men in Laredo. A fourth was killed by agents as the arrests were being made. Two more arrests were made in South Carolina. A sixth man also was arrested, the DEA said... There is no evidence the Zetas have considered escalating their reach to include hiring Army-trained Americans to carry out killings. But these arrests show it is not beyond the realm of possibility that there are U.S. citizens willing to do such work. The three men accused of being at the center of the operation -- Kevin Corley, Samuel Walker and Shavar Davis -- had military experience and training they were willing to use on behalf of a drug cartel, prosecutors say... According to the complaint, Corley promised the undercover agents that weapons could be easily stolen from military posts, and that he could train 40 cartel members in two weeks. He mailed an Army tactical book to the agents, the court document says. The investigation appears to have risen to another level when Corley said he could assemble a team to carry out cartel dirty work." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Many of you may remember the plot by a crack team of two Iranian men (and yes, I do say that with some sarcasm) to hire TCO members to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the US in Washington, DC. In both cases, the actual TCO in question was never aware of either plot, and in the first case, we don't know what TCO the DEA was masquerading as. It's plausible they had their informant posing as a member of Los Zetas, but we don't know for sure from publicly available information.

But to me, there are several significant differences in the two cases. The Iranian plot was outlandish at best, scheming to use a drug cartel to conduct a terrorist attack not only on US soil, but in the capital, for the bargain-basement price of $1.5 million. Why a TCO would do the dirty work of a foreign government or a foreign terrorist organization for pocket change was, an is, beyond me. But in this case, we're talking about three African-American, non-Hispanic Americans, all with some level of military training, who were more than willing to do the dirty work on behalf of the cartels on US soil. 

It's nothing new that there's a long line of people willing to work for TCOs because of the sheer volume of money, perks, and goodies involved. TCOs rarely have to work too hard to recruit young Mexicans to kill their rivals or snitches in Mexico; many times it only takes a few hundred dollars, or some fancy electronic gadgets. On the US side, however, it's a different story due to the risks involved. US-based gangs like the Mexican Mafia, Texas Syndicate, Hermanos de Pistoleros Latinos, and Mara Salvatrucha are usually the ones tapped for contracted hits or drug distribution. From the article, it doesn't sound like any of the men involved in the sting had any gang ties.

Another thing we have to consider is how realistic the offers of assistance were that the men were making. Is it really that easy to steal weapons from a military post? When I was on active duty, I rarely went into the armory on base, but I know they're usually manned/guarded 24-7. Maybe it's possible if the guard on duty is on the take, but in my eight years of active duty as a Special Agent, I can recall one case of Security Forces reporting that weapons had been stolen or were missing from the armory. Maybe the Army is different about gun counting than the Air Force, but I doubt they're so careless to where someone could say guns were easy to steal from a military post.

Then there's the claim by Corley that he could train 40 cartel members in two weeks. Maybe. But to do what, exactly? He mentioned tactics including approaches, room clearing, security and convoy security. Based on what I know of US military pre-deployment training, this is possible, but would provide only a minimal level of expertise, unless the TCO members being trained were former military or police themselves.

Regardless, the biggest concern stems from the ultimate end of the operation: the men set a date with the undercover DEA agents raid a rival cartel's ranch near Laredo, Texas and recover 20 kilos of stolen cocaine, all on behalf of Los Zetas. Corley arrived in Laredo with his cousin, Jerome Corley, Walker (an active duty Army sergeant) and Davis (a former private in the Army reserves), along with two AR-15 assault rifles, a training rifle, and five allegedly stolen ballistic vests. According to the complaint, "Corley told the undercover agent he had bought a new Ka-Bar knife to carve a 'Z' into the victim's chest and was planning on buying a hatchet to dismember the body," per the CNN.com article. It further quotes the complaint as stating that, on the day the supposed hit was to take place, the agents had the four confirm they understood they were about to accept money and drugs in exchange for a killing.

Again, part of me isn't surprised because American gang members have been doing this sort of thing for a while, but it's disturbing in a different way when you hear that active duty and former military members are involved in this sort of thing. It's also out of the realm of what we would assume when thinking about the players involved in drug trafficking and violent TCO activity on this side of the border. It's a stark reminder that no one is immune from the allure of drug money, and no one is beyond suspicion of association with TCOs just because they're not Mexican or Hispanic or a current/former gang member.

"Mexican TCO Members Quietly Living Among Us - For Now."

Here's an excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today's "Correspondents' Watch":

"Brownsville, Texas is what most people would call a working-class town. It has an industrial feel and there are areas of the community that have seen better days. One of the city’s mainstays is its large port and its connection via three international bridges to Matamoros in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas. Driving around town, you find plenty of taquerias along with typical chain restaurants, warehouses, car dealerships, schools and other places typical for a south Texas town or Gulf Coast port city. But there is something else that makes Brownsville - as well as the neighboring cities of Harlingen and McAllen - different from the average, small port community. And that is it is located a few hundred yards from the US-Mexico border and one of the most violent areas in Mexico. As a result, many members of Mexico’s transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) spend a considerable amount of time in south Texas. Some even own homes, property and small businesses here... Several recent incidents have brought to light the fact that TCO members—some very high-ranking and some violent—are living among us in the United States, and definitely in much higher numbers along the southwest border."

To read the full article on HSToday.com, please CLICK HERE!

"Texas sheriff: Drug war violence spilling over."

Here is an excerpt from this Associated Press story, published in The Houston Chronicle:

"A shooting that injured a sheriff's deputy was the first indisputable case of spillover violence from the Mexican drug wars in Hidalgo County, the local sheriff said Monday. Sheriff Lupe Trevino, who previously said there was no direct spillover violence in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, said the Sunday shootout erupted while one of his deputies investigated a reported kidnapping and drug deal. 'I have to say that with this particular incident, the way the witnesses and the information that we have gotten particularly in the federal system, this is the first recorded spillover violence event that we have experienced — and unfortunately got one of our deputies shot,' Trevino said. One suspect was killed and two were wounded. In all, six people were taken into custody, including the alleged kidnapping victim, and are awaiting charges, the sheriff said... Trevino said the reported kidnapping was a bid to recover marijuana stolen when the Gulf cartel's reputed second-in-command, Samuel Flores Borrego, was killed in September...'Now, there are more cartel members living in Texas, in the Valley, in the United States. I'll guarantee you there's a ton of them,' he said." Link to Full Story

Analysis: That something like this has happened along the Texas-Mexico border should come as a surprise to no one. But this is what I really don't understand. Why isn't this story getting more national attention? I did a search of news stories on this particular incident, and just about everything was local in the RGV or Texas - KRGV, KGBT, The Monitor, The Houston Chronicle, etc. Although I will say, The Boston Herald did print a story on it. But why aren't the "big guys" like CNN, FOX News, and MSNBC splattering this report all over the screen?

This really shouldn't surprise me too much, either. Just last year, the first drug war-related beheading occurred in the US, specifically in Chandler, Arizona. Yep, a beheading on US soil in an apartment complex. When I tell people about that story, they look at me in awe, as if to say, why haven't I heard about this before? Then there are the five men who were electrocuted, tortured, and had their throats slit in a northern Alabama safe house in 2009. Again, only local coverage about that.

But this story in Hidalgo County is different. Most reports about possible spillover violence almost always involve bad guys killing bad guys - like the Gulf cartel members who got into a firefight on a McAllen highway a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps that's why people are disinterested; criminals killing criminals makes the work easier for law enforcement, right? But these were TCO members who shot and severely wounded an American law enforcement officer on US soil. The activities they were engaged in before the confrontation were directly related to the drug war in Mexico. Why is it that only news outlets in Texas are noticing?

The cynic in me tells me that these types of incidents are very bad PR for DHS. Everyone along the border - and particularly in south Texas - knows that cartel members are everywhere down there, but generally keep to themselves. But many border residents also knew it was a matter of time before something like this happened. This is the main reason for the subtitle of my book: The Coming Invasion of Mexico's Drug Wars. The TCOs are getting squeezed tighter and tighter by authorities on both sides of the border. However, they still need to keep the drug profits coming in. That means taking on more risk, i.e. engaging with US law enforcement and engaging in violent behavior in public on US soil.

This is not the first time that TCO members or armed drug smugglers have fired shots at US law enforcement (e.g. USBP Agent Brian Terry), and it certainly won't be the last. My question is, how many of these incidents have to happen before the US government starts rethinking its statement that the border is the safest it's ever been? And what's it going to take to move border security up the totem pole of national concerns? Hopefully, not another injured sheriff's deputy.

"Mexico gangs send deadly message to social media."

Here is an excerpt from Dudley Althaus' article in The Houston Chronicle:

"Placards left with the tortured bodies of two people hanging from a Nuevo Laredo overpass warn that the same fate awaits social media devotees who keep information flowing by text, Twitter, blogs and other means as gangsters muzzle the news media in much of Mexico. 'This is going to happen to all the internet busybodies,' said one of the notes signed with a Z, presumably for the Zetas gang that controls Nuevo Laredo. 'Listen up, I'm on to you'... The messages found in Nuevo Laredo on Tuesday, with the bodies of a man and a woman in their 20s, directly threatened two popular blogs that specialize in reporting gang-related violence." Link to Full Article

Here is an excerpt from Rafael Romo's article, "Drug violence victims go unidentified in Mexico," on CNN.com:

"More than 48 hours after two mangled bodies appeared hanging by ropes from a pedestrian bridge in a Mexican border city, authorities had yet to identify the victims... The woman was hogtied and disemboweled. Attackers left her topless, dangling by her feet and hands from a bridge in the border city of Nuevo Laredo. A bloodied man next to her was hanging by his hands, his right shoulder severed so deeply the bone was visible.Posters found with the bodies contained messages mentioning two blogs and threatening users of social media, demanding they stop reporting drug-related crimes in the city, located across the border from Laredo, Texas. Mexico's notoriously ruthless drug gangs regularly hang victims from bridges and highway overpasses. And bloggers who specialize in sharing news about trafficking have been threatened in the past. But this could be the first time users of such social networks have been targeted... CNN tried unsuccessfully to get information about the grisly slayings at the local, state, and federal level. Officials were either unavailable or unwilling to release any information about the killings. Local media reported that the male victim was 25 years old and the female 28, without citing any sources." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This latest incident has caused a global uproar, with even huge European news outlets like BBC wanting to find out more about the murdered social media users in Nuevo Laredo. The thing is, how do we really know who these people were, or what they did?

Essentially, every media outlet is basing their story on the content of the messages posted with the bodies - presumably from Los Zetas, by their signature "Z." That means that Los Zetas - the bloodthirsty criminals and killers that they are - are being taken at their word, that these two people posted in some social media outlet some sort of detailed information about TCO activity in the area. The problem is, the authorities aren't talking - probably because they don't know anything, and/or are afraid to ask any questions.

So the media and Twitter are going nuts, telling the world that freedom of the press and freedom of speech (which were already being severely hampered in Mexico by the narcos) are taking the biggest historical hit because of this incident, and no one really even knows what happened. Who were these two victims? What social media outlet (Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, a blog...) did they use? What did they say, and about which TCO did they say it? Did they even do what Los Zetas say they did? Did they post anonymously somewhere, or were they foolish enough to identify themselves somehow? And if they were indeed anonymous social media users, how did Los Zetas identify them?

There are two things that could have happened here. If what Los Zetas say happened is true, then this is one of the bigger salvos the TCO has launched against "civilians." But perhaps even that needs to be caveated. Were the victims members of a rival TCO and posting information that would hurt Zetas operations? Or were they innocents, warning others to get away from a potentially violent area due to Zetas activity?

The other scenario is that these two victims are rivals, fall guys, or random people Los Zetas killed and wanted to use to make threats and spread fear. Obviously, this incident has had that effect and more. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter who these people were (regarding TCO affiliation) or what they did or didn't do. Los Zetas are being taken at their word, and everyone is assuming the two victims did what Los Zetas are accusing them of. As a result, many social media users in Mexico are freaking out, and lots of people who provide useful information about drug war activity have probably just been silenced.

This is another one of those terrorist tactics Los Zetas have chosen to engage in. It doesn't matter whether or not you carry out what you threaten to do; the threat is often enough to persuade enough people to modify their behavior to suit your needs. Also, there's the well-worn adage that perception is reality. Whether or not these victims did what Los Zetas say they did, people are believing the message Los Zetas are putting out there. It's a perfect example of a successful psychological operation, and we'll have to chalk one up in the L column for the Mexican authorities - and a good number of media outlets.

"US officials confirm arrest of Juárez cartel leader connected to US Consulate deaths."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Borunda, Alex Hinojosa and Marty Schladen's article in the El Paso Times:

"Mexican authorities captured the reputed leader of La Linea, a vicious group of thugs that carried out murders and terrorized Juárez for a drug cartel. José Antonio Acosta Hernández, also known as 'El Diego,' one of the highest-ranking bosses of the Juárez drug cartel, was reportedly arrested Friday after a shootout with authorities in a Chihuahua City neighborhood. Acosta was indicted this year in the killings of three people connected to the U.S. Consulate in Juárez... His arrest, according to one expert, may signal the end of the Juárez drug cartel and a downturn in the violence that has gripped Juárez and the state of Chihuahua. Acosta, who was reportedly flown to Mexico City after his capture, is believed to run operations for La Linea in Chihuahua City and Juárez and was arguably the most-wanted man in the state of Chihuahua... In recent weeks, narco-graffiti threatening the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and U.S. Consulate employees appeared on public walls in Juárez and Chihuahua City. The messages telling the "gringos of the DEA" to quit meddling were signed 'Diego'... Many of the public threats from La Linea made frequent references to 'El Diego'... The capture of Acosta may be a new beginning for Juárez residents and a decrease in violence, said University of Texas at El Paso political science professor Tony Payan." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Chalk up another victory for the Calderón administration, as this is a nice one. There's no doubt that Acosta's arrest will have a detrimental impact on La Linea, and perhaps on the VCFO (Juárez cartel) as a whole. The big question is, of course, how much?

Acosta has been indicted in the US for alleged involvement in the attack on the three US Consulate employees, which makes him eligible for extradition. The only thing any narco fears is extradition. Dr Payan mentioned in the article something about Acosta providing good, useful intelligence about his organization and perhaps rivals. That's the key here, both to either preventing Acosta's extradition, reducing his sentence if he is sent to the US for trial (and assuming a conviction, of course), and bringing down the remnants of the VCFO. But will he talk?

No one can really say. Edgar "La Barbie" Valdez Villareal did, and so did Osiel Cárdenas Guillen. If the VCFO really is crumbling, Acosta may believe there's not much left to save - except his own rear end. La Linea has been a force to be reckoned with in Chihuahua for many years, and the VCFO is not a TCO to go quietly into the night - it's been fighting for its life against the Federation for quite some time now, and still maintains a presence in Juárez. However, there is a chance that Acosta could drive some pretty big nails into the VCFO's coffin; we'll see how that develops over the next few weeks and months.

But there's still the other question - how will the assumed demise of La Linea, and perhaps later on the VCFO - affect levels of violence in Juárez? Many people believe that if the VCFO were to concede or be destroyed, the Federation would win control of the Juárez plaza and peace would ensue. Unfortunately, that probably wouldn't be the case.

In past years, the violence in Ciudad Juárez has been a result of the turf battle between the VCFO and the Federation. But something happened in the last couple of years to change to rules - throw them out the window actually...the local drug trade exploded. There are something like 500 colonias, or neighborhoods, in Juárez, and each one has its own gang defending its turf - and dealing drugs. These gangs have joined in the bloodshed, and it's gotten to the point that no one in Juárez really knows who is killing whom. The Federation and the VCFO don't have their top people mixed up in that mess; they hire out lower level thugs to do the grunt work for them in that chaos. The cops are afraid of going in and asking too many questions, let alone thoroughly investigating any murders that occur in Juárez, so it's too simplistic to say that once the VCFO is out, everything will get better. Juárez still has a few hundred gangs to deal with.

That being said, if the Federation ends up being top dog in Juárez as a result of Acosta's arrest (whether that's in a few weeks or months), they have the power to rein in all the disparate factions in the city and establish some order. Whether or not they want to is a good question. With all the killing and chaos, less authority is scrutinizing the movement of drugs across the border into El Paso. However, all those gang members already in the drug business and possibly looking for work...this could result in the largest narco recruiting drive the drug war has ever seen.

At this early point in the game, post-Acosta arrest, it's too soon to tell what impact him being out of the game will have. Of course, it's always interesting to speculate, and imagine positive outcomes. As always, more to come...

Conflicting accounts about Heriberto "El Lazca" Lazcano's death

I spent a few hours last night following the minute-by-minute updates on Twitter, as well as speaking to my own sources in the media and on the ground in Mexico. Here's what I know.

 

The Monitor out of McAllen was the first US news outlet to report that Heriberto "El Lazca" Lazcano Lazcano, head of Los Zetas, had been killed in a shootout between Los Zetas and the Gulf cartel in Matamoros. The reporter claimed to have a solid source on the ground, and based all the reporting on what this anonymous source was saying. The Brownsville Herald was the second US news source to start reporting El Lazca's death. Their reporter is also standing by her source and her story, although the BH has changed their headline and ledes to reflect "reportedly killed," rather than just "killed."

My own sources were being told that there was a meeting going on between Los Zetas and the Gulf cartel in Matamoros, the meeting went horribly bad, and the shooting started. That story would explain what El Lazca was doing there in the first place. Unfortunately, that information was provided by the same source The Monitor was using. I've been told by other journalists who work in the RGV that The Monitor and reporter passing on all this info are notorious for bad information, and for "stirring the pot" to get attention.

Analysis: We need to take a look at a couple of common-sense things when examining the veracity of this story. First, neither the media nor the Mexican government have confirmed that El Lazca was even in Matamoros, let alone in the midst of the gun battle. Second, capos are rarely - if ever - on the front lines of these affairs, so why would El Lazca be the first? Third, media reports have shifted on whether this was a shootout between Los Zetas and the Gulf cartel, or between Los Zetas and the military, or if all three groups were shooting at each other. If Los Zetas have moved into the stronghold of the Gulf cartel - Matamoros - then this is an extremely significant event.

Alejandro Poiré said last night that El Lazca wasn't among the dead, but he hasn't exactly been forthcoming with more details, and neither has SEDENA.

My suggestion for sussing out more truth to the story is to keep an eye on Miguel "Z-40" Treviño Morales, Los Zetas' no. 2. The last I read, he was the plaza boss in Nuevo Laredo. If El Lazca is really dead, Los Zetas will need to replace him in a big hurry, and Z-40 is the obvious choice. If law enforcement or media notice any changes in his people's movements or operations, then there might be something to the rumors.

Bottom line, until I see a body - either displayed by a Mexican coroner, or the Gulf cartel which is rumored to have it - I'm not convinced.

 

"Wildfires And Gunfire: Threats To Emergency Responders On The Border"

Here's an excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today's Correspondents' Watch:

"Emergency responders who deal with dangerous wildfires, flash floods, mudslides and the aftermaths of earthquakes, are used to putting their lives in danger to save others. But the sorts of danger they typically don’t expect are the threats that come in the form of drug- and human-smugglers. Wildfire season is in full swing, and the entire southwest border is feeling the sting of massively destructive blazes that already have consumed hundreds of thousands of acres. More than 2,100 firefighters from across the country have been sent to various parts of Arizona to deal with the second worst fire disaster in the state’s history. Fires in Texas that started in early spring have ravaged almost two million acres - and this year’s fire season still has many more months left. It’s quite a testament to the bravery and skill of these crews that they can come together from so many different places and departments, come up with a plan, and work together effectively to execute it. And that’s what makes it so unfortunate that the latest danger for them is not the fires, but their fellow human beings hiding behind them – the armed drug and human smugglers."

To read the rest of the article on HSToday.us, please CLICK HERE!

"Los Zetas Employ Terror Tactics Near US Border."

Here is an excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today magazine's Correspondents' Watch:

"Just when people thought the drug war in Mexico couldn’t get any more horrendous, mass graves have begun to be uncovered near the border. Several found in the northern Mexican state of Tamaulipas were filled with more than 300 rotting corpses. And with more mass graves being unearthed, the numbers of the dead are piling up. And they aren’t likely to be the last mass graves that will be found. Mass graves in Mexico aren’t a new phenomenon, though. They’ve been found in other areas of the country, but usually with fewer cadavers. While most of the previously discovered mass graves were almost always filled with members of transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) - rivals, traffickers who lost loads, dealers who owed money, etc. - what makes the newer graves different is that they’re filled with the bodies of innocent Mexicans and citizens of other Latin American nations." 

To read the full article on the HSToday website, please CLICK HERE!

"Exaggerating U.S. border violence?"

I am extremely excited to let you all know that Chuck Norris not only knows who I am, but he agrees with my point of view! Enough to quote me in a lengthy piece he recently wrote for WorldNetDaily.com. Now, WND is not my favorite source of information because they're very skewed to the right - more so than me - but I can't help but be excited that Mr. Norris found my opinion significant enough to quote. Here's a brief excerpt:

"After a decade of playing one on television, a few months ago, my brother, Aaron, and I were blessed to become real Texas Rangers, in the presence of Gov. Rick Perry, fellow Texas Rangers and many others. Gov. Perry mentioned at that induction, 'As the drug cartels have turned up the heat on the other side of that border over the past few years, we have invested significant state resources to secure our border, looking to local police departments, county sheriffs, game wardens and even Texas military forces. However, when it was time to take the fight to the bad guys, there was only one choice to lead our efforts, so we formed our Ranger recon teams. It is reassuring to know that our Rangers are on the job, especially in light of ongoing reports of deteriorating conditions with kidnappings, assassinations and terroristic acts just miles from Texas communities.'

"Only weeks later, on Jan. 31, 2011, U.S. Department of HomelandSecuritySecretary Janet Napolitano asked public officials to stop exaggerating claims of violence on the U.S. side of the border and "be honest with the people we serve." She added, "Let's stick with the facts. We need to be up front and clear about what's really happening along our borders." And the very same day she told a group at the University of Texas in El Paso that it is inaccurate to say that the border is out of control and overrun with violence, citingstatisticsfrom the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting program. However, Sylvia Longmire, a former special agent with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and a senior intelligence analyst and bordersecurityexpert for the California Emergency Management Agency, says Napolitano's statements don't have a leg of credibility to stand on."

To read the rest of Mr. Norris article - and see how he quoted me - please CLICK HERE!

"Slain U.S. missionary was fleeing cartel gunmen with husband."

Here is an excerpt from Jared Taylor's article in The Monitor:

"A police officer watched the blue Chevrolet pickup truck speed against traffic toward the checkpoint at the Pharr-Reynosa International Bridge shortly after noon Wednesday. Inside was Sam Davis and his wife, Nancy, who was still alive after suffering a gunshot to her head about 70 miles south of the Rio Grande, police said. Police and U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers called an ambulance, which rushed the 59-year-old missionary to McAllen Medical Center. She died at 1:54 p.m. Wednesday. The rural Monte Alto couple worked as missionaries in Mexico for more than three decades... The couple was returning from a mission near San Fernando, about 70 miles south of Reynosa, police said.On the outskirts of the city of about 30,000 residents, the missionaries encountered a drug cartel checkpoint and refused to stop, authorities said. Several men in a black pickup truck tailed the couple past the impromptu checkpoint and opened fire. Sources said at least five gunshots struck the back of the missionaries’ pickup truck, leaving it 'riddled with bullets.' The missionaries may have been fortunate to escape the region and avoid kidnapping." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is one of the more tragic stories I've heard related to Mexico in a while, and that's saying something, considering everything that's going on right now. These folks had been working in Mexico for 30 years, just to have this horrible nightmare happen to them. The incident highlights a few drug war issues.

First is the DTO "unofficial" checkpoint. I get a LOT of emails from people planning to travel to Mexico, and asking me if certain parts of the country are safe. I try to answer as best I can, but I'm not familiar with every town and every road and highway. Even if I were, the locations where DTOs set up these checkpoints change pretty often. I don't know how familiar the Davises were with the narco situation in Tamaulipas, but it was obviously a bad - and sadly, fatal - decision to blow through the checkpoint. This is why having situational awareness of your destination in Mexico isn't enough; you have to find out what's happening on the route you plan to use to get there. I can't stress enough that if you plan to travel to Mexico - particularly to a non-resort or rural area within 100 miles of a narco hot spot, you should contact the closest US Consulate in Mexico to ask them what the security situation is. I can try to help you and offer advice, but only to an extent.

Second, I'm more than a little concerned that the gunmen just started indiscriminately spraying the Davises' truck with bullets without knowing who was inside. But you know what? I have a feeling that even if they knew there were two American missionaries in their fifties sitting in that truck, they wouldn't have cared. Because they blew through the checkpoint, I'm sure the gunmen assumed it was members of a rival cartel or someone else who deserved to get shot for not stopping. Most Mexicans know better than to blow through a checkpoint, official or not, so the Davises' behavior likely came off as more than a little suspicious.

So what does this imply for Americans doing God's work - or any other work or pleasurable activity, for that matter - in Mexico? Well, don't automatically assume that you're out of harm's way because (a) you're American, and (b) you're doing something kind and charitable for the people of Mexico. DTOs don't give a rat's behind about who you are or what you're doing in their country. If you get in their way and don't follow their rules, you're a viable target, case closed. 

I tell anyone who plans to do any sort of driving in Mexico to ALWAYS stop at checkpoints, and always have some cash on hand to pay the inevitable bribe. Often, that's not enough. You have to read up (plenty of others' experiences on the 'net...do a Google search) on how to specifically offer the bribe to get going on your way and avoid getting arrested if it's a police checkpoint...and eventually having to pay a bigger bribe to avoid going to jail. DTOs will normally not mess with an American after collecting said bribe. I'm a big fan of the author's work (Hi Jared!), but I have to disagree with his statement that the Davises' were lucky to escape being kidnapped. Yes, we're seeing more Mexican politicians, businessmen, and migrants being kidnapped for ransom - especially by Los Zetas. However, we have yet to see any innocent Americans taken by the DTOs, probably because of the political/diplomatic firestorm that would ensue. Can you imagine the response if Los Zetas posted some sort of proof of life on YouTube for two American missionaries in their late fifties? But maybe I'm being naïve to assume our government would aggressively step in; they might take the same non-negotiation stance with organized crime that they do with terrorists.

Regardless, this is a tragic ending to a horrific story that all Americans with interests in Mexico would be wise to read about. I will remind readers again that there are still plenty of places in Mexico that are safe to visit for vacations and business trips. However, road trips in Tamaulipas, Nuevo León, Chihuahua, Durango, Michoacán, and a few other places are ill-advised. Remember, the State Department is your friend when it comes to reading up before you go...use them.

*UPDATE* I just finished reading this report from CNN, and it looks like the Davises didn't blow a DTO checkpoint after all. It seems that while they were driving, narcos in three trucks tried to box them in so they could get the Davises to pull over and then steal their truck. One of the three trucks wasn't successful in getting in front of the Davises' truck, so someone driving parallel to them fired a couple of shots at them; one of which caught Nancy in the back of the head, and at least one more that lodged itself in the truck. 

When I read earlier reports of the truck being sprayed by dozens of bullets, it didn't make sense that narcos would shoot up a truck they wanted to steal. This account - straight from Nancy's husband, I believe - makes more sense and is infinitely more plausible. My analysis still stands; questionable checkpoints are still out there, and carjackings like this one are occurring with more frequency.

"Lame-Duck Lands Bill Threatens Border Security."

Here is an excerpt from Dana Gattuso's article in the National Review Online:

"With his time running out, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is expected to try to force a massive omnibus lands bill through Congress. If passed, the mega-package would buy up and tie up millions of acres of land in over 13 states — and worse, increase the national- security risk at the Mexican border. The omnibus bill, which includes over 100 federal land-acquisition bills, is on a fast track this lame-duck session and is expected to come up for a vote next week. Individually, these bills failed to make it beyond committee, but the Democratic leadership is hopeful they can pass it by ramming it through the lame duck as an omnibus bundle. Many of the bills failed to pass because they are considered controversial. For example, legislation sponsored by Senator Bingaman (D., N.M.) would designate over 100,000 acres of land at or near the New Mexico–Mexico border as federal wilderness area, increasing the threat of drug smuggling into the U.S. from Mexico... [A report] by the GAO last October that found environmental-protection laws on federal lands are limiting border-patrol officials’ ability to detect and stop illegal aliens... Wilderness designations are a particular problem. They are the most restrictive form of federal land protection, not only keeping the public out but in many cases denying access to federal border-patrol officials as well." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Before we even get to the border situation, I have to say I'm disturbed that this bill is even making it to the floor for a vote. Apparently, the omnibus bill contains over 100 separate land acquisition bills - the New Mexico thing is only one of those - which individually failed to make it past committee. This makes me wonder why someone - I guess in this case, it's Harry Reid - feels they're worthy of being signed into law through the omnibus process if they can't even make it past committee.

But, I digress. If this omnibus bill passes and that land is designated as a federal wilderness area, then that means it'll enjoy the same status as the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge in southern Arizona. If you don't recall, I posted on this a few months ago; portions of that Refuge were closed to the general public in 2006 because "The situation in this zone has reached a point where continued public use of the area is not prudent." By situation, the US government means violent drug smuggling activity. I have to agree with the article's author in her assessment that such a designation of an area along the southwest border would serve as a huge invitation in neon lights to drug and human smugglers that reads, "Come on in! We're open!" You can even read Secretary Napolitano's comments in the article about how difficult it is for Border Patrol agents to respond to smuggling activity in places like this with transportation methods that don't disturb the environment in any way.

I'm not saying that certain lands in our country don't deserve to be protected, and the southwest border shouldn't automatically be excepted from our efforts to preserve our pristine lands. However, there's a political element to this that I don't like. To be fair, I don't know enough about that part of New Mexico to understand why 100,000 acres should fall under that protection status. However, given the current state of affairs along the border, I can't side with protecting trees or lizards or preventing some kind of rainfall erosion over maintaining some semblance of border security.

It's also not guaranteed that those areas will definitely be used by smugglers. But, really...who are we kidding? I recently watched an episode of "War Stories" with Oliver North where the camera crew tried to drive into the Buenos Aires refuge. To say that Border Patrol was ticked off to see them there is a huge understatement. They take the dangers posed by smuggling activity there very seriously. I would hate to see a similar situation crop up next door in New Mexico because someone on Capitol Hill had some agenda to push through.

Three DTO-related incidents on US soil in six weeks

Here is an excerpt from "One killed in suspected execution style shooting" on Action 4 News/ValleyCentral.com:

"Mission Police are reporting one of two victims dead, after a suspected execution style shooting Tuesday night... The shooting reportedly happened last night near the Cimarron Country Club, at the intersection of Glasscock and Rio Grande Drive. Police say several gunshots were fired... A number of vehicles were seen at the location of the shooting with Mexican license plates. Four suspects are reportedly in police custody, while police continue to look for two more suspects." Link to Full Story

Here is an excerpt from  "Police probe whether beheading was 'hit' from drug cartel" by Mike Sakal in the East Valley Tribune:

"Chandler police are investigating the possibility that the stabbing death and decapitation of a 38-year-old Phoenix resident believed to be an illegal immigrant from Mexico earlier this month was a “hit” by a Mexican drug cartel against a member who betrayed them. Alejandro Cota-Monroy, whose decapitated body was found inside an apartment at 300 West Fairview St. the morning of Oct. 10 amid a bloody and gruesome scene, may have ripped off a Mexican cartel of illegal drugs, according to Chandler police Detective Dave Ramer... Initial media reports indicated that the man’s death could be connected to a Mexican religious ritual, the Saint of Death, because candles and a Ouija border were reportedly found at the scene. But Ramer said the slaying had “nothing to do” with the religion, although drug dealers and drug cartel members are known to participate in it because they believe if they do, it will protect them from law enforcement." Link to Full Article

Here is an excerpt from "Two Zetas executed in Brownsville, Texas" in The Brownsville Herald:

"Authorities have linked Thursday’s double homicide on FM 511 in the northwest outskirts of Brownsville. Texas, to Mexican drug cartels and are investigating the killings as spillover violence from the Tamaulipas war between the Gulf Cartel and Los Zetas. The bodies of Omar Castillo Flores “El Omarcillo”, 25, and Jose Guadalupe Lopez Perez, 38, were found inside a gray Dodge Ram pickup that was riddled with bullets, police spokesman Eddie Garcia said Friday. He said the truck had a Mexican license plate on the back bumper, and he identified both men as residents of Mexico... Brownsville Police Chief Carlos Garcia confirmed the information provided by Mexican law enforcement officials who stated that Omar Castillo and Jose Lopez were members of the Zetas criminal organisation and that Omar Castillo was the younger brother of former Gulf Cartel member Alberto "Beto Fabe" Castillo Flores." Link to Full Article

Analysis: While these three incidents happened in two different states, three different cities, and six weeks apart, they signal a disturbing possibility: Mexican DTOs might be more willing to take risks and engage in violent activity against their selected targets in the US.

Not that violent activity by DTOs on US soil is anything new. In August 2008, four suspects were paid between $400,000 and $450,000 to torture five victims with electric shock and slit their throats in an Alabama apartment. The murders have been tied to a Mexican DTO that transports cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. In February 2009, gang members threw an inactive grenade into a strip club in Pharr, Texas. In August 2009, 16 members of the "Los Palillos" gang were indicted for the torture and murder of nine people in San Diego on behalf of a Mexican DTO.

In all fairness, there's no concrete proof (yet) that either the McAllen country club shooting or the Chandler beheading are definitely connected to Mexican DTOs, but I'd be willing to bet money that they are. The real question becomes, are we seeing a trend, or are these three incidents just becoming more noticeable?

We know a couple of things. First, hitmen working for DTOs are starting out younger and younger, which means they lack the experience and expertise of their predecessors. That means hits these days tend to be messier and more public. We also know that some DTOs in some places are getting more desperate to hang on to their territory and their share of drug profits. This means they may be willing to take more risks when it comes to engaging in violent activity on this side of the border.

It's so hard to say because criminals tend to not report crimes committed against them. It could be just a sheer coincidence that these incidents happened within a few weeks of each other, or that the police found out about them; the killers could have just been careless in all three cases. However, I'm a firm believer that once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, and three times is a conspiracy. I prefer not to be an alarmist, but I'm concerned that these incidents were so blatant, and may have been designed to send a message. I'm not raising the red flag just yet, but I know I'll be keeping an eye out for other incidents like this in the next few weeks.

"Ciudad Mier evacuates after Zetas threaten to kill residents."

Here is an excerpt from this story in The Monitor:

"Hundreds of families have fled thisPueblo Magico amid reported death threats from drug cartel thugs. About 300 people are seeking shelter in nearby Miguel Alemán, the nearest city to this town across the border from western Starr County. Sources said after [Antonio Ezequiel 'Tony Tormenta] Cárdenas’ slaying Friday, members of Los Zetas, the drug cartel controlling Mier, were yelling in the streets that they were going to kill  everybody who remained in the town, sparking the exodus from town. Mexican Army officials in Reynosa and Nuevo Laredo denied knowing of any recent violence in Ciudad Mier. The military sources denied any knowledge about the threats. And today, authorities said they will need to open another shelter... Authorities in Miguel Aleman are helping the people, but nothing is being done to solve the situation in Ciudad Mier." Link to Full Article

And here is an excerpt from a separate but related story by Melissa Del Bosque in The Texas Observer:

"Residents in Mexican border cities including Ciudad Mier and Nuevo Guerrero have been living unde siege-like conditions for the past year. They are living without electricity, water. Their gas stations have been incinerated in a scorched earth campaign to take over the area as a prime drug smuggling route. One resident of Ciudad Mier, said cartel members have threatened to dynamite her town of 6,000 inhabitants, which neighbors Roma, Texas.  With the death of Gulf Cartel capo Tony Tormenta in Matamoros last week, the bloody fighting over territory with the Zeta cartel has escalated  to the point that Ciudad Mier residents started fleeing their town last Friday to take refuge in the neighboring city of Miguel Aleman... A resident of Ciudad Mier in the Monitor article described his city as a ghost town: 'The authorities do not go there. There are no soldiers there. There is nobody,' the former Mier resident said. 'The mayor is not there anymore, there is no police, no traffic authority — nobody. It’s a ghost town. All the businesses are closed. If you want an aspirin, you have to travel to Miguel Alemán, and by bus, because if you drive they take away your car.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: I'll be the first to admit that I've never heard of Ciudad Mier prior to reading these stories, let alone know about the extent of the violence going on there. This isn't the first time something this extreme has happened there, either. Hundreds of people have reportedly been killed there this year, although there's no official body count. In nearby Nueva Ciudad Guerrero, the town's only gas station has been blown up by narcos, food is in short supply, and federal police forces have moved out - essentially ceding control to the DTOs. On the other side of Ciudad Mier in Ciudad Miguel Alemán, the commander of the state police there had his severed head recently delivered to a nearby military post.

Here's a map image of the area so you can get a better idea of where this is going on. Also, I need to show you something interesting:

You see that large lake in the northwest corner of the map? That's Falcon Lake, where David Hartley was reportedly shot and killed by junior members of Los Zetas last month in a possible case of mistaken identity. So the violent activity in these towns comes as no surprise because we know it's a hotbed of DTO activity.

What does blow my mind is the threats by Los Zetas to kill everyone in the town of Ciudad Mier. The immediate, dramatic, and desperate response by the town tells me these threats were not overestimated, misunderstood, or mistranslated. The threats to kill hundreds of innocent men, women, and children also goes well beyond any traditional definition of activity carried out by mere organized crime.

Here's some raw video of what Ciudad Mier looks like now (i.e. a ghost town), and how its residents are waiting things out in Ciudad Miguel Alemán:

I welcome any civil, logical, and intelligent attempts to convince me that this is just criminal activity and not some form of terrorism. And before you respond, do a little bit of research on the history of the AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) and their methods. Just a hint: The AUC had no ideology and no desire to take over the government; they were paramilitaries acting as enforcers for Colombian drug lords. They were also designated a terrorist group by the US government in 2001.

"Authorities Say Cartel Leader’s Death Won’t Curb Violence."

Here is an excerpt from this story on KRGV.com:

"Over the weekend, more than 50 people were killed in several gunbattles in Matamoros. Among the dead, according to Mexican officials, the head of the Gulf Cartel Antonio Ezequiel Cardenas Guillen. Guillen, also known as "Tony Tormenta," was killed along with four of his gunmen. Just one day after his death, rival drug gangs hung signs on bridges and other public places gloating about his death. Authorities said with Cardenas now out of the way, rival Zetas will be even stronger and keep the violence coming, as rival drug gangs battle for power." Link to Full Article

Analysis: As I'm sure most of you have heard or read one way or another, on Nov, 5m Mexican authorities killed Antonio Ezequiel "Tony Tormenta" Cárdenas Guillen, one of the two heads of the Gulf cartel (CDG). Of course what everyone wants to know is, what will this mean for the DTO dynamic in northeastern Mexico, and how will it affect violence levels?

Well, I don't think things are going to get better, but they're not going to necessarily get worse. What happens depends mainly on how quickly Ezequiel can be replaced, if he's going to be replaced at all. What most media outlets are not telling you is that "Tony Tormenta" was not the only guy in charge of the CDG. He shared leadership with Jorge "El Coss" Costilla Sanchez, who is still around and actually has a pretty big price tag on his head - placed there by the US government. As you may know, Ezequiel was the brother of the notorious former CDG leader Osiel Cárdenas Guillen, who was arrested by Mexican authorities in 2003 and extradited to the US in 2007. 

Stratfor has something very interesting to say about Tony and El Coss: "Costilla Sanchez was said to be the operational leader of the cartel, with Tony Tormenta enjoying his position [as the Tamaulipas plaza boss] only due to his relationship to his brother, Osiel. In many ways, Tony Tormenta’s death could prove beneficial to Gulf cartel operations." I haven't read anything about Ezequiel being replaced by a lieutenant being promoted from within the CDG, so it's possible that Costilla Sanchez will try to maintain control of the CDG on his own.

If you hadn't heard, Los Zetas have been fighting with the CDG for control of the Texas-Mexico border region for the better part of a year and a half. Los Zetas will likely see Ezequiel's death as an opportunity to wrest control of some plazas - particularly Reynosa and Matamoros, from the CDG. However, I agree with Stratfor's assessment that the CDG will likely be prepared for this. I said in my interview with John Vause on CNN International a few days ago that I think this will be just a hiccup for the CDG. Yes, they've been weakened by Los Zetas and Mexican government actions over the last couple of years, but they still have plenty of fight left in them. We'll probably see more violence in northeastern Mexico over the next month or two as Los Zetas test the waters, but I think things will eventually go back to how they were in Tamaulipas before Ezequiel's death...at least until someone picks off Costilla Sanchez, that is. Then you'll be seeing another post from me on the CDG's fate.

Read more: Mexico Security Memo: Nov. 8, 2010 | STRATFOR 

What really happened to the Hartleys on Falcon Lake?

Analysis: I know I normally start off my posts with excerpts from news stories, but there are too many small pieces of this story in separate articles. I'll try my best to encapsulate everything here. 

You probably already know the basic story, but in case you don't... David and Tiffany Hartley went for a ride on their jet skis last month on Falcon Lake, which straddles the Texas-Mexico border. There are some beautiful church ruins (#12 on the map) that are partially submerged on the Mexican side that they were trying to check out. While they were near that area, Tiffany says they were approached by men in three boats who started shooting. They began to flee towards the US side of the lake, but then David got shot and fell off his jet ski. Tiffany tried to pull him up onto her ski, but she says they started shooting at her. So, she had to leave him and beat feet to avoid getting shot herself.

Tiffany has provided a few different versions of the story, which has caused authorities on both sides of the border to be a little suspicious. David's body hasn't been found yet, and it will probably never be found. I've also read accounts that say David was shot from the front, which doesn't jive with him getting shot while heading away from the "pirates" towards the US side of the lake. The same account said the Hartleys had just returned from a luxury cruise and bought a house filled with new furniture shortly after attending a seminar for people having financial trouble.

The latest analysis by Stratfor says the shooting was a case of mistaken identity. David apparently had worked in Reynosa, and their car had Tamaulipas plates. This led Los Zetas to believe the Hartleys may be rival DTO Gulf cartel scouts. Stratfor also surmises that the killing was unauthorized, and the accidental work of young amateurs who have probably been killed by their cartel bosses already. The head Mexican investigator has already been killed, with his severed head delivered to Mexican authorities, and the search for David's body has been suspended indefinitely.

So what really happened? I have to tell you, this story doesn't pass the smell test for me. There's too much that doesn't make sense, and Tiffany has told too many different versions of what happened. I keep going back to the motive of the alleged shooters. Robbery (which is what pirates do)? No way...two jet skiers wouldn't exactly have a lot of cash on them, and I haven't read anywhere that the pirates took David's jet ski - or even tried to take Tiffany's. Retribution? I was told by a reporter friend of mine who got an off-the-record tip that the Hartleys may have been involved in some drug activity, but that hasn't been fleshed out enough. For fun? I still think it's too dangerous for cartels to start randomly shooting at innocent Americans just to do it because they know the response will likely be strong and swift. 

I think the Stratfor explanation makes sense. I know that many DTOs are hard up for shooters, so sometimes they have to hire younger punks with itchy trigger fingers. I just didn't expect that Los Zetas - probably the strongest DTO next to the Sinaloa Federation - would be so hard up that they'd have to go that route. Then again, they did just execute 72 South American migrants who refused to work for them. The more-then-slightly cynical explanation that "the wife did it" also makes sense, especially if the Hartley's were hard up for money and she was looking for a life insurance payout. However, we know Los Zetas were definitely involved in the incident - whatever really happened - and it's unlikely Tiffany had entered into some sort of arrangement with them. 

The Mexican authorities do not want to get back in this game for fear of losing more investigators, and they've already spent way more time looking for David than they would have looking for a Mexican citizen. I highly doubt David's body will ever be found - I agree with Stratfor that Los Zetas had to eliminate it - and we'll never have an account of events outside of Tiffany's side of the story. One can only hope that US citizens actually start heeding the advice given in State Department travel warnings and stay away from places like Falcon Lake known to be highly active drug smuggling areas.

"Border Wars" on NatGeo is worth checking out

I recently caught on to a series on the National Geographic channel called "Border Wars." It's a documentary that follows US Border Patrol agents around while they patrol the US-Mexico border, and also observes the work of US Customs and Border Protection agents at selected ports of entry. I'll be honest, I'm fascinated after watching a few episodes from last season, mostly with the clips of Customs agents working hard to find hidden compartments in vehicles that are holding an impressive amount of drugs and cash. Another thing that made an impression was the glimpse of the hostile conditions under which Border Patrol agents often work - especially while wearing long-sleeved dark green uniforms. Who came up with that bright idea? 

Anyway, if you've never been to the US-Mexico border and are curious how these folks do their jobs, the show (if you get NatGeo channel) is well worth checking it out. I believe the new season starts tonight (Wednesday) at 8:00pm EST: http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/border-wars

"What's behind Mexican migrant killings still unclear."

Here is an excerpt from Tim Johnson's article in McClatchy Newspapers:

"President Felipe Calderon on Friday accused the gunmen who killed 72 illegal migrants in northern Mexico this week of "incalculable savagery" as his government attempted to depict the   major drug gang implicated in the slaughter as weakened and desperate. The discovery of the grisly massacre Tuesday night at a ranch near San Fernando, about 45 miles southwest of Brownsville, Texas, put the spotlight on Los Zetas, a crime syndicate based along the Gulf Coast of Mexico that has international tentacles. The massacre — and its murky motives — continued to shake Mexico on Friday... Calderon himself also confirmed that two state criminal investigators who'd been assigned to probe the slayings had vanished... Alejandro Poire of the National Security Council said the gunmen had captured the migrants and given them a choice: Work for Los Zetas as gunslingers and peons, or face death. When the 58 male and 14 female migrants resisted, they were killed... However, an Austin, Texas-based strategic intelligence research group, Stratfor, said in a report Friday that Los Zetas, sometimes called simply the 'Z's,' indeed are hurting... Another analyst of Mexico's security situation, Edgardo Buscaglia, cast doubt on official accounts of the massacre and criticized Calderon's handling of it... 'The president, unfortunately, looks at all of this as a media war,' Buscaglia said. The portrayal of Los Zetas as weakened 'is a marketing story' to deal with the international black eye Mexico has suffered with the massacre,' he said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: So unfortunately, it looks like there's still a lot of doubt surrounding this incident, despite the extensive media coverage over the last few days. Was it really Los Zetas who committed this heinous act? If so, are they weakened or stronger than ever? And did they kill the migrants because they needed the manpower, or simply because they couldn't pay ransom?

The reason that the Mexican government believes it was Los Zetas is because the one man who survived the mass killing told authorities that the shooters identified themselves as such. I know of several instances where Los Zetas have had no problems taking credit for things or advertising themselves, so that's not out of the ordinary. However, this also sets them up to be framed, as it were, by rivals. The area where the massacre occurred has been Gulf cartel territory for some time, but Borderland Beat reported in mid-June that gunmen belonging to Los Zetas had attacked other cities and towns under the control of the Gulf cartel in the previous two weeks, including Mier, Reynosa, Tampico and Valle Hermoso. It's likely the killers were Zetas, but keep in mind the possibility that men from the Gulf cartel could be setting up their former partners. And who better to take the bait than non-Mexican migrants who aren't as familiar with the workings of the different Mexican DTOs? I know it's a stretch, and such a plan would have been useless if that one migrant hadn't gotten away from them.

As for Los Zetas losing strength, that's also possible. They had gotten strong enough that the Sinaloa Federation, La Familia, and the Gulf cartel felt the need to (temporarily, of course) join forces in order to put Los Zetas out of business. Considering how much bad blood there is between the Federation and the CDG, that alliance speaks volumes to the capabilities Los Zetas had achieved. So does this mean that the alliance was doing its job, and the massacre was an act of desperation? I'm not so sure. Remember, Los Zetas share a special bond and have a whole truckload of special forces training. This is what makes them some of the best and most efficient killers in Mexico. Heck, they were recruiting the Guatemalan Kaibiles to help them. Why all of a sudden would they want to forcibly recruit a group of 72 non-Mexican migrants into their organization (as slaves or otherwise) who aren't trained or vetted? They probably have a line of former cops and soldiers a mile long wanting to work for them and make the money they do. They'd also be better off just subcontracting to a Mexican gang.

We know that the methods of killing have become increasingly brutal over the years because, in a way, they have to. Just like TV or video games, we become insensitive to certain things over time, so DTOs have to get creative or just do something over-the-top to get a rival's--or the government's--attention. This could be a "simple" case of an opportunity for some Zetas to extort a large group of unfortunate immigrants from other countries. Maybe they felt less sympathy for them because they weren't their countrymen. Who knows? When the migrants couldn't pay up, the killers might have seen that as a chance to teach them a lesson, earn some street cred, and send a message at the same time.

These are just a few of the possibilities that have crossed my mind, and the truth is often far stranger than anything I can come up with on my own. Considering that investigators of the killings are now starting to disappear, we may never get to the bottom of the story.

UPDATE: Police blotter entry claimed to be proof of Laredo ranch takeover

Yesterday, I had an interesting email exchange with CNN's Nick Valencia regarding the Examiner.com story of a supposed takeover of a ranch in Laredo, Texas by Los Zetas. He had been exchanging emails with the story's author, Kimberly Dvorak, who was still sticking to her story, despite heaps of evidence to the contrary. Well, the "evidence" she provided him that the takeover actually occurred is making the Internet rounds today - a screenshot (and possibly a digital snapshot) of a police blotter entry. Here it is:

 

Nick asked for my thoughts on it, and here's what I told him:

Analysis: "There are several tiny details wrong with the entry. First of all (and you probably already know this), you have the City of Laredo Police Department and Webb County Sheriff - two separate law enforcement entities with different jurisdictions. Why would an official blotter entry refer to LSO (Laredo Sheriff's Office) when there's no such thing? LPD is only referred to as such at the end of the report. I have a hard time believing a deputy with WCSO or officer with LPD would make such an error repeatedly. Also, why would Border Patrol respond to such an incident that would clearly fall under the jurisdiction of local law enforcement? If anything, the FBI would respond with a hostage rescue team, not Border Patrol. From a law enforcement perspective, this report makes no sense to me. Finally, Los Zetas telling the ranch owner that no one is allowed on-site without permission? Really? Like someone would come knocking in the middle of an armed takeover of a ranch on US soil and be allowed to visit by one of the most dangerous cartels in Mexico."

This story still hasn't made it into the mainstream media. The blotter entry story made it into the North Star National (never heard of it) and some blogs, but nothing like CNN, FOXNews, or MSNBC. And now that I've had more time to think about it, I'm finding more and more holes in the blotter story. Why haven't subsequent entries been provided, which would ostensibly outline how things turned out? It looks like a photo of a computer screen, which may have been taken with a cell phone camera. Why didn't the leaking party at whatever law enforcement agency take a photo of more entries to back up his claims?  Why isn't there any evidence of arrests, or injured hostages/narcos/cops? That blotter entry also contained a LOT of sensitive operational details. Normally, blotter entries are short and to the point. It's not good operational security to include how many SWAT team members are involved, where they're setting up for surveillance and/or building breach, etc. 

Still, waaaaay too many things that don't make sense. Still not convinced, Kimberly!

"Los Zetas drug cartel seizes 2 U.S. ranches in Texas."

Here is an excerpt from Kimberly Dvorak's article on Examiner.com:

"In what could be deemed an act of war against the sovereign borders of the United States, Mexican drug cartels have seized control of at least two American ranches inside the U.S. territory near Laredo, Texas. Two sources inside the Laredo Police Department confirmed the incident is unfolding and they would continue to coordinate with U.S. Border Patrol today. “We consider this an act of war,” said one police officer on the ground near the scene. There is a news blackout of this incident at this time and the sources inside Laredo PD spoke on the condition of anonymity. Word broke late last night that Laredo police have requested help from the federal government regarding the incursion by the Los Zetas. It appears that the ranch owners have escaped without incident but their ranches remain in the hands of the blood thirsty cartels. Laredo Border Patrol is conducting aerial surveillance over the ranches to determine the best way to regain control of the U.S. ranches, according to the Laredo Police department. The approximate location of the U.S. ranches are10 miles northwest of I-35 off Mines Road and Minerales Annex Road. Just off 1472 (Mines road) near Santa Isabel Creek north of the city of Laredo, Texas." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Normally I wouldn't dignify a story like this with a post, but it's making enough rounds across the Internet that I feel compelled to dispel the rumors and set Ms. Dvorak straight. First of all, the story is completely untrue. I've confirmed that through the Webb County Sheriff and US Northern Command. A US government spokesperson has also dismissed the story as false. It's unfortunate that Ms. Dvorak insists on sticking to her story, which is based on anonymous and circular information.

Since I used to be the South America Policy Examiner for Examiner.com (I've since stopped because it pays pennies for the work you have to do to make any worthwhile money), I know that your earnings are based on the number of hits your article page gets, and how long the reader stays on the page. I guarantee you Ms. Dvorak is seeing a spike in hits today, and I'm not crazy about the fact I'm contributing to that - and the further spread of her bad article - by linking to it above. But fair is fair, and I won't make an exception just because the story is "hogwash," to quote the Sheriff in Laredo.

Let's go beyond the fact the story has been discounted by several local and national law enforcement and government authorities for a minute. Why would Los Zetas try to seize two ranches in Laredo? They already have homes and properties and cars in various cities in the southwest border states, and with all the money they have to burn, they can just buy any ranch they want. Why expose themselves to US law enforcement with such reckless behavior? The story says the ranch owners escaped without incident; that in and of itself is odd. It throws the possibility of the seizure as DTO retribution against the owners out the window. It also implies that the ranch owners either had some kind of warning about the intrusion or were let go by the intruders. Neither of those theories fit with Los Zetas modus operandi; they're extremely stealthy, and generally don't let witnesses just wander off.

Either way, the important takeaway is that Los Zetas have NOT taken over two ranches in Laredo, and always remember to ask critical questions when you read a story like this that seems too sensational to be true. One of these days it might be, but chances are there's less to it.

"Shots apparently fired from Juárez pelt City Hall, enter office."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Borunda's article in the El Paso Times:

"Several gunshots apparently fired from Juárez hit El Paso City Hall on Tuesday afternoon. No one was hurt, but nerves were rattled at City Hall in what is thought to be the first cross-border   gunfire during a drug war that has engulfed Juárez since 2008. El Paso police spokesman Darrel Petry said investigators do not think City Hall was intentionally targeted but rather was struck by stray shots. 'It does appear the rounds may have come from an incident in Juárez,' Petry said. City Hall sits on a hill about a half-mile north of the Rio Grande... Petry said an inspection by police and city staff found that City Hall was hit by seven gunshots, which appeared to be losing velocity when they struck. Six of the rounds hit stucco walls on the north and south sides of the building. Two bullets were recovered -- the one that went through the window and one that bounced off an exterior wall. The size of the bullets was not disclosed... El Paso police said the time the gunshots hit City Hall coincides with a shooting in west Juárez on Bernardo Norzagaray boulevard, which runs parallel to the Rio Grande... Investigators found 40 bullet casings from an AK-47 and other firearms." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I definitely agree with Petry's assessment that City Hall was not intentionally targeted, but had the misfortune to be in the line of fire of an incident in Juárez. I'm not a ballistics expert, but I remember enough from my active duty Air Force days and my firearms experience to know the range of a small-caliber handgun versus that of a rifle. I'd say it's likely those rounds came from a rifle due to the sheer distance, but it doesn't really matter; those folks in City Hall were really freaked out, and rightfully so.

So what do we make of this incident? Unfortunately, not much can be made of it. You have to chalk it up to "that's what happens" when you're a city in such geographical proximity to a place like Ciudad Juárez. And there isn't anything that can practically be done about it. Retrofitting a building with a face made of up mostly glass windows with either concrete or bullet-proof glass is impractical at best. Fortunately, it's not like these stray bullet incidents are happening every day. We know they've happened before in similar sister-city situations in Texas, but again, they didn't involve intentional targeting of US buildings. On top of all that, the targeting of a building like El Paso's City hall would be a radical departure from the usual tactics of DTOs, and it wouldn't accomplish anything as far as DTO business goals go. 

I do find it amusing that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott wrote President Barack Obama on Wednesday to say Tuesday's "cross-border gunfire" was more proof that the state "is under constant assault from illegal activity threatening a porous border." He also used the incident as evidence that the 1,200 National Guard troops Obama plans to send to the border won't be nearly enough. I agree with him completely on that in general, but even if 5,000 Guard troops were on duty when that incident occurred, they couldn't have done anything to stop it. 

El Paso City Manager Joyce Wilson also shrugged off suggestions that more security could prevent stray bullets from flying across the border. I have to agree with Wilson on this one. Technically, City Hall was not intentionally "under assault" like Abbott claims. While I hate the fact that something like this can happen and yes, put Americans in harm's way, we have to understand that this situation - meaning stray gunfire across the border - is not something the US government or law enforcement can control. Yes, it is excruciating for many (myself included) to acknowledge that, and worse to feel so helpless about it. But until Mexican authorities can get a handle on these types of incidents in their border cities that are mere yards from ours, we have to just hope and pray that something like this doesn't happen again.

"Drug cartel issues threat to off-duty Nogales police officers."

Here is an excerpt from Jonathan Clark's article in Nogales International:

"A Mexican drug cartel has threatened Nogales police officers, saying they will be targeted for retribution if they conduct off-duty drug busts. Nogales Police Chief Jeffrey Kirkham told the Nogales International on Friday that the threats stemmed from an incident approximately two weeks ago, when off-duty officers surprised marijuana smugglers while riding horseback in an unincorporated border area east of town. The officers seized part of the drug load, and the smugglers were able to flee back into Mexico with the other part. 'As a result of that,' Kirkham said, 'our officers have received threats from the cartel that they are to look the other way if they are off-duty, or they will be targeted by a sniper or by other means.' NPD learned of the threats through informants, he said... Santa Cruz County Sheriff Antonio Estrada said he was unaware of similar threats being made against his deputies. 'They seem to respect an officer who’s doing his job,' Estrada said of the cartels, 'but when you do it as a civilian, they really take offense.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: I've seen several official reports circulated by various law enforcement agencies regarding threats made by DTOs against federal agents and local police, but most of them end up being only rumors. This threat seems to be more credible than usual, given the response by Nogales PD. However, it is still based on information provided by an informant, and we have no way of knowing (a) how reliable that informant's information is, (b) what his motivation might be for providing it (possible testing of officer response to threats?), or (c) if the information he provided has been independently corroborated.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that the threat is real. I find it interesting that Sheriff Estrada said the DTOs respect US officer response if they're uniformed, i.e. on duty, yet take offense if they do anything while off-duty. As a former agent myself, I know first hand that it's not like you stop being a cop the second you change your clothes, or take your badge off your belt. There are certain protocols to follow if you're off-duty versus on-duty, but police officers are still authorized to act appropriately to their mandate if they come across illegal activity while off-duty.

I'm not sure where that DTO mentality comes from, if Sheriff Estrada's take on it is indeed accurate. Maybe DTOs differentiate between US police action as "that's business" versus "that's personal." Honestly, this is the first time I've come across information indicating a difference in DTO behavior towards US law enforcement based on their duty status. If I have any readers that can elaborate further, your comments are most welcome!

"Portion of US wildlife refuge closed due to violent border activity."

The sad part about this story is that it's not actually a story, and it's not even remotely news (in the sense that it's a recent occurrence). While exchanging emails with a reader this afternoon, he emailed me a document that sent me through the roof. It's a 2006 notice from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, advising the general public that a portion of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge in southern Arizona had been closed to the public because it had been "adversely affected by border-related activities." Furthermore, the Department stated it felt "continued public use of the area [was] not prudent." This closure was effective as of October 2006. Click HERE to read the entire notice, but here's the essential text:

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has closed a portion of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge south of the Garcia Road to public use, under authority found in 8 RM 13.5 and 50 CFR 25.21(e) effective October 3, 2006. Garcia Road runs east/west parallel to the international boundary about one mile north of the line. This area is about 3500 acres in size. Our concern for public safety is paramount. The situation in this zone has reached a point where continued public use of the area is not prudent. The Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge has been adversely affected by border-related activities. The international border with Mexico has also become increasingly violent. Assaults on law enforcement officers and violence against migrants have escalated. Violence on the Refuge associated with smugglers and border bandits has been well documented. Many of these activities are concentrated at, or near, the border. The concentration of illegal activity, surveillance and law enforcement interdictions make these zones dangerous. Closure is in effect until further notice. 

The refuge sits almost in the center of Arizona's border with Mexico. Here's a map:

I'm frustrated that many politicians and federal government officials can breezily claim that border violence spillover isn't happening, and the US side of the border is as safe as it's ever been. Yet, we hear stories like the one I posted about earlier today from the Pinal County Sheriff, who says he has no control over portions of his own county. And I read and hear countless stories from ranchers on the US side of the border who constantly deal with armed Mexican thugs on their property who like to break into innocent people's homes and rob them at gunpoint. Then I read this - which our government has obviously known about for some time - and it sends me through the roof. Why hasn't this still-in-effect closure been widely reported in the news? More importantly, why has the security situation in one of our own wildlife refuges been allowed to get so out of hand that we've ceded control to drug and human smugglers, and just outright closed it to public access?

I know this is coming across as a soapbox rant, and I have to offer my apologies. I try to keep my analysis on subjects like this as level-headed as possible, but in light of the back-to-back-to-back confrontations between violent border crossers, smugglers, US law enforcement, and average Americans, I'm starting to lose patience with people who say spillover isn't a problem. Maybe not in their neighborhood, but I've got a truckload of people and towns who would beg to differ.

"Pinal County Sheriff: Mexican drug cartels now control parts of Arizona."

Here is an excerpt from MaryEllen Resendez's article on ABC15.com:

"Two men shot earlier this week could be the result of the ongoing battle between Mexican drug cartels now spilling over deep into Arizona, officials say. Pinal County investigators say  an area  known as the smuggling corridor now stretches from Mexico's border to metro Phoenix. The area , once an area for family hiking and off road vehicles has government signs warning residents of the drug and human smugglers. Night vision cameras have photographed military armed cartel members delivering drugs to vehicles along Highway 8. 'We are three counties deep. How is it that you see pictures like these, not American with semi and fully automatic rifles. How is that okay?' asked Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu. Babeu said he no longer has control over parts of his county. 'We are outgunned, we are out manned and we don't have the resources here locally to fight this,' he said at a Friday news conference... Babeu said he doesn't believe the drug cartel problems will not be solved when SB 1070 becomes a law, or with President Obama's promise of 1,200 troops spread out among four border states. 'It will fall short. What is truly needed in 3,000 soldiers for Arizona alone,' Babeu said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I've written at length about the debate over border violence "spillover" - the confusion over what it really entails, and whether or not it's actually happening. The naysayers point to crime statistics, which in several major border cities show that the incidence of major crimes has gone down. El Paso is even considered the 2nd or 3rd safest city in the whole country. However, I don't believe you can use crime statistics alone to determine whether or not border violence spillover is occurring; there is just way too much anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

Sometimes people point to a few sheriffs in border counties and say they're just being paranoid. However, this county is not even along the border - it's three counties in and roughly 80 miles from Arizona's border with Mexico. Even more disturbing is this image I was sent this morning of a sign posted along mile marker 150 of Interstate 8 by the US Bureau of Land Management:

If you're a tourist or any other American driving along I-8 and see this sign, what are you going to think? Personally, you can tell me a hundred times that San Diego and El Paso and other cities along the border have declining crime rates, but if I see this sign, I'm going to book it out of there as fast as I can. Worse yet, this sign comes across (to me, anyway) as an acknowledgement by a federal government agency that this activity is occurring well within US territory with their knowledge, and US law enforcement doesn't have the resources to protect everyone from the threat posed by drug and human smugglers.

Here's a local news video relative to the story:

If this situation doesn't constitute border violence spillover, then I don't know what does. 

"Mexico anger high as US Border Patrol kills teen."

Here is an excerpt from Olivia Torres and Christopher Sherman's Associated Press article in Yahoo! News:

"Mexicans are seething over the second death of a countryman at the hands of U.S. Border Patrol agents in two weeks, an incident near downtown El Paso that is threatening to escalate tensions over migrant issues. U.S. authorities said Tuesday a border patrol agent was trying to   defend himself and colleagues when he fatally shot the 15-year-old as officers came under a barrage of big stones while trying to detain illegal immigrants on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande... Preliminary reports on the incident indicated that U.S. officers on bicycle patrol "were assaulted with rocks by an unknown number of people," Border Patrol Special Operations Supervisor Ramiro Cordero said Tuesday... The shooting happened beneath a railroad bridge linking the two nations... Arturo Sandoval, a spokesman for the Chihuahua state Attorney General's office, said a spent .40-caliber shell casing was found near the body — raising the question of whether the fatal shot was fired inside Mexico, although he did not explicitly make that allegation... U.S. official, meanwhile, said video shows the Border Patrol agent did not enter Mexico. [He] said the video also shows what seem to be four Mexican law enforcement officers driving to the edge of the dry but muddy bed of the Rio Grande, walking across to the U.S. side, picking up an undetermined object and returning to Mexico near the area where the boy's body was. According to the FBI, Border Patrol agents were responding to a group of suspected illegal immigrants being smuggled into the U.S. near the Paso Del Norte bridge, across from Ciudad Juarez around 6:30 p.m. Monday. One suspected illegal immigrant was detained on the levee on the U.S. side, the FBI said in a statement. Another Border Patrol agent arrived on the concrete bank where the now-dry, 33-foot (10-meter) wide Rio Grande is, and detained a second person. Other suspects ran back into Mexico and began throwing rocks, the FBI said. At least one rock came from behind the agent, who was kneeling beside a suspected illegal immigrant whom he had prone on the ground... The agent told the rock throwers to stop and back off, but they continued. The agent fired his weapon several times, hitting one who later died, said the FBI, which is leading the investigation because it involved an assault on a federal officer. The agent was not injured, Simmons said... T.J. Bonner, president of the union representing Border Patrol agents, said rock throwing aimed at Border Patrol agents is common and capable of causing serious injury." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is definitely the southwest border controversy of the moment (as if the USBP tasering of a meth addict a few days ago wasn't enough for you), and that means there's much about the situation to discuss - and speculate about. The investigation is ongoing, which means that new details come out every day, and often those details in today's media reports contradict yesterday's details. Please keep this in mind as the story unfolds. I've selected the above AP story to quote from because it seems to be the most detailed account published yet.

First, no one is really sure on which side of the border this incident occurred. The Mexican government says the USBP agent who fired his weapon did so (illegally) on Mexican soil. The FBI, so far, is saying that the incident occurred on the US side of the Rio Grande, and other US officials are claiming they have a video depicting Mexican law enforcement officers crossing the river (illegally) to pick up some unidentified object on the US side and bring it back to the Mexican side by the victim's body. The clear implication here is that the object was the spent .40-caliber casing of one of the bullets fired by the USBP agent. I don't know what will come of that video; I do know that if it comes down to he-said-she-said pure witness testimony, you're going to have a slew of contradictory accounts regarding where the agent was and where the boy was.

Then, of course, there's the bigger issue of whether or not the shooting was warranted. Many people (and certainly the victim's family and Mexican government, in this case) would say that the use of a gun wasn't warranted to "mere" rock throwing. Well, you might be surprised at the circumstances under which it is, as this isn't the first time such an incident has occurred, and agents have been cleared of any wrongdoing. First of all, USBP use-of-force guidelines permit agents to use their handguns against rock throwers if they feel their or their colleagues' lives are being threatened. I've seen pictures of agents who have been hit by rocks, and in many cases, it's not pretty - particularly a recent incident where an agent lost an eye after being hit with a rock the size of a brick. We're not talking pebbles here, folks. Some of these "rocks" being used are huge, and could kill someone if hit hard enough in the head.

Now, it's bad enough to have to deal with rock throwers one-on-one. But some of the media accounts lead me to believe this agent may have been ganged-up on by several rock throwers at once. I don't know if that's the case, or what size the rocks are. I will tell you that if he was in a prone position holding someone down by himself, then all of a sudden starting getting hit by softball-sized rocks being thrown by three people, I wouldn't be surprised at all that he drew his gun and started firing. I know I'd be in fear for my life, as pepper spray and a taser gun - even a baton - wouldn't cut it in that situation. Just my personal opinion.

Actually, here's an example of a previous similar incident. In 2005, a USBP agent shot an 18 year-old who was throwing rocks at him near the San Diego-Tijuana border crossing. The boy died, and an extensive inquiry began regarding the agent's use of force during the incident. He was cleared of all wrongdoing, and the investigation showed there wasn't enough evidence to charge him with anything. In 2007, another agent shot and killed a 22 year-old Mexican national near the border after the tried to smash the agent's head with a large rock. After the agent was acquitted of wrongdoing, the victim's family filed a civil suit against the US government, and the Mexican government filed a protest similar to what it's doing now. Again, nothing came of the suit.

Bottom line, it's easy to condemn or support certain actions when you don't know all the facts. I'll be perfectly up front in saying I'm biased towards law enforcement since I used to be a military federal agent; that shouldn't come as a surprise to any of my regular readers. That's not to say that US agents don't ever make mistakes or have clouded judgment. However, many Americans don't understand what it's like to be working on the border every single day, often in the searing heat, and having to deal with drug smugglers (who are often armed) and belligerent illegal immigrants. Last year, there were over 1,000 violent incidents perpetrated against USBP agents. There was a two percent drop in the number of incidents from the previous year, but that's the first drop (however small) in several years. I'm just saying that before people start going ballistic about the big bad US agent with a gun firing indiscriminately against some hapless immigrant, they should think about the threats being faced every day by our agents along the border, and wait to find out more about what happened in this specific case before passing judgment.

"Meth believed to be a factor in Taser death."

Here is an excerpt from Kristina Davis' article in the San Diego Union Tribune:

"Methamphetamine abuse and high blood pressure were believed to be contributing factors in the death of a Mexican man who suffered a heart attack after being shot with a Taser stun gun, the Medical Examiner’s Office said Wednesday. Anastacio Hernandez Rojas stopped breathing after being shocked by federal border officials and was declared brain-dead at a hospital Saturday. He was taken off life support Monday. Authorities are still awaiting the results of toxicology tests, which could take about six weeks, to determine what substances may have been in his system when he was shocked. Amphetamine use is not uncommon among the human smuggling routes of East County and in Arizona, with smugglers giving the substances to their charges in an attempt to make them walk faster and longer on what can be an arduous trek. U.S. Border Patrol agents also commonly find empty cans of energy drinks strewn along smuggling trails. San Diego Police Department officials said Hernandez Rojas and his brother were arrested by U.S. Border Patrol agents about 7:20 p.m. Friday on suspicion of illegally crossing the border in the Otay Mountain area. The two men were transported to a Border Patrol station for processing, then to the border turnstile at San Ysidro to be returned to Mexico. As agents were unloading him from a van and taking off his handcuffs, police said he started fighting with the Border Patrol agents, who used batons to try to subdue him. U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers were called for help. A customs agent shot Hernandez Rojas in the back with a Taser and he stopped breathing shortly afterward. Officers administered CPR before paramedics took him to the hospital." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I was waiting a little bit for this story to develop a little further before posting on it, and I'm glad I did. I know we occasionally hear stories about people occasionally getting beaten, tasered, and otherwise abused by police á la Rodney King, and I was hoping this wouldn't be one of those cases. USBP agents, in my experience, are usually very professional and highly trained, so I would hope that what happened to Hernandez Rojas wasn't a case of a bunch of jerks on some power trip.

For those of you not familiar with the effects of methamphetamine (meth) on the mind and body, it's an extremely powerful mental and physical stimulant. It can make your mind feel sharper and your brain feel stronger. It will keep you up for hours because of the extremely heightened state of awareness it puts you into. Many who take it feel invincible, like they can do anything. While meth doesn't have as strong a physical effect as PCP, it still makes for a very potent adversary in a fight. If it's true that Hernandez Rojas had a good amount of meth in his system when he was confronted by USBP agents, then it's more and more likely that the agents and responding Arizona DPS officers acted in accordance within protocol to protect themselves, and to prevent Hernandez Rojas from causing injury to himself.

As for the man's death, taking meth while having a high blood pressure condition does not a strong heart make. Again, if this is true, then there was no way any police officer could know that tasering Hernandez Rojas would have such an impact. There is still an investigation to be conducted and autopsy tests to be run, but I have a feeling this is going to work out in favor of the USBP agents and Arizona DPS officers.

UPDATE: Just as a note, I have a link to the San Diego County Medical Examiner's report on Hernandez Rojas' condition. It essentially says he died from a heart attack, to which meth abuse and hypertension contributed. It's also listed as a homicide; however, keep in mind, if he had pulled out a machine gun, and cops responded by shooting and killing him in self-defense, it would be reported the same way. It's still prudent to wait for the outcome of the internal investigation.

I also find it pretty amusing that Mexican Ambassador to the US Arturo Sarukhan is tweeting that his government will do everything necessary to prevent the future use of excessive force by US authorities against its citizens. This is funny, considering the routine use of excessive, brutal, and abusive force by Mexican law enforcement authorities against illegal immigrants from Central America, usually in Mexico's southernmost state of Chiapas where they enter. 

"Largest weapons cache in years seized in Laredo."

Here is an excerpt from Christopher Sherman's article in the Houston Chronicle:

"Laredo police say they made one of their largest weapons seizures in years after pulling over a truck laden with brand new assault rifles, bayonets and ammunition that they believe was headed to Mexico... Acting on a tip from the Webb County Sheriff's Office, Laredo police   stopped a vehicle containing 175 brand-new, boxed assault rifles, 200 high-capacity magazines, 53 bayonets and 10,000 rounds of ammunition. One of the two men in the vehicle tried to flee, but was apprehended, said Laredo Police Investigator Joe Baeza. Baeza said when authorities laid out the cache in a conference room of the federal building in Laredo Monday, it covered half the floor. He said it was the largest weapons seizure in a decade in the area around Laredo, which is 145 miles south of San Antonio along the U.S. border with Mexico. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are investigating the seizure, but Baeza said the presumption is the vehicle was heading to Mexico." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This story is a stark reminder of the southbound weapons trafficking problem we're dealing with. The AK-47s that were seized are high on the list of Mexican DTOs' weapons of choice. While the story doesn't say exactly where they were purchased, it's likely a straw buyer bought them through legal means over a period of time at either gun shops or gun shows in Texas. This is discouraging to gun rights' groups who assert that the claim about so many guns going to Mexico from the US is a conspiracy by left-wingers to reinstate the assault weapons ban. And it's also true that such a reinstatement would directly affect the sale of AK-47 and similar rifles within the US.

However, there is a different, "good news" aspect to this story. First of all, the weapons never made it out of the US and into Mexico. I have always asserted that the key to slowing down the southbound flow of weapons is not to implement new laws, but to enforce the ones we already have. Second, the reason law enforcement was able to catch these guns before they made it to the border is because of a simple Crime Stoppers program. Someone (likely anonymous) contacted the Webb County Sheriff's Office with information about the van and its shipment, and together with the Laredo Police Department, they were able to identify and stop the van. That's simple, good police work with the help of human sources. True, I have no idea if the person who provided the information was a rival of the intended weapons recipient, or a concerned individual who didn't want those guns getting into the wrong hands. 

Regardless, I want to hear/read more stories about this sort of thing happening - law enforcement agencies working closely with gun shop owners and confidential informations to successfully stop weapons shipments like this one from ever making it to the southwest border. 

"Officials: 3 men kidnapped, murdered in Juárez were US citizens."

Here is an excerpt from Aileen Flores' article in the El Paso Times:

"Chihuahua state police confirmed Tuesday that three of the four bodies found in the back of a pickup in east Juárez on Monday were those of U.S. citizens abducted during a wedding last week... All are from La Mesa, [New Mexico], in Doña Ana County... The Moraleses were kidnapped by gunmen who burst into the wedding ceremony Friday evening at El Señor de la Misericordia Catholic church... On Monday, Mexican police found four bodies with signs of torture in the covered bed of a Toyota Tacoma with Texas license plates... Their father said the wedding took place in Juárez because that is where the bride was raised. He said she is also a U.S. citizen... During the ceremony, a group of armed men arrived, ordered everyone to get down to the ground and kidnapped the victims. Rafael Morales said Mexican and U.S. authorities are assisting the family in the investigation... Chihuahua state police officials said the family did not file a kidnap report with the state police. They said an investigation into the slayings continues. No arrests have been made." Link to Full Article

Analysis: The groom's father has told authorities and the media that he has no idea why his son and the others were kidnapped and killed, but the immediate answer is that they seriously ticked off someone in a major DTO - likely either the VCFO or the Federation, since that's who's fighting in Juárez these days. Initial information indicated there was never a ransom request or contact made by the kidnappers; now we know why. This was a targeted hit against those four people, and although we may never know the exact reason they were targeted, it's most likely there was some sort of DTO link there. 

I have no information at all that indicates DTO enforcers are just randomly kidnapping and killing people for no reason. As I've mentioned before, that type of action would represent a MAJOR shift in DTO tactics - especially if US citizens were being targeted just because they were citizens. Several dozen US citizens have either been killed in Mexico or become victims of cross-border kidnappings. But US citizenship doesn't mean you're clean and invulnerable, or that you didn't have DTO ties before you swore the oath. I hate to be so cynical, but unless I read something solid to the contrary, I'm going to assume that these US citizens in particular were either actively involved in the drug trade, were witnesses to something they shouldn't have seen, or were working as informants for a US agency. All three of these situations are likely to put someone - regardless of citizenship - six feet under in a Mexican dirt pile.

"Tijuana club scene revs up as drug-war fears ease."

Here is an excerpt from Richard Marosi's article in the Los Angeles Times:

"Four months after the capture of the notorious crime boss Teodoro Garcia Simental, this border city is showing glimpses of its old, vibrant self. Like survivors of a Category 5 hurricane of crime, residents are emerging from their homes, wary but hopeful. While clashes in other key drug-  trafficking centers such as Juarez are reaching new heights of brutality, the uniquely savage violence that has plagued Tijuana during the government's three-year war on organized crime has declined dramatically since the January arrest. Drug-fueled crime has always cycled up and down, of course. But there are no signs that anyone of Garcia's ruthless ambition has stepped into the power void. Although homicides still occur at a steady pace, the beheadings, massacres and dissolution of victims in lye that were Garcia's terrorizing trademark have largely stopped... Government officials complain that the State Department's travel alerts are scaring off visitors. After Garcia's capture, local authorities hoped Washington would ease the warnings, but the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana issued another one, saying Garcia's arrest could trigger more violence." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I have to admit, this one has me stumped. Not because of the slowdown in violence, but because of the apparent cause. Back in January after El Teo's arrest, I was definitely concerned that violence in Tijuana would get even worse (if that was even possible) because of the power vacuum his arrest caused. I felt that El Chapo's people were more powerful than the AFO remnants left in the area, and hoped that Sinaloa faction would come in and quickly sweep away any opposition to solidify the position El Teo and his people had been carving out over the last two years.

So imagine my shock when I started getting emails from my sources in San Diego that things were suspiciously quiet in Tijuana. They knew I expected the opposite, and wanted to know if I had heard anything different. I asked them if they knew who was in charge down there now, and I was even more shocked by the answer - the AFO. 

It's not often I'm stumped by these developments between DTOs, and that's not because I know everything about the drug war - I'll be the first to tell you I still learn something about it every day. It's just that these conflicts go through fairly predictable cycles and movements, and analysts like me tend to have enough information about which DTOs are in a better position to take over a plaza. So at this point I can only make an educated guess regarding why the AFO came out on top in Tijuana, resulting in hopefully more than just fleeting calm.

It could be that El Chapo has his hands full with battles on several other fronts, and just doesn't want to deal with Tijuana right now. The Federation already runs at least two other plazas along the California-Mexico border, and he may be willing to let this one go for a bit to focus on other problems. An alliance was recently formed between the Federation, the Gulf cartel, and La Familia to attempt to nip the threat posed by Los Zetas in the bud, and that may be sapping some resources. Former Federation ally and component, the Beltrán Leyva remnants, are likely linking up with their former ally, Los Zetas, in an effort to remain relevant - and profitable - which ups the stakes in that battle.

Or, it could be that El Chapo feels he's making enough money from his other plazas and doesn't need any more out of Tijuana. Nah, I didn't think so either.

Maybe I'm not giving the AFO enough credit here. But it's really hard to be optimistic about their chances, considering that DTO is in the worst shape it's ever been after two years of protracted fighting with El Teo's people. They do know the lay of the land better than the Federation's people, and still have staunch allies in some places in northern Baja. That doesn't change the fact that they're still so fractured, and have outsourced kidnappings and killings to so many gangs and thugs whose loyalties are questionable at best.

I'm truly happy that some residents of Tijuana are feeling mildly optimistic about these developments, but it's the cynic in me that says this is too good to be true. If this "Pax Mexicana" continues for maybe another 6 months to a year, I'll feel better about it. But for the time being, I'll wait for the next cycle to start.

"Focus in Krentz killing on suspect in US."

Here is an excerpt from Brady McCombs' article in the Arizona Daily Star:

"The killing of a Southern Arizona rancher that sparked an outcry to secure the border was not random, and investigators are focusing on a suspect in the United States, the Arizona Daily Star has learned. High-ranking government officials with credible information...said Cochise County   Sheriff Larry Dever is investigating a person in the United States, not in Mexico, in connection with the shooting... Krentz was found gunned down on his ranch northeast of Douglas a day after his brother reported drug-smuggling activity to the Border Patrol that led to the seizure of 290 pounds of marijuana and the arrest of eight people on the ranch. The night of the killing, officers followed a single set of footprints to the U.S.-Mexico border. That sparked widespread speculation that Krentz was killed by an illegal immigrant or a drug smuggler from Mexico... Forty-eight hours after the killing, Dever told reporters that investigators believed the shooting was carried out by one person, but that they didn't know if it was a man or a woman, or the person's nationality. But Dever said they had reports that Krentz made reference to an "illegal alien" over a two-way radio he used to communicate with his brother while working that day on the southern part of their ranch... The Southeastern Arizona valley where Krentz was killed is a heavily trafficked people- and drug-smuggling corridor that has seen an increase in burglaries in recent years. Sheriff's investigators and most residents believe the crimes are being committed by drug smugglers heading back to Mexico." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I've received a LOT of questions by email on this incident in the last couple of weeks, and my response has typically been that it's hard to speculate too much because, to date, no one really knows what happened to Krentz. I also make it a point to not typically comment on illegal immigration stories because (a) it detracts from my focus on different border violence issues, and (b) it's just way too controversial and I'm a conflict-avoider.

So what makes this story different, that's making me want to write a blog post on it? Two things, specifically. First, I feel a very strong need to remind people that no one, including investigators and the press, know exactly what happened to Krentz. The only facts anyone has is that (a) Krentz is dead, and (b) Krentz was shot. Speculation ranges from the killer being an illegal immigrant (which many think led to the current controversial law in Arizona), to a contract assassin who specifically targeted Krentz, to a drug dealer who Krentz stumbled across while he was transporting a load. Before anyone gets screwed into the ceiling over this, wait to find out all the facts.

Second, this statement by Sheriff Devers really makes me mad, but not for the reasons you might think: "We cannot sit by while our citizens are terrorized, robbed and murdered by ruthless and desperate people who enter our country illegally."

To provide some much-needed perspective, I have to remind him and readers alike that we have been dealing with this behavior by violent gang members for years. And now he - and others - want to get mad about it? Members of brutal gangs like the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) have been in the US for decades, killing each other and innocent bystanders in drive-bys in large cities and small towns alike. A good chunk of MS-13 members are here in the US illegally, and have been (again) for decades. They get busted for criminal activity, go back to El Salvador (big point - they aren't Mexican), then come back illegally to commit more crimes. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that the media and politicians alike are making this story into such a huge and controversial deal when (a) we don't even know who killed this rancher, and (b) our citizens have been terrorized, robbed, and murdered by gang members who have been here illegally (in 33 US states, I might add) for decades.

I'm not naïve enough to ignore the fact that this story comes at a crucial time in the immigration debate, and people on both sides of the aisle will use this poor rancher's memory however they see fit to suit their agendas. Just remember that we have some serious gang violence issues across this entire country that are much more serious - and very much connected to the Mexican drug trade - that shouldn't be ignored or forgotten.

UPDATE: US Consulate in Nuevo Laredo was not specifically targeted

I still have information coming in from various sources on Friday night's incident of an explosive device of some sort being thrown over the Consulate wall and going off. What I do have so far from a trusted source is that the device was a grenade, and it was thrown as a result of a fight between other elements outside the Consulate. This means the US Consulate in Nuevo Laredo was NOT the target of a grenade attack.

The Laredo Morning Times published an article on this story this morning, but it didn't contain much new information on the attack itself. What it did mention is that the FBI, the ATF, and Mexico's PGR (Attorney General's Office) are all opening an investigation on the incident. Maybe they'll find out who threw the grenade and what the exact circumstances were regarding the fight that led to it being unintentionally thrown into the compound; and maybe they'll never find out. If I hear anything more that's substantial, I'll post it here.

"Bomb damages US consulate in Mexico; no injuries."

Here is an excerpt from this Associated Press article:

"An attacker threw an explosive device over the wall around the U.S. consulate in the border city of Nuevo Laredo, breaking windows and startling employees inside but causing no injuries, the U.S. Embassy said Saturday. The attack, which took place about 11:30 p.m. Friday, is under investigation, embassy spokesman Claude Young said. Young said the consulate and the consular agency in the border town of Piedras Negras would be closed Monday pending a review of security measures. Mexican federal prosecutors in the capital said they were reviewing evidence from the scene, including video feeds from security cameras at the consulate... U.S. State Department employees in the area had not been victimized until last month. That's when gunmen separately chased down and killed an American woman who worked at the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez along with her husband in their SUV and another man married to a Mexican consulate worker in a similar vehicle. All three had been at the same party. In 2008, two men fired shots and threw a grenade — which didn't explode — at the U.S. consulate in Monterrey. Nobody was hurt in that assault, but the gate was left pockmarked. Five days later gunmen again fired at that consulate." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I'm working to try and get more details from official sources on this incident, so I can only speculate on a couple of things at this point. First, this sort of thing has happened before, as evidenced by the 2008 attack in Monterrey. Given the widespread availability of grenades and other explosive-type devices that can be made in someone's garage, the perpetrator(s) could be cartel-related, gang-related, thugs, punks, or someone who's pissed off that they or a relative didn't get a visa.

While we don't know the significance of this attack yet (if there is any), one thing to be mindful of is our growing role in the drug war. No, we don't technically have boots on the ground, but we're providing military assistance in the form of training and equipment. We're also providing the Mexican government with a lot of money via the Mérida Initiative. It may look like a more-or-less stand-off approach by politicians and diplomats, but it may be just a matter of time before DTOs regard us as a potential - or current - threat to their operations in-country.

More to come, folks...

US State Department issues travel warning for parts of Mexico.

Here are some of the more salient excerpts from yesterday's travel warning:

"The Department of State has issued this Travel Warning to inform U.S. citizens traveling to and living in Mexico of concerns about the security situation in Mexico, and that it has authorized   the departure of the dependents of U.S. government personnel from U.S. consulates in the Northern Mexican border cities of Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey and Matamoros until April 12.  Family members of US Government personnel assigned to other areas of Mexico outside the Mexican border states are not affected by this departure measure. This Travel Warning supercedes that of February 22, 2010, and announces the authorized departure of some dependents and updates security incidents.

"Recent violent attacks have prompted the U.S. Embassy to urge U.S. citizens to delay unnecessary travel to parts of Durango, Coahuila and Chihuahua states(see details below) and advise U.S. citizens residing or traveling in those areas to exercise extreme caution.  Drug cartels and associated criminal elements have retaliated violently against individuals who speak out against them or whom they otherwise view as a threat to their organizations. These attacks include the abduction and murder of two resident U.S. citizens in Chihuahua.

"The situation in the state of Chihuahua, specifically Ciudad Juarez, is of special concern.   The U.S. Consulate General recommends that American citizens defer non-essential travel to the Guadalupe Bravo area southeast of Ciudad Juarez and to the northwest quarter of the state of  Chihuahua including the city of Nuevo Casas Grandes and surrounding communities.  From the United States, these areas are often reached through the Columbus, NM, and Fabens and Fort Hancock, TX, ports of entry.  In both areas, American citizens have been victims of drug-related violence."

To read the full travel alert on the US State Department website, please CLICK HERE.

Analysis: First off, I need to remind readers that the State Department has different levels of alerts and warnings for US citizens abroad, based on the level of severity. To review information regarding these different levels, please CLICK HERE. Travel warnings are the most severe of the three, and the State Department issues these after much thought and with care, as they know the warning will usually annoy the country in question's government and often scare the bejesus out of US citizens planning that cruise to Cancun or vacation to Cabo San Lucas.

Second, readers need to know that this situation is serious, and any potential travelers need to make note of the locations specifically mentioned in the travel warning. They're mentioned for very good reasons, i.e. lots of people - including US citizens - are dying there. That being said, there are plenty of places in Mexico that are still safe to visit. But you have to do your homework. The State Department has really good information in the travel section of their website, and you can always call the Embassy in Mexico City or the Consulate in the city closest to where you'll be visiting to get more detailed information.

Above all, be smart, stay informed, and don't take your safety for granted.

"Three people linked to US consulate in Mexico killed."

Here is an excerpt from this news story on BBC News online:

"Three people connected to the US consulate in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez have been killed, the White House has said. They include a consulate employee and her husband, both American, and the Mexican husband of another employee... The three victims were killed in drive-by shootings on Saturday afternoon, a US official told the BBC on condition of anonymity, citing privacy considerations. The White House statement did not provide any details of the incident in Ciudad Juarez... Meanwhile, the State Department has authorised government employees at six US consulates in northern Mexico to send their family members out of the area over concerns about rising drug-related violence. The six consulates are in the border cities of Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey and Matamoros. The department said in a statement Sunday that recent violent attacks have led the US Embassy in Mexico City to advise American citizens to delay unnecessary travel to parts of the Mexican states of Durango, Coahuila and Chihuahua." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Unfortunately, I don't have much to offer by way of analysis yet because this story is just breaking this morning. I felt it was important to get the raw information out there first. I'm working to find more details on who the victims are and who the shooting suspects are, but information is very scant right now, even in the Spanish-language Mexican dailies. If any of my readers out there have more solid details, please email me at spooky926@gmail.com or post the info in the comments section.

I should say right now that I have no indication at the present time that these people were specifically targeted by Mexican DTOs strictly because (a) they were American, and/or (b) they were associated with the US consulate in Cuidad Juárez. That may change, but such targeting would represent a massive shift in DTO modus operandi, and it's too soon to draw such dramatic conclusions from an incident on which we have so little information right now. More to come...

"Mexican mayor fears massacre of 16 was random."

Here is an excerpt from Alicia A. Caldwell's Associated Press article in The Washington Post:

"The mayor of a violent Mexican border city said Monday he fears a shooting that killed 16 people in a working class neighborhood may have been random because many of the victims   were 'good kids' with no apparent ties to drug gangs. The dead included at least eight teenagers, the youngest a 13-year-old girl. Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz said police were pursuing all lines of investigation. But he said none of the victims of the attack Saturday night had criminal records, and the teenagers were 'good kids, students, athletes... 'There is no logical explanation, a concrete reason for this event. This is something that worries us, gratuitous or random criminal acts,' Reyes told MVS Radio. 'It goes way beyond what had been happening and puts Ciudad Juarez in even greater danger.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: Until the results of the investigation start coming out, it's almost impossible to say whether or not these kids were or weren't involved with organized crime. This truly is a sad, no-win situation either way. If the kids weren't involved in the drug trade, then someone decided it would be a good idea to just randomly shoot and kill a bunch of people in Juárez. That would be a significant development because it's a clear sign that DTO tactics are degenerating further, and delving into terrorist tactics.

If any of the kids were involved in the drug trade, then it becomes a sad reflection of the state of things in Juárez - the age of perpetrators and victims becoming lower and lower, and opportunities for Mexico's youth in such places declining. The allure of the DTO lifestyle to many teenagers in Mexico can't be denied, and is just one of the many aspects of the drug war the Mexican government has to figure out how to combat. 

In this case - if any of those kids were involved with organized crime - sending in the Mexican army isn't going to cut it. This is a profound sociological issue that can only be dealt with at a cultural - i.e. a familial - level.

"The Irony of Mexico’s Problems along its Southern Border."

Here is an excerpt from my latest article on MexiData.info:

"It’s interesting how observers of Mexico’s drug war often assume that the country’s biggest problems are occurring along its northern border with the United States. What many people don’t realize is that Mexico has its own southern border problems with Guatemala (and Belize), and they’re not to be taken lightly. Guatemala has a long history of instability, poverty, and being a haven for criminal activity. Its border with Mexico is tiny compared to the 2,000-mile length of Mexico’s border with the U.S., but that hasn’t made it any less problematic for a country that already has its hands full with a drug war, a sliding economy, and massive emigration issues... If the illegal cross-border transfers of food, clothing, and bicycles were the only issues at hand along Mexico’s southern border that might not be so bad. But unfortunately, that’s the nicest part of the problem."

To read the rest of this article at MexiData.info, please CLICK HERE.

"El Paso 2nd safest U.S. city: Ranking a contrast to violence across border."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Borunda's article in the El Paso Times:

"A new ranking shows El Paso moved up to the second-safest large city in the nation even while a vicious drug cartel war has turned Juárez into one of the deadliest cities in the world. El Paso   trailed only Honolulu for the lowest crime rate for cities with more than 500,000 population in an annual publication released Monday by CQ Press. The ranking is based on crime data for 2008. Civic leaders lauded the rating, saying it counters a negative perception that El Paso is a violent place because of the killings across the border... Violent crime in El Paso -- which was ranked the No. 3 safest large city last year -- has remained steady even as a drug war has claimed more than 3,000 lives in Juárez since it began in January 2008... Last weekend, Chihuahua state police reported 31 murders in Juárez. There have been more than 2,200 deaths this year." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I absolutely love reading about El Paso's safe-city ranking every year because it's such a perfect example of the conundrum posed in trying to define border violence spillover. Some might ask, how is it possible that Mexico's most violent city and one of the US' safest cities can coexist literally a stone's throw from each other?

Well, the answer is a little more complicated than you might think. Just because no one is getting killed in El Paso doesn't mean that the DTOs aren't there. I'm willing to bet a LOT of money that I don't even have that the DTOs - most likely the VCFO and the Sinaloa Federation - have plenty of representation there. We certainly know that gangs who distribute drugs and carry out hits for the DTOs in the US are in Texas, so they're likely in El Paso, too.

So why aren't they killing anyone?

It just so happens that murder and mayhem are really bad for business on US soil. Also, US law enforcement agencies in and around El Paso are particularly good at what they do. They have to be, considering the bloody insanity happening in their Mexican sister city of Cuidad Juárez.

But that's only half of what I want to address about this story. The other point I want to make is that border violence spillover cannot simply be defined by body bags and toe tags. The DTOs are everywhere in the US, and we know that they're killing and kidnapping people - almost all of whom are in the drug business - on US soil. While they're apparently not doing it in El Paso, we know there are hundreds of DTO-sanctioned kidnappings happening in Phoenix, dozens in San Diego, and many varieties of DTO-directed murders happening in cities and towns across the US.

So what can cities like San Diego, Laredo, Nogales, and others on the US side of the border take away from El Paso's experience so that they, too, can be ranked among the country's safest cities? Unfortunately, not much. I hate to say that because it would be nice if it were as easy as emulating their best practices. But US border cities and towns aren't in a vacuum of border-related "stuff." Their crime rates, people flow, and general operating environments are all viewed differently by DTOs. They make the final decision regarding how much they're willing to risk by engaging in dangerous behavior on our side of the border. 

That sounds like US law enforcement has little say or control over how things go in border cities, but that's not what I'm trying to say. San Diego's crime statistics look different than El Paso's, but that's not because law enforcement efforts are weaker; I can attest to the awesome set-up San Diego has for dealing with DTO-related criminal activity. Overall crime in San Diego has actually remained steady or slightly declined over the last several years, despite the fact that it's less than two dozen miles from Mexico's second most dangerous city - Tijuana. But more people have been murdered there in the last year than in El Paso.

What does it mean? Well, two things. First, comparing El Paso to other US border cities is like comparing apples to oranges. There are just too many variables to take into account, and those variables are coming from two different countries. Second, don't let the good news about El Paso lead you to believe border violence spillover isn't happening. In the absence of a clear and standardized definition, the meaning of spillover is in the eye of the beholder anyway. But just remember that a broader approach than just looking at annual murder statistics is needed when trying to assess the impact of DTO activity on the Mexican side of the border.

"[Arizona] DPS arrests 3 after undercover buys of grenades."

Here is an excerpt from Lauren Misak's article in The Arizona Republic:

"Investigators seized 23 inert grenades and arrested three men in Maryvale [Arizona] Tuesday night on suspicion of selling the grenades knowing they would be converted to live explosive  devices... Investigators on Monday received a tip from an informant that the men were selling dormant grenades that do not contain a fuse or explosive powder. Investigators purchased seven new, round military grenades for $400 each Monday. On Tuesday night, investigators purchased an additional 16 pineapple-shaped grenades. The suspects were arrested following the second buy, DPS spokesman Steve Harrison said... Investigators believe the grenades were headed to Mexico. They do not know where the grenades came from... Detectives suspect the sellers' intent was to sell the grenades to be converted into an explosive device, which could be easily done by adding a fuse or gunpowder. While it is not illegal to sell inert grenades, it is illegal to sell them with the intent to use them as an explosive device." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Before I can fully weigh in on this, I have to remind readers that there are a lot of unanswered questions in this story. First, we don't know exactly what type of grenades they were, where they were manufactured, or how the sellers obtained them. Second, we don't know why they were selling the grenades in the US with the intent to get them live when they could have easily done the same thing with already-live grenades in Mexico.

This concerns me because the general line of thinking among Mexico observers/analysts is that military-grade hardware - like grenades, grenade and rocket launchers, and some .50-caliber rifles - are generally obtained by DTOs outside the US. Existing evidence indicates that stuff mostly comes from the Koreas, Central American countries, existing Mexican army stocks, and former Soviet bloc countries.

Remember, this incident doesn't mean that those grenades came from a US source, although the possibility does exist - and is perhaps likely. You can easily buy inert round and pineapple grenades through US military surplus dealers, as that's perfectly legal. They're cheap, too - $8.99 for an inert pineapple model. This could signal a new way of obtaining grenades for DTOs in Mexico - buy them legally in the US, convert them into live grenades, then send them south in a similar fashion to pistols and rifles.

This is a good story to keep an eye on to see what additional information develops.

"US soldier dies in drug attack in Mexico strip bar."

Here is an excerpt from Julian Cardona's Reuters article:

"Gunmen with automatic weapons burst into a Mexican strip club on the U.S. border, opened fire on patrons and killed six people including an American soldier, the army said on Wednesday. The hooded gunmen stormed into the bar in Ciudad Juarez as strippers were dancing for customers, sought out the six men and shot them each several times. A 26-year-old off-duty U.S. soldier who had crossed over from El Paso, Texas, was among the dead, army spokesman Enrique Torres said. 'It appears drugs were being sold at the place,' Torres said of the strip joint. 'The hitmen went directly for their victims, no one else.' The suspected drug hitmen escaped the bar easily, while panicking customers fled in their cars as pools of blood gathered around spent bullet cases on the bar floor." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This news story just left me speechless, and made my stomach completely sink. Separate news reports said the soldier was actually a US Air Force staff sergeant, named David Booher, stationed at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico. He was originally from El Paso, so he was probably home on leave and went across the border with some of his hometown buddies. I don't know if that was the case, as it's 6:00 pm in New Mexico right now, and there's likely no one at the base public affairs office right now.

But what the hell was an active duty servicemember doing in a Cuidad Juárez strip club?

Current military policy prohibits military members from traveling to certain parts of Mexico without explicit permission from their commanders. My military sources tell me they're waiting for the investigation to reveal whether or not the soldier had that permission. 

The most important question that begs a firm answer is, was he targeted for execution, and if so, why?

While I hate this fact, US military members sometimes use drugs, and sometimes even deal drugs. I know because I was one of the people who investigated them. Was Booher somehow involved in the drug business, and if so, was he targeted by DTO hitmen because of it?

As unpleasant and disheartening as that scenario sounds, there's one that's even worse: he may have been targeted simply because he was a US military member. I don't know what the likelihood of this is, as it would represent a major - and dangerous - shift in tactics for Mexican DTOs. Rumors to that end have been batted about, but nothing has ever been confirmed, and low confidence was placed in their credibility.

The third and most likely scenario is that Booher was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Two of his fellow victims were strip club employees, and Booher may have been seen as guilty by association by the hitmen simply because he was in the company of people in the drug business. DTO sicarios have yet to start killing people at random; but they have been known to kill "extra" people "just in case," and be more tolerant of collateral damage to ensure they get their target.

If I find out more about this case/investigation, I'll be sure to post an update.

"One Mexico border city is quiet, maybe too quiet."

Here is an excerpt from Richard Marosi's article in the Los Angeles Times:

"Here in Mexicali, people fear the desert sun more than drug hit men. The city of 700,000 has a homicide rate comparable to that of Wichita, Kan., and one of the biggest police deployments is Operation Beat the Heat, in which officers haul blocks of ice to shantytown residents. There hasn't been a bank robbery in Mexicali in 18 months, or a reported kidnapping in a year. Mexicali is considered so safe that top law enforcement officials from Tijuana raise their families here, and are seen visiting restaurants and movie theaters without the phalanx of bodyguards that usually follows them everywhere else. But is Mexicali an oasis of tranquillity, or just a mirage?... Some U.S. authorities suspect that the fire-free zone in Mexicali comes at a cost: a cozy relationship between Mexican law enforcement and the country's most powerful organized crime group, the Sinaloa drug cartel, which is believed to have shifted trafficking through the city to avoid gang battles in other border areas." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is a really great article, and I like how it presents both the U.S. and Mexican government points of view on why things aren't happening in Mexicali. Admittedly, I think it leads the reader in the direction that Mexicali is dirty and the few Mexican cops that are there are in with the Federation. But hey, that's probably true. 

As for the Mexican government's claims that it's difficult for cartels to take hold in Mexicali, I just don't buy it. They are EVERYWHERE. Personally, I believe that the majority of quiet, conflict-free places in Mexico are that way because there's only ONE cartel running the show there. The violence shows up when two or more cartels are fighting over one smuggling corridor into the U.S. If the Sinaloa Federation is really in charge in Mexicali (which it likely is), then that makes sense. Other violence comes about when the military or LOTS of federales are sent in to wipe out the cartel presence. There are obviously very few cops or soldiers in Mexicali, which means that cartels can operate freely...and peacefully.

"17 charged in string of brutal kidnappings and slayings in San Diego suburbs."

Here is an excerpt from Richard Marosi's article in the Los Angeles Times:

"Authorities announced charges Thursday against a Mexican gang that took Tijuana-style violence to the upscale suburbs of San Diego County, kidnapping, torturing and killing well-to-do residents, even after some families paid large ransoms. The gang, a rogue cell of the Tijuana-based Arellano Felix drug cartel, moved across the border in 2002 and posed as U.S. law enforcement, donning FBI and police uniforms and caps while snatching victims outside homes and public places, said San Diego County prosecutors. Nine victims were killed from 2004 to 2007, and the bodies of two of them were dissolved in chemicals at a rented house in San Diego. Gang members were also charged with trying to murder a Chula Vista police officer in September 2005, peppering his car with high-caliber bullets before fleeing in a car. The gang targeted people it suspected of having links to organized crime, although some victims had no known ties, authorities said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: When I was working as an analyst for the State of California, one of the most frustrating things for me, as well as colleagues in other border states, was the fact that no standardized definition exists for the term "spillover" or the concept of "border violence spillover." Whether or not it is occurring depends on whom you ask. In February 2009, Texas state Homeland Security Director Steve McCraw said, "Yes, absolutely it has occurred; there's no question about it," McCraw said after a hearing before the House Committee on Border and International Affairs." However, the unanimous opinion of 10 Southern Arizona law-enforcement officials interviewed by the Arizona Daily Star in April 2009 was that spillover was NOT happening. "Spillover crime would be bad for business," Douglas, Arizona Police Chief Alberto Melis said. "And they're businessmen."

But what guidance are these people using to form their very visible and influential public opinions regarding spillover? I ask this question because, reading the reasons 17 people were charged in San Diego for that string of kidnappings and killings, it's obvious to me (but apparently not to everyone) that border violence spillover is happening in San Diego, and probably plenty of other cities on the US side of the border. You might ask what guidance I'M using to form my opinion. One part of it is the fact that violent criminal activity directly related to Mexico's drug trade occurred and is occurring in the United States. A second part of it is that many of the perpetrators of these types of crimes move freely between both countries and target illegals, legal residents, and US citizens alike. True, most victims are not "innocent" in the sense that they are usually involved or connected to organized crime in some way. This fact does little to calm the fears of neighbors in the US cities and towns where these crimes are happening. The third part is the bold willingness to impersonate US law enforcement officers and use high-powered weapons in our cities to carry out the orders of foreign organized crime groups. If the actions of those 17 individuals don't qualify as border violence spillover, I don't know what ever will. 

"The growing threat of grenades from Mexico."

Here is an excerpt from Jacques Billeaud's Associated Press article in The Dallas Morning News:

"It was a scenario U.S. law enforcement had long feared: A fragmentation grenade from Mexico's bloody drug war tossed into a public place. Only the grenade thrower's bumbling in that January incident prevented bloodshed in a South Texas bar – he neglected to pull a  second safety clasp. But the act was proof that one of the deadliest weapons in Mexico's drug battle is a real threat to the U.S., and investigators are stepping up efforts to make sure it doesn't happen again. While Mexican drug violence has been spilling across the border in the form of kidnappings and killings, grenades are a particular worry because they can kill large numbers of people indiscriminately, and they are a weapon of choice among Mexican cartel members... [Grenades] are preferred by drug hit men because they are cheap and easy to find. Many are left over from Central America's civil wars and sold on the black market to drug cartels. Some are brought in by weapons smugglers. Others are diverted from the region's militaries: In April, Guatemala seized 563 grenades after a shootout with Mexican drug cartel members, and officials later determined the grenades came from Guatemalan military bases. And there is evidence that those grenades are making their way north." Link to Full Article

Analysis: When that South Korean-made grenade was thrown into a bar in Texas, I was working as an analyst for California's homeland security apparatus, so I was very concerned about a similar incident occurring in San Diego or Imperial Counties (closest to the Mexican border). That happened in February 2009, and a similar incident hasn't happened since, either in Texas or anywhere else on the US side of the border. Given the widespread availability of hand grenades in Mexico - along with the DTOs' willingness to use them - one has to wonder why they haven't been used more frequently in the US.

I can only speculate, of course, but DTOs historically haven't been too big on drawing attention from US law enforcement inside US territory. There was a huge to-do in May 2009 about a possible order by Sinaloa's "El Chapo" Guzman to engage US law enforcement (rather than run) if confronted while moving a load. Neither that order, nor the meeting where that order was supposedly given, were ever confirmed. I don't believe that order was ever given because confronting US law enforcement unnecessarily on US territory is bad for business. Like it or not, several Mexican DTOs and their US-based gang distributors have a good thing going here. Drawing major attention to themselves by lobbing grenades into public places or in front of police stations in Texas - like they do almost every day in Mexico - is not the best way to stay under the radar and keep the drug business going by keeping scrutiny to a minimum.

To further back up my theory, I'm taking a look at the Pharr grenade incident itself and the alleged perpetrators. The "attack" was completely bungled, and the grenade was thrown by a local gang member. I still don't know exactly why they did it, but rumors being thrown around at the time included an attempt to impress the Gulf cartel to seek ad-hoc employment with them, as well as some kind of gang-on-gang hit. Regardless, it was an amateur job by a group of punks who had no clue what they were doing. Not that the level of professionalism in Mexican hits is always high, but in a DTO-sanctioned job, the grenade usually goes off.

Then there's the question of whether or not the author's assertion that grenades are heading north is true. Well...maybe. I don't doubt that grenades could make their way into the US for similar attacks in the future, but if they're already there, the ATF and local cops aren't finding them; at least, not in the numbers that the Mexican authorities are finding them. And while grenade attacks are more common in Mexico and are viewed as a criminal matter, they just don't happen at all in the US. I can almost guarantee you that a grenade going off in a McDonald's or a mall or in front of a police station in Arizona would be viewed by civilians as a terrorist-style attack. DTOs know this, and they know that would be very bad for business indeed.

"Suspect in murders headed Minuteman group."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Newhauser and Dan Shearer's article in The Sahuarita Sun:

"Two of the three people arrested in connection with the May 30 murders of an Arivaca man and his daughter headed up a splinter Minuteman group, and were looking for drugs and money to fund their efforts to keep illegal immigrants and drug runners out of the country, sheriff’s officials said.Jason Eugene Bush, 34, was arrested Thursday in Kingman; Shawna Forde, 41, was arrested Friday south of Sierra Vista; and Albert Robert Gaxiola, 42, was arrested Friday afternoon in Tucson. All three have been charged with two counts of first-degree murder, one count of first-degree burglary and one count of aggravated assault in connection with the murders of Raul Flores and his 9-year-old daughter, Brisenia. Flores’ wife was shot during the incident but managed to shoot one of the intruders... Officials said Forde is associated with the Minutemen American Defense group and that Bush and Gaxiola, who is from Arivaca, are associates of Forde. The group is not associated with the national, 12,000-member Minutemen Civil Defense Corps... Within Minuteman group circles, Forde is controversial... Hal Washburn, vetting officer for Washington state chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, said Forde was encouraged to leave the group over questions about honesty and her inability to follow orders, according to the story. San Diego Minutemen lists Forde among people they won’t work with, calling her 'unstable.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: I was just getting ready to type that this story isn't normally the type of incident I provide commentary for, but the circumstance is so unusual and fascinating that I just couldn't resist. Forde is obviously a disturbed individuals with paranoias and extreme views regarding immigration and border security. It's incredibly sad that a man - regardless of his involvement in the drug trade - and his nine year-old daughter had to die because Forde felt justified in funding her operation by stealing drug money and killing drug dealers.

Regardless of how you feel about the official Minutemen organizations, I think it's important that they've made a quick and concerted effort to distinguish themselves from Forde's group. The MCDC does not condone murder or even violence (as far as I know), and I believe their funding comes primarily from donations. Forde's kind of vigilantism makes her and her group no better than the narco-thugs she claims to abhor. Reportedly, the plan was to kill all witnesses, and it's difficult to think that Forde and her two accomplices were sick enough to include a nine year-old in that plan; it can't be said if they knew a child would be in the home. When bullets are flying (the male victim's wife returned fire), anything can happen. But, regardless of how bad drug dealers and DTO members and enforcers are, nothing (in my opinion) justifies this kind of counter-drug vigilantism on US soil.

UPDATE: Playa Bagdad device was NOT a missile

Rather, it was an MK 25 marine marker. According to The Ordinance Shop:

"The MK 25...marine location markers are launched from aircraft or surface craft. They are launched from aircraft to provide day or night reference points for marking the course of enemy submarines in antisubmarine warfare operations. They are suitable for any type of sea-surface reference-point marking that calls for both smoke and flame for a period of 10 to 20 minutes... The Mk 25 marker consists of a cylindrical outer tube about 18.5 inches long and 2.9 inches in diameter. A valve assembly is fitted into the projecting chimney at the marker's nose end. The smoke and flame are emitted from this opening. At the opposite end is a heavier aluminum base assembly to which the outer tube is crimped. The heavy base end causes the marker to float in the water with the chimney out of the water and the base in the water."

Here's a photo of what the hotel employee actually found:

Here is an image of what the Mexican authorities claimed they found to El Universal:

Now, I suppose that after enough tequila, you might mistake the marine marker for the very front end of the missile portion of an SA-7. Still, this is yet another example of the Mexican authorities greatly exaggerating claims of high-powered weapons they've seized, or in this case, stumbled upon. If you remember, I posted a couple of weeks ago on a .50-caliber Browning "anti-aircraft" weapon that the Mexican authorities seized from a BLO stash. It wasn't even a real Browning, but a replica manufactured in Oregon. Why do the Mexican authorities invent these claims? Probably a couple of reasons; to make themselves and their efforts look better than they are, or to make the DTOs look more well-equipped and dangerous than they are so they can receive more counter-drug funding. I'm just speculating, but in this kind of war, one-upmanship means quite a bit to the parties involved.

"Mexican drug lord orders deadly force."

Here is an excerpt from Josh Meyer's article in The Baltimore Sun:

"The reputed head of Mexico's Sinaloa drug cartel has instructed his army of associates to use deadly force if necessary to protect their increasingly contested trafficking operations, even against U.S. law enforcement, according to authorities here and in Washington. The threatened offensive by Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, Mexico's most-wanted man, was described by U.S. officials as being highly unusual, given that his associates have avoided violent confrontations with American law enforcement officers, and have kept their blood feuds with fellow traffickers largely south of the border. Guzman is believed to have delivered the message personally in early March, during a three-day gathering of his associates in Sonoita, a small Mexican town just a few miles south of the Arizona border, according to U.S. intelligence bulletins sent to several state and federal law enforcement officials. The Sonoita meeting is one of many indications that Mexico's most-wanted man is becoming more brazen even in the face of a massive Mexican government crackdown on his activities and deadly turf rivalries with other traffickers." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I'm really concerned about this, as it's plausible enough to be true. I haven't seen the bulletin in question yet, and even if I had, I might not be able to comment on it anyway as it's probably marked as Law Enforcement Sensitive. So, going solely on the information in this newspaper article, I agree with the author's assessment that Guzman's brazenness is unexpected, yet not out of the realm of possibility with everything that the Mexican government has been doing to crack down on his operations. Still, DTOs have shied away from directly confronting US law enforcement because it's not good business sense to engage US authorities unless absolutely necessary.

I'm curious if the bulletin has more details regarding the rules of engagement, or ROEs, for US authorities. Did Guzman differentiate between engaging locals and feds? Did he order his people to fire only if fired upon? Did he offer instructions for disposing of any US law enforcement bodies after a deadly shootout, or were his orders only to shoot and run? These questions may sound inconsequential, but considering that DHS is drawing up a new (and I imagine lengthy) border response plan, the response to any intentional deadly-force engagement by DTOs with US local or federal law enforcement is likely to be bigger and more intense than it would have been, say, two or three months ago. All this being said, the order may just have been an attempt by Guzman to instill some courage (or at least bravado) in his drug runners, who may have been more prone to dump pricey shipments at the first sign of US authorities. Drug runners are mostly still wary of US law enforcement, but I think this information is plausible, and US law enforcement along the border is wise to be even more cautious than usual.

"Mexico arrests 'drug gang boss'."

Here is an excerpt from this BBC News article:

"Mexican police have arrested one of the country's most sought-after suspected drugs bosses. Gregorio Sauceda Gamboa was arrested in a raid on a house in the city of Matamoros, near the  US border. He is accused of being one of the kingpins of the notorious Los Zetas drugs gang, the armed wing of the Mexican Gulf Cartel. Police consider Mr Gamboa, 44, to be a founder of the gang... As well as being on a list of most wanted drugs suspects in Mexico, he is also wanted by the US Drug Enforcement Administration." Link to Full Article

Analysis: At first sight, I thought this was a pretty big deal, as Sauceda Gamboa was in the upper echelon of the Gulf cartel's org chart. Then I read Strategic Forecasting's analysis of the arrest, and I was considerably disheartened to learn it's not as big a deal as I thought, although it's still a good victory for the Mexican government. It appears that Sauceda Gamboa was demoted in 2006, possibly due to alcoholism and drug abuse. While he was one of the founders of Los Zetas and a key figure in their initial association with the Gulf cartel, he was supposedly recently at odds with the group. Stratfor speculates that Los Zetas may have provided authorities with information on Sauceda Gamboa's whereabouts, which may have led to his arrest. Gregorio's brother Hector was killed in a firefight in Reynosa in February, possibly under similar circumstances. Either way, it looks like Sauceda Gamboa will be easily replaced, with minimal disruption to Gulf cartel operations.

"Incursions of border by cops, troops rising."

Here is an excerpt from Torrey Meeks' article in The Washington Times:

"Unauthorized border crossings by Mexican authorities such as soldiers and police spiked more than threefold in 2008, according to an annual report the U.S. Customs and Border Protection  (CBP) agency sought to keep secret. Now that the report is public, the result of a lawsuit by a public-interest group, the agency is attempting to downplay its significance. "BorderStat Violence, FY 2008 Year in Review" says that 147 foreign government incursions occurred in 2008, a 359 percent increase from the previous year. Only 216 incursions were tallied in the previous nine years. "There are a lot of places out there where the border isn't clearly marked," said Lloyd Easterling, spokesman for CPB. He said even accidental aircraft crossings from Canada were considered incursions... "Our agents out there are seeing people dressed up and acting in a military-like fashion," he said. "Whether they're in any kind of official uniform or something they bought that may look like fatigues ... I don't know," he said... The CBP report also showed a jump in violence against U.S. border personnel, a trend that Mr. Easterling said is troubling. Violence against CBP officers and agents is up 167 percent at ports of entry and 23 percent outside them, the report said." Link to Full Article 

Analysis: For starters, I'm not fond of the wording the author uses in referring to CBP's handling of this report, saying they "sought to keep [it] secret," as if they had something embarrassing to hide. I'm going to assume that the report probably wasn't even classified, but rather "For Official Use Only," or more likely, "Law Enforcement Sensitive." This just means the report contains official agency information or sensitive investigative or operational information which, in the hands of the media or the public, may jeopardize agents' safety or the integrity of an investigation or operation.

Next, I believe that the dramatic increase in cross-border incursions can be attributed to three things, not the two mentioned in the article. First, yes, improved technology being used by CBP is able to detect more people, and thus more incursions. Second, yes, there are probably more incursions occurring than before. Third, I believe there are more incursions by DTO enforcers dressed as Mexican army or Mexican law enforcement in addition to the existing incursions by the "genuine" article.

And that's where the real problem lies - being able to identify friend or foe. DTO enforcer groups - most notably Los Zetas - are sometimes partly made up of former Mexican soldiers. Obtaining official uniforms with all the right patches and insignia is very easy, and these disguised enforcers making an incursion are virtually indistinguishable from bona fide soldiers. Imagine the hesitation and assessment required by CBP and Border Patrol agents when detecting these guys; a friendly "Hello!" and warning to return to Mexico to disguised enforcers might result in an all-out firefight. Anything more aggressive against a group of bona fide soldiers and you have a serious diplomatic situation on your hands. And agents defending themselves against aggressive illegal immigrants throwing rocks, molotov cocktails, and God knows what else have to measure the consequences of every action they take because they might lose their jobs over certain responsive actions - or worse yet, get arrested and thrown in jail.

Make no mistake - this is NOT a simple case of less effective patrolling resulting in more border incursions, as I think this author might be trying to imply. There are many variables to take into account, including technology, the shifting of human movement, and disguised bad guys. Unless Mexican cops and soldiers start getting chips imbedded in their forearms identifying them as such to US agents along the border, distinguishing friend from foe during the prevention of and response to border incursions will continue to be yet one more challenge faced by CBP.

"A Tale of Two Laredos."

Here is an excerpt from Todd Bensman's article on GlobalPost.com:

"All is quiet now on Coahuila Street. But traces of the violence that destroyed the lives of two American brothers with businesses here linger. A blackened structure is all that's left of Alan Gamboa's once-profitable radio communications business, after it was drenched in diesel and burned to the ground the night of Dec. 5. His brother, Ricardo Gamboa, is still missing — and feared dead — after being kidnapped by cartel gangsters on Coahuila Street the previous morning. Violence and kidnappings have become almost commonplace in Mexico, as the country's civil drug war rages. Often, the murder and kidnap victims are American residents of border cities like Laredo, who are involved in the drug trade. But the violence that upended the Gamboa brothers' lives is different. By all accounts, they were not drug dealers. Their only transgression, it seems, was to rent a house to the U.S. State Department and Drug Enforcement Administration, which set up an anti-cartel intelligence operation with Mexican federal police in the rented space. The brothers' tragic story offers a rare glimpse into a part of Mexico's drug war that gets little notice. The narrative of the conflict as a fight to the death between drug cartels and the Mexican government often excludes another player: the U.S. government. And as the Gamboa tale demonstrates, the American government's actions in Mexico can also lead to casualties." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is a very interesting article regarding the innocent civilians that end up involved in Mexico's drug war, and a view point that isn't often explored. Human intelligence sources and the general assistance of locals are required in any counterdrug operation. Sometimes those sources of intelligence or assistance are what the intelligence community calls "witting," or completely knowledgeable about their role and potential consequences of their involvement. Sometimes they are "unwitting," which means they don't know the full identities of the people they are working with or their intentions.

In this case, it appears Americans who reside in Texas but work in Mexico provided assistance to the US Government unwittingly, and are now being punished by cartel enforcers because they see them and their families as collaborators. So the debate becomes, should the US State Department have been more forthcoming about their intended uses for the Gamboa house, or should the Gamboas have been less naive and more inquisitive about their new renters? I think a strong argument can be made for both sides.

As for the State Department, as long as they followed US and Mexican laws regarding the rental transaction, I'm willing to bet they had no legal requirement to tell the Gamboa brothers (who are estranged) anything about their planned use of the house. For example, if you own a house and rent it out to a nice couple with steady income and great credit, you can't demand that they tell you if they plan to use it to make pornographic movies, even though that might change your desire to rent your home out to them. Also, the information surrounding the planned use of the home may have been classified or, at the least, operationally sensitive, and the State Department may not have been allowed to share that information with the Gamboas. I do find it interesting that the Gamboas didn't dig a little deeper during the transaction - although it appears that Ricardo knew little to nothing about the rental since his brother Alan managed it. I would be HIGHLY suspicious if all those armored vehicles showed up at my front door with a bunch of G-Men offering eight months rent in advance.

As for the Gamboa brothers, their situation is tragic, and made more so by their apparent naivete. Nuevo Laredo is one of the more violent border cities in Mexico, and not much happens there that the Gulf cartel and their enforcers - Los Zetas - don't know about. I find it hard to believe the Gamboas thought their actions in any capacity would go unchecked. However, I'll give the Gamboa brothers the benefit of the doubt by believing they really didn't think the rental circumstances were unusual. I don't know if they truly believed they could stay neutral - or at least untouched - in the drug war in a place like Nuevo Laredo, but they were probably trying hard to do so. As it is with all Mexican kidnapping cases, I'm not optimistic about Ricardo's chances with his abductors, but I hope he's returned safely to his family.

This case is a good example of the difficulties both the Mexican and US Governments have in obtaining reliable, willing, and uncorrupted human sources on both sides of the border, but particularly in Mexico. I would imagine that any potential unwitting, clean sources like the Gamboas would have no interest whatsoever in assisting either government for fear of cartel retribution. Thus, government agencies are resigned to conducting operations in a more clandestine fashion. While not informing landlords or car salesmen or restaurant owners or others of their roles in assisting the US or Mexican Governments may well be legal and operationally necessary, it places these individuals and their families in danger because of the appearance of collusion. While some may say this is the cost of doing business in such a dangerous place against such a formidable foe, I'm sure the Gamboas and others trying to stay out of the drug war feel that's a price they shouldn't have to pay.

"The Enemy Within: Cartel-related violence has moved well beyond American border towns."

Here is an excerpt from Eve Conant and Arian Campos-Flores' article in Newsweek:

"Surprising as it may seem, Phoenix has become America's kidnapping capital. Last year 368 abductions were reported, compared with 117 in 2000. Police say the real number is likely much higher, since many go unreported. Though in the past most of the nabbings stemmed from domestic-violence incidents, now the majority are linked to drug-trafficking and human-smuggling operations that pervade the Arizona corridor. It's still unclear to what extent the snatchings are being directly ordered by Mexican cartels, but authorities say they're undoubtedly a byproduct of the drug-fueled mayhem south of the border. "The tactics are moving north," says assistant police chief Andy Anderson. "We don't have the violence they have in Mexico yet—the killing of police officers and the beheadings—but in terms of kidnappings and home invasions, it has come." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is one of the better articles I've read lately on the anecdotal/case evidence aspect of border violence spillover (for more on this topic, click HERE). It mostly covers kidnappings in Phoenix with a great amount of detail and first-hand accounts, which makes for good reading and high impact on the reader. It also talks about the presence of DTO members or associates in other parts of the country nowhere close to the southwest border, like Alabama and North Carolina. It's disconcerting to read about kidnap victims being gagged and tortured in safehouses thousands of miles away from where we would expect that to be happening.

There are two main points I'd like to make about this excellent article. First, it makes clear to the reader that the majority of victims involved are involved in the drug trade. I particularly like the quote from a law enforcement officer who explains that many times, kidnap victims are rescued by the police, then go straight from the place they were being held to jail to await trial for the crimes they committed. Second, this article reinforces one of the points I make in my IN FOCUS segment on spillover- specifically, the point that some agencies view spillover as DTO-related criminal activity occurring within the US. This article clearly shows that the law enforcement individuals interviewed believe spillover is happening, despite any statistical evidence or "official" statements to the contrary.