Security experts Tuesday were baffled and angered by the Philippines' handling of a hostage crisis in which a lone gunman was able to monitor ill-coordinated police operations live on television.
"The fact that there was essentially live video was mistake number one," said assistant professor John Harrison, a homeland security analyst at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.
He told AFP there should have been a media blackout to deny the hijacker feedback on what was going on around him. No way, "freedom of the press" is more important, even when people get killed. Journalists say so and they're the ones who get to have opinions.
Instead, he was able to follow events -- including frenzied speculation by serving and former police chiefs appearing on Philippine networks -- via the bus's internal TV.
A retired Philippine military official who wrote a counter-terrorism manual and now runs a security consultancy said the police had enough expertise and equipment to deal with such an incident, but they were not put to use. "Those budget-stealing bastards on the SWAT team aren't getting the glory from this one!"
The retired official believed many of the policemen on the scene, some of them seen crouching without any body armour behind patrol cars, did not appear to be fully trained Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) personnel.
"They just put helmets on certain people," he remarked.
#1
Speculation from fools. The SWAT team was their real team, umbrellas and all. They are trained in all the tactics and mission profiles to include a hostage situation on a bus. It was the SWAT sniper team that took the guy down.
The mistake we are making here is asking people like some guy in Sigapore and a retired official, no credability. We also take leadership and decision making for granted. They did not have command and control of the situation, they did not have leadership to force them to stick to their training. So they screwed up over and over. How many times did they lose the sledge hammer into the bus? Six times! He was not wearing his proper gloves as SOP stated he should. The agruements to shoot or not is another one of issue. It is a decision the commander on the ground should make based on a number of criteria, First being the safety of the hostages and last being the welfare of the hostage taker. Media blackouts are not only impossible but not required. Allowing him to see his situation will certainly add perspective of futility. If done right a plus for the police.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/24/2010 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Holed up indoors, starring at his balls and blank score card, listening to an angry, culinary obsessed Michelle. Quite frankly, I can think of no more fitting reward for the lazy bugger.
#5
Are the judges going to ask questions about social awareness and what you would do to change the world? I'm think the answer might be to "install sharia law everywhere; not achieving that goal blow it up?" The talent contest? Maybe how far you can cast a stone? Bathing suit competition? These are the bathing suits?
[Chosun Ilbo] The U.S. Defense Department in its annual review of China's rising military might hinted at a warning that Beijing could deploy its troops in North Korea if political instability threatens to spill across the border.
"China's leaders hope to prevent regional instability from spilling across China's borders and thereby interfering with economic development or domestic stability. Changes in regional security dynamics -- such as perceived threats to China's ability to access and transport foreign resources, or disruptions on the Korean Peninsula -- could lead to shifts in China's military development and deployment patterns, likely with consequences for neighboring states," as the report delicately phrased it.
Put bluntly, the Chinese Army could be deployed along the border with North Korea if the North Korean regime collapses, threatening Beijing's interests.
This is the first time the U.S. government has openly mentioned China's possible military response to sudden changes in North Korea, meaning that it is taking a realistic approach to the role China plays in North Korean issues.
In May 2008, around 200 Chinese military engineers held an exercise setting up pontoon bridges across the Apnok (or Yalu) River that marks the border with the North and conducted other drills there, in what observers said was a preparation for sudden changes in North Korea.
In the defense review, the U.S. forecasts that the Chinese military will intervene in missions outside its borders in the event of "changes in regional security dynamics." A possible reunification of the Korean Peninsula led by South Korea following regime collapse in the North could be one such change. South Korea's efforts to achieve reunification in the event of a regime collapse in North Korea could meet with Chinese opposition if Beijing intends to maintain an allied government there.
The "unification tax" President Lee Myung-bak proposed in his Liberation Day speech on Sunday stirred up a tremendous amount of controversy due to perceptions that it reflects the South's intention to absorb North Korea. The presidential office tried to diffuse the situation by saying the purpose of the comments was merely to prepare people for the possibility of reunification, but it remains to be seen whether the international community will buy that line.
If both the U.S. and China view a sudden change in North Korea as a real possibility, South Korea, which will feel the brunt of any instability in the North, urgently needs to come up with a response.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/24/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
CHINESE MIL FORUM > JAPAN SAYS [Daoyus] ISLANDS DISPUTED WITH CHINA ARE [jointly] GUARDED BY US, + also JAPAN as per the US-JAPAN SECURITY TREATY,
* WMF > JAPAN DECLARES WAR ON CHINA: TOKYO'S UPCOMING NATIONALIZATION OF 25 ISLANDS INCLUDING THE DAOYUS CLAIMED BY CHINA. CHINESE THINK-TANK CIISC in ASIA-PACIFIC BELIEVES THAT JAPAN INTENDS TO FORTIFY + CLAIM EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION/SOVEREIGNTY OF THE DAOYUS + OTHER CHIN-CLAIMED ISLANDS, CONTINENTAL SHELF, + ITS DESIRED EXCLUSIVE EXONOMIC ZONE.
* SAME > CPLA INTEL NEWFLASH: CHINA MAY PERMANENTLY BASE ONE OR MORE PLAN TYPE 095 NUCLEAR-ARMED FBM SUBMARINES IN THE YELLOW SEA TO OPPOSE THE US AIRCRAFT CARRIER.
* SAME > PEKING PROFESSOR ZHU FENG: CHINA [Beijing Party-Govt] MAY FORMALLY UPGRADE + DECLARE THAT THE YELLOW SEA IS ITS "CORE INTEREST" OR SOVEREIGN DOMAIN, +ALSO ITS NAVAL, MILITARY OPERATING ZONE WHERE FOREIGN MIL FORCES ARE FORBIDDEN.
* SAME > CHINA HAD DECIDED TO FIGHT THE US WARSHIPS: US CIA DISCLOSES 71 NIE REPORTS DATED FROM 1948-1978 INDICATING CHINA'S LACK OF FEAR IN MILITARILY CHALLENGING + OPPOSING US MILITARY FORCES DURING THE KOREAN WAR, VARIOUS TAIWAN STRAITS CRISES, + THE VIETNAM WAR.
#2
Norks collapse. China sends in its divisions in a land grab.
As the man says, ROK "urgently needs to come up with a response". Bambi wont be any help, delaying any decision on an urgent requests from his generals to go north for 90 days.
One big a*s mistake America.
Posted by: Mike Ramsey ||
08/24/2010 5:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The Chinese need at least some fig leaf to cover any land grab otherwise they would provide the 'excuse' for consumers worldwide to boycott. Yes, there are dozens of reason to do it now, but people strangely need some sort of face saving reason to cover their actions which up till now have largely been rationalized away. It's a gamble. The rational fig leaf would be coordination/cooperation of the South with 'joint' teams and commands, no objection from Japan, and probably the price of reducing American forces [since the 'threat' no longer exists] down to material assistance teams in the South. An anschluss would simply fulfill many of the regional nations base fears of who the Chinese really are and remove any self delusion about their intents. Don't show your hand till you need to.
#4
The newspaper that had this article is the NYTimes of SKorea.
I think they oppose reunification (because of the high cost to SK taxpayers) and they are trying to scare the public by saying that SK preparation for reunification will make China invade.
Posted by: lord garth ||
08/24/2010 8:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Chinese consider the northern part of Korea the same as they consider Taiwan and Tibet to be a historical part of Greater China and the southern parts of Korea as vassal states.
#6
It's a small step from vassal state to irrevocable part of greater China, just ask the Tibetans and the people in Xinjiang, or at least those who aren't exported Han.
And those countries that were Vassal States of China in the Middle Ages include: Vietnam, Korea, Mongolia, Laos, Thailand, Burma, most of the 'Stans (including Afghanistan) and, thanks to the Mongols, Russia.
So, where's the Middle Ages Revival Tour going to stop next?
They have a much stronger claim to Mongolia and the Eastern Half of Russia than they do Taiwan.
#8
Fact is, No One wants NORK. It will take 50 years to make the place rational. It is like freeing a GULAG into your society and NORK is a GULAG period.
East Germans were far more nuanced and only set Europe behind 15 years - provided with lingering circumstance. This is something no one wants at all.
China talks game, but on game day, it looks as if they will forfeit.
[Chosun Ilbo] The North Korean party elite have recently felt the country is at something of a historic turning point, with regime change just around the corner. Leader Kim Jong-il believes that the only way for him to maintain his power is to establish the hereditary succession of his son, but it is doubtful whether the entire party agrees.
Ri Je-gang, the first deputy director of the Workers Party's Organization and Guidance Department, the prop for Kim Jong-il's heir apparent, recently died in a mysterious car accident, and Pak Jae-kyong, the deputy director in charge of propaganda of the General Political Department of the North Korean People's Army, was recently removed to a post in charge of overseas affairs. There is no way of knowing the inside story, but something is clearly going on. These could be signs of a rift in the leadership between those who feel the winds of change blowing and the Kim loyalists.
O Kuk-ryol and Jang Song-taek apparently have gaining power in the North. Both are Kim Jong-il's closest associates, but power is leaning toward the former. Commanding the Operation Department of the party for a long time and enjoying Kim Jong-il's absolute trust, O has built firm personal links in the armed forces. Now even Kim cannot afford to remove O. Jang Song-taek, meanwhile, lost his two elder brothers in the armed forces to heart attacks and has few close associates remaining due to incessant intrigue against him. The power structure is cracking.
North Korea has had few political upheavals. However difficult it was, Kim Jong-il's associates always united behind him. But the question is what a future without him holds, and whether they face a stark choice between Chinese-style reform and being thrown on the scrap heap of history.
The North's food shortage is even more serious than the famine during the latter half of the 1990s. But markets that were deserted for several months after the botched currency reform late last year are reviving, and the people are restless. The authorities find it all but impossible to control the markets any longer, and the suspension of foreign aid means the armed forces and those in power have little to bargain with.
Few party leaders know what Kim Jong-un looks like and what he has done. The party's propaganda department should make the same efforts it did to establish Kim Jong-il as his own father's heir, but that does not seem to be happening.
Kim Jong-il specially created a secret body dubbed "No. 10" with the authority to ferret out and dispose of people who raised questions about his family lineage, lest anyone raise doubt about the genetic purity with which the regime is obsessed. If Kim Jong-un is to be presented as the heir, the background of his mother Ko Young-hee will inevitably be exposed, and that is bound to eventually lead to the disclosure of Kim Jong-il's private life and his own origins.
But the biggest stumbling block to hereditary succession is Kim Jong-il himself. Having reduced his own father Kim Il-sung to a powerless figurehead, he must now dread what Kim Jong-un might do if he is built up too fast. He is in a bind, both compelled to designate an heir and mortally afraid of doing so, with the result that the whole process is stalled.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/24/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
TOPIX > SOUTH KOREA: NORTH HAS DEPLOYED TROOPS [ROK detection of "massive movement/deployment" of DPRK troops to near Pyongyang].
#4
DRUDGEREPORT AM > SOUTH KOREAN MILITARY DRILL ENVISIONS "OCCUPYING NORTH" ["Stabilization" of imploded or mil defeated DPRK to be followed by "Unification" wid ROK].
* YONHAP NEWS > SOUTH KOREA SEEKS UNIFICATION WID NORTH KOREA IN PEACEFUL, GRADUAL WAY.
Very nice, but TWO PROBS...
* CHINA per se wants to make it clear to its Asian neighbors that it, NOT THE USA, is the MILPOL BIG BOSS = EL HEFE' of the EAST + SOUTH CHINA SEAS, i.e. YELLOW SEA, WEST SEA, + SEA/GULF OF VIETNAM [Hainan] + MALACCAS.
* Iff KIMMIE + REGIME are beginning to lose thier [Dynastic] grip on formal Pol, Ideo Power, WILL NOKOR DO SOMETHING MIL DESPERATE, ee A NEW, MORE EXPLOSIVE MIL INCIDENT(S) INDUC A "GREAT POWER" MIL CONFRONTATION, to include lockstep wid Islamist Iran???
Iff the News Repors are accurate, its more evidencia that LT Food, Econ-Troubled NOKOR may unilater self-implode before NUKE-HAPPY IRAN does 2010-2012/2015.
THIRD PROB > WMF + CHINA MIL BLOGS = The USDOD is preparing Optional Plans-Schemas to send US TROOPS INTO NORTH KOREA in order to help stabilize the country, as part of a possib UN OR INTERNATIONAL COALITION WHICH MAY, OR MAY NOT BE, LED BY CHINA???
There's nothing quite like listening to imbeciles rant about Illinois politics. The Wall Street Journal writes that, "If (U.S. Attorney Patrick) Fitzgerald doesn't resign of his own accord, the Justice Department should remove him ..."
The Washington Post, in commenting on the likely retrial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, says that "(Fitzgerald) should stand down before crossing another fine line - the one that separates prosecution from persecution."
You want to talk about persecution, try living in a state where a "For Sale" sign seems permanently posted on the governor's mansion.
[Bangla Daily Star] The reservoir of hatred has to be very deep for Pakistan to reject India's aid at a time when desperate, flood-affected, marauding men snatch precious food from wailing, helpless women; when advertisements for donations are appearing in British and American newspapers; when the United Nations has stepped in to lead a rescue effort; and when the World Bank has offered two billion dollars over the next two years to ameliorate the consequences of an unprecedented national calamity. It took an American rap across the knuckles before Pakistan accepted India's five million dollars.
Dr. Manmohan Singh's response to this gratuitous insult was a testament to his faith; he offered more. The best answer to visceral animosity is surely a civilised handshake, even if one may have to count one's fingers after the hand has been shaken.
A caveat is essential. We must not confuse the Pakistani people with the Pakistan government. The government was playing politics with a crisis. The starving have no time for cynicism. The true victims of any such calamity are the poor, for the rich live above water. No poll has indicated that Pakistan's flood-displaced would rather go hungry and roofless than eat wheat or take shelter under a tent purchased with India's dollars.
Was Asif Zardari's fear of Indian money directly related to his fear of the Pakistan army?
A natural disaster of these proportions can become a defining moment in history. There were many reasons why East Pakistan broke away to create Bangladesh in 1971, but the Yahya Khan regime's hopeless, and perhaps even prejudiced, neglect of the region after the devastation caused by the cyclone in 1970 became the conclusive evidence that persuaded Bengalis that they would never get justice in Pakistan. There is already sufficient information from the ground to indicate that Pakistanis are at least as angry with Zardari as Bengalis were with Yahya Khan.
The Khyber-to-Balochistan deluge -- stretching across 20% of the country, a space larger than Italy -- has begun to reinforce a resurgent public view that the Pakistan army might have become a more natural institution of governance than the Pakistan People's Party and the democratic organisations now in power. Its chief Ashfaq Kayani mobilised his troops for relief instantly.
Zardari, in a display of astonishing, callous indifference, preferred to go on what can only be described as a working holiday in France and Britain, wherein the holiday invited more publicity than the work. The army also donated, very quickly, a day's pay, a thought that did not immediately occur to legislators.
Zardari, in sharp contrast, breezed through his expensive jaunt, spending $12,000 per night for his suite in London, and zooming off, with his children and his nominated heir to the Bhutto throne, on helicopters to his chateau in France. A Zardari spokesman explained that this chateau had been in the family possession for 18 years. That then would be around the time when the Bhuttos were in power in Islamabad. Two plus two in Islamabad equals a chateau in France and a lordly estate in England.
Pakistan's internet is also in flood. The invective against Zardari has to be read to be believed. Alas, the most exhilarating examples cannot be reprinted in a newspaper. It is safe to assume that the credibility of the PPP has been washed away in this flood, and it remains in office from now for purely legal, rather than politically legitimate, reasons.
The reputation of the principal opposition party, led by Nawaz Sharif, which rules Punjab, has been battered by allegations of corruption and mal-administration. The main parties have a vested interest in protecting one another. But the fact is that their incompetence has left a huge vacuum, and the only institution capable of filling it is the army.
The civilian challenge to political parties comes from a far more dangerous force than the army. To put this in a single sentence; fundamentalist organisations with a terrorist wing, like the renamed Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, reached the affected people long before the government.
The only comforting news from internet chatter is the manner in which civil society in Pakistan has mobilised to fill the gap that Islamabad has left. But there is only so much that impromptu citizen action groups can do. They cannot be a substitute for a nation's government.
Zardari's fear is valid. Would a coup be as unpopular today as it would have been a year ago? In fact, a year ago it would have been impossible. It might not have become probable even now, but Kayani is a patient man in a country where elected officials are conducting impatient hara-kiri.
Zardari has been cozying up to American VIPs like John Kerry, but Washington's generic dislike of coups is not so strong as to sabotage its self-interest. America is involved in a borderless war in Afghanistan. America's strategic imperative demands a strong government in Islamabad, and if that means giving recognition to a future President Kayani, so be it.
Asif Zardari's decision to buy a chateau in France could prove to be a wise investment. It is certainly a far more comfortable address for an ex-president than a VIP jail within a fortress on the Indus.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/24/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
Suppose you're that rare international traveler who needs to fly between Tehran and Caracas. Instead of connecting between two or three cities on multiple airlines--with interminable layovers--why not fly nonstop?
You won't find it on Travelocity--or any of the other internet travel sites--but Iran Air, the Islamic state's official carrier, could seemingly meet your needs. Iran Air offers monthly bi-monthly service between Tehran and the Venezuelan capital, but don't try booking a seat. While travel agents can "see" the flight in their system, the Iranian carrier isn't accepting reservations. You see, Flight 744 is apparently reserved for members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), intelligence agents and Hizballah operatives.
#1
Persians have never been monolithic. Nobody really speaks for everybody, and never has. This is a calculated diplomatic and military strategy on their part.
If you get half a dozen of their political leaders, then ask them their policy on a subject, they will each give totally different responses and act as if each of them speaks with authority.
So this means that their threats, and promises, are meaningless. Only their actions count. And never underestimate their strategy, even if it looks foolish. These people had ancestors that invented chess.
"A few weeks ago, according to official and private reports, the Iranian air force shot down three drones near the southwestern city of Bushehr, where a Russian-supplied nuclear reactor has just started up. When the Revolutionary Guards inspected the debris, they expected to find proof of high-altitude spying. Instead, the Guards had to report to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that the air force had blasted Iran's own unmanned aircraft out of the sky.
Apparently, according to official Iranian press accounts, the Iranian military had created a special unit to deploy the dronessome for surveillance and others, as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad bragged on Sunday, to carry bombsbut hadn't informed the air force."
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
08/24/2010 17:20 Comments ||
Top||
Great article at Belmont Club
...Its a network of people who are gainfully employed in negotiating, finding funding for and advancing the Leftist agenda. Its not just a cause, its a job.
From the beginning, though, I pointed out that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was no great bargain and that his Cordoba Initiative was full of euphemisms about Islamic jihad and Islamic theocracy. I mentioned his sinister belief that the United States was partially responsible for the assault on the World Trade Center and his refusal to take a position on the racist Hamas dictatorship in Gaza. The more one reads through his statements, the more alarming it gets. For example, here is Rauf's editorial on the upheaval that followed the brutal hijacking of the Iranian elections in 2009. Regarding President Obama, he advised that:
He should say his administration respects many of the guiding principles of the 1979 revolution--to establish a government that expresses the will of the people; a just government, based on the idea of Vilayet-i-faquih, that establishes the rule of law. Isn't that special?
Coyly untranslated here (perhaps for "outreach" purposes), Vilayet-i-faquih is the special term promulgated by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to describe the idea that all of Iranian society is under the permanent stewardship (sometimes rendered as guardianship) of the mullahs. Under this dispensation, "the will of the people" is a meaningless expression, because "the people" are the wards and children of the clergy. It is the justification for a clerical supreme leader, whose rule is impervious to elections and who can pick and choose the candidates and, if it comes to that, the results. It is extremely controversial within Shiite Islam. (Grand Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq, for example, does not endorse it.) As for those numerous Iranians who are not Shiites, it reminds them yet again that they are not considered to be real citizens of the Islamic Republic.
I do not find myself reassured by the fact that Imam Rauf publicly endorses the most extreme and repressive version of Muslim theocracy. The letterhead of the statement, incidentally, describes him as the Cordoba Initiative's "Founder and Visionary." Why does that not delight me, either?
Would one of those alleged moderate Muslims followers the Religion of Peace (TM) who allegedly were horrified by 9/11 have chosen to build a mosque precisely at Ground Zero? What kind of Muslims would pick this particular place in all the state of New York?
#2
I do not find myself reassured by the fact that Imam Rauf publicly endorses the most extreme and repressive version of Muslim theocracy.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, The Bridge Builder, endorses Iran's theocracy where the elections and results are rigged until the desired result is obtained. Where violence is used as a tool to suppress opposition. Since he is an imam, I suppose he would endorse Vilayet-i-faquih. Don't most of these people aspiring to "bridge-building" want to be in charge? Religion is the tool. The thing our Founders were trying to get rid of was a State run church/religion. Am I correct to assume that Vilayet-i-faquih is Iran's version of Sharia law, the law of islamic states? Freedom of religion is not a suicide pact. There is a lot of double speak going on with this mosque.
The Cordoba Initiative, so-called, would also not be challenged if it were trying to establish itself anywhere else on Manhattan Island.
I have an inkling that Mr. Rauf, however tolerant he may or may not be (there is mixed evidence on the question), and his comrades knew this. I also have an inkling that they chose Ground Zero precisely to invite the protest against it. This is a skirmish in a very long contest with historic resonance. If the elite's [note that TNR does not consider itself in the 'elite' group, but it evidently includes the NYC mayor]
indifferent to the reasonable emotions of a society win this one they will ultimately have lost much more than chalking up a sterile and merely circumstantial reading of the First Amendment.
Posted by: Lord Garth ||
08/24/2010 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
what if 19 Christians (you pick the denomination) ran a 747 into a soccer stadium full of Saudi fans, killing abt 3,000 of them and then 10yrs laters wanted to build a church or even a grand Cathedral across the street from the ruined stadium...let's see how tolerant & receptive these self proclaimed muslim bridge-builders would be...
#6
This is why the fake term Islamophobia is so dangerous: It insinuates that any reservations about Islam must ipso facto be "phobic." A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike. Islamic preaching very often manifests precisely this feature, which is why suspicion of it is by no means irrational.
Spot on Hitch! As Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was overseas on his State Dept. sponsored Bridge Building tour his wife hit the Sunday news show circuit back in the US. Daisy Khan proclaimed that opposition to the GZM was not simply phobic but an organized hatred of Islam. One wonders if our intrepid Imam shares his wifes views and if so is this part of his moderate dialogue? In light of such a strong opinion, perhaps its quite rational to question why this mosque, at this location, and at this time. Just as no one in the US is denied their right to worship as they see fit is it rational to question the motives of a group of Imams doing the Holy head bounce just prior to boarding a plane in Minneapolis?
#7
The Cordoba initiative is nothing more that a victory Mosque at ground zero. There is NO muslim community there, there is no need to build one unless your making a statement to the world that you won this war. A sort of raising the flag of victory at the battlefield.
Now our F()ked up political parties and their respective media outlets have reduced this to partisan hacking. MSNBC has countered every arguement as hate and FOX is not much better calling zero the anointed one.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/24/2010 11:31 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I think the dedication date - Exactly 10 years - to the day - after 9/11/2001 tells us all we need to know about the 'message' the Murder Mosque is intended to send. The celebration of the murder of 3,000 people by Islam.
#10
I wonder if there is anything non-violent that the islamic community in the US could do that would generate as much anti-islamic feeling among the population of the US as the building of this mosque. This is a real eye-opener for many people. They are beginning to understand that the penetration of islam into our society didn't end with the attacks on 9/11. Hopefully the force of the opposition to this disgrace will be powerful enough to stop it.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
