Thread: "these lamentable acts" (Journalism)

On CNN.com:

Police find decapitated body of Mexico newspaper editor - CNN.com

(CNN) -- The editor of a Mexican newspaper was found dead, her body decapitated and with a note next to it, officials said.

Maria Elizabeth Macias Castro, 39, was the editor in chief of the newspaper, Primera Hora...

This newspaper editor was allegedly executed for writing about the drug cartels. The article also mentions the deaths of a couple of bloggers less than a month ago whose (extremely messy) torture-killings are also credited to members of a drug cartel whom the bloggers had criticized.

Do you think it is courageous—or is it foolish?—for writers to continue to write about things that have gotten other people imprisoned or killed…?

There are Mexican newspapers that are trying to take a stand against the drug cartels. They are well aware of the dangerous waters they're wading in, but choose to stand and fight. If it weren't for their brave efforts, we'd never know how evil and depraved the drug cartels are. I'd never call these people foolish.

Journalists in Mexico seem to be the only genuine opposition to the drug cartels. Most of the higher echelons of the police seem to be in thrall to the drug barons, many Mexican politicians seem to owe their positions to the support of drug money - I find it odd that the, supposedly, richest man in the world is a Mexican businessman, when the country is not a major industrial power and the GDP is a fraction of that of others. Until Mexico's politicians/army/police acquire some backbone, this situation will continue to exist; and it will be followed soon by the UK as soft policing, judicial process and The Human Rights act allow criminals, murders, paedophiles and terrorists to roam our streets without let or hinderance.

Originally Posted by Bloggsworth

this situation will continue to exist; and it will be followed soon by the UK as soft policing, judicial process and The Human Rights act allow criminals, murders, paedophiles and terrorists to roam our streets without let or hinderance.

Who knows? Perhaps the worm will turn. Perhaps one day soon, enough will be enough. Perhaps "someone" may come along and inspire the population into an era of vigilante justice. Don't say it can't happen; if I can think of it, so can others.

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

Who knows? Perhaps the worm will turn. Perhaps one day soon, enough will be enough. Perhaps "someone" may come along and inspire the population into an era of vigilante justice. Don't say it can't happen; if I can think of it, so can others.

Vigilante justice is as bad as criminality and terrorism.

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

Who knows? Perhaps the worm will turn. Perhaps one day soon, enough will be enough. Perhaps "someone" may come along and inspire the population into an era of vigilante justice. Don't say it can't happen; if I can think of it, so can others.

Actually I place the existence of drug cartels on the shoulders of the people who insist on taking drugs. Supply and demand. I understand that drug addiction is considered by many to be a disease, but I don't have much tolerance for those who use them recreationally.

Selling drugs is a great way to make money, and it appears that that type of business attracts less than savory people. The drug cartels are simply taking advantage of some people's silliness (casual users), and other people's weaknesses (addicts). They'll go out of business if everyone stops using the stuff—which, of course, will never happen.

I have a suspicion that the translation of the official's remark was based on linguistic root similarity and that the word translated here as 'lamentable,' while directly related to the english word entomologically, may have much stronger connotations in the original than in the translation. If this is the case then appearance of official connivance would be lessened.

I think people must have a vested interest to want to report this kind of thing.

Originally Posted by patskywriter

Actually I place the existence of drug cartels on the shoulders of the people who insist on taking drugs. Supply and demand.

You should place the existence of drug cartels on the shoulders of our drug laws. Demand and black market supply. American drugs laws have wrecked Mexico.

The drug cartels are simply taking advantage of some people's silliness (casual users), and other people's weaknesses (addicts). They'll go out of business if everyone stops using the stuff—which, of course, will never happen.

The only way to make that entire industry go away is with the stroke of a pen, really simple.

Originally Posted by Blood

The only way to make that entire industry go away is with the stroke of a pen, really simple.

Legalize drugs--could make matters worse. Drug houses wouldn't be a bad idea. A place where people could go to get high legally and sleep off the effects before going home. Legalizing drugs would cause many automobile accidents and deaths.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

Legalize drugs--could make matters worse. Drug houses wouldn't be a bad idea. A place where people could go to get high legally and sleep off the effects before going home. Legalizing drugs would cause many automobile accidents and deaths.

Let us suppose this assumption is true, would that be worse than defunding a global multi-billlion $ black market industry run by cold-blooded killers?

Originally Posted by Blood

Lets suppose this assumption is true, would that be worse than defunding a global multi-billlion $ black market industry run by cold-blooded killers?

Cold-blooded killers won't go away by legalizing drugs. Do you think they will be enrolling in some university because they have no drugs to sell? They will probably just undersell the legalized vendors.

I don't have a solution to the problem, but I know that automobile accidents will skyrocket if drugs are sold legally. I wouldn't be against building large parks for people addicted to drugs. The drug-addicted folks can enter at 9am, receive the drugs at 10am, and get locked inside the park at 11am.

It's a win-win situation. They get to be high, and all pedestrians are kept safe. On special occasions, the authorities send could musicians to the park entertain the druggies.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

… On special occasions, the authorities send could musicians to the park entertain the druggies.

No way! They'd hook the musicians who aren't already hooked. I'd rather they set up a few flat-screen TVs for entertainment.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

I don't have a solution to the problem, but I know that automobile accidents will skyrocket if drugs are sold legally. I wouldn't be against building large parks for people addicted to drugs. The drug-addicted folks can enter at 9am, receive the drugs at 10am, and get locked inside the park at 11am.

It's a win-win situation. They get to be high, and all pedestrians are kept safe. On special occasions, the authorities send could musicians to the park entertain the druggies.

I prefer getting high at work.

*