"Stay away from Mexico"

[DeletedUser6029]

ok, next point of discussion

The US State Department issued a strong warning warning Americans to stay away from Mexico. It advised all youth in this part of the country to NOT travel to Mexico during this spring break season. It also allowed for all family members of US officials to come home from border regions.
Texas Tribune
This is just one example of many stories on the situation.
No big deal right? I mean we in TX hear about this all the time, border violence etc. It is always a concern, but one we take seriously when it reaches a level that the State department steps in and says "no, it is really bad right now"

Except, guess what? Our esteemed leader, Obama, allowed for his 13 year old daughter to spring break in the very region his state department warned not to go to. Really? Then to top it off, when the various media reported on it, the white house stepped in and demanded all the news media to cease and desist on this story, remove all reports on it etc etc. Here is my question.

Was this choice a blatant disregard for the situation? Is this a case of "do as I say, not as I do"? While the media/white house have a long understand of you leave the kids alone, does the fact that the shock of this behavior (letting his 13 year old travel to this area) and the subsequent reporting of such an error in judgement on his part, count as reporting on the kids? Should the story be allowed to run so that the world sees the truth of the situation? Should the White House have stepped in, and should the news outlets let him bully them?
reason.com
theblaze

Personally, my opinion is, he is trying to shove under the rug an election year screw up. I think the news papers should continue to hash it out, and let the voters decide his genius come November. I think it showed lack of incite, and it was a blatant example of his usual disregard for things. More specifically, I don't think Americans should foot the bill for the secret service, and the expenses of the trip that was done in such lack of judgement.

 

[DeletedUser]

The argument is a U.S. specific one and illustrates sincere concerns about the brutal drug wars going on in Mexico (particularly the border cities). However, incidents of U.S. citizens being targeted is very low in comparison to violence in the U.S. Also, almost all of the victims were participating in drug trafficking.

Please consider the sensationalism and base-xenophobia associated with the reports found in local newspapers. Examination of facts does present an increase in U.S. citizen casualties, but again almost all of the victims were participating in some form of drug trafficking. That is important to realize, important to understand.

 

[DeletedUser6029]

The argument is a U.S. specific one and illustrates sincere concerns about the brutal drug wars going on in Mexico (particularly the border cities). However, incidents of U.S. citizens being targeted is very low in comparison to violence in the U.S. Also, almost all of the victims were participating in drug trafficking.

Ok, I have a report to refute this, but on a side note, That is not true about the "almost all of the victims were participating in drug trafficking. Actually, many of them were not.
Council on Foreign Relationsf The link won't work...so here are some quotes. (it is a PDF)

The geography of that violence is limited
but continues to spread, and its targets include a growing number of government officials, police
officers, journalists, and individuals unrelated to the drug trade.

The February 2011 killing of a U.S. immigration and customs agent signals that U.S. law
enforcement officials are now in the crosshairs. If current security trends continue to worsen, the
emergence of a genuine insurgent movement, the proliferation of “ungoverned spaces,” and the
deliberate and sustained targeting of U.S. government personnel will become more likely.

The above quote is key in why I find Obama's choice to send his daughter so shocking in its utter disregard.

While not apparent from the raw statistics, Mexican drug violence is highly concentrated. Twothirds
of drug-related homicides occur in five of the thirty-two Mexican states and roughly 80 percent
happen in just 168 of 2,456 municipalities. The density of violence has made major trafficking cities
like Ciudad Juárez and Culiacán among the deadliest places in the world. With just over one million
inhabitants, Juárez had more than two thousand homicides in 2009 and 2010, a number that exceeds
the combined annual totals for New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, DC. Violence is
increasingly directed toward the government. Dozens of elected officials, hundreds of police and
military personnel, and intelligence agents working with U.S. law enforcement in the fight against
organized crime have been murdered.10 Also, the murders and disappearances of sixty-seven reporters
over the last decade have sent a chilling message to the media—the eyes, ears, and voice of civil
society—and have made Mexico one of the world’s most dangerous places for journalists.11

Interestingly enough, it was one of the "regions" that Obama sent his daughter...and told us to NOT go...double standard? And at risk of repeating my point, should he be allowed to have the fact that he did this bullied out of the public eye?

For the record, I heard about this story from a "legit" news agency, not a right wing one. It was only after they began disappearing, did I decide ok, wait a second.

Please consider the sensationalism and base-xenophobia associated with the reports found in local newspapers. Examination of facts does present an increase in U.S. citizen casualties, but again almost all of the victims were participating in some form of drug trafficking. That is important to realize, important to understand.

Considering the report above which was written in 2011 (March) and the situation has escalated, The question is still, if the State Department (Hillary Clinton and company) said noooooo don't go, we STRONGLY advise against it, etc etc, what business does the President have allowing his 13 year old daughter to go? Secondly, because he did do such a huge gaff, should he be allowed to bully the press into removing it?

edit : it should also be noted that the reason the state department issued the warning is because increasingly, innocent tourists have been either caught in the crossfire, OR killed to send a message.

 

[DeletedUser]

The geography of that violence is limited

but continues to spread, and its targets include a growing number of government officials, police officers, journalists, and individuals unrelated to the drug trade.

You like posing dishonesty? That is referring to Mexican government officials, police officers, journalists, etc.

As to Obama's daughter, she has an army following her everywhere, in and out of the U.S. I hardly see that as a double-standard.

 

[DeletedUser6029]

You like posing dishonesty? That is referring to Mexican government officials, police officers, journalists, etc.

As to Obama's daughter, she has an army following her everywhere, in and out of the U.S. I hardly see that as a double-standard.

Have you read the report? I beg to differ on who it is referring to. All one has to do is google the many examples of Americans here. No dishonesty here. Wishful thinking? It is a copy paste word for word......

As to Obama's daughter, It is a black and white, yes or no answer...Do you think it is ok for Obama to send his 13 year old child into a zone that his own state department not 3 weeks ago strongly encouraged American youth NOT to visit over spring break, AND allowed for all diplomatic families in that area to leave their post and come home? Are you saying as a parent, that was ok? Are you saying that as the president of our country, commander in chief and big gun in the State department, to go point blank AGAINST the advise of his cabinet and send his 13 year old there? Really? Quit side stepping here Hell.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, I read the report, and yes you misrepresented that paragraph.

As to Obama's daughter, the children of the Presidents have historically been off-limits to the press corps. Although not policy, it is a matter of privacy and security that the children are never hounded, photographed or otherwise written about other than when they are presented with the President / President's wife. News groups respect this, politicians respect this. Well, except in the case of Santorum, who obviously thinks it's good for his campaign to point out Obama's elder daughter is in a group trip with her school in Oaxaca, accompanied by Secret Service personnel (allegedly on or about 25 SS).

If you want my opinion, I visited Mexico frequently over the past 30+ years. More murders are committed in the U.S., more violence, more abductions, more rapes. I provided statistics awhile back in another discussion. Bottom line is, I'm not going to stoop so low as to criticize Obama's parenting skills. Politicians shouldn't use their children, or the children of their opposition, as tools for political gain. His daughter being in Mexico was never advertised by the Obama administration, it was made news by Santorum pointing it out.

 

[DeletedUser6029]

ok, I won't discuss this with you anymore...but neither will I not correct your errors.
The story was initially broke by AFP, and sent out to The Huffington Post, International Business Times, The Australian, The Telegraph and Global Grind. From their it came BACK to America and picked up by our mainstreet media. I am not going to get into a wizzing match with you when you offer no back up for the misinformation you are offering.

Oh yes, I found an internet version of that report I didn't copy word for word with no dishonesty *rolls eyes*
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49915390/Mexico-Csr-60-Uncorrected

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, AFP presented it as news, not as politics. Santorum posed it as politics the following day, condemning Obama for allowing his daughter to travel to Mexico (Oaxaca), with 25 Secret Service personnel and police, after the State Department issued a travel warning for many region-states of Mexico. I think it's important to point out, Oaxaca is not on the State Department's warning list. Doh!

 

[DeletedUser6029]

I think it's important to point out, Oaxaca is not on the State Department's warning list.

I will give you that point. And your right, that was a key point. Ok, you win.

I actually had no opinion on this, I was curious as to other folks.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would have to agree with Hellstromm, Obama's daughter has so much security the chances of risk to her are tiny.

As for another American youth, they don't have an army following them so it's more risky.