It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mexico Accused Of Framing Border Agent

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I beleive the pamphlet is a survival guide more than anything else. I read spanish and can tell you that it is not instucting HOW to get in , but how not to DIE, or suffer dangers. They probably released this due to the alarming death rates people suffer in these crossings.




posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee

Originally posted by ChrisF231



Most people in Mexico are either pure Spanish or Mestizo (mixed Spanish and Indian heritage). The pure Indians were mostly eradicated either by the Conquistadors or by various Mexican military campaigns.



so mexico is full of full blooded whites? as it is spaniards are white, and after the reconquista, the country was repoulated by the celtic tribes of the north. But you say that mexico has no indiginouse population because these same people currently ocupy the physical land in mexico....it was irradicated.....oh, then why is it that over 95% of the country is NATIVE AMERICAN genetically!??

According to the CIA World Factbook: 60% of the population is Mestizo, 30% are Amerindian or predominantly Amerindian, 9% white and 1% other.'

30% is not 95% of the people.

www.cia.gov...



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
So.....people that share the same genetic base as those "native americans" here are not native americans because there may have been a little diffusion between races? did I miss something here?


You sure did miss something and it had to be in history class. Many Spanarids immigrated to Mexico from Spain therefore are not or cannot be considered as Native Americans. Now do a search of kw's New Spain.

[edit on 8/12/2007 by shots]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
oh ok.......they are not native american in mexico.....they are white....cool
thanks for bringing that to my attention. I'll go tell my mexican wife and half mexican daughter that they are in fact my same race. Thanks for that clarification. I might have to bleach my wifes skin though just to keep up that facade. I'll have to tell her to unlearn guahaco because apparently she is not native american and that is clearly a native american language. so much to do........



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Guys, let's can the attitude and post with decorum please.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   
as for history...I am a spaniard and have a mexican wife....I know my cultures history. Maybe I can teach you being that I have been to both places and know intricacies of both cultures. You are ignorant of what mexicans consider them selves



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
as for history...I am a spaniard and have a mexican wife....I know my cultures history.


Kindly get back on topic, the thread is not about spanish history or your heritage. It is about a border guard who some believe has been framed of a crime he did not comit intentionally, he acted in self defense.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
so stop talking about the validity of native amercans peoples calim to said heritage.

On topic how does a rock constitute grounds for firing a gun at the guy. Its not like its legal to kill some one if the threat is minimal. he could have steped back from the guy and the rock, not like it has the same range as a fire arm, called for back up, or at least taken a non lethal shot. He is trained I think right, why not shoot the leg, was he so scared of a rock.....



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
He is trained I think right, why not shoot the leg, was he so scared of a rock.....


Police are trained to shoot center mass. Read that as the torso. Hey, what would have happened if he HAD hit the cop with the rock and incapacitated him. That's very possible. Then HE would have had a firearm.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
intent is not the same as action. they guy may have felt threatened himself, as far as being trained to shoot towards the center, what are cops in the states supposed to do if a guy with a rock comes at them, shoot to kill? If that had happened here with the same officer he would have been thought of as being unfit for his job. Police are trained to handle situations that pose a minimal threat with less than lethal means. If not every drunk guy that swings at a cop would be shot on the spot. Or ever person who "may " be garnishing a fire arm would be shot dead according to your statement. There are many ways to deal with a scared man with rock...most dont involve shooting him.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   


On topic how does a rock constitute grounds for firing a gun at the guy. Its not like its legal to kill some one if the threat is minimal. he could have steped back from the guy and the rock, not like it has the same range as a fire arm, called for back up, or at least taken a non lethal shot. He is trained I think right, why not shoot the leg, was he so scared of a rock.....



I guess it depends on how big the rock is and if he's close enough to use it in a hammer like way. No agency trains it's people to "shoot for the leg". If you use deadly force you fire center mass period.

This guy may or may not have acted properly all i care about is that he has the abillity to call exculpatory witnesses. The fact that the Mexican govt is paying these people to testify while at the same time refusing to allow others to testify is what gets me the most. A foreign government using its power to deprive this guy of a fair trial is an issue that deserves to be broadcasted from the rooftops.

(small edit right after posting)

[edit on 12-8-2007 by jefwane]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
may be so...I agree no nation should use its power and influence to circumvent the laws. The question I ask is why the guy was shot dead to begin with. why not a warning shot.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
*snip*

There are many ways to deal with a scared man with rock...most dont involve shooting him.


I guess his taser was in the shop for repairs.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee

Originally posted by Johnmike
I'm ashamed of silly little arguments like, "Crossing the border doesn't require a death sentence!"


Your right we should kill everyone for every crime. That way no one will want to commit crimes.

You park your car illegally next to a fire hydrant....DEATH!

You speed in a 30 ....DEATH!!!!!

You drink a beer inthe park when it clearly states "no alcholhol"...DEATH!!!

Is that a can you droped on the floor.....DEATH DEATH DEATH...

Now we can PROTECT our selves from all those criminals.

Shoot the world!!!!!!


Flawed logic. This border patrol agent felt compelled enough to use his fire arm for a reason. No one wants to take a humans life. Regardless of who they are or where they're from. I think your trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with the above rhetoric.

When you are threatend BY A CRIMINAL, and your only choice is to 'shoot' that criminal in order to save yourself, would you do it?

People murder, steal, all the time, thats against the law.. But it doesnt stop ppl from doing it. Laws were created by man, since when did man become unfallable? We live in a sick world. Glad to know you understand that now.

[edit on 12-8-2007 by West Coast]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
The question I ask is why the guy was shot dead to begin with. why not a warning shot.


He allegedly threatened the officer with a rock that is why and rocks can and are considered as leathal weapons in those situations.

The US Border aPatrol has many vehicles with special guards just for the purpose of deflecting rocks and molotov coctails.. Seems Rocks are considered their weapon of choice.

www.youtube.com...

Throwing of rocks starts after the where is the fence commecial.


The US Border Patrol must use specially protected vehicles along this part of the border. Five pound rocks and even Molotov cocktails are used by the illegal aliens in their attacks upon the Agents.

Source with Picture of vehicle




[edit on 8/12/2007 by shots]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   
It reamins to be proven is in fact his life was threatened by a flying rock ,or if in fact he used excesive force. The fact that his trial is not being done as fair as possible sucks , flat out, is a terrible thing. The fact that this guy was killed for commiting a crime that in no way posed a threat for anyones life is more concerning. what if this sets a presedent. What can we expect for our own citizens in the future?



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Throwing of rocks starts after the where is the fence commecial.



what?

How many of the border patrol are killed by these rocks?

[edit on 12-8-2007 by newyorkee]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by newyorkee
The question I ask is why the guy was shot dead to begin with. why not a warning shot.


He allegedly threatened the officer with a rock that is why and rocks can and are considered as leathal weapons in those situations.

The US Border aPatrol has many vehicles with special guards just for the purpose of deflecting rocks and molotov coctails.. Seems Rocks are considered their weapon of choice.

www.youtube.com...

Throwing of rocks starts after the where is the fence commecial.


The US Border Patrol must use specially protected vehicles along this part of the border. Five pound rocks and even Molotov cocktails are used by the illegal aliens in their attacks upon the Agents.

Source with Picture of vehicle




[edit on 8/12/2007 by shots]


Im glad you mentioned this. Rocks are used against border patrol agents with the intent to hurt and or kill the agents.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   
again I ask, how many border patrol agents are KILLED by these rocks. I would argue that if the number is zero then it can not be justification for killing someone with a rock as "their wepon of choice"

Not saying I condone this behavior, but also I cant immagine how killing a person with a lump of stone is correct either.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by newyorkee
It reamins to be proven is in fact his life was threatened by a flying rock ,or if in fact he used excesive force. The fact that his trial is not being done as fair as possible sucks , flat out, is a terrible thing. The fact that this guy was killed for commiting a crime that in no way posed a threat for anyones life is more concerning.



So your saying, that you have valuable proof to the encounter? You know for a fact that the man in question that was killed 'posed in no way a threat to the border agent'?


Why some people feel the need to pick and choose one side without know all the facts is beyond me. No one here is saying killing a human being is right, just that when your life is put at stake you have to choose. Kill or possibly be killed? Its survival of the fittest, its been going on since the beginning of time, and will be that way till the end of time as well.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join