Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime Security

Anonymous Kills Websites, Cartels Kill Bloggers 627

Posted by Soulskill
from the comittment-and-scope dept.
An anonymous reader writes "While drug cartels in Mexico are disemboweling people they accuse of blogging about drug violence, Anonymous busies itself taking down Mexican government websites. With all the problems facing people in Mexico right now, including drug cartels extorting teachers for 50% of their pay and killing schoolchildren (thus shutting down the school system), Mexico's biggest oil field in terminal decline and drug cartels kidnapping busloads of people and forcing them into gladiator-style contests to the death, Anonymous' actions appear particularly petty."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anonymous Kills Websites, Cartels Kill Bloggers

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    We need to increase spending on the war on drugs, thus increasing scarcity and profit margins.
    • by durrr (1316311)
      No, we need to get the global broadcast rights for the gladiator events.
    • by pnewhook (788591) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:18AM (#37419178)
      Actually the complete opposite needs to happen. The way the government stopped the smuggling of alcohol and the related gang/mob violence during prohibition was to re-legalize alcohol. Make drugs a legal product and have the government tax the profits. It will immediately stop all this wasteful drug related violence and security expenditure.
      • Just because there aren't drugs to traffic doesn't mean the problem will be solved. Organized crime will not vanish, but merely shift its business to some other form of social exploitation. There's a lot more than just money involved in this trade, and the cartel members aren't just going to go get normal jobs if the demand for drugs diminishes. It's clear already that they know threats of violence can be used to extort money from teachers--and I hate to think how this might escalate if it became their o
        • Just because there aren't drugs to traffic doesn't mean the problem will be solved

          It's not an all-or-nothing situation, cut the money flow and the violence will stop increasing at the steady pace it has those last years and eventually will start winding down. Just like any other activity, stop making it profitable and it'll decrease and disappear eventually.

        • by DriedClexler (814907) on Friday September 16, 2011 @11:08AM (#37421358)

          Just because there isn't alcohol to traffic doesn't mean the problem will be solved. Chicago and New York gangs will not vanish, but merely shift their business to some other form of social exploitation. There's a lot more than just money involved in this trade, and gang members aren't just going to go get normal jobs if the demand for alcohol diminishes. ...

          Therefore, we should not repeal Prohibition.

      • by Kamiza Ikioi (893310) on Friday September 16, 2011 @10:30AM (#37420886) Homepage

        The major drug problem between the US and Mexico is Marijuana. Our culture is very "meh" on having it outlawed, so there is a higher market for it, unlike drugs like heroin and meth with scares the crap out of most people, including the pot smokers among us. So it's not as though all those weed sales will transfer to cocaine or heroin if marijuana is legalized. They'll simply go out of business, or become legitimate, like beer producers did. Beer producers didn't say, "Shit, we can't dodge taxes and shoot at the federal lawmen anymore... so screw beer, we're going to start selling heroin!"

        No, they went legit, and the guns went away. The gangs and mafias changed to do other illegal things, but they lost a huge portion of income. The same would happen with marijuana.

        By the way, all those liquor taxes are paying for local community services, like schools. This is taxable, just like liquor, cigarettes, or any other luxury item.

    • by Bert64 (520050) <bert@s[ ]hdot.fi ... m ['las' in gap]> on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:23AM (#37419234) Homepage

      Or ditch the "war on drugs" entirely... The illegal trade in drugs costs authorities billions, and fuels organised crime such as the drug cartels in mexico and other countries.

      So instead, legalise drugs but put in place controls on them:

      Quality controls, drugs available from reputable suppliers rather than dodgy dealers, so drugs don't end up contaminated with other even more harmful substances.
      Taxes - tax drugs the same way that the currently legal tobacco and alcohol are taxed.
      Monitoring - know who's taking drugs.

      Government saves on law enforcement costs trying to police drugs...
      Government further benefits from tax income from the sale of drugs.
      Drug users benefit from cheaper supplies, which are also safer and have a legal avenue for complaint.
      Drug companies can develop alternatives that provide the effects the users want, while reducing the negatives (e.g. see electronic cigarettes).
      Drug users need not hide their activities, and can more easily seek help to give up.

      It's an obvious solution, and the only ones who stand to lose are the criminal gangs who are currently making huge profits from illegal drugs.

  • by davidbrit2 (775091) on Friday September 16, 2011 @07:50AM (#37418904) Homepage
    Deaths from blogging accidents are about to go way up.
  • Legalise drug trade (Score:5, Informative)

    by ttong (2459466) on Friday September 16, 2011 @07:55AM (#37418932)
    Legal trade causes far less trouble, clearly the best way forward is to legalise the trade and use the extra tax income to police and jail those who still engage in crime.
    • by networkconsultant (1224452) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:07AM (#37419070)
      You do realize this is all due to the new form of prohibition right? You can legalize everything all you want in Mexico but the market being Supplied is to the north. Until it's legal on both sides of the border, violence will be an issue.
      • by Andy Dodd (701) <atd7&cornell,edu> on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:25AM (#37419254) Homepage

        I think that's his point...

        This country doesn't seem to have learned from its mistakes with Prohibition, which created some of the most violent gangs and cartels in this country's history, at least the most violent until the New Prohibition (aka War on Drugs).

      • by eth1 (94901)

        I've supported legalizing (some) drugs - marijuana at the very least - for a long time because of this. It would do far more to hurt the cartels than anything we're doing now.
        Unfortunately, I'm sure the cartels know this, too, and that anyone in the US or Mexico that makes serious headway in that direction will have a very short lifespan.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Nope....

      Take a look at prescription drugs... they are perfectly legal to carry, yet they kill more people than hardcore drugs, such as heroin, coke, and meth do combined, and I am also including deaths by drug deals, not by drug use alone....

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Take a look at prescription drugs... they are perfectly legal to carry, yet they kill more people than hardcore drugs, such as heroin, coke, and meth do combined, and I am also including deaths by drug deals, not by drug use alone....

        Most of that is actually manslaughter by doctor, i.e. insufficient diligence on the part of the physician when prescribing. It's not really death by drug because abuse of prescription drugs is the smallest cause of death by them.

    • by qortra (591818)
      I completely agree, but the real magic is that Mexico wouldn't have to dump more money into their policing if they legalize. Legal drug trade wouldn't generate any more violence than legal bubble gum trade. The people who are currently hanging bloggers up on bridges would simply starve to death alone after legalization. None of their skills adequately prepare them to conduct profitable legal business, and all of their connections and power are derived from their massive income. It's so ridiculous that thes
      • by Jmc23 (2353706)
        Being legal in Mexico wouldn't stop the violence if it was still illegal in the US. People would still fight for the right to supply. As to the cost of policing, you do realize mexico is now making money off the war on drugs right? The US is funding it.
    • Legal trade causes far less trouble, clearly the best way forward is to legalise the trade and use the extra tax income to police and jail those who still engage in crime.

      What are you, some kind of neo-crypto-liberal-homo-socialist or something?! Naw, us real Americans prefer our drugs the old-fashioned way, illegal and funding criminal enterprise.

    • by gandhi_2 (1108023)

      Leave it to a moral relativist to place the blame of murdering drug dealers on people who don't think you should do drugs.

      Would you be so cavalier about a War on Human Trafficking? Or would you suggest surrendering if that war started getting messy too?

      If all your decisions in life are decided by which choice is "less trouble", then you truly stand for nothing worth standing for.

      The blame here starts with Americas brain-dead drug-using oxygen thieves. The blame continues with the enablers, liberal pop-cultu

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Xest (935314)

      Agreed, it's not like legalised alcohol causes any problems that put burdens on the health system and increases deaths by drink driving accidents and so forth or anything.

      Seriously, it's not as simple as you think. Sure legalisation gets rid of organised crime but it creates other issues in terms of higher levels of sometimes fatal substance abuse.

      Note that I'm not saying legalisation isn't the best solution of a bad bunch - it might well be - but so many idiots think it's a silver bullet and it's absolutel

  • You're talking about a world-wide network of script kiddies vs an organized cadre of bloodthirsty monsters. What in the world do you expect them to do?

    • I think the point is that taking down the government web sites serve no purpose and might even be beneficial to the drug cartels, it just doesn't make any real sense to me.

    • by discord5 (798235)

      What in the world do you expect them to do?

      Wear a Guy Fawkes mask and take down the cartels ninja-style.

      I can smell the plot for the next hollywood blockbuster already. All it needs is some kickass explosions, and women.

  • Ha. is it. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by unity100 (970058)
    has the moron who has submitted this, asked himself, how the hell drug cartels become able to do those things that you dont even see in civil wars ? do you think it could be possible without assistance from within government ? note that government in mexico is extremely corrupt.

    and what relevance does anonymous's actions have to this ? this seems like moronic bashing just because you want to bash.

    quality of accepted submissions have been declining lately.
    • by Jmc23 (2353706)
      Actually, the cartels are upping their actions precisely because the government isn't playing ball with them. All of this increased violence is in direct reaction to the new US style War On Drugs.
    • I can just tell you are very wrong. Yes, the government is quite corrupt (although I doubt it is as corrupt as you think), but here we are not talking (at least, we are no _longer_ talking) about govt. people being bribed not to mess with them. The cartels have become militarily stronger than the State in many regions, and although the government does not want to admit it, the talks about a "failed state" and about an effective civil war are correct... In some areas of the country.

      Please note the "some area

  • Recall... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Shoten (260439) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:01AM (#37418994)

    I remember when the online community castigated Yahoo for cooperating with the Chinese, a couple of years ago. People talked about it like it was a choice between giving the Chinese the information they wanted, or not giving it to them; nobody considered that the Chinese could get the information by threatening the Chinese employees of Yahoo who had access to the information, or by alternate (and even less friendly) methods. What nobody seemed to realize is that when you're dealing with certain kinds of things (like criminal organizations and repressive governments), things don't stay in online. There are kinetic repurcussions to actions, and if the 'bad people' are more comfortable in the real world than the online one, they're going to show up on your doorstep, not in your inbox.

  • by s0litaire (1205168) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:05AM (#37419036)

    RIAA Label Used In Massive Cocaine Trafficking Ring

    http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-label-used-in-massive-cocaine-trafficking-ring-110916/ [torrentfreak.com]

    Earlier this year record label boss Jimmy Rosemond was arrested on the suspicion of leading a massive cocaine trafficking ring.

    The founder of Czar Entertainment used shipments of music equipment to transfer cocaine across the United States.

    These shipments went to several music studios, and according to a recent court filing uncovered by The Smoking Gun, Interscope Records is one of them.

    This suggests that people at the RIAA label were in on the game.

    Previously entertainment industry representatives have suggested that piracy can be linked to organized crime, and the above suggests that the same can be said for the music industry.

    How many people in the music industry were part of the drug ring remains unknown at this point, but we would advise the RIAA to carefully investigate its members to avoid the practices from escalating.

  • "More stories about the latest X Factor series and how BigMacs make you fat, thanks. This is a little too depressing for me." says the rest of the world.
  • by the_raptor (652941) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:08AM (#37419076)

    Of course those actions appear petty. Petty is 99% of what Anonymous gets its kicks from. From abusing 12 year old girls (even if they kind of asked for it) to posting insulting comments about physically disabled people. The stuff like Project Chanology (the attacks on Scientology) was an aberration and really involved more non-Chan New Friends then it did Chan Old Friends, even though it started on the Chans. Anonymous originally got media attention for Habo Hotel/Second Life raids and harassing people on MySpace/Facebook.

    Anonymous isn't your friend. Anonymous aren't moral crusaders. Anonymous are in it for the lulz.

  • by FudRucker (866063) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:09AM (#37419082)
    pull all the troops out of afghanistan and iraq and send them in to mexico to hunt down and kill these drug smuggler cartels before this sort thing becomes common in the USA
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by drinkypoo (153816)

      This is a troll, right? Nobody is this dumb, are they? Just in case, those Mexican cartels only even exist because of the War On [some] Drugs here in the USA.

    • Or... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:23AM (#37419236)
      Or we could stop militarizing law enforcement, and try a new, less violent approach to drug policy (like, say, legalization).
    • by Jmc23 (2353706)
      Do you people not understand that as long as the US has a billion dollar market for drugs that there will ALWAYS be a supplier? You're talking about a poor country with high unemploment where minimum wage is about $4/day.

      The problem here is not poor starving people willing to do anything to survive, it's rich americans needing to get their drug fix.

  • Anonymous is anyone; after all, they're anonymous. The drug cartels don't like the Mexican government. Since anyone can claim to be part of Anonymous, what better way to shift the blame AND send a message at the same time?

  • They aren't interested in a fight, they want head lines.

    If they had balls they would shut down every cartel in the world, but you know, that would require a gut check they can never meet.

    It is one thing to go after groups who have the power to jail you but another to go after groups that WILL kill you.

  • by JavaBear (9872) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:15AM (#37419152)

    IF "Anonymous" want to regain even the tiniest sliver of support, they'll try to stop the hack and release of petty information such as celebrity cell phones, and start taking down the EVIL guys, such as the drug cartels.

    • by rednip (186217)

      ...start taking down the EVIL guys, such as the drug cartels.

      How exactly? I really doubt if a DOS would do it, or do you expect these 'super hackers' to go rambo?

    • They dont want support. They want lulz. This is achieved by finding easy targets, not from selecting targets based on an ulterior motive (except those cases of orchestrated DDOS against certain websites).
  • Fighting a war in a country that is no where near us... while Mexico has so many problems that rolling in the tanks and bombing the hell out of cartel compounds would be a far better thing to do?

    Honestly, why don't we clean up our own back yard before trying to make everyone else clean theirs up first? Is the United states armed forces that afraid of the drug cartels?

  • I think Mobama should send them a couple of pissed off Marines there for a little R&R (tequila, women and fire), or just hire a merc wing from the US DOD and do a cleanup... Mexico shouldnt be that difficult to overtake... a couple of M1A1 HA Abrams Main Battle Tank should do the trick... Mexico Urban layout is like afghanistan ultra light...

  • Daily Mail alert! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:20AM (#37419208) Homepage

    and drug cartels kidnapping busloads of people and forcing them into gladiator-style contests to the death

    Links to The Daily Mail, which is nearly as bad as a Goatse link.

  • by Raenex (947668) on Friday September 16, 2011 @08:48AM (#37419552)

    Anonymous would get my respect if they used their hacking skills to infiltrate the murderous thugs instead of defacing government websites.

  • Seriously. If they truly want to help people, they wuld be helping the government fight the drug cartel nightmare that is happening right now.

    Douchbags.

    Hell, whose to say a anonymous isn't being manipulated by a drug cartel?

  • by PPH (736903) on Friday September 16, 2011 @10:46AM (#37421066)

    Just have someone blog under the name Pedro Nadie or whatever. Identify him as living just outside a small town in Northern Mexico and have him really piss off the cartels. When they come to get him, the little cabin is surrounded by the army. Game over.

  • I wonder... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Syberz (1170343) on Friday September 16, 2011 @11:23AM (#37421522) Homepage

    Smoking is legal and can kill you.

    Drinking is legal and can kill you.

    Myriad other things are legal and can kill you.

    So why not legalize all drugs, tax the sh*t out of 'em like cigarettes. The self-destructive will be able to do so, the curious ones will be able to try and the recreational users will be able to do so too. I'd be curious to see what would happen.

    • So why not legalize all drugs, tax the sh*t out of 'em like cigarettes.

      Because a black market will develop to avoid the taxes and other government controls, and we will be back to square one.

      The self-destructive will be able to do so, the curious ones will be able to try and the recreational users will be able to do so too. I'd be curious to see what would happen.

      Controlled substances are most often controlled for good reasons, even if the enforcement is misguided. The self-destructive will drag others down with them (i.e. their own kids). Allowing easy access to satisfy curiosity is a very bad idea with highly addictive and ultimately destructive substances.

      What would likely result from legalization is more addicts and more drug-related crime.

      • Because a black market will develop to avoid the taxes and other government controls, and we will be back to square one.

        The choice here isn't between the status quo and legalized drugs taxed to the point they cost the same is illegal drugs. The choice is between the status quo and legalized drugs that are taxed heavily, but still a lot cheaper than smuggled drugs. You could raise a TON of revenue on, say, weed, and still have it be a lot cheaper than it is now (as has been shown in states where weed is quas

      • I see no significant alcohol black market nor cigarette black market trying to avoid government controls / taxes. Most people opt for convenience and go to the liquor store rather than driving out to the woods to find a moonshiner. Self-destructive behavior affecting others can be prevented by actually punishing people that do so. They already take kids away from people all the time for being addicts. Drug related crime would possibly increase in the form of theft, but keep in mind that legalizing drugs wou

3500 Calories = 1 Food Pound

Working...