Four stories that appeared on same day on www.watchingmexico.com
sparked this analysis & links to full stories still are ther

If you sign on to twitter, you would’ve gotten instant notice of each
story: http://www.twitter.com/watchingmexico.

Here are the headlines:
1.      Drug Cartels Blitz Six Mexican Army & Police Station In Michoacan
state After Arrest of Cartel Leader, Killing Five Officers.

2.      SEPARATE STORY: Mexico Identifies 12 Tortured Bodies as Federal
Agents Slain by Suspected Drug Cartels.

3.      Washington Post: Mexico Army Accused
Of Torture in Drug War<p>

4. Next Day: U.S. “Human Rights Watch” Calls for End of American
Military Aid to Mexico

ANALYSIS: OF CALL FOR END OF U.S. MILIRARY AID TO MEXICO.

By RICK KIEL

First, the charges of torture against Mexico ’s military as they fight
the ravenous drug cartels pop up on the Washington Post, then come the
demands, to the left, to cut off military aid to Mexico.

 I hate to pat myself on the back, but after that Washington Post
story on army torture I wrote on twitter over the weekend “as sure as
night follow day, the call will come to punish Mexico for this alleged
torturing.” (http://www.twitter.com/watchingmexico/)

That came Monday from U.S. Human Rights Watch, as posted to the right
of this analysis.
Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

You can run through the history of several dozen U.S. allies since the
New Left took control of the media in the 1960s, where first an
upstanding member of the mainstream media runs a story about
corruption or torture by one of our allies locked in a life and death
struggle against an enemy that also, bye the bye, detests the United
States and everything we stand for.
Then comes the calls to cut off U.S. aid, especially military
assistance.

They all then grow increasingly isolated, and weaker, and finally
collapse to the huzzahs again of the American media, only to be
replaced by a regime that is one hundred times more brutal, that will
execute thousands instead of torturing hundreds, but since the new
leadership mouths the platitudes of being a “government of the
people,” the cheering in the U.S. media goes on.

Is Mexico next?

To go to ancient history of 1979, the Shah of Iran was once seen as a
beacon of enlightenment in a savage region of blood lust, intolerance
and hatred of Westerners and Christians in the Middle and Near East.

Then, the cascade of articles appeared about torture, lack of
democracy and corruption.

The drum beat of nasty stories on the shah and his government went on
for about a decade.
Then came the calls to cut off U.S. aid.
Jimmy Carter, the absolute worse president of the 20th century and
stretching hard for all time nasty, finally shoved the cancer-stricken
shah from his throne when he was at his physically and mentally
weakest and flew in the ayatollah Khomeini?

How’d that work out for human rights in Iran?

All of us old enough remember the smug smile of Carter as he ushered
the shah out and the ayatollah in.
I worked for the UPI Foreign Desk at the time and a still anonymous
stringer won a Pulitzer prise for capturing the execution by firing
squad of about eight guys, caught just as half were already crumpling
from the bullets.

They were only part of thousands of executions carried out by the
“holy” Shia mullahs, the same thugs who in the war with Iraq drafted
tens of thousands of teenage boys and sent them ill-trained or
untrained into the machine guns and land mines to be slaughtered like
the innocent lambs they were.

Now, is it Mexico’s turn?

Don’t get me wrong. We’re not talking about little Hispanic angels
here.

There is no one more attune than I am to the corruption and drug
involvement of major members of the Mexican elite.
The sleaze and venality goes all the way down to traffic cops that
place themselves at the most lucrative and illogical traffic jams in
Mexico City to halt and shake down the drivers on the spot, to split
the lag in rigid percentages with sergeants, lieutenants and captains
up and down the line.

My wife is Mexican and a native of Mexico City, a fact she is very
proud of. Few love Mexico City and the crazy non-stop life in the
streets and families than she but oh, did she grow keen abouy living
in the U.S. for one great reason. And it took me years to extract her
from her beloved Mexico.

But once in the U.S., she tentatively called the local police in
Prince William County, Virginia, where we lived, about a roving dog
who tore up our garden, then teenage carousers who committed petty
crimes like knocking over postal boxes.

The police came immediately, and acted when they saw illegal behavior
… without asking my wife for a bribe.
“Oh, I love this country,” she said after one such call.

She also learned that she could call the police when a husband beat
one of her friends (not me, I vow, promise, swear), and was amazed at
how seriously they treated the offense, and how quickly they hauled
away the malefactor.
Not the way the police worked in macho Mexico.

”Oh, I adore the police here,” she would coo, a light of affection in
her eyes.

But the Mexican police don’t regularly hold “people’s court” sessions
in some mobbed government building and then immediately haul off
dozens of people for immediate execution.

Yes, the police and army have been involved in killing protestors and
dissidents here and there in the past 40 years, but there was no
systematic elimination of tens of thousands of real or perceived
opponents of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, which ran the
country with a not so gentle iron fist from the end of the Revolution
through its acceptance of defeat in the year 2000 presidential
election. (Their presidential candidate was apparently trounced
convincingly in 1988, but an unexplained computer “glitch” halted
ballot counting with the opposition candidate well ahead, only to find
himself far behind when the government got the computer up and
running.)

Compare Mexico to Cuba, where again the media critics first pummeled a
fairly nasty dictator in Batista, which was followed by a cut in U.S.
government support, which allowed Fidel Castro to knock over the
unenthusiastic police and armty who remained and sweep to power.

Yet, as part of the “radical struggle,” the great hero Che Guevara
ordered the execution of children – CHILDREN – for stealing food “from
the revolution.”

The New York Times, whose articles paved the way for the withdrawal of
U.S. support from the admitted thug Batista, never got around to
publishing those stories on his child executions.

They were already on to stories on the corruption and torture in South
Vietnam, and then on our other allies of Cambodia and Laos.

How’d those people make out once the United States with drew its
support?

About two million Cambodians butchered? Everyone with eyeglasses or
any sign of education was immediately butchered.
The North Vietnamese killed thousands of “collaborators” once they
achieved “independence” for the South, and sent hundreds of thousands
to “re-education camps” for periods of 10 to 20 years of brutal
treatment.
I was an idiot, among the hundreds of thousands who self righteously
chanted, Ho-Ho-Ho chi min, the NLF is gonna win.”
[Histor lesson – Ho Chi Minh, the hard-core Communist who led the
north, though he didn’t live to see final victory, appeared so
harmless in his wispy beard, he just HAD to be a nice guy]

And then I was reading about thousands of people who fled the country
in leaky boats, attacked by pirates, the women raped as they pirates
threw their men and children into the sea, and yet they kept still
launching themselves into the sea. Why, why why, when they had the
gentle nationalist communist regime they all seemed to want.

The U.S. media applauds for the Honduran president who wants to turn
himself into a Hugo Chavez of Veneuela, call for U.S. assistance to
put him back to office so that he can continue his campaign, which
violates the Honduran constitution, to have himself re-elected, while
the dogs of the media who applaud the executioner Guevara want the
U.S. government to cut off aid to Mexico.

Stay tuned …