The recent posts about cartels and bad guys got me thinking about one Nomads' point about protesting and or discussing Mexican issues by expats via
the internet.
As we all know the internet is information that can reside in a permanent or material place like a server or laptop. The difference being that if you
have illegal stuff on your computer you may be in a jurisdiction that forbids such possession.
In some countries like China you may not have the right to download certain material or even join forums. I imagine for instance, if you had Mexican
anti-govt material on your laptop and for some reason immigration was able to see that you might be subject to laws. Much like someone having
terrorist stuff on their computers in the US, it leaves you open for investigation or more.
There is another scenario though. Let's say you were just driving around in Mexico wifi hacking your way around. You post messages in a forum then
drive off to do it again and again.
Who and how could they(yes they) possibly find and ID you in Mexico. I'm not inferring that it can't be done with a lot of resources, I'm just
stating the obvious.
Even if your laptop was examined the material you post lives on some server somewhere, most likely in another country.
So I'd like to know how many Nomads alter or not their content for threatening reasons?
Now, with that said for the purpose of this poll I split the questions between guests and permanent (6+ mo a year) non-citizens of Mexico.
--------------------
Question: Do you refrain from Mexican politics and/or cartel messages online because of the potential risk or threat of harm? Thanks
(edit to change feely to freely but I can't)
[Edited on 2-11-2010 by Sharksbaja]DENNIS - 2-11-2010 at 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sharksbaja
Question: Do you refrain from Mexican politics and/or cartel messages online because of the potential risk or threat of harm? Thanks
I pretty much stay out of politics, mainly because I'm not involved and I don't care.
I don't see cartel activity as being in the realm of politics although, and I know, some politicians are involved. Crime in the society is everybody's
business and I openly discuss that.k-rico - 2-11-2010 at 08:01 AM
Every poll should have a "WGASA" option, as in the name of the railroad line at the San Diego Wild Animal Park.
True story, when the park was being designed the designers were debating the name of the railroad.
Someone said "Who gives a schit anyhow" - WGASA ELINVESTIG8R - 2-11-2010 at 08:47 AM
The only thing that could be construed as political with respect to my comments about Mexico is my desire for the Mexican Army, Navy, Marine Corps,
and Air force and the Federal, State, and Municipal Police Forces to go en mass from one end of Mexico to the other searching door- to-door,
block-by-block, building-by-building, ranch-by-ranch cleaning out every armed and unarmed scumbag. I realize Mexico has dealt a small blow to one
group in Baja California but they cannot afford to PUSSYFOOT around and need to bringing the rest to justice. That way the good
people of Mexico can return to a normal way of life sooner than later. AND, To hell with the bellyachers politically correct pinheads who say to treat
these criminals with kid-gloves. Let them complain all they want. I say do what has to be done! I want Mexico back to being what is once was before it
lost its luster. If they want to put me in jail for saying this so be it.Woooosh - 2-11-2010 at 08:55 AM
I didn't see a voting option that applied but took #1 anyway. But I would have preferred one of these answers:
Yes, I post political opinions and worry because Mexican law is not specific, especially about internet postings on US servers.
Yes, I post my political opinions anyway and live in fear of reprisal from board readers who could turn me in.
[Edited on 2-11-2010 by Woooosh]Iflyfish - 2-11-2010 at 09:45 AM
Articles from the Mexican Constitution that MAY relate to this issue.
Article 6. The expression of ideas shall not be subject to any judicial or administrative investigation, unless it offends good morals, infringes the
rights of others, incites to crime, or disturbs the public order.
Article 7. Freedom of writing and publishing writings on any subject is inviolable. No law or authority may establish censorship, require bonds from
authors or printers, or restrict the freedom of printing, which shall be limited only by the respect due to private life, morals, and public peace.
Under no circumstances may a printing press be sequestrated as the instrument of the offense.
The organic laws shall contain whatever provisions may be necessary to prevent the imprisonment of the vendors, newsboys, workmen, and other employees
of the establishment publishing the work denounced, under pretext of a denunciation of offenses of the press, unless their guilt is previously
established.
Article 8. Public officials and employees shall respect the exercise of the right of petition, provided it is made in writing and in a peaceful and
respectful manner; but this right may only be exercised in political matters by citizens of the Republic.
Every petition shall be replied to in writing by the official to whom it is addressed, and said official is bound to inform the petitioner of the
decision taken within a brief period.
Article 9. The right to assemble or associate peaceably for any lawful purpose cannot be restricted; but only citizens of the Republic may do so to
take part in the political affairs of the country. No armed deliberative meeting is authorized.
No meeting or assembly shall be deemed unlawful which has for its object the petitioning of any authority or the presentation of a protest against any
act; nor may it be dissolved, unless insults be proffered against said authority or violence is resorted to, or threats are used to intimidate or
compel such authority to render a favorable decision.
Article 16.
Administrative officials may enter private homes for the sole purpose of ascertaining whether the sanitary and police regulations have been complied
with; and may demand to be shown the books and documents required to prove compliance with fiscal rulings, in which latter cases they must abide by
the provisions of the respective laws and be subject to the formalities prescribed for cases of search.
IflyfishIflyfish - 2-11-2010 at 09:48 AM
I post from the USofA on issues that I consider to be important to BOTH the USofA and Mexico. I do not post anything in Mexico that could be
considered to be critical of Mexico. I obey the law to the letter when in Mexico.
IflyfishwithamexicanconstitutioninmypocketwhenfishinginmexicoDave - 2-11-2010 at 10:06 AM
I would never openly voice my political opinions yet do participate in the process:
By bribing politicians well...and often. DENNIS - 2-11-2010 at 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave
By bribing politicians well...and often.
You are the model guest. Keep up the good work.
Under no illusions...
Dave - 2-11-2010 at 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
You are the model guest. Keep up the good work.
That I'm nothing but a guest by trying to keep my hosts happy.
And thanks, I'll try.Sharksbaja - 2-11-2010 at 12:38 PM
That's the spirit Dave. "when in Rome...."
You'll probably have them(politicians) lined up at the door by days end!
[Edited on 2-11-2010 by Sharksbaja]ecomujeres - 2-12-2010 at 03:57 PM
I don't post political things in general anywhere in forums, not out of fear of reprisal by any government, but because I'd rather spend my energy
being politically active out in the world, interacting directly to bring about political and social change.vgabndo - 2-12-2010 at 04:14 PM
As I understand the terms of my visas, I am not allowed to become involved in Mexican politics. I refrain from wearing my favorite Partido de
Trabajeros baseball cap. But, if I have a comment to make to someone in the US on my ATT account, it is private communication and none of the business
of the Mexican government. In the USA, I realize I have a liability under the Bush "patriot" act, if I make a careless statement about the government.
My idiot congressman actually voted for a bill that retroactively exonerated ATT for illegally handing over our PHONE records to the Bush regime.
