Newsweek’s focus is definitely too narrow. North Korea, Israel and Mexico are all good candidates as well.

But if I had to pick my choice of one place not to be, especially now during Ramadan, I’d pick Kashmir.

Some sources place the death toll between 80,000 and 100,000 for the ongoing conflict there.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/india_kashmir_unrest

here’s that link again, in case the one above doesn’t work.

Doh! How could I forget Kashmir? Or for that matter, the nuclearized Indo-Pak border? Thanks, Alex.

Here’s a good example of an urban legend perpetuated and irresponsibly passed on by an honest-to-goodness newspaper (they’re infallible right?) as the truth without any checking of facts. I’m not saying the murders didn’t happen, mind you. No, I’m talking about a bit of sensationalism tossed off nonchalantly as if it were fact.

In the article they imply that the women may have been murdered for an underground “snuff” filmmaking ring. Contrary to popular belief, there is no known instance of a real snuff film. In the 30 years or so that the snuff rumor has been around, not one actual case has ever been found to exist. The shadowy “American” and “Greek” buyers of the supposed films are probably completely fictional creations. (Hey, something else to blame on evil American businessmen. Bonus! At least this time we can share the blame with those depraved Greek fat cats.)

For the whole scoop, read this article http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm from snopes.com.

Weird. Though Snopes does run with a few well-used caveats in there—”routinely” and “commercially sold” being two of them.

Anyway, the snuff film angle is just a theory. As James said, whether snuff films exist or not has nothing to do with whether the murders took place, which they did. My own theory has deeper roots—back in the late 80s there was a cult operating in the Matamoros area. It got busted for murder, when it was discovered to have ritually sacrificed 20 or so women, mostly Americans as I recall. If I remember right (it was a long time ago) the leader committed suicide or died somehow, but not all of his followers were rounded up. Could be some of the same people in Ciudad.

Caveat of my own—I could have some of the Matamoros details wrong, but the cult was real, as were its killings.

As I said, I wasn’t really commenting on the veracity of the story, just pointing out the interesting side facts that snuff films are an urban legend, and the phenomenon of said urban legend being repeated by a “reputable news source.”

No need to get defensive, Bryan. Now, put that caveat down and back away from it slowly! No one needs to get hurt here…

Hey! Who you calling defensive? You want a piece of me? I’ll put this caveat upside your head, punk!

Kidding…and I wasn’t intentionally being defensive in the previous comment. Sorry if I came across that way.

Mexico? Come on, now, Bryan. Don’t just buy into this xenophobic hype. Have you ever been to Mexico? There are less murders in all of Mexico during the course of one year than there are in just my own home city of New Orleans. (That may be a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much.) I spend a good deal of time in Mexico, particularly in Mexico City, and I feel much safer there than in many other places in our own country. If you tally up the killings and crimes in this great country of ours, the picture presented is a United States that is one of the most dangerous places to live. I would think that being from the vicinity of Baltimore, Washington DC, and Philadelphia, you’d be pretty aware of this. Now, that’s not to say that I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else. I don’t, because there’s a lot to like and admire about this country. I think we have just become more comfortable with the risks and dangers of urban living in the U.S.

Oh, and the story of the Ciudad Juarez crimes against women is not new at all. It’s well-known by those who keep abreast of Mexican-US border affairs. The most plausible theory is that young, poor, solitary women working in the maquiladoras, become victims of the seedy life and hopelessness that surrounds them in these maquiladora communities. If you want to read up on some good human interest stories of modern Mexico, which includes a treatment of this Ciudad Juarez crisis, get a hold of True Tales of Another Mexico by Sam Quinones.

Xenophobic? I usually try to keep discourse at a decent level, but that’s absolutely uncalled for Jimmy. Nothing in my post or the comments is in any way xenophobic. Xenophobia carries an implication of not only fear but of racial hatred, neither of which apply to me or can be reasonably read into what I said about the Mexico murders. The story itself isn’t xenophobic—it’s just a news story about a very grisly series of crimes. Your charge is utterly baseless. You owe me an apology.

And yes, I’ve been to Mexico. I was in Matamoros not long after the cult I mentioned above was discovered. There were travel advisories, but we took our chances anyway (didn’t drink the water, though). I’ve been to lots of other countries and territories too, and lived overseas for four years. I’m about as far from a xenophobe as you’re ever likely to run across.

Bryan - My apologies to you and to the readers of your blog if my comments seemed offensive. I certainly did not intend for my comment to come across the way it must have to you. I wasn’t calling you xenophobic. I know that you are not. I know that you have a racially mixed family. I just for the life of me could not understand how you could place Mexico in the same category as Iraq, North Korea, and other really, really troubled and dangerous spots in the world. Mexico is simply not in this league and it is unfair to suggest so.

In my line of work, I hear all the time what I think is a knee-jerk reaction to all things Mexican (or Latin American) as reinforcing a negative stereotype of the region as one of lawlessness, rampant crime, and constant social/political chaos - a stereotype which, by the way, I think is erroneous. Mexico is by far nowhere near one of the most dangerous places in the world to be.

But, whether you want to admit it or not, there is an overall underlying fear of the foreign in our country - especially since 9/11 - and particularly of Mexicans who happen to be the most numerous of the modern wave of immigrant groups to this country. To lump Mexico in the same category as Iraq or North Korea seems hyperbolic and totally unfair to our southern bordering neighbor. I guess I was just surprised to hear you single out Mexico in this way. Or simply to even agree with someone else’s suggestion of this. I would have expected you, of all people, to not be so hasty to give such a negative picture of Mexico without some fairer comparative references.

But, again, I want to end with the same sentiment with which I started this post. I am sincerely sorry if I offended you.

Apology accepted. Just note that for the overwhelming majority of conservatives, calling us racists, xenophobes, and the like is in fact a smear. The vast majority of us are neither racist nor xenophobes (I’d even go as far as to say that you’ll find about as many racists and xenophobes on the left as on the right, and mostly on the fringes of both), but the left commonly calls us such names in order to marginalize us. It’s a handy way to discount our arguments and ideas without actually having to deal with them on a factual basis. Most conservatives run from it, I guess because they’re afraid the smear will stick, but not me. I won’t put up with it, at all, ever.

Bryan - I don’t want to belabor the point, because my comment obviously made you upset and clearly put you on the defensive. And I didn’t intend for this to happen at all. But I did not call you racist or xenophobic.

If you look closely at what I said, I was exhorting you not to buy into this xenophobic hype of projecting Mexico as one of the most dangerous places in the world. That is not the same as if I were to have labelled you as inherently xenophobic - i.e. an originator of this misinformed hype. In fact, the assumption behind the comment was that you are NOT xenophobic; but that you could be subject to the influence of a stereotype of Mexico that I think does originate in a fear of the Mexican foreigner.

I appreciate and respect that you won’t put up with what you consider to be a smear. In fact, I would never expect you to, and I am grateful that you called me on what you perceived to be an injustice. But I will also not cave in to (and my apology should not be taken as so doing) a labelling of me based on what I think is a misunderstanding and misinterpretation of my comment.

I do sincerely regret that I offended you. And for that I am truly sorry as a human being. And I’ll even take the lashing that my inability to perceive this effect on you has brought me. There is never a justification for the lack of clarity in writing that conveys something perceived as hurtful. But the Easterbrook in me will not acknowledge the claim of smear and the false charge of racist-labelling that you want to ascribe to me. Given the respect that I have always tried to show to you on your blog, your charge is no more nor less hurtful to me than what I wrote was apparently hurtful to you.

Actually Jimmy I’m used to being called a racist, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. Josh Marshall did it to me in email, and it’s a standard tactic used against conservatives. I was just putting you on notice that, on my own blog, I won’t tolerate it. And I reiterate that there was nothing in either the post, the original story or any comment that warranted even suggesting xenophobia. The story is about a long series of horrid murders in Mexico. Mexico may or may not be a dangerous place, but having been there and having grown up in nearby Texas, my experience tells me that it is. It’s probably not as bad as Colombia or a few other nearby hot spots, but the place is riddled with political corruption, with drug cartel violence and the like. And if you happen to be a young woman living in or around Ciudad, you probably don’t feel too safe these days.

But you missed entirely the point of the post. It was about an absurd Newsweek story based on the assumption that Iraq is more dangerous today than it was a few months ago. When Saddam Hussein ruled, and tortured, gassed and killed people for sport. I was poking a hole in that story, by pointing out that even in nearby Mexico things may be pretty bad, so naming a most dangerous spot on earth is tricky. Maybe I didn’t write the post well. But bringing up xenophobia simply had no place, so I responded.