FEDS USE CONGRESSMAN REYES TO BULLY NOSY EL PASOANS

Clearly, we're not supposed to dig too deeply into what's going on in
lawless Juarez.

Don't ask, because Uncle Sam is not going to tell. And if you dare
ask, then our congressman will do what he can to put a sock in your mouth.

Let me rephrase that. Perhaps the higher-ups in Washington are
telling Congressman Silvestre Reyes to making sure we shut our yaps
down here at ground zero of the Juarez drug war.

Last week, our City Council, voted 8-0 to ask the feds to have an
open discussion on what would happen if the prohibition against drugs
was lifted; perhaps that would weaken the world's drug cartels?

Within hours, Mayor John Cook vetoed the measure.

Did Reyes get to Cook?

Tuesday, four on council changed their vote, meaning Cook's veto stands.

Yes, Reyes contacted members of council, telling them to change their
vote or face losing federal grant funding. It was a bully tactic.

Four got scared and caved, it sure seems -- Emma Acosta, Melina
Castro, Eddie Holguin and Rachel Quintana.

This "just-talk-about-it" proposal came up because drug cartels own
Juarez and are fighting a vicious war for control of drugs just yards
away from us. Murderers, kidnappers and thieves run free; there is no
law enforcement. There have been 1,600-plus persons murdered,
gangland style, in the past 13 months.

So, led by South-West city Rep. Beto O'Rourke, council originally
asked that since the feds' so-called "war on drugs" hasn't worked in
four decades, and drug problems are getting worse, is there something
else that can be done -- like discussing if lifting prohibition, as
was done on alcohol 75 years ago, would help ease the murderous situation.

Then came Reyes -- and what a lame argument he has: Here we are, a
city that is suing the feds over the border fence and nobody was
worried about losing grant money for that.

Why now?

Is it because it's the Juarez drug-war issue, a no-no to talk about?

A few months ago, representatives from our county hospital went to
Washington asking why victims of the drug war in Juarez were
routinely showing up at Thomason full of bullets. We wanted to know
who's to pay for this. And we had other logical questions.

When our guys went to Reyes' office in Washington ... well, they came
back with their tongues cut out, metaphorically speaking.

There was the cloudy situation last summer amid the drug war when a
relative of Reyes was kidnapped in Juarez, then set free after a
ransom was paid. It turned out to be Reyes' sister-in-law.

He said he never met her and wasn't involved. He didn't use his
congressional power to rescue her, he said.

OK, that could well be. But it was a cloudy situation all the way
through. It's odd he never met his wife's sister, who lives just
across the bridge. Weddings? Baptisms? The Christmas season?

And what about all the women killed in Juarez even before the drug
violence began last January? Hundreds killed, their bodies strewn all
over the place.

Some contend that because many of these women worked in the
maquiladoras, our business leaders and our government didn't want to
make a fuss because maybe it would hurt the free-trade agreement.

It wouldn't look good.

So everybody just clammed.

The DVD "Borderland" asked that question quite sharply. Why don't our
business leaders speak up. It's their business interests that are getting hurt.

Questions abound. What's clear is, we're not to ask.