Borderline Madness Headline Animator

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Falcon Lake Murder: Pirates, Psychics and Sheriff Sigi

You know, this story would almost be funny if it weren't really happening.

It would make for a good movie too.

But the truth is, it's not funny because evidence is pointing to a very big and scary cover up.

Some day, I hope to be able to share the information that is being gathered on this case, but until then, we'll be looking at the very obvious.

Take for example the fact that Falcon Lake had previously never experienced any "pirate" attacks until 2010.

The first attack coming in April 30, 2010, but that news didn't make a big splash, and to me, it was like Sheriff Sigi was upset it didn't cause the effects he wanted, so he tried again TWICE in May, and when that didn't work, he tried again April, with his final attempt, the Hartley's, finally hitting the mark.

Here are those stories according to Texas Monthly (which got it's news from the Monitor):

April 30:  Five people in two boats were fishing on the lake and visited Old Guerrero, a Mexican city abandoned when the reservoir was created in the 1950s. The group was taking pictures of the church and other submerged buildings at the site when four heavily tattooed men appeared in boats and climbed aboard the fishermen’s vessels. The intruders claimed they were “Federales” — Mexican federal police — but had no uniforms, troopers said.  (Note the importance of pointing out they were heavily tattooed men.  The scarier the better, even though the last thing these drug cartel members want is to be identified through their tattoo's.  A very reliable informant tells me that it is very rare for Zeta's to be tattooed because then it is harder for them to deny any involvement if they are caught.  The only one's that are more than likely to be heavily tattooed are the MS13 and other gang members that operate for the Zeta's.  However, it is very unlikely that MS13 or gang members will be found on boats.  Who knows though?  If there can be pirates on speed boats on a lake, there can be gangsters too.)

May 6:  Three fishermen were about a quarter of a mile from Marker 14 on the north side of Salado Island, above some submerged ruins, troopers said. As they were fishing, two men in a boat quickly approached and pointed AR-15 assault rifles toward the anglers. One of the gunmen boarded the boat, looking for cash, drugs and firearms.  One of the attackers chambered a round in his assault rifle and said he would shoot the men if they did not give him money.  (Why would they be looking for drugs?  Mexico supplies the drugs, not the US.  Again, drugs = criminals, so I classify this as another attempt to make the enemy look scarier)

May 16:  Law enforcement officers received a report that a vessel carrying five armed men had approached some boaters. Investigators have not found the boaters to obtain details about the incident, which apparently occurred on the U.S. side of the lake.  (Naturally, since no one knows who the boaters were, you just have to suck it up as fact, right?)

And six weeks before May 16 or 19, Zapata County Sheriff Sigifredo “Sigi” Gonzalez said the first suspected cartel pirate hijacking he heard of occurred when a group of fishermen had their boat stolen and were left naked on the Mexican side with only a cell phone to call for help. (Well I'll be damned!  I thought the first incident happened on April 30th and they were able to make it back, albeit a little short on cash.  Fabricating much Sheriff Sigi?)
But that's not all.  Sheriff Sigi said the following back in May of 2010:

"It makes me nervous that these things are happening. It irritates me because we can try and do more if the federal government would provide more funding," said Gonzalez. "I dread having to even think of having a fisherman resist, shot in the head, and we can't even go retrieve the body."  
Amazingly enough, exactly just that happened on September 30, 2010 when Tiffany and David Hartley were chased by "pirates" and David Hartley was supposedly shot in the head and his body to this day has not been retrieved because "we can't even go" over there.

If that's not surprising, later that same day, Sheriff Sigi goes into details about what more than likely happened to the body.  This is what he predicted:
"I don't think we're ever going to find him," Gonzalez said late Thursday. "We can't go over there, obviously, and I'm thinking that if the Mexican authorities have not gone to look for him, the people that did this would - if I were them - have cut the vest and let him sink, or I would have pulled the body out of the water so there'd be no evidence ... before the Mexican military gets there."
While, personally I don't believe that David was ever shot to begin with, assuming he was, then it is no coincidence that Sheriff Sigi was once again correct in his predictions.  No body was ever found!

Then, that weekend, a private investigator, Raul G. Reyna Jr., from Edinburg, Texas tries stealing some of the spotlight and Sheriff Sigi doesn't like it.  He warns the private investigator:

Reyna needs to be careful about nosing around too much in this case "because he’s going to come up missing a head."

In his comments, he also adds:

"If we know there’s no body to be found, why should we risk more people searching? Why should we risk having people out there searching and getting beheaded when we can’t find a body?
Now, the article that published the above quotes from Sigi is dated Sunday, October 17, but in there it says "this past Saturday", which I'm sure they didn't mean "yesterday" because more than likely the paper was written on Saturday, October 16 or around that time.  Which means, the Saturday they are referring to is Saturday, October 9, 2010.

The reason I believe this also, asides from the above mentioned reasons, is because I've done a search and every post that has this news story has no comments in regards to the beheading of Rolando Armando Flores Villegas on October 13, 2010.  Neither in the news article or in the comment section, and you know those anti-immigrants, racist, xenophobic, and/or Tiffany supporters would not have let that one go.  And because it is a news article, I find it odd that they would not mention his beheading when it very clearly relates to what Sheriff Sigi is warning about.

Which brings us to Sheriff Sigi's other predictions:  The beheading of Rolando Armando Flores Villegas.
It may be possible that Rolando Armando Flores Villegas was set up to be beheaded, and I'm not going to beat around the bush with this one:

I strongly believe Sheriff Sigi had something to do with it!

Rolando Armando Flores Villegas was very adamant that nothing in Tiffany's story was adding up.  There was no body.  No jet ski.  No witnesses (besides an unreliable good Samaritan.  My words, not his.).  So it's very possible that he was on to something and Sheriff Sigi didn't like it.

In short, he wasn't being "careful about nosing around too much in this case", and like Sheriff Sigi predicted, he ended up "missing a head".

Let us see what other predictions the Sheriff has in store for us:
3/31/2009 - "Gonzalez, who heads the Southwestern Border Sheriff’s Coalition, said it’s only a matter of time before a shootout breaks out between cartel members and federal, state, and local law enforcement.
...We are looking for help in catching the bad guys who are coming in, sir, and also protecting the citizens and residents who are already living in our counties so that they not get kidnapped and not get extorted, not have their homes invaded, that they not get tortured and things like this."

And no wonder he makes it sound so dangerous here on the border.  Look at what he's asking for for his local agencies:  "$500 million a year for 5 years was the figure that we looked at as being actually something meaningful that would provide the resources"

Is Sheriff Sigi crying wolf?  Why shouldn't he?

According to the Boston Review: At War In Texas by Tom Barry, " Sheriff Gonzalez has so much border-security funding from DHS and DOJ that each of his deputies is assigned two vehicles, a patrol car for regular duty and a new SUV for overtime border-security operations."  Later on, Mr. Barry goes on to say that "Border sheriffs enjoy virtually unlimited overtime-pay accounts, new fleets of vehicles, and the latest security technology."

Of course, Sheruff Sigi doesn't want to use that "latest security technology or new fleets of vehicles cuz the boogy men pirates might put a dent in 'em.

Most importantly, Mr. Barry notes that, "in Zapata County, Sheriff Gonzalez has so much border-security funding from DHS and DOJ that each of his deputies is assigned two vehicles, a patrol car for regular duty and a new SUV for overtime border-security operations."

Holy crapoly!  No wonder Sheriff Sigi is making all these predictions that mysteriously are coming true!

But back to his predictions, and sorry these are not coming out in order, iammetx is too lazy to place them in order, but don't worry, they all happened in 2010.

Apparently there was an incident back in March 2010 with an "armed" Mexican helicopter flying over U.S. airspace and hovering over homes.

According to the Sigster, this was a Mexican Marine helicopter because it hovered over the homes of CBP agents and surely they know what they were looking at.

Oddly enough, the only people who could confirm this actually happened were, according to the Sigi, a deputy, a local news reporter, and a federal officer who, the sheriff said, "has since been muzzled by higher-ups".


Asides from that, they had pictures!  Albeit a bit blurry, but they claim you can actually see where it says Marina on it.  Here's one that they provided, although you can't really tell where it actually is.  It could have been taken in Mexico for all we know:

Which oddly enough looks exactly like this helicopter photo taken in 2009:
Too bad we can't see a chopper number in that back tail for the first photo.  Sneaky little punks!

Here's another one compared to that one:
Yowzers!  Now that's a chopper!  Where it is at or if it is even Mexican remains to be a mystery, and I'm sure Sigi is loving every minute of it.  

Especially with his prediction of "it's not the first time and it won't be the last."  

Surely enough, he was right, again. Too bad the link to that article will never be found complete, as it was scrubbed from the Internet like most news articles involving the Sigster.  

However, I was able to find a forum where you can see a little bit more of that article where it clearly states:
"Border Patrol spokesman Jason Darling says the Mexican military is conducting operations near Zapata along the Rio Grande."


It is little wonder that Sheruff Sigi didn't go into detail about the fact that a long-standing agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada allows for temporary incursions for medical or law enforcement purposes.

But what can you expect from someone who's stomping his foot down in order to pocket $500 million every year for 5 years under the guise of border security, right?  

Well, here are some of his predictions that are yet to come true, so let's keep an eye out for this guy:

"Osama Bin Laden can come across border and not get caught" 

"Be careful of the lull before the storm"
And come to think of it, there has been a lull in Sheriff Sigi's diatribe.  

I wonder what he's planning next?  Blaming Osama bin Laden for another 9/11 on the border?

All I know is that before 2010, we didn't have so much commotion here on the border, and all of it coming just from one county and one Sheriff, the Sigster.  

Let's just hope he keeps it at 2010 and shuts it at 2011, but we'll find out pretty soon as we continue to investigate this case.

Until next time...

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Falcon Lake Murder: The Broken Window Fallacy

Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James Goodfellow, when his careless son happened to break a pane of glass?

If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation—

"It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade—that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs—I grant it;

I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly.

The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child.

All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."

It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another.

It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library.

In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented

The top story is a parable written by Frédéric Bastiat and taken from an essay he wrote on political economics.  That essay is called, "That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen".

The essay is a good read, and I would recommend people to visit the link and read it to get a better understanding about how I view issues on the border.  My favorite is the Broken Window Fallacy in which it explains how a community loses money over a broken window in a time where everyone views that broken window as an economic gain.

This is exactly how I feel when I hear stories like that of David Hartley.

Tiffany has said many times that she believes David died for a bigger reason, and that she's supposed to be here doing this (fighting for border security).

In short, David's death was the broken window, and Tiffany's voice is the economic gain.

Or so they think...

In the midst of this tragedy, those who live on the border are bombarded with the constant questions of how safe it really is to live here.  Many just role their eyes and explain that it's all blown out of proportion.

Trying to convince myself it wasn't just me, I visited Falcon Lake recently and asked the locals of Zapata County how they felt living so close to the border.  I, of course, disguised myself as someone who was just curiously asking a question and I was surprised at the emotions that were shown by many of the local business owners.

"They exaggerate too much.  It's totally safe out here.  People make it sound like we are living in a war zone, but we are not," said one local fish and tackle owner whom I will not name as he did not know I was sort of interviewing him for my blog.

But it's convenient for a business owner to say it is safe because they are the ones that are losing business to stories like the Hartley's.  If I take their word for what they say it is only because I am a border resident myself from this area, and I can testify that the stories are truly exaggerated.  Take for example the following clip:

@ 1:30 Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez claims the following:

"It is literally a war.  If you stand by the border you can hear the can hear the uh rocket propelled grenades, you can hear the gunfire.  We're being overrun by the drug cartels!"

Notice the look of the border patrol after he says that.  You can tell they know he's full of shit, because he is.

So I take it Tiffany was deaf as well as stupid then, huh, Sheriff Sigi?

Surely she must have heard the grenades and rocket propelled grenades and gunfire that it should have prevented her from going into Mexico.

But I wonder why she went anyways?  Could it have been because she didn't hear anything?

I know I didn't hear anything from my visit to Falcon Lake and my fishing trips to the river or my shopping in town that is just a block away from Mexico.

Man, that guy will go to any lengths to get money in his pockets won't he?!!

But that aside, Tiffany was interviewed recently by Robin Craig of Today's Widow.  Here's the video:
You know, I like Robin Craig because she reminds me of my mother, not only in the way she looks, but because my mother is a widow too (as I assume Ms. Craig is also).

I really like the fact that she asked a lot of questions, but I wish she had asked the questions that her viewers were asking.  In this interview, Tiffany again says that she never experienced any violence while living in Mexico.  As I mentioned previously, Tiffany is out right lying, as she clearly stated in her facebook wall that she and David were kicked out of their home by the cartels and left homeless.  That's how they ended up in McAllen.

So why does she insist she was innocent to the violence going on down in Reynosa?

I also find it hard to believe that no one, besides the good Samaritan, saw or heard anything.  I went down to Falcon Lake myself to get a closer look at the scene and was surprised at all the evidence I found that clearly makes this story as beyond weird.

Not only did I pass 4 public boat ramps to get to Subways, but Subways was just a block away from the police department.  Then, based on the news videos of the public boat ramp from which they allegedly launched from, that means they must have done a U-turn from Subways to go back to the 4th public boat ramp.

This whole time I kept wondering why they passed so many public boat ramps?

The first public boat ramp is the one that leads to the international bridge and the Falcon Lake Dam.  From that public boat ramp to the next, it was maybe a 30 minute drive.  The third and fourth boat ramp being about 10 minutes in between.  Why did they pass all those public boat ramps?

It almost felt to me like they were intent on getting to this 4th public boat ramp on purpose, and I can see why, but I will reveal those details later.

From this public boat ramp, you could clearly see all the way out to Mexico.  I could see the posts that mark the boundaries in the water, and I could see people on speed boats and jet-skis racing back and forth on the water in the distance.

Now, I need glasses, but even without my glasses I could very clearly see these people out there on the water.

One boat made me giggle a little because from where I was at, maybe it was my eye sight or something, but it looked all black, even the people in the boat looked like they were dressed in black, and it reminded me of pirates.

But they were fishing, standing still in the water and boats raced back and forth behind them.

Why, I just had to wonder...this place was very busy!

Boats and jet-skis were constantly being loaded and unloaded into the water from the very same spot that Tiffany and David must have unloaded their jet-skis.  Surely there had to be more than one witness!  At no point did I see the flow of people going in and out slow down.  People were constantly there!

And from where I was fishing, I had no choice but to be looking out into the waters into Mexico, to the very same spot that more than likely Tiffany came out from before dialling 911.

It was all a very surreal experience for me.  It was like I was there and something was telling me that I was not crazy for believing that there is more to this story than what is being told.

In Robin Craig's interview, Tiffany brings up the story about the ranchers being displaced by the cartels.

That story is very fitting for Tiffany, as the story about the ranchers being kicked out by the cartels was proven to be a lie made up by Jeff Schwilk, the founder of the anti-immigration San Diego Minutemen, aka "Bikini Boy".
Jeff Schwilk posing in his bathing suits.
She also mentions the murder of Robert Krentz, but goes on to add that he was murdered by "illegals".

She surely needs to contact authorities with that bit of information, as no one knows for sure who killed Robert Krentz, not even the authorities themselves.  Robert Krentz was known to help undocumented immigrants in need, so it could have been one of those anti-immigrant nut cases setting this up to make his murder look like it was done by undocumented immigrants.

The murders of the missionary and the ICE agent happened in Mexico, not the USA.  I hate it when they make it sound like it happened here.  People need to get that through their heads!  They happened in MEXICO!  That is why the US government is NOT responding to these incidents with troops to the border, because they happened outside of this country, not on our Texas borders!  Had they actually happened on our soil, I would be equally upset if they didn't respond.

But they didn't!

Well..except for the ICE agent because he was one of the special ones.

Now, it's not to say that I don't think the US should get involved, but that's just opening a whole other door.  The US can only get involved so far before crossing the line.  They've done what they can.  What else do we want them to do?  Start a war?

I bet we wouldn't like it if Mexico did the same to us.  People already get pissed off when Mexico gets involved when one of their own is murdered by border patrol.

But I take it we are justified when we are the ones doing the unnecessary killings and Mexico needs to do their part to keep their people over there, right?

I wonder, then, what else can the US do if they've been warning people for months before the Hartley's not to go to Mexico?

Anyways, we are working on some interesting new developments, but they may take weeks to process.  I do have more to say, but I will leave that for next time.

Until next time...

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Falcon Lake Murder: To be or not to be?

Well, this case gets more and more frustrating as time goes on.

Recently, Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez has announced four suspects in the David Hartley murder case.  According to Action4News, "the four of them...were part of a larger group of seven men that attacked David and Tiffany Hartley..."

So we now have a group of seven men.  Two of them are the Farias brothers, and now these two new suspects, with 3 more still unidentified.

Now in this Youtube video, Tiffany Hartley says the following @ 3:03:

Anderson Cooper:  How many people were there?  How many boats were there?

Tiffany Hartley:  There was three boats, um, that were chasing us and then one boat came up to me and I saw two people in that boat but there was a sss, third or fourth person in that boat, I just didn't see them.

In short, there were 4 people in that one boat.  You either saw them or you didn't, but you already gave a number (I'm talking to Tiffany here) which means there was more than two people in the boat, and you can't go from third to fourth unless you recognize there was a third person in that boat, which you clearly recognize when you said "fourth person".

So four people in one boat, two boats left, and 3 people needing placement on those boats.  How should we place them?  One in one boat and two in the other?  Or were all 3 in one boat and the last boat driven by ghost pirates?

Oooh!  I like the sound of that...ghost pirates!  It makes for an interesting read, yes?

Further into the interview @ 3:26:

Anderson Cooper:  And, and how many guns were there?  Were there just one?
Tiffany Hartley:  Um, I just saw the one, uh, that was pointing at me. I wasn't looking for any other ones.
Notice the little shake of the head at the end of that answer, lol.  Sorry, but I can't help but laugh at the absurdity of this whole case and how INVESTIGATORS can't see what we see!

I mean, I could read her thoughts with that one shake.

"Good comeback Tiffany!  That was a good answer!" she thinks in her head.

Why a good answer?

She only saw ONE gun.

She saw bullets flying.  She saw David Hartley flying.  She saw boats coming, but she didn't see any other guns but the one that was aimed at her?

So who was the one saying that they were waving GUNS?  Or are you saying that all the barrage of bullets came out of one lone gun?

These must be some very poor pirates.  I wonder if they took turns with their one gun, and I apologize for making fun of an incident that sounds so severe, but frankly, I just don't believe any of this story and I cannot fathom why NO ONE, to this date, has done nothing other than attack our beautiful and secure borders.

It's sickening really.

So, 7 suspects, 3 boats, 1 gun.  

It almost sounds like a catchy song.

A song that keeps on changing, because now the Sheriff claims it wasn't just any gun, but a rifle!

And to make matters worse, now the Sheriff is also claiming that the story about the suspects is untrue but it really isn't.

If that's confusing to you, then welcome to the club because just about every article I read in which Sigi denies having mentioned four more suspects in this recent news, well, they all seemed to have disappeared from the web and they have been replaced with recounting about what we already knew months ago.

Personally, I think it was just a media stunt that was made because both Tiffany and Sigi feed off the lime light and, well, they were running short on energy and they decided to feed off the media frenzy caused by the capture of the ICE agent murder suspects.

However, the announcement was a fart in time, for no sooner than the news got out, Sheriff Sigi was claiming that there are no suspects and that it was all a misunderstanding.

Elsewhere, Tiffany continues to play the victim role:

Seriously, again, I just don't get it.

She can remember certain details, like her not seeing the "third or fourth" person in the boat, 3 boats, she could see bullets hitting the water, hear them hitting the water as well, she could see David flying, a gun to her face, the person holding the gun looking back and picking up, putting down, picking up the gun, erm "rifle", and she also fled "not looking back" until she could not "see them anymore"....yet she claims she wouldn't be able to identify the suspects in a line up?

Wait a fuckin moment here!

How in the world do we have suspects then if this poor excuse for a lady claims she doesn't know who shot her husband, what they look like, what they wanted, where they went, how they got there, or where they are?

You can't just go around picking up people, especially if they are coming from unknown sources, and I don't care what Sigi says if they are reliable sources.  The fact that their identities have to be kept secret speaks volumes of very shady people, and very shady people deal in very shady ways.

What proof do we have that these suspects even committed a crime?

Was there a description of them?  No!
Were bullets found and traced back to them?  No!
Were they found in possession of something that linked to David Hartley?  No!

We're reliving a witch hunt, and if Sheriff Sigi gets away with believing fairy tails from people who probably want to set up others, then we're in for big trouble here on the border.


What kind of a Sheriff is Sigi?  He's no Sheriff!  He's a wanna-be punk Sheriff who wants fame and will obtain it by falsely framing himself a hero.  Just watch!

Before I do that, though, did I mention that in one of her claims she states that she fled, "NOT LOOKING BACK" until she could "NOT SEE THEM ANYMORE", yet the witness says there was a boat chasing her?

Ok, now let me go throw a tantrum.

I'll post more information which I have found soon.  Until then...

Stop Demonizing Our Borders

Subscribe Now: iheart

I heart FeedBurner