PDA

View Full Version : Wolves-Spurs game being delayed by fire



NBA_Starter
12-04-2013, 09:52 PM
A fire in an elevator will delay the start of Wednesday's Spurs-Wolves game in Mexico City.

http://dev.rotoworld.com/headlines/nba/219084/wolves-spurs-game-being-delayed-by-fire

kdspurman
12-04-2013, 10:26 PM
Word is Stern wants to have the game anyway.

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1951309/825697174_medium.jpg

That's his ultimate FU to Pop/Spurs :laugh2: for resting his guys, you get to inhale this!

AlexTmz2
12-04-2013, 10:46 PM
^ Jesus! I wouldn't mind them sitting this one out at all.

Slug3
12-04-2013, 11:03 PM
Just hope there was no foul play involved.

PurpleJesus
12-04-2013, 11:10 PM
and they want Mexico to get an expansion team.

They can't successfully host one game, how will they host 41? Not to mention the target put on wealthy athletes by the gangs there.

naps
12-04-2013, 11:15 PM
Damn! Hope nothing serious.

BTW, why was there a game scheduled in a neutral arena? I mean it's not an exhibition or all-star game. Anyone?

kdspurman
12-04-2013, 11:19 PM
Damn! Hope nothing serious.

BTW, why was there a game scheduled in a neutral arena? I mean it's not an exhibition or all-star game. Anyone?

Just part of their global movement. Trying to have that global brand. The last game in mexico city was in the 90's Suns/Rockets I believe. Finley & Barkley were the high scorers lol

kdspurman
12-04-2013, 11:19 PM
^ Jesus! I wouldn't mind them sitting this one out at all.

Yea Pop wasn't having it... Spurs buses left before any official word was announced.

J4KOP99
12-04-2013, 11:22 PM
Lol gotta love pop

NBA_Starter
12-04-2013, 11:35 PM
All Hail Pop

*Superman*
12-04-2013, 11:57 PM
Word is Stern wants to have the game anyway.

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1951309/825697174_medium.jpg

That's his ultimate FU to Pop/Spurs :laugh2: for resting his guys, you get to inhale this!

Wow I thought that was photoshopped for a second. Looks real bad.

0nekhmer
12-04-2013, 11:57 PM
I need some love for my fantasy numbers

kobe4thewinbang
12-05-2013, 12:36 AM
LOL, Mexico is dangerous as hell. Why even go there? Go somewhere safer.

Hellcrooner
12-05-2013, 01:26 AM
LOL, Mexico is dangerous as hell. Why even go there? Go somewhere safer.
So is Usa, specially some cities.

So, what was your point again?

Hellcrooner
12-05-2013, 01:29 AM
and they want Mexico to get an expansion team.

They can't successfully host one game, how will they host 41? Not to mention the target put on wealthy athletes by the gangs there.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?846584-Shots-fired-Heat-player-Mason-jr-robbed-of-rolex-and-fired-at-in-robbery-attempt
:whistle:

blahblahyoutoo
12-05-2013, 01:49 AM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?846584-Shots-fired-Heat-player-Mason-jr-robbed-of-rolex-and-fired-at-in-robbery-attempt
:whistle:

yeah, lets pretend that crimes targetting celebrity figures isn't a prominent thing in latin american countries.
and that corruption isn't rampant, and that criminals and cartels aren't afraid of repercussions.
yeah, lets do that.

PurpleJesus
12-05-2013, 02:08 AM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?846584-Shots-fired-Heat-player-Mason-jr-robbed-of-rolex-and-fired-at-in-robbery-attempt
:whistle:

Mexico is notorious for their kidnappings for ransom. They were listed as the 8th country in the entire world as the most dangerous area to be kidnapped for ransom, with nearly 20,000 kidnappings happening in the recent year.

So yea, lets throw a team predominately made up of US players, with a US coaching staff, with likely no one on the team who speaks Spanish, and throw them in one of the more dangerous countries for wealthy people.

Do you really not see how its a bad idea?

John Walls Era
12-05-2013, 02:09 AM
Mexico isn't dangerous if you are only in the tourist area.

PurpleJesus
12-05-2013, 02:20 AM
Mexico isn't dangerous if you are only in the tourist area.

so put a team in Cancun?

Hawkeye15
12-05-2013, 03:25 AM
at least our "home" game becomes an actual one...

FreakaNashur
12-05-2013, 05:07 AM
and they want Mexico to get an expansion team.

They can't successfully host one game, how will they host 41? Not to mention the target put on wealthy athletes by the gangs there.
that's very ignorant...they are tons of proffesional athletes that reside in mexico city


Damn! Hope nothing serious.

BTW, why was there a game scheduled in a neutral arena? I mean it's not an exhibition or all-star game. Anyone?
the NFL does it once a year in London..

TrueFan420
12-05-2013, 05:31 AM
So is Usa, specially some cities.

So, what was your point again?
True but in Mexico you have gangs more powerful than the government and corruption is rampant. In USA our political leaders are owned by corporations while similar to gangs less violence is used. Well more like less visible violence.

Pablonovi
12-05-2013, 04:48 PM
Quote Originally Posted by TrueFan420 View Post

True but in Mexico you have gangs more powerful than the government and corruption is rampant. In USA our political leaders are owned by corporations while similar to gangs less violence is used. Well more like less visible violence. [end quote]

Hey readers of this post,
Recently I've gotten criticized for the length of some of my posts. But, IF the quality is good, then the principle involved here should be: the higher the quality, the better it is if it's long.
I'm in my mid '60s, a pretty old guy AND with a ton of experience and study about these matters. I put a good deal of effort into summing up that experience and study in such posts; and believe that the quality speaks for itself.

If you disagree with my main points; harping on the length is disingenuous, a kind of "dirty trick"; so, please keep your disagreements to the content and not to the length, ok?

Hey TrueFan420,
Your second and third sentences are spot on.
Not so your first sentence.

Your third sentence: "Well more like less visible violence" ... if you think along similar lines, you might much more closely approach the situation in Mexico.

ARE THE MEXICAN GANGS/MAFIA REALLY THE ENEMIES OF, AND MORE POWERFUL THAN, THE GOVERNMENT? OR ARE THE TWO ACTUALLY, MUTUALLY-INTERCONNECTED AND FRIENDS?
For example, you say "... you have gangs more powerful than the government..." BUT, while that's the common perception (perhaps put out for "public consumption"?); did you know that the President from 2006-2012, his sister was married to THE #1 Drug Lord ("El Chapo" Guzman). No wonder, all over the country, attacks against his crime syndicate were miniscule (for public consumption?); while attacks on his rival were massive and frequent. It should be no surprise that, before the 12 years with the PAN Political Party in power, things went the exact opposite way (and are reverting back to that, now that the PAN is back out of power).

WHEN THE POWER-IN-POWER IS SWITCHED, THE DRUG-WAR'S MAIN TARGET IS SWITCHED?

This switching strictly according to which of the top parties is in power can only mean that there is no great divide between the gangs and the Presidency; instead they are not only NOT ENEMIES, they are, instead, essentially, one-and-the-same group. To a much lesser extent, this happens on the State level; in the 32 states of Mexico. The State Governor tends to be the locally-dominant mafia's man; but the Federal Government has the military - so things get very complicated - and one can only TRY to understand them on a case-by-case basis.

COULD IT BE THAT THE AVERAGE AMERICAN KNOWS LESS ABOUT MEXICO (and the Drug-Situation) THAN THE AVERAGE MEXICAN?

It turns out, contrary to what the great majority of Americans believes, the average Mexican understands these things (though, for sure, vaguely at best), better than the average American. How could this be so? Because in America, far from the scenes of the drug-wars; 6 Giant corporate media groupings control what 90% of us are told; whereas in Mexico, the ideological/cultural control is much less concentrated WHILE, they experience directly both the violence and the coverage. It is much more eye-opening to be "on the scene" and then be exposed to the "spin" afterwards.

MANY COUNTRIES ARE THOROUGHLY DOMINATED BY ONE OF FEW MAJOR-POWERS. MEXICO IS THOROUGHLY DOMINATED BY THE U.S. (economically, politically, and culturally).

"LOCAL" CORRUPTION IS AN INEVITABLE BY-PRODUCT OF THAT; INSTEAD OF BEING A SIGN OF "LOCAL" INFERIORITY OF CHARACTER

"... corruption is rampant ..." . Yes and no. Visible corruption is rampant, true. But, if one were to compare the corruption in Mexico to the corruption in the US (most of it not nearly as visible); I'd say that a true measure of corruption between the two would show that the US is FAR MORE corrupt than Mexico is; AND, that the corruption in Mexico (and in the 150 or so countries primarily dominated by US and US-puppets) is an inevitable consequence of foreign domination combined with the use of "titeres" / puppets; the rich of the given country who betray their own country in service to the foreign dominant power. After-all their options are basically:
a) sell-out your own country AND live in absolute luxury as a puppet; OR
b) "seis piez abajo / 6 feet under". The US, and all other dominant countries have never hesitated to remove/eliminate any who would challenge their absolute domination.

This system of neo-colonialism * is extremely effective in both:
1) "raping" the dominated country of its independence, wealth, standard of living, etc.; while
2) maintaining the illusion (in both the dominated country and the dominating country) that the opposite exists; thus the illusions of democracy, independence and national-responsibility are maintained.

'LOCAL" CORRUPTION IS AN INEVITABLE BY-PRODUCT OF FOREIGN DOMINATION

If we were only talking about one country (Mexico, for example), or a region of countries (Latin America); we might be able to mis-interpret what's going on and come to believe that corruption is endemic to those countries/peoples; "in their nature". But, when we realize that some 150 countries around the world have highly un-equal trade with the US; which results in the US getting wealthier while all those countries get poorer; then we should be able to see the PATTERN, foreign domination thru neo-colonialism is a world-wide system, existing for over 100s, and is super-effective at both enforcing the wealth-transfer AND maintaining corrupt "local" governments. Let's not put primary blame on the victims; despite surface appearances.

* neo = new; because while the basic relationship is essentially the same, a "new" fašade is put out front; i.e. "local" (rich) people and "local" armed forces do the dirty work; while the "Imperial" power's forces are just behind the curtain whenever things might get out of the control of the local traitors. The proof? The balance of trade, the balance of transfer of wealth is ALWAYS in favor of the bigger power. How could this be so except because the bigger powers force it to be so? If the tiny minority of super-rich of the big power can super-exploit the vast majority of the poor in the dominated country; why wouldn't they "go for it"?

THOUSANDS OF US CIA AGENTS IN MEXICO: WHAT FOR?

iirc It was back in 1971 that I saw that the US had 1,000 some CIA agents IN MEXICO. These are some of the most highly-trained and effective professional assassins in the world. They were NOT there on vacation. They were: killing, wounding, disappearing, torturing, intimidating, spying ... influencing in a MAJOR way virtually every aspect of Mexican society. How could it be otherwise? US Banks are the world's #1 drug-traffickers; the CIA works for the US 1%, the billionaires; and the Bank billionaires are the single most powerful group within that 1%. The CIA works to control the international drug trade for the US bankers.

US-CONTROLLED AFGHANISTAN; SOURCE OF 95% OF THE WORLD'S HEROIN (hmmmm)

Proof? In the year before the US invasion of Afghanistan, the Taliban had wiped out some 99% of all the drug production and trade. Following the US take-over of Afghanistan, (surprise, surprise) drug production and trade there has reached and surpassed previous levels. Now, some 95% of the world's heroin comes out of US-controlled Afghanistan; and the US banks are making the lion's-share of those profits. Otherwise, they'd be bankrupt.

WHO GETS THE LION'S SHARE OF THE PROFITS FROM NEO-COLONIALISM?
Decades ago, I saw the percentages along the lines of that at least:
95% of the profits go to the US rich;
5% of the profits go to the "local" rich.

With the passage of decades this split-percentage could only have worsened for countries such as Mexico. Perhaps it's now 99% to 1%. Thus, the US rich rob those countries blind; while the local puppets: live a traitor's life of luxury AND don't have to work a day in their lives doing so.

Pablonovi
12-05-2013, 05:02 PM
I tried to edit the above post to fix some typos, add bold and fix some other stuff but couldn't get the "edit" function to work.

One important edit clarification would be to my second capitalized sub-head:
It reads: When the power-in-power ...
It should, of course, read: When the party in power ...

kdspurman
12-05-2013, 05:33 PM
at least our "home" game becomes an actual one...

Yep. Adelman was not happy about them playing against us on a neutral court. Hopefully they fit the game in a nice spot and not somewhere where a team is playing like 3 straight games.

Pablonovi
12-05-2013, 06:04 PM
I read a report about 3 months ago that, contrary to widely-held popular opinion, Mexico City, is THE most crime-free city of all large cities in the world. * The same can NOT be said about certain cities/states and regions of the country. But the Distrito Federal has some 20 million residents; 25 million if you include Netzahualcoyotl and a couple more cities that are physically in contact with the D.F. That's almost 1/4 of all Mexicans; and it is a tribute to the people of the Capital that after decades of huge problems there, now so many can live so closely packed and have so little crime.

The Treatment Of Women As Perhaps The Truest Indicator Of A Country's Civility
25 years ago, you would NEVER see women (other than prostitutes) out on the streets after dark. Now, you see it all the time. This is, for me, the greatest improvement of all in the living conditions and the cultural sphere in Mexico.

MEXICO COMPARED TO THE U.S. RATE OF INCARCERATION. MEXICO = WAY BETTER
The number of people per 100,000 incarcerated:

Mexico: 169 / 100,000 (49th out of 164 countries in the report);
US: 715 / 100,000 (1st, = worst, out of 164 countries in the report).
Wow!

At one point in the last decade, I lived for more than a year in the Mexican capital - the changes from a generation ago are truly & remarkably wonderful.

* Unfortunately, I didn't keep a copy of the article; but will look for a link to it.

NBA_Starter
12-05-2013, 08:55 PM
It is good to see they will be able to make it up.

bmd1101
12-05-2013, 09:47 PM
Damn I wish to the document was still available, there was a report by US JFC that showed a strong possibility a complete collapse of Mexican Government and power transferred to gangs/cartel's within 2 decades requiring US intervention. That report was from 2008 and was located at: http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/JOE2008.pdf

It was discussed somewhat here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexico/4271720/Mexico-in-danger-of-collapse-says-US-army.html


Using figures for simple incarceration is a bit iffy to me, you can get thrown in a county jail easily with the US' arrest first ask questions later form of policing. Prison numbers would be better.

Robert Peel must be rolling in his grave.

blahblahyoutoo
12-05-2013, 11:29 PM
I read a report about 3 months ago that, contrary to widely-held popular opinion, Mexico City, is THE most crime-free city of all large cities in the world. * The same can NOT be said about certain cities/states and regions of the country. But the Distrito Federal has some 20 million residents; 25 million if you include Netzahualcoyotl and a couple more cities that are physically in contact with the D.F. That's almost 1/4 of all Mexicans; and it is a tribute to the people of the Capital that after decades of huge problems there, now so many can live so closely packed and have so little crime.

The Treatment Of Women As Perhaps The Truest Indicator Of A Country's Civility
25 years ago, you would NEVER see women (other than prostitutes) out on the streets after dark. Now, you see it all the time. This is, for me, the greatest improvement of all in the living conditions and the cultural sphere in Mexico.

MEXICO COMPARED TO THE U.S. RATE OF INCARCERATION. MEXICO = WAY BETTER
The number of people per 100,000 incarcerated:

Mexico: 169 / 100,000 (49th out of 164 countries in the report);
US: 715 / 100,000 (1st, = worst, out of 164 countries in the report).
Wow!

At one point in the last decade, I lived for more than a year in the Mexican capital - the changes from a generation ago are truly & remarkably wonderful.

* Unfortunately, I didn't keep a copy of the article; but will look for a link to it.

that's cuz all their criminals are on our side of the border :D :D :D

SPURSFAN1
12-06-2013, 10:17 AM
US needs to stop gun running to mexico. What's the best way to destabilize an area? Provide a ton of illegal guns. The US funds drug cartels too man. It's not just one countries problem.

Pablonovi
12-06-2013, 05:30 PM
There are profit-making businesses; and then there are the super-profits makers. At the top of this list are such things as:
1. runaway shops ("maquiladoras") = shutting down US (union-)jobs, and setting up in super-low-wage areas;
2. bank loans (at very high interest rates; AND backed by the US Gov; thus these are guaranteed super-profits;
3. military sales (very high profits, with cost-over-run contracts, AND a guaranteed buyer-of-first-&-last-resort, the US Gov.; and,
4. illegal trafficking (drugs, children, women, body-parts, laborers, ...)

So, you are definitely right SPURSFAN1,
The US top 1%, the super-rich billionaires, own/control the US Gov. lock-stock-and-barrel; and use it to dominate over a hundred countries around the world. Sometimes they use stability; other times in-stability and chaos; other times they invade.

With illegal trafficking being such a huge source of profits, all the big US banksters are up to their eyeballs in drug-money. Their banks would have failed long before now if it weren't for the criminal drug-business AND the criminal bailouts where they were rewarded with more than a 1T $ dollars for bankrupting their own banks/businesses. So, of course, they "fund" the drug cartels; they run them, PERIOD.

Pablonovi
12-06-2013, 06:20 PM
Damn I wish to the document was still available, there was a report by US JFC that showed a strong possibility a complete collapse of Mexican Government and power transferred to gangs/cartel's within 2 decades requiring US intervention. [SNIP]

Hey bmd1101,
People might want to take a moment to ponder the phrase, "requiring US intervention." Who declared the US Gov to be the world's policeman? The US has no legal nor moral right to usurp such a role. Nothing that happens in any other country "requires US intervention". Instead this is phrased in this particular way as a pretext; a pretext to justify the otherwise un-justifiable - attacking/invading/destroying other countries, supposedly to "save them".

WHEN A COUNTRY GETS INVADED BY THE US, INEVITABLY LIFE GETS HORRIBLY WORSE
No exaggeration: Afghanistan and its people are a million times worse off than they were before the US invaded. Same thing with Iraq. Same thing with Libya. Same thing with Syria. The death tolls in each country are horrendous; the wounded 100 times worse; the destruction of so much of each country has led to an all-sided breakdown; most basic necessities are now available sporadically or not at all.

People are dying en-masse from: starvation, diarrhea (due to dirty water supplies); and preventable diseases that the country was reasonably handling before the US invasion. Depleted Uranium residue from US weapons keeps on "giving the gift of death" for, basically, all-eternity (DU's half-life is 5 Billion years!). Numerous other WMD's used BY THE US; (and/or spread by the US due to having bombed chemical factories and warehouses) have left vast swaths of each of these countries as eternal no-life zones; and other, much-larger areas, as living hells (where cancers, diseases and birth-defects are pervasive).

EACH COUNTRY IS SET-BACK DECADES, IF NOT 100S OF YEARS = HELL ON EARTH
In sum, in every single one of those countries, millions are dead, many more are injured, many more than that are suffering terribly; with desperation, demoralization and hatreds way worse than ever. This is the only and inevitable consequence possible when the US war machine intervenes - it destroys entire countries; and sets them back decades if not hundreds of years.

US INTERVENTION IS THE KISS OF DEATH; "REQUIRED" NOWHERE
Whatever problems those countries had before the US invasion; there are way worse now. Mexico will never "require a US intervention". What Mexico and every other country outside the US borders needs is a guarantee that the US will NEVER intervene, under any circumstances. Such "help" is THE Kiss Of Death.

Fundamental Law Of Human Nature:

WHERE THERE'S OPPRESSION, THERE'S RESISTANCE.
WHERE THERE'S MASSIVE OPPRESSION, THERE'S MASSIVE REVOLUTION AGAINST IT.
Every one of these US (totally illegal and immoral) "interventions" has resulted in a tremendous rise, country-wide, of hatred towards and struggle against the US Gov. How could it be otherwise? *

WARS ABROAD PLUS REPRESSION AT HOME = NO COINCIDENCE

Each war abroad further bankrupts the US economy, leading to ever more suffering within the US. Simultaneously, political repression has continuously been ramped up. This is NO coincidence; far from it. As the 1% gets ever-richer through destroying entire countries, and sucking this country dry, wrecking our entire country economically; we, too, inevitably rise up. That's the whole point of the rapidly increasing: spying, arresting, droning, police-violence cycle. The 1% is preparing to squash our rebellion, a rebellion that they themselves are forcing us into.

Therefore, the people of the US and of the world require that the US STOP intervening. Instead of ever more enemies and police; what we need is ever more peace and jobs everywhere in our world, so people everywhere can put enough food on our tables and just get along with each other.

Give Peace A Chance
- - - - -
* Not publicly, but yes "in private", US Generals admit (and have so for several years now) that they've been totally defeated in both Afghanistan and Iraq. One should ask, "But how is this possible?" After all, the US has literally a million times as much weaponry, along with untold other huge advantages; whereas the people of those countries were betrayed by their own "leaderships", and subsequently extremely poorly armed and trained, near-starving year after year, crushed by poverty and by sadness for the loss of loved ones all around. And yet, THEY are defeating the greatest war-machine of all time.

Given all that is at stake, this would seem to be THE biggest question we need to know the answer to. imo, it reduces down to a simple equation: invasion-by-death-machine is ALWAYS WRONG, immoral; resistance against it is ALWAYS RIGHT. Poor people defending their families and their rights ALWAYS WIN (regardless of the horrendous price forced on them) exactly because their cause is just.

Isn't it time we, the people of the US, did our part; and dismantle this bestial, death-dealing, war-machine?