[AuntB]

Okay, I’m really trying to understand what it is you find ‘deceptive’. Is it the title?

Is it this sentence in the article?
The report states: “Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone.”

Are you saying the report doesn’t say that? Or could you not find the report? Let’s get to the bottom of it.

Or are you saying there is no threat in Mexico?

[angkor]

Directly after the cover page of the JOE study - on page ii - is the following caveat, which each and every follow-on exaggerated report (including the opening post to this thread) completely fails to mention:

"This document is speculative in nature and does not suppose to predict what will happen in the next twenty-five years. Rather, it is intended to serve as a starting point for discussions..."

And here are the two speculative paragraphs out of 56 pages that are generating these exaggerated stories and FR posts (with my emphasis):

"In particular, the growing assault by the drug cartels and their thugs on the Mexican government over the past several years reminds one that an unstable Mexico could represent a homeland security problem of immense proportions to the United States."

[snip]

"The Mexican possibility may seem less likely, but the government, its politicians, police, and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels. How that internal conflict turns out over the next several years will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state. Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

[End Mexico cites from JOE]

That's it. Fifty-six pages and those two paragraphs are the totality of what we have to generate stories in blogs, mentions by Lou Dobbs, vague references in the Wall Street Journal, and posts in FR. There is no other discussion of Mexico in those 56 pages. Zero. None. Nada. Not a peep.

So, yes, these have very much been wholesale misrepresentations of the JOE report, and those who propagate it as even an unofficial Pentagon position or as anything other than thoughtful speculation and possibility are doing their readers no service.

As I've said, to do so is lying, plain and simple.