UPDATE AND TIMELY ......
SPECIAL ATTENTION OF :
UPDATE AND TIMELY ......
SPECIAL ATTENTION OF :
The 26-year-old New Jersey-born Iraq veteran accused of executing five people and wounding eight others at a Florida airport claimed just two months ago that he was hearing voices.
It was part of a difficult adjustment to civilian life after serving overseas. He sat in an FBI office in Anchorage, Alaska, in November, claiming the CIA was forcing him to join ISIS. He also became a father for the first time last year and was struggling to take care of himself, let alone a child.
On Friday, Esteban Santiago snapped, opening fire near the baggage claim area at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. He reloaded, fired until he was out of bullets and calmly surrendered without saying a word.
Santiago was born in New Jersey but moved to Puerto Rico when he was 2, relatives said.
He grew up in the southern coastal town of Penuelas before joining the National Guard in 2007, and served with that unit in Iraq from April 2010 to February 2011.
From there, Santiago spiraled down a dark descent that included a less than honorable discharge, arrests for domestic violence and now the first mass shooting on U.S. soil in 2017.
By Anna Von Reitz
It's you life, your law, your choice to make.
The incident occurred between Thursday night and Friday morning at the Monte Cristo prison in Roraima state, on the border with Venezuela. According to the Brazilian newspaper O Globo, the assailants threw multiple bodies over the gates of the prison after cutting their heads off. Some bodies were also missing their hearts. An image in the local newspaper Roraima em Tempo shows some bodies missing limbs.
In addition to those killed, a total of 74 people, both inmates and guards, were reportedly held hostage throughout the siege until police were able to subdue the attackers.
Early reports, citing regional Justice Minister Uziel Castro, suggest that the riot was an attack on members of the Família do Norte (FDN) drug trafficking gang, tied to the second-largest gang in the country, the Red Command (CV). Castro reportedly told journalists that there was “no riot” in the prison, but rather a calculated massacre, seemingly exclusively of FDN members.
The FDN has been at war with the country’s largest gang, the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC), for some months, a war that had recently affected the Monte Cristo prison. The PCC is based in Sao Paulo, Brazil’s largest city, while the CV operates in Rio de Janeiro. Police have found evidence over the past year that indicates the PCC is looking to play a bigger role in Rio de Janeiro, challenging local control.
A confrontation between the two gangs left 11 inmates dead in October, many also beheaded and some burned to death. Authorities reportedly chose to separate members of the two gangs following the incident to prevent repeats, leaving many unanswered questions as to how guards failed to prevent the incident on Friday morning.
Roraima em Tempo published an image of a note the newspaper claims was found in the prison reading “blood is paid in blood,” allegedly an instruction from the PCC to its members. The prisoners also reportedly possessed gunpowder, cell phones, drugs, other instructional notes from drug gang heads, and pieces of iron that could be used as weapons.
The blood to be paid was spilled on the morning of New Year’s Day in neighboring Amazonas state, at the Anisio Jobim Prison Complex of Manaus (Compaj). Police do call the incident there a riot: a 17-hour episode of violence that left 56 dead and 184 fugitives. While Brazilian Justice Minister Alexandre de Moraes refused to ascribe blame to the FDN gang, claiming that half of those killed did not have a gang affiliation. Inmates who took video of the bodies following the massacre identified the heads of those killed as PCC members, however, though their claims have yet to be officially confirmed.
De Moraes told reporters following the second massacre that Brazil’s prisons “have not gotten out of control.” “It is another difficult situation, Roraima had already had problems previously,” de Moraes argued. “Local authorities were already monitoring this. It is not out of control.”
De Moraes also once again denied that gangs could have been involved in the incident: “This is apparently not retaliation by the PCC towards the Familia do Norte… the gangs had been separated in this prison, so everyone was from the same gang, the PCC.”
The more the threats to freedom increased over 2016, the more Americans understood the need for the right to keep and bear arms, which is protected under the Second Amendment. More than 27.5 million guns were purchased by Americans in 2016.
According to background check numbers released by the FBI, the total sales for 2016 were 27,538,673. Remember, this does not include any private sales, which would make the numbers much higher.
This figure is more than 4 million over 2015's sales.
For 19 months in a row, gun sales have been on an upwards trend. This has been largely due to Islamic terror attacks, race-related violence, an administration hell bent on attacking the Second Amendment and the possibility of a Hillary Clinton presidency, which would have been even more blood thirsty for gun owners than the Obama administration.
Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah was so effective at attacking the Second Amendment and indirectly causing gun sales to skyrocket that he was referred to in 2015 as "The Greatest Gun Salesman of All Time" and in 2016 as the "Nation's Top Gun Salesman."
This was the man who was behind his administration running guns from Benghazi to Syria before the US consulate attack. This all came on the heels of his administration being uncovered for arming Mexican drug lords who killed hundreds of Mexicans through "Fast and Furious."
Consider that America is number one in the world in gun ownership, yet she is not even in the top 100 countries when it comes to murder rates. In fact, America's numbers of gun violence would be significantly low if it were not for the highly populated metropolitan areas and strict gun control cities like Chicago, Illinois, which saw over4,300 shootings in 2016.
The central government also took aim at armed citizens who protested illegal land grabs by the Bureau of Land Management. Patriots were arrested for their armed stand in Nevada and Oregon. Charges in Oregon were either dismissed or the patriots were acquitted and many were transferred to Nevada to face trumped up charges for their role at Bundy Ranch in 2014. Yet, the central government continues to try and pursue those found innocent in Oregon on more charges while they are absent.
I'd say that there are many Americans with their eyes wide open as to the need to be armed for personal protection, but we still have a way to go to get them to see the real need for the Second Amendment is to secure a free state. May God help us to that end.
Florida Governor Rick Scott bypassed Obama, and went straight to Donald Trump and Mike Pence for information and guidance on the Ft Lauderdale shooting.
Watch the video:
Florida Gov. Rick Scott says he has reached out to Trump and Pence since the shooting, but not Obama pic.twitter.com/ymXWlgVWDf
— Pamela Moore (@Pamela_Moore13) January 6, 2017
NEEDLESS DEATHS IN #FortLauderdale bc ISIS would NOT even exist if Obama did not foolishly withdraw from the Middle East prior to reelection
— DefendingtheUSA (@DefendingtheUSA) January 6, 2017
Incredible footage has emerged showing how the US Military dug deep below Greenland's ice cap to create a hidden site for launching ballistic missiles at the height of the Cold War.
The original plan was to build 2,500 miles of tunnels which would have covered an area of 52,000 square miles – which is bigger than the size of England.
By the time it was abandoned in 1966 due to the ice cap starting to crush the camp, soldiers had already built two miles of tunnels and a facility that boasted a hospital, theatre, church and a shop for 200 of its inhabitants.
By the time Camp Century was abandoned, soldiers had already built two miles of tunnels and a facility boasted a hospital, theatre, church and a shop for 200 of its inhabitants
The project was abandoned in 1966 because the unstable ice above threatened to crush the camp
The original plan was to build 2,500 miles of tunnels which would have covered an area of 52,000 square miles – which is bigger than the size of England
The camp was given the codename Project Iceworm and troops disguised themselves as polar researchers
Camp Century was built in between 1959 and 60 in northwestern Greenland, officially to test sub-ice construction techniques.
The real plan was top secret - creating a hidden launch site for ballistic missiles that could reach the Soviet Union.
It was given the codename Project Iceworm and troops worked under the disguise of polar researchers under the ice, according to The Sun.
A narrator in the video footage says: 'Camp Century is buried below the surface of this ice cap.
'Beneath it, the ice descends for 6,000 feet.
'In this remote setting, less than 800 miles from the North Pole, Camp Century is a symbol of man’s unceasing goal to conquer his environment, to increase his ability to live and fight if necessary under polar conditions.
'This is the story of Camp Century: the city under ice.'
Camp Century was built in between 1959 and 60 in northwestern Greenland, officially to test sub-ice construction techniques
Footage has emerged of US Military picking their spot ahead of the start of the project in 1959
A section of the 2,000 miles of tunnels already built before the project was abandoned in 1966
Military personnel busy building the underdground camp way under the ice cap in Greenland
The project was abandoned in 1966 because the ice cap began to crush the camp.
The US removed a portable nuclear reactor that had supplied heat and electricity, but left an estimated 200,000 liters of diesel oil and sewage, according to an international study published in August.
Scientists are warning that as global warming melts the ice cap, the waste could surface and pollute the environment.
Greenland is calling on Denmark to clean up an abandoned under-ice missile project and other US military installations left to rust in the pristine landscape after the Cold War.
The 1951 deal under which NATO member Denmark allowed the US to build 33 bases and radar stations in the former Danish province doesn't specify who's responsible for any cleanup.
Tired of waiting, Greenland's local leaders are now urging Denmark to remove the junk that the Americans left behind, including Camp Century, a never-completed launch site for nuclear missiles under the surface of the massive ice cap.
'Unless Denmark has entered other agreements with the United States about Camp Century, the responsibility for investigation and cleanup lies with Denmark alone,' said Vittus Qujaukitsoq, Greenland's minister in charge of foreign affairs.
An abandoned US Air Force vehicle outside the eastern Greenland settlement of Kulusuk where there used to be a US Air Force base as part of an early warning radar system
In an October 24 letter to Danish Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen, obtained by The Associated Press, Qujaukitsoq asked about Denmark's plans for Camp Century, adding that an international study said the waste includes 'radioactivity, oil and PCB pollution.'
PCBs stands for polychlorinated biphenyls, a man-made chemical once widely used in paints, plastics and other products, but were banned after they were demonstrated to cause cancer and other ailments.
At a meeting on November 17 in Nuuk, the Greenland capital, to discuss the issue, Jensen said Denmark's Environment Ministry was investigating the environmental risks.
'I hope it can be done as quickly as possible,' he told a news conference, declining to give any specifics.
Jensen later told The Associated Press in an email that 'it is still too early to say who will be involved in a possible cleanup.
A rusty container of lubricant oil for a U.S. military vehicle stands among abandoned US military material in 2005
The US military was interested in Greenland during the Cold War due to its strategic location in the Arctic.
Under the 1951 agreement, the US also built four radar stations as part of an early warning system to detect incoming Soviet bombers.
The US Air Force still uses the Thule Air Base, about 1,200 kilometers (745 miles) below the North Pole.
Military airfields in Narsarsuaq, Kulusuk and Kangerlussuaq have become civilian airports.
Several other military installations have been abandoned, some in remote areas, in the hope they would be entombed forever in the thick ice cap that covers most of the vast island.
Local authorities have started clearing some of the sites, but don't have sufficient resources, said Rasmus Eisted of Danish engineering company Ramboll, which has been involved in some cleanup projects.
Eisted singled out a junkyard in Kangerlussuaq containing miscellaneous military equipment from the time it was a US Air Force Base known as Sondrestrom.
The continuing cleanup task was larger than first anticipated, he said.
Aleqa Hammond, a former Greenland premier who now represents the mostly Inuit population of the Arctic island in the Danish Parliament, said Greenland could bring Denmark before a UN panel on indigenous issues unless it deals with the junk.
'Denmark is responsible for cleaning up after the Americans,' Hammond said.
'I see a potential political crisis between Greenland and Denmark.'
Victoria Nuland, the US Assistant Secretary of State, did not spend much time and energy with Christmas and New Year celebrations this year. She has another very urgent and pressing problem to solve, before leaving the State Department, and this is the “Cyprus conflict”. The way she wants to solve this conflict is by transforming a second member of the EU, after Greece, into a protectorate. As the proposed solution for Cyprus is higlhy unstable, powers outside the EU will be provided also with a bomb inside it, that is with the possibillity of provoking a Bosnian-type conflict inside, not outside EU borders.
In the same time she wants also to get Turkey admitted immediately to the EU, by the window of the “Cypriot settlement”. By virtue of the provisions of the “Cyprus settlement” under consideration now, Turkey is invested after January 12 with many of the rights and powers (and none of the obligations) of the member-states. It will also legalize in Geneva, its military presence and its right to intervene militarily inside the European Union.
Such an outcome of the Geneva conference will have enormous strategic consequences for Europe and for the Middle East, transforming the whole “Eastern Meditarranean”, a sea lane of vital importance, into a kind of “Mare Nostrum” of the “Naval Forces”, excluding from there any “foreign” strategic influence (German, Russian or Chinese) and laying one more foundation for encircling Russia from the South with a kind of “security belt” and trying to hinder its access to the “warm seas”, a centuries long dream of British imperial planners. It will constitute the deeper change of the Mediterranean strategic landscape, since the eruption of the so-called Eastern Question or, at least, since the Greek national revolution, two centuries ago.
The type of settlement Mrs. Nuland wants to impose on Cyprus is a new version of the Annan Plan, rejected by the overwhelming majority of Cypriots during the 2004 referendum, in spite of enormous pressure they had suffered and a real terror campaign against them, warning the day of Doom would come on the aftermath of a No vote. The Annan Plan is violating all essential provisions of European, International and Constitutional Law, including the UN Charter. In the light of its provisions, it represents the most comprehensive effort undertaken, since the defeat of Nazism, in 1945, to impose a totalitarian system in any western country.
The Annan plan is instituting a kind of Frankestein state in Cyprus, where, among other things, the rule of majority (democracy) will be formally abolished, where there will be permanent vetos of the two Cypriot communities in every level of decision making and in all branches of power (executive, legislative, judicial), and, in the very probable case that system would be brought to an impasse, foreign judges will decide everything. In reality, the new “state” will be governed by foreign judges, concentrating upon themselves, three centuries after Montesqieu, all powers.
The solution provides for imposing to the new “state” a complete disarmament status, that is forbid it from the right of self-defense and the means to exercise it (an army). And do it in a permanent terms, not as a temporary measure, as it happened with Germany and Japan after the 2kd World War. In Orwellian terms, this is called “Cyprus demilitarized”. In reality there will be many traffic problems there provoked, because of the military vehicles of Britain, Turkey, other NATO countries and Police cars from various “Christian and Muslim countries” which will be present there. Britain and Turkey will have the legal right to intervene militarily inside a territory of the European Union.
Mrs. Nuland does not want to wait for any referendum. She knows that she can hardly win a second referendum in Cyprus (or in any other European country these times) on such terms. She has no time, she leaves the State Department on the 20th of January and she wants to end her career with a triumph, that is succeeding where MacMillan, Johnson, Kissinger, Bush, Annan, before her, failed miserably. There are also more essential reasons she wants to solve (or to create?) now this problem. Both the Greek and the European crises may enter a new and more dramatic phase next year. As for the Middle East, adjacent to Cyprus, it is waiting now for a Big Deal or a Big War.
The only way to do what she wants, in order to circumvent the provision for a referendum, is to have the President of Cyprus Mr. Anastasiades and the leader of Turkish Cypriots Mr. Akinci sign all that, or as much as they can of that. Then, Mr. Tsipras, Mr. Erdogan and Mrs May will endorse them and they will do something else also, legalize the Turkish military presence inside the European Union for some indefinite, as we write period. Mr. Yuncker plans also to be there to applaud all that in the name of the European Union. The State Department has already warned the US Congress to be ready to adopt bills on Cyprus and the Commission altered all its programs for January 12. That day, CNN will announce to all the world that the Cyprus conflict has already been solved. When people will realize what happened, and they will begin to tear their hairs, there will be no Obama or Nuland to answer any questions. (And maybe that arranges many more people than one can figure out)
Mr. Anastasiades has already agreed to all that, Mr. Tsipras is under pressure also to agree. Mr. Yuncker, Mrs. May and Mr. Erdogan already agreed. There remain some serious differences still on the composition of the Conference which remain to be settled as we write this article.
And the referendum? you will probably ask. Ok, they will promiss to make two referendums, one for the Greeks and one for the Turkish Cypriots. Maybe they will do them, but only if they are sure of the result. Anyway, even if those referendums take place, they will not have much sense, as it will be impossible for the inhabitants to return to the status quo ante. The Republic of Cyprus as we know it will be dead and the Turkish military presence on the island legal. As for the voters they will be in front of the choice to accept after all what is too late to change or risk a chaotic situation, if they refuse it post factum.
Is all that legal? No, nothing here is legal. (Look to the appendix 1, for the opinion of the Honorary President of the International Association of Constitutional Law, Professor Kasimatis). On the contrary they represent a coup d’ etat stricto sensu and in two ways. They constitute the most serious possible breach of the constitutional order of the Republic of Cyprus and of the Treaties of the European Union, as Cyprus is a member of this Union.
No international conference and not even the President of Cyprus himself (or, for that matter, the Greek PM) has any right to sign agreements that infringe on the sovereignty of the Cypriot state (like for instance legalizing the Turkish military presence on the island, when numerous UN resolutions ask for the immediate withdrawal of Turkish forces, which invaded the island in 1974). Even more, nobody, including the President of Cyprus, has the right to change the constitutional structure of his state, much more, abolish it altogether! If they do it, it would be a coup d’ etat, in the strict legal sense of the word, that is a serious breach of the constitutional order of the Republic of Cyprus and, as this Republic is also a full member of the European Union, of the Treaties of the EU. Such things would be probably legal, only if we were living still under a medieval regime of absolute monarchies, not in Europe in 2016.
The whole Geneva conference reminds us very much of what happened in Vichy, France, on the 10th of July 1940, when the French National Assembly invested, with an overwhelming majority, Marshal Petain with constituent powers. In spite of the fact that even it was the National Assembly itself which took this decision, everything Petain did was considered a coup d’ etat and, inspite of being a hero of the First World War, he was condemned to death after the liberation of France. Charles De Gaulle has become what he became, in the history of France and of the world, because he refused to recognize this, supposedly legal coup, by the French deputies and Petain and fought against it.
In Cyprus, unlike Petain, Mr. Anastasiades not only did not get an authorization of his parliament for what he is doing, he even refused a demand of the opposition for an urgent debate.
By the way and until some weeks ago, all Cypriot and Greek governments since 1974 refused the Turkish proposal to convene such a conference, claiming that the only thing they could discuss about Cyprus with Turkey, was the withdrawal of the Turkish troops which invaded the island and remained there in spite of UN resolutions calling for their immediate withdrawal.
But this was until December 1st. That day, Mr. Anastasiades has announced to his citizens that he is accepting the proposal without explaining much why he is doing it, what will be the purpose and the agenda of this strange conference. He did not consult with political parties in the island or the Greek government before announcing his decision. The most absolute confusion was reigning in the island, until December 27, when the leader of the Turkish Cypriots Mr. Akinci, speaking to the Turkish Cypriot media, probably to warn Anastasiades not to deviate from what they had already agreed in secret, explained a little bit what will happen in Geneva.
According to what he said the Republic of Cyprus will not be present in the Geneva conference. All documents there will be signed by the “new Cyprus federation to be constituted”. In that way he revealed the real purpose of the operation, which is no other than to abolish the existing state in Cyprus (we repeat, a member of UN and the EU) and to create a new one, without asking the opinion of the citizens, without electing a Constitutional Assembly and without any authorization from anybody to do that. In that case, we don’t speak even about an operation of regime change. We have to speak about “country change”.
A Greek Cypriot politician who is friend of Mr. Akinci answered to him explaining that he better avoid much public talk.
The citizens of the Republic themselves are now in a state of complete shock, as they cannot believe that they will live in another state by January 12, they know nothing about it! Cyprus has a tradition of invasions and coups, but it is difficult still for the citizens to grasp the new and unbelievable reality that their own President is planning to sign the death of his own state! It is very difficult, psychologically and intellectually, to stop believing that Mr. Anastasiades is not their leader (even if some they may consider his as bad, wrong, corrupted or incompetent), but he is their killer!
If the Cyprus thing succeeds it will in itself represent a colossal advancement of new political technologies. The trick is simple and genious. For a rape to be recognized as a rape, the victim has to resist and denounce the rapist. But here the rapist and the person charged with denouncing the rape is the same, the President of the Republic.
Anastasiades himself is the most powerful weapon US ever had in Cyprus. But Mrs Nuland has also another very powerful weapon and this is the situation in Greece, the confusion and the dependence of Greek political forces. The cooperation of Greece to this operation is deemed absolutely necessary for political reasons.
Mr. Tsipras in Athens, is now under enormous US pressure to give his consent and in a very difficult condition otherwise. SYRIZA is characterized also by a huge confusion regarding the Cyprus conflict. The Greek economy and society are very much into a death spiral, and the PM seems to be to the absolute mercy of Creditors, including the IMF. The German government nearly declared war against Greece, when his government decided, on the eve of Christmas, to give some financial peanuts to very poor Greek pensioners in a very real danger for their life and respecting the discipline of the program imposed to Greece (against the will of its people). The Finance Minister had to send a humiliating letter, promising more pension cuts in the next year, in order to get an armistice from Scheuble. If all that was not enough, Mr. Erdogan is threatening to fluid Greece with new waves of refugees.
Let us come back at this point to the term coup d’ etat we used. Maybe the readers are associating this with tanks and machine guns. Concerning the use of weapons they have to be a little patient. They will hear most probably their noise (as they heard it from Kiev), but they have first to wait until the Geneva operation succeeds and if it succeeds. But a coup d’ etat has nothing to do with the means used. It has to do with the breach of the constitutional (and European in our case) order of a given state.
Maybe the readers will also question if a head of a given state can make himself or participate in a coup d’ etat against his own state. Not only he can, he is a thousand times more effective if he chooses to do it, as the only thing he has to do is use and abuse the powers he already legally possesses and can use. For example, the legal head of the Greek state, King Constantin, has participated in a US-backed coup d’ etat against the constitutional order of his own state in 1967, by legalizing the government of the Colonels.
The same thing was done by the head of the Russian state Boris Yeltsin in 1991, when he dissolved the USSR and in October 1993, when he bombed his own Parliament, if we examine those events from the point of view of soviet and Russian constitutional order. But nobody in the West has noticed of course this legal aspect of things, as westerners liked very much what Yeltsin did. We refer to this example, because it bears great analogies to what they are trying to do now in Cyprus.
We asked the top Greek specialist on Constitutional Law and Honorary President of the International Association of Constitutional Law, Professor Yiorgos Kasimatis, about what and what is not legal for this Geneva conference to do. This is his opinion:
“The Republic of Cyprus is internationally recognized as a full sovereignty state, by its admission to the United Nations and to the European Union. Nobody, including the President of Cyprus, the Greek PM or any international conference are entitled to take any decisions infringing, directly or indirectly, upon the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus or alter its constitutional structure. If they do it, it will be a very serious violation of both the Cyprus constitution and of the Treaties of the European Union. Only a constitutional assembly or the citizens themselves via a referendum, are entitled to adopt such measures. The only subject an international conference could discuss is how to apply the UN resolutions asking for the immediate withdrawal of Turkish occupation forces and the full restoration of the sovereignty of the Republic. It is not legal to connect or depend those international obligations, directly or indirectly, on any constitutional changes in the country. On the contrary, all third parties have the obligation to abstain from any actions or declarations, much more from signing any documents, which constitute a direct or indirect infringement upon the right of Cypriot citizens to decide by their own free will on the fundamentals of their state structure and on the international status of the Republic. All parties should do everything in their power to assure to the Cypriots the conditions for the free expression of their will, without any threats, blackmails, pressures, faits accmplis etc.”
2017 is going to be a big year for Conservatives and those tired of Democrats ruining this great Nation. WikiLeaks single handedly dismantled the Clinton campaign and exposed more corruption than we ever imaged.
Following the election, many have wondered if WikiLeaks and Julian Assange will quietly go away or keep fighting for justice. If you wanted them to keep fighting to expose corruption, you are in for a treat as WikiLeaks has selected their first target of the year: CNN.
They are tired of the disgusting behavior of the mainstream media and they threatening to sue CNN now for their inflammatory remarks.
We have issued instructions to sue CNN for defamation:https://t.co/YLfyQ9ROCy
Unless within 48h they air a one hour expose of the plot.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 4, 2017
WikiLeaks has issued a 48 hour warning to CNN and if they do not retract all of their inflammatory statements, videos, and article, they will take the mega media corporation to court and sue them for defamation.
CNN initially thought they could just issue an apology and that would satisfy Assange. Think again.
WikiLeaks also argued that they will expose CNN outside of the courtroom, too, if they continue to play these games.
US 2017: Former CIA head official denounces government critic as a 'pedophile'. https://t.co/TWu91qp929>— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 5, 2017
One thing remains clear: WikiLeaks doesn’t plan to stop after derailing Hillary Clinton and her team of cronies. CNN is merely their first target, and plenty more will surely follow.
They’ve put CNN on notice and they have 48 hours to air a one hour special confessing to their lies or they are in big trouble. If they or anyone think WikiLeaks are bluffing or incapable, ask Hillary Clinton how powerful Assange and his team can be.
Ernie Wayne terTelgte, The Montana Natural Man, first gained the attention of patriots across the nation when he amassed millions of views on YouTube with his actions within the Montana court systems. The event that went viral was due to his being arrested for fishing without a license and then resisting arrest. We covered his last court appearance he had for driving without a license. Ernie was arrested last month and has a new Omnibus hearing Thursday January 5th, 2017. We will also be covering this as well. Check back for more video updates.
This video brought to you courtesy of Jason Van Tatenhove of Liberty Brothers Radio.
Here is the original video that got over 7 million views.
Check back to this blog for updates. The omnibus hearing this morning will be published later today if everything goes right. Ernie is preparing for another hearing in February and refused to enter their jurisdiction again this morning. Quite frankly, they don't quite know what to do with this freedom loving American State national living lawfully on the land jurisdiction in Montana State.
To get the whole background of what his stand is based on, as he mentioned in this video, get the book by Anna Von Reitz called "You Know Something is Wrong When.....: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause" at her website here: http://www.annavonreitz.com/order.html
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/28/us/homeland-security-border-bribes.html?smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur">case of corruption inside the Department of Homeland Security was overshadowed by headlines about Russia and Israel this past week. Yet, federal employees accepting millions of dollars in bribes to avoid doing their job, is certainly worth a look.
Hundreds of DHS employees have "looked the other way" as drugs crossed the border because cartels have made them offers they can't refuse. Other employees have sold green cards and other documents illegally. More from The New York Times:
It was not an isolated case. A review by The New York Times of thousands of court records and internal agency documents showed that over the last 10 years almost 200 employees and contract workers of the Department of Homeland Security have taken nearly $15 million in bribes while being paid to protect the nation’s borders and enforce immigration laws.
No wonder our immigration system is so broken.
In order to address the internal issues, the department has hired more investigators, offered ethics training and is administering polygraph tests to new applicants, The Times reports.
The Times report does not include the gifts, trips or money that DHS employees have stolen, the editors note.
Once the inside corruption is taken care of, Donald Trump's administration can get to work on building a wall along the southern border, install better aerial surveillance and send more agents down there to be on the patrol.
This is one time our elected leaders should pay attention to the advice of Vladimir Putin. I would suggest that not only our leaders but every citizen of USA should pay attention to this advice. How scary is that? It is a sad day when a Communist makes more sense than our LEADERS but here it is !!!!
Vladimir Putin’s speech – SHORTEST SPEECH EVER.
On August 04, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:
In the past six weeks, the Washington Post published two blockbuster stories about the Russian threat that went viral: one on how Russia is behind a massive explosion of “fake news,” the other on how it invaded the U.S. electric grid. Both articles were fundamentally false. Each now bears a humiliating editor’s note grudgingly acknowledging that the core claims of the story were fiction: The first note was posted a full two weeks later to the top of the original article; the other was buried the following day at the bottom.
The second story on the electric grid turned out to be far worse than I realized when I wrote about it on Saturday, when it became clear that there was no “penetration of the U.S. electricity grid” as the Post had claimed. In addition to the editor’s note, the Russia-hacked-our-electric-grid story now has a full-scale retraction in the form of a separate article admitting that “the incident is not linked to any Russian government effort to target or hack the utility” and there may not even have been malware at all on this laptop.
But while these debacles are embarrassing for the paper, they are also richly rewarding. That’s because journalists — including those at the Post — aggressively hype and promote the original, sensationalistic false stories, ensuring that they go viral, generating massive traffic for the Post (the paper’s executive editor, Marty Baron, recently boasted about how profitable the paper has become).
After spreading the falsehoods far and wide, raising fear levels and manipulating U.S. political discourse in the process (both Russia stories were widely hyped on cable news), journalists who spread the false claims subsequently note the retraction or corrections only in the most muted way possible, and often not at all. As a result, only a tiny fraction of people who were exposed to the original false story end up learning of the retractions.
Baron himself, editorial leader of the Post, is a perfect case study in this irresponsible tactic. It was Baron who went to Twitter on the evening of November 24 to announce the Post’s exposé of the enormous reach of Russia’s fake news operation, based on what he heralded as the findings of “independent researchers.” Baron’s tweet went all over the place; to date, it has been re-tweeted more than 3,000 times, including by many journalists with their own large followings:
Russian propaganda effort helped spread fake news during election, say independent researchers https://t.co/3ETVXWw16Q
— Marty Baron (@PostBaron) November 25, 2016
But after that story faced a barrage of intense criticism — from Adrian Chen in the New Yorker (“propaganda about Russia propaganda”), Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone (“shameful, disgusting”), my own article, and many others — including legal threats from the sites smeared as Russian propaganda outlets by the Post’s “independent researchers” — the Post finally added its lengthy editor’s note distancing itself from the anonymous group that provided the key claims of its story (“The Post … does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings” and “since publication of the Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list”).
What did Baron tell his followers about this editor’s note that gutted the key claims of the story he hyped? Nothing. Not a word. To date, he has been publicly silent about these revisions. Having spread the original claims to tens of thousands of people, if not more, he took no steps to ensure that any of them heard about the major walk back on the article’s most significant, inflammatory claims. He did, however, ironically find the time to promote a different Post story about how terrible and damaging Fake News is:
‘Pizzagate’ shows how fake news hurts real people https://t.co/cOh7RZ4RqK
— Marty Baron (@PostBaron) November 26, 2016
Whether the Post’s false stories here can be distinguished from what is commonly called “Fake News” is, at this point, a semantic dispute, particularly since “Fake News” has no cogent definition. Defenders of Fake News as a distinct category typically emphasize intent in order to differentiate it from bad journalism. That’s really just a way of defining Fake News so as to make it definitionally impossible for mainstream media outlets like the Post ever to be guilty of it (much the way terrorism is defined to ensure that the U.S. government and its allies cannot, by definition, ever commit it).
But what was the Post’s motive in publishing two false stories about Russia that, very predictably, generated massive attention, traffic, and political impact? Was it ideological and political — namely, devotion to the D.C. agenda of elevating Russia into a grave threat to U.S. security? Was it to please its audience — knowing that its readers, in the wake of Trump’s victory, want to be fed stories about Russian treachery? Was it access and source servitude — proving it will serve as a loyal and uncritical repository for any propaganda intelligence officials want disseminated? Was it profit — to generate revenue through sensationalistic click-bait headlines with a reckless disregard to whether its stories are true? In an institution as large as the Post, with numerous reporters and editors participating in these stories, it’s impossible to identify any one motive as definitive.
Whatever the motives, the effects of these false stories are exactly the same as those of whatever one regards as Fake News. The false claims travel all over the internet, deceiving huge numbers into believing them. The propagators of the falsehoods receive ample profit from their false, viral “news.” And there is no accountability of the kind that would disincentivize a repeat of the behavior. (That the Post ultimately corrects its false story does not distinguish it from classic Fake News sites, which also sometimes do the same.)
And while it’s true that all media outlets make mistakes, and that even the most careful journalism sometimes errs, those facts do not remotely mitigate the Post’s behavior here. In these cases, they did not make good faith mistakes after engaging in careful journalism. With both stories, they were reckless (at best) from the start, and the glaring deficiencies in the reporting were immediately self-evident (which is why both stories were widely attacked upon publication).
As this excellent timeline by Kalev Leetaru documents, the Post did not even bother to contact the utility companies in question — the most elementary step of journalistic responsibility — until after the story was published. Intelligence officials insisting on anonymity — so as to ensure no accountability — whispered to them that this happened, and despite how significant the consequences would be, they rushed to print it with no verification at all. This is not a case of good journalism producing inaccurate reporting; it is the case of a media outlet publishing a story that it knew would produce massive benefits and consequences without the slightest due diligence or care.
The most ironic aspect of all this is that it is mainstream journalists — the very people who have become obsessed with the crusade against Fake News — who play the key role in enabling and fueling this dissemination of false stories. They do so not only by uncritically spreading them, but also by taking little or no steps to notify the public of their falsity.
The Post’s epic debacle this weekend regarding its electric grid fiction vividly illustrates this dynamic. As I noted on Saturday, many journalists reacted to this story the same way they do every story about Russia: They instantly click and re-tweet and share the story without the slightest critical scrutiny. That these claims are constantly based on the whispers of anonymous officials and accompanied by no evidence whatsoever gives those journalists no pause at all; any official claim that Russia and Putin are behind some global evil is instantly treated as Truth. That’s a significant reason papers like the Post are incentivized to recklessly publish stories of this kind. They know they will be praised and rewarded no matter the accuracy or reliability because their Cause — the agenda — is the right one.
On Friday night, immediately after the Post’s story was published, one of the most dramatic pronouncements came from the New York Times’s editorial writer Brent Staples, who said this:
Now that this story has collapsed and been fully retracted, what has Staples done to note that this tweet was false? Just like Baron, absolutely nothing. Actually, that’s not quite accurate, as he did do something: At some point after Friday night, he quietly deleted his tweet without comment. He has not uttered a word about the fact that the story he promoted has collapsed, and that what he told his 16,000-plus followers — along with the countless number of people who re-tweeted the dramatic claim of this prominent journalist — turned out to be totally false in every respect.
Even more instructive is the case of MSNBC’s Kyle Griffin, a prolific and skilled social media user who has seen his following explode this year with a constant stream of anti-Trump content. On Friday night, when the Post story was published, Griffin hyped it with a series of tweets designed to make the story seem as menacing and consequential as possible. That included hysterical statements from Vermont officials — who believed the Post’s false claim — that in retrospect are unbelievably embarrassing.
VT Gov. Peter Shumlin on Russian hacking attempt: 'One of the world's leading thugs, Putin, has been attempting to hack our electric grid.' pic.twitter.com/liJbVLdT5A
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) December 31, 2016
That tweet from Griffin — convincing people that Putin was endangering the health and safety of Vermonters — was re-tweeted more than 1,000 times. His other similar tweets — such as this one featuring Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy’s warning that Putin was trying to “shut down [the grid] in the middle of winter” — were also widely spread.
But the next day, the crux of the story collapsed — the Post’s editor’s note acknowledged that “there is no indication” that “Russian hackers had penetrated the electricity grid” — and Griffin said nothing. Indeed, he said nothing further on any of this until yesterday — four days after his series of widely shared tweets — in which he simply re-tweeted a Post reporter noting an “update” that the story was false without providing any comment himself:
In contrast to Griffin’s original inflammatory tweets about the Russian menace, which were widely and enthusiastically spread, this after-the-fact correction has a paltry 289 re-tweets. Thus, a small fraction of those who were exposed to Griffin’s sensationalistic hyping of this story ended up learning that all of it was false.
I genuinely do not mean to single out these individual journalists for scorn. They are just illustrative of a very common dynamic: Any story that bolsters the prevailing D.C. orthodoxy on the Russia Threat, no matter how dubious, is spread far and wide. And then, as has happened so often, when the story turns out to be false or misleading, little or nothing is done to correct the deceitful effects. And, most amazingly of all, these are the same people constantly decrying the threat posed by Fake News.
A very common dynamic is driving all of this: media groupthink, greatly exacerbated (as I described on Saturday) by the incentive scheme of Twitter. As the grand media failure of 2002 demonstrated, American journalists are highly susceptible to fueling and leading the parade in demonizing a new Foreign Enemy rather than exerting restraint and skepticism in evaluating the true nature of that threat.
It is no coincidence that many of the most embarrassing journalistic debacles of this year involve the Russia Threat, and they all involve this same dynamic. Perhaps the worst one was the facially ridiculous, pre-election Slate story — which multiple outlets (including The Intercept) had been offered but passed on — alleging that Trump had created a secret server to communicate with a Russian bank; that story was so widely shared that even the Clinton campaign ended up hyping it — a tweet that, by itself, was re-tweeted almost 12,000 times.
Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank. pic.twitter.com/8f8n9xMzUU
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 1, 2016
But only a small percentage of those who heard of it ended up hearing of the major walk back and debunking from other outlets. The same is true of The Guardian story from last week on WikiLeaks and Putin that ended up going viral, only to have its retraction barely noticed because most of the journalists who spread the story did not bother to note it.
Beyond the journalistic tendency to echo anonymous officials on whatever Scary Foreign Threat they are hyping at the moment, there is an independent incentive scheme sustaining all of this. That Russia is a Grave Menace attacking the U.S. has — for obvious reasons — become a critical narrative for Democrats and other Trump opponents who dominate elite media circles on social media and elsewhere. They reward and herald anyone who bolsters that narrative, while viciously attacking anyone who questions it.
Indeed, in my 10-plus years of writing about politics on an endless number of polarizing issues — including the Snowden reporting — nothing remotely compares to the smear campaign that has been launched as a result of the work I’ve done questioning and challenging claims about Russian hacking and the threat posed by that country generally. This is being engineered not by random, fringe accounts, but by the most prominent Democratic pundits with the largest media followings.
I’ve been transformed, overnight, into an early adherent of alt-right ideology, an avid fan of Breitbart, an enthusiastic Trump supporter, and — needless to say — a Kremlin operative. That’s literally the explicit script they’re now using, often with outright fabrications of what I say (see here for one particularly glaring example).
They, of course, know all of this is false. A primary focus of the last 10 years of my journalism has been a defense of the civil liberties of Muslims. I wrote an entire book on the racism and inequality inherent in the U.S. justice system. My legal career involved numerous representations of victims of racial discrimination. I was one of the first journalists to condemn the misleadingly “neutral” approach to reporting on Trump and to call for more explicit condemnations of his extremism and lies. I was one of the few to defend Jorge Ramos from widespread media attacks when he challenged Trump’s immigration extremism. Along with many others, I tried to warn Democrats that nominating a candidate as unpopular as Hillary Clinton risked a Trump victory. And as someone who is very publicly in a same-sex, inter-racial marriage — with someone just elected to public office as a socialist — I make for a very unlikely alt-right leader, to put that mildly.
The malice of this campaign is exceeded only by its blatant stupidity. Even having to dignify it with a defense is depressing, though once it becomes this widespread, one has little choice.
But this is the climate Democrats have successfully cultivated — where anyone dissenting or even expressing skepticism about their deeply self-serving Russia narrative is the target of coordinated and potent smears; where, as The Nation’s James Carden documented yesterday, skepticism is literally equated with treason. And the converse is equally true: Those who disseminate claims and stories that bolster this narrative — no matter how divorced from reason and evidence they are — receive an array of benefits and rewards.
That the story ends up being completely discredited matters little. The damage is done, and the benefits received. Fake News in the narrow sense of that term is certainly something worth worrying about. But whatever one wants to call this type of behavior from the Post, it is a much greater menace given how far the reach is of the institutions that engage in it.
A confidential government report says terrorist groups such as the Islamic State have all but abandoned trying to put together huge plots such as the Sept. 11 attacks and warns counterterrorism agencies of a “new landscape” where lone killers strike and massacre quickly thanks to the digital age.
The report by the National Counterterrorism Center marks a historical shift that requires the FBI, CIA and other agencies to try to locate the mobile and digital-savvy loner, and not necessarily detect a complex plot.
“The steady rise in the number of lone actor operations is a trend which coincides with the deepening and broadening of the digital revolution as well as the encouragement of such operations by terrorist groups because intensified [counterterrorism] operations have disrupted their ability to launch larger plots,” the NCTC says in a report obtained by The Washington Times. “Lone actors now have greater capability to create and broadcast material than a decade ago, while violent extremists can contact and interact with potential recruits with greater ease.”
The report was circulated Dec. 28 to counterterrorism agencies across the country.
The analysis says the new faces of extremist violence are “small autonomous cells” and “individual terrorism.”
“Recent rapid technological change, which allows terrorists to reach a large audience quickly and directly, has enabled them to achieve their messaging goals without launching large-scale attacks which demand significant physical infrastructure,” says the NCTC, which operates under Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper.
“Increasingly, thanks in part to the digital revolution, they can rely on what Syrian terrorist Abu Musab al-Suri called ‘individual terrorism.’ With ISIL losing territory and the al-Qa’ida network increasingly decentralized, individuals and small autonomous cells may increasingly take the initiative in both the murderous and messaging dimensions of violent extremism,” the report states.
The Islamic State, which holds territory in Iraq and Syria, has created armies in over a dozen countries and is known as ISIS, ISIL and Daesh.
In a speech last month to troops at U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command, President Obama touted his counterterrorism efforts by saying no group has launched a complex plot from abroad against the United States during his presidency.
Critics say that may be true but that Islamic terrorist attacks are increasing globally.
The massacres in San Bernardino, California, in 2015, and last summer in Orlando, Florida, are just two examples of this type of terrorism.
Other examples: An Islamic State agent gunned down 39 New Year’s revelers at a packed nightclub in Istanbul. Also this holiday season, Anis Amri, a lone terrorist devoted to the Islamic State, drove a truck through a Berlin outdoor Christmas market, killing 12.
The NCTC calls this “The new landscape … with few formal boundaries or solid structures, where groups can form wherever resources permit and circumstances are favorable. It is also one in which technology may permit active militants in the future to become individual terror broadcasting units, cataloging their path to terror and teaching others their tradecraft.”
The center identifies the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as the “turning point,” when terrorists realized that the internet and social media could provide platforms to reach and organize radicals by the thousands.
It points to Abu Musab Zarqawi, the al Qaeda in Iraq leader in May 2004, who videotaped his beheading of American Nick Berg and disseminated the gruesome image on the internet.
“The exact number of downloads is unknown, but its wide dissemination on extremist websites, and the ‘buzz’ it created on extremist online forums, suggested this footage reached a much greater audience than any comparable material,” the report says.
What followed was Syrian terrorist Abu Khalid al-Suri’s analysis of technology and publication of a training guide titled “A Call to Global Islamic Resistance.”
“He provided one of the most articulate and elaborate definitions of this strategy and the first one which explicitly stressed the internet as a means of relaying advice and orientation. This new doctrine allowed violent extremist groups to become more resilient in the face of intense international [counterterrorism] efforts,” the NCTC report states.
One terrorist who bought into al-Suri’s analysis was American al Qaeda member Anwar al-Awlaki. He posted 1,910 videos on YouTube, one of which has been viewed 164,420 times. Al-Awlaki, who urged attacks on the U.S. as a member of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in 2011.
The report highlights the Islamic State, which rose from a defeated al Qaeda spinoff in Iraq to amass a huge army of terrorists based in Syria, and invaded Iraq in 2014.
“ISIL has consciously choreographed violence in the areas it controls to meet the demands of its key audiences, and it has carefully exploited the capabilities of contemporary media technology to deliver that content, often via social media but also via other means,” it says.
Robert Maginnis, a retired Army officer who is out with a new book, “Future War,” said the NCTC report captures the “modern terrorist.”
“The modern terrorist acts more often than not without detailed operational guidance from a central authority like al Qaeda in Pakistan or ISIS central in Raqqa, Syria,” Mr. Maginnis said. “They take general encouragement from public pronouncements of their ideological leaders such as ISIS’ glossy magazine Dabiq and then operationalize their radical intentions either individually or by small autonomous cells of close and trusted associates.”
The migrant Tunisian Amri is a prime example.
“The modern terrorist is hard to detect, much like the truck terrorist at the Berlin Christmas market weeks ago,” Mr. Maginnis said. “He hid within his closed community, used personal resources, struck in an unexpected way and then disappeared into the fabric of the society of his new country.”
Four days after the first sporadic protests emerged in Mexico City, following the infamous "gasolinazo", or mandatory 15%-20% increase in Mexican gas prices which went into effect on January 1, the mood across the country has significantly deteriorated, with hundreds of demonstrators blocking highways, snarling traffic, raiding gas stations, jeopardizing critical supplies, and looting stores as angry but impotent motorists lashed out at the price surge, which is only going to get worse as inflation spikes even more following the record plunge in the Mexican Peso.
Residents steal fuel and diesel from a gas station in Veracruz state
As a reminder, the price of oil rose Sunday by as high as 20.1% to 88 cents per liter, with diesel at 83 cents — the equivalent of 12 days of a minimum wage to fill a tank of gas - compared to the U.S.’s seven hours — and the price ceiling will be adjusted daily starting Feb. 18, before letting supply and demand determine them in March.
The unrest has caused some gas stations to close altogether. Antonio Caballero, who heads a network of 800 gas stations, said at a press conference this week he will temporarily close any filling station threatened by violent protesters. According to unconfirmed reports, even the local drug cartels warned ahead of the price hike they would burn down gas stations should the price increase come into effect.
However, as tends to happen during mass civil disturbances, it’s not just gas stations that are being targeted. Some protesters have used the gasolinazo as an excuse to loot supermarkets and other stores in several states.
A man runs with toys as a store is ransacked by a crowd in the port of Veracruz,
Mexico after gas price hikes rage out of control
As of Thursday morning, 250 stores had been looted and 170 were closed or blockaded in all of Mexico, according to the National Association of Self-Service and Department Stores.
At least 430 protesters were detained on charges of vandalism, including four police officers according to El Universal.
Protesters block the entrance to a Pemex gas station as they burn tires during a
protest against the rising prices of gasoline
The unrest 'resulting in the theft of merchandise put at risk the lives of clients and workers in the stores, primarily in Mexico State, Michoacan, Hidalgo and Mexico City,' the statement said.
Suspects are detained by navy police after a store was ransacked by a crowd in
the port of Veracruz during gasoline price protests
In the Gulf coast city of Veracruz, store guards were overrun Wednesday
by crowds who carried off clothing, food, washing machines, televisions,
DVD players and refrigerators; 50 establishments including convenience stores, supermarkets and big-box outlets suffered looting, according to a preliminary count by the local chamber of commerce.
A group of people grabs toys as a store is ransacked by a crowd in the port of
Veracruz, Mexico after frustrations over a sharp gas price hike erupt into violence
Store guards were overrun by crowds who carried off clothing, food, washing machines, televisions, DVD players and refrigerators
Extra police patrols were deployed, and at least 14 people were detained, the state government reported. At one supermarket officers fired into the air to disperse the multitudes.
According to Fusion, adding to the chaos on the streets is a wave of unconfirmed news and threats on social media perpetuating rumors about a curfew on Wednesday, pushing some businesses to temporarily close two days before Mexico’s Día de Reyes, a religious holiday that normally has parents flocking to stores to buy toys for their kids.
The state-owned oil company Pemex said Tuesday that blockades of fuel terminals in the states of Chihuahua, Morelos and Durango had caused a "critical situation" in distributing fuel to gas stations there. It said that if the blockades continued, it could interrupt operations at airports in Chihuahua and Baja California.
Mexicans’ collective anger over the situation is being directed mostly at President Enrique Peña Nieto, who in 2015 had promised that country’s frequent pump price hikes would end with his much-touted finance and energy reform plans. However, as a result of the plunge in oil prices , the long-awaited liberalization of the country’s energy sector which would have led to lower prices, the promised relief at the pump has yet to materialize.
Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, president Nieto called the gas price hike “painful” yet “inevitable.”
2) Gracias a la Reforma Hacendaria, por 1era. vez en 5 años, ya no habrá incrementos mensuales a los precios de la gasolina, diésel y gas LP
— Enrique Peña Nieto (@EPN) January 5, 2015
“I call society to listen to the reasons for taking this decision, which, without having been made, I must say, would have led to more painful effects and consequences,” he said Wednesday after several days of notable silence. He added that he understands the anger of Mexicans and did not want to make the “painful, difficult and inevitable” move, but had to.
He told Mexicans Wednesday to accept the dramatic hike in gas prices as a necessary move, to the anger of “gasolinazo” protesters, who reiterated their call to take down the country’s most unpopular president on record.
Demonstrators stormed several government buildings on Wednesday, demanding the resignation of Nieto and sympathetic state governors who have promoted the Institutional Revolutionary Party’s neoliberal reforms that have included privatizing the national oil company Pemex. Pena Nieto had promised to lower gas prices in his campaign, but they have kept rising since he took office.
A series of actions, including boycotts, petition signing, meetings, assemblies and civil disobedience are planned for the week, as the prologue to a national march next week. As of earlier this week, tens of thousands have already participated in roadblocks and seized, looted and vandalized gas stations, prompting 400 stations to close and affecting the operations of airports and bus stations.
The tweet below lays out a "map of peaceful protests against gasolinazo. We have the right to protest."
Meanwhile, the blowback against the unpopular price hike is spreading to the political class. Pemex has requested that state governors help open access to stations to continue business, but several governors have already come out against the hike. The governor of Chihuahua, Javier Corral, said he would not deploy forces to quell the protest, which he supports, and Aristoteles Sandoval of Jalisco, who is a member of the PRI, said Mexicans have a right to be angry. Veracruz Governor Miguel Angel Yunes said he expects the rise to mostly affect the poor and threaten political stability, lamenting that Peña Nieto did not consult governors before implementing the measure.
Taxes represent 44 percent of the price of gasoline, tweeted Guadalajara Mayor Enrique Alfaro, adding to a trending hashtag, #ReversaAlGasolinazo, to reverse the measure by lowering taxes.
Several media and politicians, including Peña Nieto, have denounced the protests as violent, which organizers insist is a mischaracterization of the peaceful actions, which aim to redistribute oil for free or at significantly reduced prices. Many extrapolated their opposition as opposition also to violence, corruption and impunity in the country, with which they hope to create a wider front against Peña Nieto's administration and business-as-usual in traditionally authoritarian Mexican politics.
"The history of our country is stained with big and deep social problems without resolution," wrote feminist group MujerEs YA!, "where violence and impunity have marked the path of daily life, until the point of voracious alienation that plays between indifference and immobility, which uses whatever measure to convince the public of its uselessness, of its drowned inert voice, accustomed to the toxic, a population that merits little, because it demands little, because it naturalizes its own death."
— Samuel Mendoza (@SamuelMdzM) January 3, 2017
But the worst is yet to come. According to increasingly more analysts, who initially were silent on the topic, the price increase will raise the price of basic goods, provoke unemployment, inflation, economic stagnation and potentially economic contraction and even recession.
While most high schoolers were enjoying their winter break, six teenagers from Mississippi spent a morning volunteering as pallbearers for a veteran they did not know.
The young men from Long Beach, Mississippi laid to rest Jerry Wayne Pino who died at the age of 70.
Mr Pino served in the Navy during the Vietnam war and did not have any family. He passed away on December 12.
Six young men volunteered as pallbearers at a veteran's funeral because he did not have family members to carry his casket
The young men from Long Beach High School immediately said yes when a friend contacted them to be pallbearers for Jerry Wayne Pino's funeral