Some members of the government, political parties, mob gangs and 'business men' around the world, such as: El Chapo Guzman and Pablo Escobar (both assassins, thieves, drug dealers, prostitution handlers, arms dealers in Mexico and Colombia, respectively), Carlos Romero Deschamps and Carlos Duarte (both Mexican thieves and possibly related to prostitution handling and arms dealing), Mario Marín and Kamel Nacif, (both related to the underworld traffic of underage people in Mexico, and into the U.S.A. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrACc2tOBCo -, https://www.thebajapost.com/2019/04/16/arrest-warrant-against-gober-precioso-and-kamel-nacif/ - the late pedophile, Marcial Maciel (known to have molested hundreds, if not thousands, of children while at the same time posting as one of the most respected catholic priests of Mexico) - https://elpais.com/diario/2010/01/24/domingo/1264308758_850215.html - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu7NK049FCs, Grupo Televisa, who is known to drug actresses and demand sexual favors for job promotions, - http://elmanana.com.mx/noticia/151752/Revelan-supuesta-prostitucion-en-Televisa.html - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPFol24eSlM -, Ricardo Salinas Pliego, `business man´ friend and allied of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who was recently discovered as one of many 'business men' involved in a fraud of billions of pesos - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-01/one-billionaire-took-in-millions-in-deal-at-heart-of-pemex-probe - https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Pemexs-Corruption-Crackdown-Has-Investors-Scrambling-To-Get-Out.html - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJmGItiEnlU - Carlos Salinas de Gortari (most likely involved in the killing of the Cardenal Juan José Posadas Ocampo, José Francisco Ruiz Massieu, Luis Donaldo Colosio Murrieta and police officer and T.V. showman, Paco Stanley) - https://www.lanetanoticias.com/expuesto/325561/salinas-mato-a-colosio-y-a-ruiz-massieu-lo-firmo-y-lo-confirmo - https://www.proceso.com.mx/168834/los-tres-crimenes-posadas-colosio-ruiz-massieu-resultado-de-un-clima-de-impunidad-donde-todo-es-posible-ovalle - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as-o7UnhlSw - Arturo "La Rata" Montiel (Mexican politician or thief, best known for stealing thousands of millions of USD, and the late pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein (who took underage girls from Mexico and LatinAmerica into the U.S.A., for prostitution)-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iiz8vbPwMSo-. All of them are examples of people that have committed terrible crimes and by the way, fucking Mexico. Yet almost all of them have escaped justice and civility one too many times, in one way or another, in Mexico and abroad. This has got to stop.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-leads-the-world-in-illegal-drug-use/
U.S. Leads the World in Illegal Drug Use
July 1, 2008 / 11:30 AM
/ WebMD
Marijuana use was more widely reported worldwide, and the U.S. also had the highest rate of use at 42.4% compared with 41.9% of New Zealanders.
In contrast, in the Netherlands, which has more liberal drug policies than the U.S., only 1.9% of people reported cocaine use and 19.8% reported marijuana use.
"Globally, drug use is not distributed evenly and is not simply related to drug policy, since countries with stringent user-level illegal drug policies did not have lower levels of use than countries with liberal ones," researcher Louisa Degenhardt of the University of New South Wales, Australia, and colleagues write in PLoS Medicine. U.S. Leads Drug Use
In the study, researchers surveyed more than 54,000 adults in the Americas (Colombia, Mexico, and the United States), Europe (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Ukraine), Middle East and Africa (Israel, Lebanon, Nigeria, South Africa), Asia, (Japan, China) and Oceania (New Zealand).
The survey included questions about legalized drug use, such as alcohol and tobacco, and illegal drug use, including cocaine and marijuana, during the participant's lifetime.
Overall, alcohol had been used by most of those surveyed in the Americas, Europe, Japan, and New Zealand compared with much smaller proportions in the Middle East, Africa, and China.
Tobacco use was also most common in the U.S. (74%), followed by Lebanon (67%) and Mexico (60%). Researchers found gender and socioeconomic differences in both legal and illegal drug use. For example, men were more likely than women to have used legal and illegal drugs , and younger adults were more likely than older adults to have used drugs of all kinds.
Single adults were more likely than married adults to report tobacco, marijuana, and cocaine use but not alcohol use. People with higher incomes were also more likely to use both legal and illegal drugs.
"The use of drugs seems to be a feature of more affluent countries. The U.S., which has been driving much of the world's drug research and drug policy agenda, stands out with higher levels of use of alcohol, cocaine, and cannabis, despite punitive illegal drug policies, as well as (in many U.S. states), a higher minimum legal alcohol drinking age than many comparable developed countries," write the researchers.
By Jennifer Warner
Reviewed by Brunilda Nazario
©2005-2008 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved
The History of Drug Abuse in the United States
https://aforeverrecovery.com/blog/drug-abuse/the-history-of-drug-abuse-in-the-united-states/
Here are some facts about the history of drug abuse in the United States. Substance abuse is not a new epidemic or a problem that has only started in the country.
Drug abuse has been reported in many countries for hundreds of years, including in the United States of America.
By understanding the history of drug abuse and its problems, it is possible to put the current situation into perspective and learn from the challenges of the past.
Early Use of Drugs
Drug
abuse has been a problem from the foundation of the country. The United
States is a relatively young country and drugs from other areas of the
world were already used for medicinal purposes in the early history of
the country.
Before the 19th century, substance abuse was primarily related to plant-products and alcohol.
The
drugs that were commonly used in the early history of the country were
obtained from poppy plants or similar plants that helped reduce feelings
of pain.
The primitive forms of drugs that were not synthetically created were still dangerous and addictive.
Despite
being made directly from natural substances, such as poppy plants, the
impact on the body was similar. The difference was the lack of knowledge
related to addiction and the limited recovery solutions.Opium and Alcohol
Opium and alcohol were common substances that were used in early American history.
Doctors
would use opium to dull pain during surgical or medical procedures.
When opium was not available, the doctors would turn to alcohol to dull
or mask the symptoms of the health problem.
Although the drugs were used for medical purposes, the addictive qualities of the drugs were not fully understood before the Civil War. Many soldiers were given opium to dull pain during surgery and became addicted to the drug.
During
the 1800s, developments in medicine led to the creation of morphine,
codeine and cocaine. Initially, the drugs were unregulated and readily
available.
When it became clear that the drugs were a serious
problem, regulations were developed and laws were made to help contain
the problem. In 1906, regulations passed to make it harder to obtain
certain substances.
Early Treatment and Laws
After
measures were taken to regulate drugs and certain drugs became illegal,
the United States began taking steps to offer treatment solutions.
During the early 1900s, the treatment options were still limited due to the lack of information.
In 1914, the Harrison Act passed, and it caused the development of positive changes in drug treatment.
By 1918, clinics were established for drug maintenance, and addiction to narcotics became illegal.
Drugs
were no longer readily available and easy to obtain. Certain substances
were banned due to the dangers associated with addiction, and medicinal
medications were only available through a doctor’s prescription.
As it became obvious that substance abuse was still a problem, addiction became a matter of public health and safety.
By 1939, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics
began taking a harsh stand against illegal drug abuse and started
prosecuting medical doctors who enabled addiction by giving
prescriptions that violated laws.
Treatment options were still
limited due to the lack of knowledge, which led to further studies and
evaluations into addiction. When the National Institute of Mental Health, or NIMH, was established after World War II, substance abuse research was funded, and more efforts were made to prevent drug abuse in future generations.
Prevention
measures were taken to ensure that the public became aware of the
dangers associated with drugs and illegal use of substances.
New Wave of Drug Abuse
Despite efforts to prevent substance abuse
and the laws that regulated drugs on a federal and state level,
substance abuse did not stop with the legal changes. Many men and women
continued to abuse drugs and alcohol.
During the 1960s, consumers began using drugs for recreational purposes.
The particular drugs that were abused during the 1960s and 1970s varied. The drugs that were commonly abused include:
Although
the hippie culture was known for abusing hallucinogenic substances and
marijuana, other drugs were still a problem. Opiates remained a
challenge due to the addictive nature of the drugs and the medical use
of the drugs. Although cocaine was still abused during the 1960s and
1970s, it was a secondary drug and did not gain the popularity of
hallucinogenic substances.
With the new drugs and the popularity
of certain substances, measures were taken to make more substances
illegal and take an active approach to preventing substance abuse.
During
Nixon’s administration, a large portion of the budget for substance
abuse was put into treatment and prevention as opposed to legislation
and regulation.
Certain substances that were not previously illegal, such as LSD,
were made illegal during this era. It was a time when substance abuse
came to the front and measures were taken to prevent future addictions.
History of Drug Abuse During the 1980s and 1990s
The
1980s saw a shift in the type of drugs that were abused. The drug of
choice shifted from hallucinogens to cocaine, which resulted in a wave
of violence and violent crimes.
Throughout
the 1980s and 1990s, drug abuse began to increase. President Clinton’s
administration saw an increase in illicit drug abuse, which resulted in
an increased anti-drug budget and further efforts to prevent substance
abuse in younger generations.
By the year 2000, the number of
arrests related to illicit substance abuse increased dramatically. More
than 1.5 million arrests were related to drug abuse. Even in crimes that
were not directly associated with buying or selling drugs, many
criminals were also abusing drugs at the time of the crime, which
resulted in a secondary charge.
It became clear in the 1980s and
1990s that substance abuse was a problem that was not gradually
reducing. Despite the efforts of lawmakers, it was not possible to
completely prevent substance abuse or to avoid illicit drugs.
Changing Laws
As
state laws begin to change and certain drugs are used for medical
purposes, it is not surprising that the federal laws are also shifting.
When drugs that are legal for medicinal purposes are obtained in states
where the laws have been changed, the federal laws are secondary.
Medicinal
marijuana is allowed in certain states, but only when it is used for
legitimate medical purposes with the supervision of a doctor.Treatment Solutions
Although the legal factors and the history of drug abuse
are a concern, the research into addiction treatment is a positive
result that has occurred after years of study and legal changes. There
is a wide range of treatment options and many solutions are proven to
help when individuals are trying to overcome an addiction.
The key is finding the right solution for the individual, which can take time and research.
The United States has a long history of drug abuse.
Although the drugs that are most commonly abused in any generation
change over the years, it is not a new problem. Drug abuse and addiction
have been a problem that has carried forward for generations. While
lawmakers have proposed and passed legislation to reduce drug abuse, it
is a fact that illicit use of substances is a problem. Fortunately,
changes over the years have resulted in laws that focus on long-term
drug rehab and prevention so future generations will not contribute to
the history of drug abuse.
Enrique Peña Nieto es investigado por presunto soborno por «autorizar» la compra de Fertinal con un sobreprecio que dañó el patrimonio de Pemex y al erario público. CIUDAD DE MÉXICO.
- El ex presidente Enrique Peña Nieto es investigado por autoridades de Estados Unidos por un presunto soborno en la compra-venta de Fertinal, realizada por Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) en 2015.
De acuerdo con documentación entregada por un «informante» bajo pena de perjurio, según las leyes de Estados Unidos, al Departamento de Justicia de ese país y a la Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC, por sus siglas en inglés), Comisión de Bolsa de Valores de Estados Unidos y agencia del gobierno de esa nación, Peña Nieto recibió un soborno por «autorizar» la compra de la empresa privada con un sobreprecio que dañó el patrimonio de la petrolera y al erario público.
EL UNIVERSAL consultó a la SEC sobre la investigación, pero esa autoridad declinó comentar.
El nombre de Peña Nieto se menciona en la documentación que está en poder de las autoridades estadounidenses y que apunta a su «aprobación», a cambio de sobornos, para que el ex director de Pemex, Emilio Lozoya Austin, pagara 635 millones de dólares por Fertinal, «cuando esta empresa era efectivamente insolvente, con cientos de millones de dólares en deuda».
Las consultoras PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) y Binder Dijker Otte (BDO), así como la Auditoría Superior de la Federación, habían advertido que Fertinal se encontraba en quiebra, pues tenía una deuda bancaria de 264 millones de dólares y que sólo disponía de 12 mil dólares de efectivo en cajas.
La situación de la empresa era tan precaria que un año después de ser adquirida por la entonces paraestatal, el director de Pemex Fertilizantes, Juan Alfredo Lozano Tovar, comentó en la sesión 005 Ordinaria de Consejo de Administración con fecha del 21 de septiembre de 2016, que «se consolidó la adquisición de Fertinal recibiéndose en una situación de crisis de liquidez, con un capital de trabajo negativo y un riesgo inminente de quiebra, lo que generará que se presente un EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes/Utilidades antes de Intereses e Impuestos) negativo» y que por lo tanto era necesario implementar un plan de choque para abatir costos.
Aun así, Lozoya Austin habría recibido autorización del mandatario para adquirirla y entregar a Fertinal 51 millones de dólares para un reparto de dividendos antes de la operación de compra-venta.
«El pago excesivo fue posible gracias a la aprobación de la transacción, mediante el soborno —a Peña Nieto— que el accionista mayoritario de Fertinal, el empresario italiano, Fabio Massimo Covarrubias
Piffer, pagó utilizando el fideicomiso 470 que se creó para formalizar la operación de compra-venta. Ese fue el mecanismo a través del cual se pagó el soborno», argumentó el informante en declaración la SEC.
Empresario consentido. Covarrubias Piffer es señalado por ser uno de los empresarios favoritos no sólo de la pasada administración.
En 1998, ganó la subasta pública de una de las dos partes del monopolio de la producción de fertilizantes en sociedad con Rogelio Montemayor, uno de los hombres cercanos al expresidente Carlos Salinas de Gortari y que más tarde fue director de Pemex con Ernesto Zedillo.
Seis años después de la privatización de Fertinal, la firma se declaró en quiebra y fue rescatada por el Instituto de Protección al Ahorro Bancario (IPAB). Su nombre sigue ligado a la lista de pasivos del organismo.
Para 1999, Bancomext le otorgó un crédito por 50 millones de dólares a Fertinal para sanear sus finanzas.
Esta no sería la última vez que el gobierno federal salvaba a una empresa de Covarrubias Piffer.
Ahora, en lo que se configura como un fraude a Pemex con la operación de compra-venta de Fertinal en 2015, aparece otro presunto ligado a esa transacción, según el informante: Ricardo Salinas Pliego, presidente de Grupo Salinas.
«Covarrubias tenía a Salinas —en un aprieto— debido a ciertos pagos de soborno a EPN», se puede leer en la declaración que dio a las autoridades estadounidenses y que figura como apoyo en la investigación.
El empresario también integró la lista de accionistas de Fertinal.
Antes de su venta, la empresa presentaba números rojos y su principal acreedor era Banco Azteca.
Según las indagatorias, esa institución financiera «era el mayor acreedor de Fertinal antes de la compra y, al mismo tiempo, también era uno de los propietarios beneficiarios de
Fertinal. Esto está prohibido por las leyes bancarias mexicanas y, probablemente como resultado de esta prohibición, ocultó su condición de accionista».
El informante, señala la documentación en poder de la SEC, «cree razonablemente que la participación accionaria en Fertinal se mantuvo a través de una entidad llamada NPK Holding, AB y Base Rock, BVBA».
De hecho, en su declaración, el informante sostiene que tenía estrecha relación con las personas que designó como sus apoderados (oficiales corporativos autorizados y abogados, etcétera) con el propósito de ocultar su participación accionaria, entre los que se mencionan a:
Su abogado personal, Jorge Cervantes Trejo de González Calvillo; Felipe Fernández Barrera, exrepresentante en Iusacell (ahora ATT México); Everardo Joaquín Espino Guerrero, abogado con poder legal en NPK Holding, AB, una empresa sueca (NPK), y Francisco Flores Meléndez, apoderado mexicano y representante de NPK.
Pago de dividendos. En el acta de Asamblea General Ordinaria de Accionistas de Fertinal del 25 de septiembre de 2015, aparecen como accionistas principales Banco Azteca y NPK Holding, AB, con 99.9999997% y 0.0000003%, cada uno.
En esa reunión, los accionistas acordaron aprobar el pago de dividendos por 871 millones 500 mil pesos (casi 50 millones de dólares).
Banco Azteca recibiría 871 millones 499 mil 999.74 pesos y KPK Holding, AB los restantes 0.26 pesos.
Un mes después, en sesión 900 Extraordinaria del Consejo de Administración de Pemex, con fecha de 26 de octubre, fue aprobada la adquisición de Grupo Fertinal y subsidiarias, con una inversión de 635 millones de dólares, mediante un financiamiento nutrido por las líneas de crédito de Pemex en Nafin y Bancomext.
Adicionalmente, dentro de la misma línea de crédito, se obtuvieron 425 millones de dólares para liquidar adeudos de Grupo Fertinal. Ambos préstamos deberían ser pagados por Pemex en 16 años.
El Acuerdo CA-208/2015 autorizó un primer movimiento de los recursos: entregar a Fertinal 50 millones de dólares, la misma cantidad que la empresa de fertilizantes acordó otorgar a sus accionistas como dividendo.
La información en poder de las autoridades estadounidenses contiene los documentos de la transacción de Fertinal sellados, incluida la información de cuentas bancarias que se utilizaron para movimientos de sobornos, así como cantidades pagadas.
Corrupción en el extranjero. Tanto el Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos y la SEC sostienen que la operación de compra-venta de Fertinal está sujeta al Foreign Corrupt Practices (FCPA), porque Pemex cotiza en el mercado de valores estadounidense y el público inversionista lo centra en su jurisdicción.
Es decir, al cotizar en la Bolsa de Valores de ese país, Pemex se sujeta a las leyes de la Unión Americana, pues la SEC es la agencia del gobierno de Estados Unidos encargada de hacerlas cumplir.
La FCPA castiga con cárcel a quienes corrompen a un funcionario público en detrimento de la empresa y sus inversionistas.
En este caso, el presunto soborno a Peña Nieto es investigado por posible detrimento en el patrimonio de Pemex y tenedores de bonos.
Además, según parte de lo declarado por el demandante, el sistema bancario de Estados Unidos fue «utilizado» para facilitar, vía cuentas en ese país, los pagos por soborno.
Hasta ahora, la investigación se centra en la participación de al menos cuatro personajes involucrados en la operación que utilizó el mercado de valores y el sistema bancario de este país para obtener beneficios personales, fuera de la ley:
Enrique Peña Nieto, entonces presidente de México; Emilio Lozoya Austin, exdirector de Pemex, y Fabio Covarrubias Piffer, principal accionista de Fertinal.
Por ello, la SEC prepara un informe detallado con respecto a las irregularidades en esta operación que tanto Pemex como el Grupo Fertinal bautizaron con el nombre clave «Proyecto Kimora» y que harán llegar al gobierno mexicano.
Publicado en: 6 agosto, 2019
Tras la masacre en El Paso: “Ya no podemos ignorar el papel de Trump en inspirar tiroteos masivos”
Por Jake JohnsonPeriodistas y políticos subrayan, unas horas después del tiroteo masivo de El Paso, cómo la retórica antimigración de Trump está siendo el caldo de cultivo para las masacres supremacistas.
“Trump lanzó su campaña de reelección en 2020 este verano al redoblar su apuesta por el tema de la división racial y étnica y la histeria antiinmigrante”, ha escrito David Schanzer, profesor de la Escuela de Política de Sanford en la Universidad de Duke y director del Triangle Center en Terrorismo y Seguridad Nacional, en un artículo de opinión para The Guardian.
Schanzer aludía al cántico racista de “enviadla de regreso” (send her back) en una manifestación en Florida que Trump provocó con sus ataques xenófobos contra la representante Ilhan Omar (demócrata de Minnesota), una refugiada somalí, y otras mujeres de color en el Congreso.
“Y tan seguro como sale el sol en el este, apenas un mes en esta atmósfera racialmente cargada”, escribió Schanzer, “un sospechoso extremista temeroso de que los hispanos ganen poder político en Texas decidió matar a tantos hispanos como sea posible en un Walmart de El Paso. Es el terrorismo inspirado en Trump una vez más”.
Mehdi Hasan, columnista de The Intercept, se hizo eco de lo publicado por Schanzer el domingo y escribió que “ya no podemos ignorar el papel de Trump en inspirar tiroteos masivos”.
“Gracias a su retórica llena de odio, su incitante incitación a la violencia y su negativa a reconocer el aumento del terrorismo nacionalista blanco”, escribió Hasan, “el presidente plantea un peligro claro y presente para la gente, y especialmente para las minorías, de los Estados Unidos”.
Los usuarios de las redes sociales también vincularon a Trump con el ataque en El Paso, y el hashtag de Twitter #TrumpsTerrorists fue tendencia el domingo.
Las autoridades de Texas creen que el tirador de El Paso, Patrick Crusius, de 21 años, es el autor de un manifiesto racista que afirmó que la masacre planeada fue “una respuesta a la invasión hispana de Texas”.Trump is now deleting his tweets calling immigrants an “invasion” now that he inspired the El Paso shooter to murder 20 people to “stop the Hispanic invasion of Texas.” Sorry @realDonaldTrump, but the internet is forever.#TrumpsTerrorists pic.twitter.com/yeiZjcjve8— Andrew Wortman (@AmoneyResists) August 4, 2019
Trump, como señalaron numerosos comentaristas, ha comparado repetidamente la inmigración a través de la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos con una “invasión” y describió a los solicitantes de asilo como criminales en discursos y tuits. “La gente odia la palabra invasión, pero eso es lo que es”, dijo el presidente a los periodistas en marzo.
El Washington Post ofreció el domingo solo una pequeña muestra del lenguaje racista que Trump ha desplegado en los últimos meses para desmotivar a sus partidarios y canalizar el odio peligroso hacia los inmigrantes, las minorías religiosas y las personas de color:More terrorists have cited Donald Trump as an inspiration for attacks on the US homeland over the past three years than any other person or organization on Earth.— Samuel Sinyangwe (@samswey) August 3, 2019
El presidente Trump ha usado implacablemente su púlpito de intimidación para denunciar la migración latina como «una invasión de nuestro país». Ha demonizado a los inmigrantes indocumentados como «matones» y «animales». Ha defendido la detención de niños migrantes, cientos de los cuales han estado recluidos en la miseria. Y ha advertido que sin un muro para evitar que las personas crucen la frontera desde México, Estados Unidos ya no sería Estados Unidos.
“¿Cómo se detiene a estas personas? No se puede”, se lamentó Trump en un mitin en mayo en Panama City Beach, Florida. Alguien en la multitud gritó una idea: “Dispárales”. La audiencia de miles aplaudió y Trump sonrió. Ignorando la sugerencia, bromeó: “Solo en el ‘Panhandle’ [espacio fronterizo donde funcionan las milicias caza-migrantes o minuteman] puedes salirte con la tuya”.
El senador Bernie Sanders, candidato presidencial demócrata de 2020, imploró a Trump que “detenga [su] retórica racista, odiosa y antiinmigrante”. “Su lenguaje crea un clima que envalentona a los extremistas violentos”, tuiteó Sanders el domingo.
Beto O’Rourke, un contendiente de 2020 que representó a El Paso en el Congreso, criticó a los medios el domingo por no hacer lo suficiente para vincular el lenguaje de Trump con la violencia supremacista blanca.Mr. President: stop your racist, hateful and anti-immigrant rhetoric. Your language creates a climate which emboldens violent extremists.— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) August 4, 2019
“¿Qué piensas? Sabes la mierda que ha estado diciendo”, dijo O’Rourke a un periodista que le preguntó qué podía hacer Trump para enfrentar la violencia racista. “Ha estado llamando a los inmigrantes mexicanos violadores y criminales”, dijo O’Rourke. “No sé, como miembros de la prensa, ¿qué demonios? Espera un segundo. Sabes, yo … estas preguntas son de las que sabes las respuestas. Quiero decir, conecta los puntos sobre lo que está haciendo en este país. No tolera el racismo, está promoviendo el racismo”.
"Members of the press, what the fuck?" Beto O'Rourke and all of us. pic.twitter.com/hJNSBsPUmA— Tommy X-TrumpIsARacist-opher (@tommyxtopher) August 5, 2019
Tim O’Brien, editor ejecutivo de Bloomberg Opinion, también golpeó a los medios de comunicación por su fracaso sistemático en vincular la retórica del presidente con masacres como el tiroteo en El Paso el sábado. “Creo que los medios han peleado tibiamente contra Trump y el racismo del Partido Republicano”, dijo O’Brien al Washington Post. “Trump ha abierto la puerta a tragedias como esta y creo que podemos esperar más. Nadie en el Partido Republicano tiene el coraje político de manifestarse en contra de él y, de hecho, muchos están felices de ser cómplices”.
Mientras tanto, Trump no mostró signos de desviarse de su curso típico después de los tiroteos masivos en El Paso y Dayton, Ohio, que dejaron 29 personas muertas.
En una serie de tuits el lunes por la mañana, el presidente culpó a las “fake news” por provocar odio y pidió que la “reforma migratoria” se vincule a la legislación de verificación de antecedentes.
The Media has a big responsibility to life and safety in our Country. Fake News has contributed greatly to the anger and rage that has built up over many years. News coverage has got to start being fair, balanced and unbiased, or these terrible problems will only get worse!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 5, 2019
ODIO BLANCO
La masacre racista en El Paso no salió de la nada. Kenneth Roth, director ejecutivo de Human Rights Watch, recordó un artículo de opinión “profético”del New York Times escrito por el ex especialista en contrainteligencia del FBI Frank Figliuzzi, quien advirtió que Estados Unidos “se enfrenta a problemas en forma de violencia de odio blanco avivado por un presidente que fomenta la división racial”.
“Realmente no importa si el Sr. Trump es verdaderamente racista o simplemente está jugando a ser uno en la televisión para atraer a su base”, escribió Figliuzzi. “De cualquier manera, su camino puede conducir al derramamiento de sangre. Cuando eso suceda, escucharemos a los funcionarios de la Casa Blanca y al liderazgo republicano afirmar que sus manos están limpias porque no se puede evitar que las personas malvadas actúen”.
Schanzer advirtió en su artículo de opinión de Guardian que si no se detiene al presidente, las masacres como El Paso podrían volverse más frecuentes a medida que Trump aumenta su retórica xenófoba en su intento de reelección.A prescient op-ed published three days BEFORE the El Paso massacre. A former FBI director for counterintelligence warns: "We’re headed for trouble in the form of white hate violence stoked by a racially divisive president." https://t.co/G8OTwKvINQ— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) August 4, 2019
“Quedan 15 meses hasta las elecciones de 2020”, escribió Schanzer. “Es asombroso imaginar cuánta más violencia puede generar este presidente si continúa por este camino profundamente inquietante”.
JAKE JOHNSON ES REDACTOR EN COMMON DREAMS.
El Salto
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/9-outrageous-things-donald-trump-has-said-about-latinos_n_55e483a1e4b0c818f618904b
9 Outrageous Things Donald Trump Has Said About Latinos
“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”
Donald Trump’s affront to the Latino community reached new heights last week after Mexican-American journalist Jorge Ramos was forcibly removed from the presidential candidate’s Iowa press conference. But it wasn’t the first time Trump has offended Latinos.
His anti-Latino remarks have cost him several business partners since the launch of his campaign in June, including NBCUniversal, which aired Trump’s reality show “The Apprentice” and co-owns the Miss Universe Organization. Several prominent figures in the Latino community have also spoken out against Trump; actress America Ferrera and singer Ricky Martin published scathing op-eds condemning Trump’s actions and rallying Latinos to unite against him.
REAL LIFE. REAL NEWS. REAL VOICES.
Help us tell more of the stories that matter from voices that too often remain unheard.
Even though only 18 percent of Hispanics take Trump seriously as a presidential candidate, the Republican has vowed that he “will win the Latino vote” if nominated.
If Trump wants to win the Latino vote, he might want to learn from past mistakes. Here are 9 of the most outrageous things the presidential candidate has said about Latinos.
A New Revolution? Mexico Still Waiting as López Obrador Nears Half-Year Mark
The new country President Andrés Manuel López Obrador says he is building looks an awful lot like the old one he swore to leave behind in the campaign.
By Azam Ahmed and
MEXICO CITY — After his landslide victory last year, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico promised a staggering transformation of his country — on par with independence from Spain and the Mexican Revolution.
But five months into his term, the new Mexico he says he is building looks an awful lot like the old one he swore to leave behind.
Corruption was a hallmark issue for Mr. López Obrador during the campaign, a national scourge he vowed to end. Yet his government has announced no major prosecutions of public officials or other prominent figures on corruption charges since he took office.
Beyond that, in his first three months, his government awarded more than 70 percent of its contracts directly, without competitive bids, according to Mexicans Against Corruption and Impunity, an anticorruption group — a sharp reversal from Mr. López Obrador’s promise to break with that tradition.
ADVERTISEMENT
On security, another pivotal issue for Mexico, he promised during the campaign to withdraw the military from the streets, undoing a contentious crime-fighting strategy that has led to widespread human rights abuses.
But instead of following through, Mr. López Obrador ended up guaranteeing the military’s role in domestic security, while homicide rates in Mexico continue to hit their highest levels in more than two decades.
On migration, Mr. López Obrador began his tenure by opening his arms to migrants heading north, criticizing the enforcement approach of the previous government. But more recently, his administration has taken a harder line as well, increasing the detention and deportation of Central Americans and others entering Mexico.
Far from countering the stiff measures taken by President Trump along the border, Mr. López Obrador has often gone along with them, wary of a dust-up with his most important trading partner.
ADVERTISEMENT
“He makes these grand statements: ‘Neoliberalism is over,’ ‘Corruption is over,’” said Carlos Bravo Regidor, a political analyst in Mexico City. “He’s more worried about intensifying the message of change than actually embarking on the difficult and uncertain labor of making change happen.”
Mr. López Obrador has also alarmed many Mexicans with his threat-tinged attacks on the media, including his admonitions that reporters should “behave well” or “you know what will happen to you” — an ominous warning in one of the world’s most dangerous countries to be a journalist. At least six journalists have been killed since he took office.
Over the weekend, about 6,000 protesters took to the streets to call for Mr. López Obrador’s resignation, frustrated with his polarizing language and leery of his administration.
Still, Mr. López Obrador remains wildly popular in the country: The most recent polling places his approval rating above 60 percent. That is largely because he understands the historical distance between the nation’s rulers and its people — and has vowed to close the gap.
He put the presidential plane up for sale and now flies coach around the country. He converted the presidential palace into a public cultural center. He cut the highest salaries for public employees and raised the lowest, and his office says all public servants are required to declare their assets and potential conflicts of interest.
These actions reflect his common touch, a rarity among the country’s leaders, whose excesses and indifference have been longstanding traditions.
A spokesman for the president said the new government had made other changes as well, including altering the Constitution to make corruption, fuel theft and electoral fraud serious felonies. More legislative changes are on the horizon, the president’s office says, in areas like labor law and education.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. López Obrador has also announced a broad range of new programs for the poor, a central promise of his campaign. If successful, he says, his programs could lift some 20 million people out of poverty during his six-year term — despite widespread questions over how he will pay for them all.
“For the first time in decades, there’s a president who talks to the vast majority of Mexicans who not only felt excluded but despised,” said Carlos Heredia, an associate professor at CIDE, a Mexico City university.
The new president also has an immense advantage in the legislature: majorities in both houses. With the opposition largely broken, there are few checks on his power, which gives him great freedom to pursue his agenda but has also led critics to fret over his confrontational behavior.
His political dominance was on display early on in his tenure when he canceled a $13 billion airport project, a decision that cost the nation dearly because the bond holders who backed it were repaid.
But Mr. López Obrador has won over many Mexicans with his unusual accessibility, in particular the televised news conferences he holds every morning at 7.
From his podium, he answers questions on the day’s events and holds forth on everything from infrastructure to baseball. By contrast, his predecessor, Enrique Peña Nieto, held only a few news conferences that allowed questions in his entire six-year term.
ADVERTISEMENT
These sessions also broadcast Mr. López Obrador’s erratic side — his thin skin, his churlishness and his tendency to launch into meandering soliloquies.
His many public complaints have led his supporters to condemn journalists as well, unnerving many of them.
“Not only is he sending this message to the people, he is also sending it to governors and municipal presidents across the country,” said Juan Pardinas, the director of the newspaper Reforma, a favorite target of the president. “Those kinds of attacks have a trickle-down effect.”
The government describes these confrontations as healthy, part of the back and forth any democratically elected leader should have. After all, the news media “criticize the government and exercise their rights to dissent,” the president’s press office said in a statement. “And we in the same way respond and argue daily without hatred or rancor.”
Of course, these are still the early days of his administration, and even Mr. López Obrador’s critics acknowledge that Mexico’s deep-seated problems would take time for anyone to fix.
Mr. López Obrador says his administration is already taming problems, including the country’s rampant violence. “We have controlled the situation, according to our data,” he said at a news conference in mid-April. The numbers of homicides, he said, “have not increased.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. López Obrador’s strategy to combat the violence resembles the past policies he once denounced.
The last two administrations authorized the military to lead the fight against drug traffickers, which curbed neither trafficking nor violence. During the campaign, Mr. López Obrador — widely known by his initials, AMLO — promised to take a different approach.
Then, shortly before he took office, he seemed to reverse himself, proposing a new security force under military command made up of military personnel and the federal police to combat crime.
Though the force, called the National Guard, will now fall under civilian control, and no commanders will be active military members, some critics question whether the new approach is r just a rebranding of the old one.
Mr. López Obrador’s government says it must act immediately to stem violence. To safeguard human rights, a historically weak point for the military, the government says it has signed an agreement with the United Nations for training.
More broadly, it contends that its investments in programs to attack the origins of the problem — poverty and a lack of opportunity — are also part of the national security strategy.
Some of Mr. López Obrador’s policies seem to reach back in time for inspiration.
On energy policy, he plans to spend billions of dollars on a refinery, betting his country’s financial solvency in a quest for what he calls energy sovereignty. Some analysts believe he wants to return to a time when governments saw national energy companies as sources of national pride and engines for development.
ADVERTISEMENT
“He is a 1960s president thrown into the present,” said Jorge Chabat, a professor of political science at the University of Guadalajara. “AMLO’s main problem is that he was born 50 years too late.”
Rather than continue the opening to private energy investment that began under his predecessor, Mr. López Obrador has halted it. Now, he is spending public money in a bid to restore the dominance of Mexico’s two state-owned energy giants, the oil company Pemex and the Federal Electricity Commission.
“I think there is a lot of ideology behind it,” said David Shields, editor of Energía a Debate, a magazine that covers the industry. “They want to move in a nationalistic direction.”
Energy analysts say the strategy will prove costly and unproductive, particularly at Pemex, which is struggling under more than $100 billion of debt while oil production hovers near its lowest level in four decades.
One area where the new president came out swinging was migration.
Upon taking office in December, Mr. López Obrador promised a humanitarian approach to migrants, moving away from what he described as the enforcement-first approach of his predecessor, Mr. Peña Nieto.
In perhaps his boldest initiative, his administration in January began offering arriving Central American migrants an expedited, year-long visa that allowed them to work and travel anywhere in Mexico.
ADVERTISEMENT
And then, in a matter of weeks, the generosity came to a screeching halt.
After more than 13,000 people applied for the permission — with many saying they were encouraged to head to Mexico by the new program’s existence — the approach was canceled.
Since then, the López Obrador administration has taken a gradually harder line against undocumented migration, seemingly in response to pressure from the Trump administration and from communities overwhelmed by migrants.
Mr. López Obrador’s government says it remains committed to treating migrants with dignity, and plans to invest billions of dollars in Southern Mexico and Central America to address the poverty that drives people to seek economic opportunity elsewhere.
It says it is not acquiescing to Mr. Trump’s demands, but few believe that.
“The conflict between pleasing Trump and being consistent with human rights and a humanitarian migration policy is defining this administration’s” response to migration, said Mr. Heredia, the CIDE professor.
Elisabeth Malkin and Paulina Villegas contributed reporting.
A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Bold Words but Meager Steps by a New Leader. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
https://study.com/academy/lesson/drug-use-in-the-united-states.html
What Is Drug Use?
Nikki wakes up in the morning and starts to get ready for school. School is stressful because she hasn't been very good at it. Stressed from her brother's shooting and arrest last year, she's always angry and getting into fights. Lately, she's been smoking weed before school and pretty much anytime she's not in school. It keeps her mellow and let's her get through the day without getting sent home.This is just one example of drug use in America. Teens often find themselves in stressful situations filled with poverty and violence, especially in the city. Marijuana is readily available and easier to get than alcohol, since drug dealers don't use age restrictions. Many teens find themselves self-medicating to get through the day and in fact, most drug users start using when they are in their teens.
However, drug use certainly isn't limited to the poor or to the city. Today, we'll look at statistics for four types of drugs, marijuana, cocaine, opiates, and methamphetamines.
Marijuana
Marijuana is becoming increasingly legal and is the most commonly used drug in the United States. People of all ages and races use marijuana. Many states have decriminalized possession charges, legalized medical marijuana and provided licenses to grow, or have legalized it all together. Teen marijuana use has held steady since 2013, although teen perception of marijuana is that it is natural and not harmful. Some attribute it to the legalization of marijuana and recent discussions in the news. |
Cocaine
Cocaine is a fast acting stimulant drug. It increases energy levels, alertness, aggression, and creates a sense of euphoria for a short time. Powder cocaine is mostly used by adults between the ages of 18 and 26, with more male than female users. Due to its energizing effects, cocaine is usually considered a club drug, found at night clubs, bars, and raves. However, once a person uses cocaine and becomes addicted, cocaine is needed just to carry out daily functions. The drug shifts from being a party drug to something the body is dependent on and use occurs throughout all times of the day and week. |
Opiates
Opiates are drugs that act as pain relievers, working with the body's natural opiate receptors. Drugs like heroin, morphine, and prescription pain medications like OxyContin, Vicodin, and Fentanyl cause pain relief, euphoria, and drowsiness in users. These medications are very addictive and prescriptions for pain relievers can quickly turn into a full blown addiction, leading to heroin use. In fact, in 2012 nearly 17,000 people in the United States died from prescription painkiller abuse. America is the biggest user of painkillers worldwide, accounting for nearly 100% of Vicodin prescriptions and 80% of Oxycodone prescriptions in 2013.The highly potent painkiller, Fentanyl, has become especially dangerous. Up to 50 times more potent than heroin, Fentanyl can quickly cause respiratory failure and death. Heroin can be laced with Fentanyl and users don't know that they are taking something stronger. In Maryland alone, Fentanyl accounted for 25% of all drug overdoses in 2013. Heroin overdoses are also on the rise. Between 2001 and 2014, heroin overdoses increased by six fold.
https://thehill.com/latino/458358-mexico-evaluating-legal-action-against-migrant-minor-detention-rule
How heroin gets across the border:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8klpnPaTUg
Inside the Sinaloa Cartel's drug operations fueling US's heroin addiction: Nightline Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G95p0NtiguY
Inside President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador ‘s odd relationship with Mexico’s drug cartels
By Benny Avni
November 9, 2019 | 2:59pm | Updated
Mexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador
Reuters
BENNY AVNI
Mexico’s criminal gangs see their president’s attempt to appease them as a license to kill.
Members of the LeBaron clan were sprayed with bullets Monday as they traveled to their Mexican home compound, about 100 miles south of Arizona. Nine Americans, including six children, are dead.
The horrific massacre raised President Trump’s ire. He immediately tweeted America’s readiness to help launch a WAR in Mexico. “We merely await a call from your great new president!” he wrote.
President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador politely rejected the offer. A favorite of Latin America’s revolutionary left, AMLO, as he’s widely known, is no war consiglieri. It “does not work,” he said in a speech Wednesday, adding that Mexico’s past wars on drugs only “caused more violence.”
As horrific as the LeBaron massacre was, in Mexico it was just another Monday. Under AMLO, the cartel wars set new homicide records, exacting an average of 100 deaths a day and surpassing death tolls in America’s Mideast and Afghanistan wars at their worst years.
And after AMLO launched a “hugs, not bullets” strategy to deal with his country’s violence, little was left of the protection his predecessors afforded American citizens in Chihuahua a decade ago.
The socialist president hopes to negotiate with the cartels, rather than fight them. When confronting the gangs, if at all, troops are ordered to tread lightly.
Also, federal forces assigned to fight the gangs are diminished in numbers. In 2009, after gangs murdered two members of the LeBron clan, Mexican authorities sent troops to defend their Chihuahua compound. But since AMLO launched his appeasement strategy, only 2700 army troops remained to patrol the vast mountainous deserts of Sonora and Chihuahua states, where the Monday massacre occurred.
One reason for lack of gang-fighting personnel is also why Trump strangely adores Mexico’s leftist president: AMLO agreed to divert nearly a third of his federal troops from fighting cartels to barring Central American “caravans” from entering Mexico’s southern border. The cartels got stronger.
Worse: AMLO‘s strategy of “abrazos, no balazos,” or hugs, not bullets, encourages more mayhem — as in last month’s clumsy attempt to politely arrest the son of Mexico’s most well-known cartel leader, Joaquin “EL Chapo” Guzman, who now resides in a US federal prison.
The fatal attack on the LeBaron clan raised Donald Trump’s ire.
EPA
After federal officials arrested the young Ovidio Guzman Lopez in Culiacan, Sinaloa (aka El Chapo’s drug kingdom), buddies of the drug princeling went on a shooting spree, killing and burning everything in sight. Admitting defeat, the federal troops let Guzman go.
That’s no way to beat the cartels that strangle any hope of Mexican progress.
A new idea in Washington — designate the cartels as terrorists to dry up their funds — isn’t much of a solution either, because the huge criminal profits are rarely kept in banks, where such designation is effective.
Mexicans, meanwhile, rightly blame America’s endless thirst for narcotics that fuel the cartel’s profits. Yet, a drug user’s weakness rarely diminishes the pusher’s guilt.
So what to do?
Suspect arrested in Mexico Mormon massacre
We may launch an American-led all-out military campaign that can eventually defeat the cartels — but not before turning it into a costly “endless war,” exacting numerous American casualties and likely losing public support in the process.
Or we can deprive cartels of profits by legalizing all drug use in America — as back when we ended prohibition. Good idea, but politically unrealistic for now.
Another option: continue what we’ve been doing all along. Since 2007, under a cooperation pact known as the Merida initiative, America has allotted nearly $2 billion to fight the drug wars in Mexico, providing arms, intelligence and training.
It hasn’t worked, but it could, with more money and arms (such as helicopters that were missing in the recent Sinaloa raid.) Further intel and training cooperation between America’s and Mexico’s cartel-fighting authorities — on both federal and local levels — and developing aggressive strategies, could perhaps begin to reverse the cartels’ fortunes.
But Trump, so far, is more eager to isolate Mexico with a big, beautiful wall than tighten cooperation with it. And AMLO, an America-skeptic his entire career, likes to cuddle Mexico’s real enemies more than fight them. That’s no recipe for success.
https://nypost.com/2019/11/09/inside-trumps-odd-relationship-with-mexicos-vicious-drug-cartels/
Inside President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador ‘s odd relationship with Mexico’s drug cartels
By Benny Avni
November 9, 2019 | 2:59pm | Updated
Mexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador
Reuters
BENNY AVNI
Mexico’s criminal gangs see their president’s attempt to appease them as a license to kill.
Members of the LeBaron clan were sprayed with bullets Monday as they traveled to their Mexican home compound, about 100 miles south of Arizona. Nine Americans, including six children, are dead.
The horrific massacre raised President Trump’s ire. He immediately tweeted America’s readiness to help launch a WAR in Mexico. “We merely await a call from your great new president!” he wrote.
President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador politely rejected the offer. A favorite of Latin America’s revolutionary left, AMLO, as he’s widely known, is no war consiglieri. It “does not work,” he said in a speech Wednesday, adding that Mexico’s past wars on drugs only “caused more violence.”
As horrific as the LeBaron massacre was, in Mexico it was just another Monday. Under AMLO, the cartel wars set new homicide records, exacting an average of 100 deaths a day and surpassing death tolls in America’s Mideast and Afghanistan wars at their worst years.
And after AMLO launched a “hugs, not bullets” strategy to deal with his country’s violence, little was left of the protection his predecessors afforded American citizens in Chihuahua a decade ago.
The socialist president hopes to negotiate with the cartels, rather than fight them. When confronting the gangs, if at all, troops are ordered to tread lightly.
Also, federal forces assigned to fight the gangs are diminished in numbers. In 2009, after gangs murdered two members of the LeBron clan, Mexican authorities sent troops to defend their Chihuahua compound. But since AMLO launched his appeasement strategy, only 2700 army troops remained to patrol the vast mountainous deserts of Sonora and Chihuahua states, where the Monday massacre occurred.
One reason for lack of gang-fighting personnel is also why Trump strangely adores Mexico’s leftist president: AMLO agreed to divert nearly a third of his federal troops from fighting cartels to barring Central American “caravans” from entering Mexico’s southern border. The cartels got stronger.
Worse: AMLO‘s strategy of “abrazos, no balazos,” or hugs, not bullets, encourages more mayhem — as in last month’s clumsy attempt to politely arrest the son of Mexico’s most well-known cartel leader, Joaquin “EL Chapo” Guzman, who now resides in a US federal prison.
The fatal attack on the LeBaron clan raised Donald Trump’s ire.
EPA
After federal officials arrested the young Ovidio Guzman Lopez in Culiacan, Sinaloa (aka El Chapo’s drug kingdom), buddies of the drug princeling went on a shooting spree, killing and burning everything in sight. Admitting defeat, the federal troops let Guzman go.
That’s no way to beat the cartels that strangle any hope of Mexican progress.
A new idea in Washington — designate the cartels as terrorists to dry up their funds — isn’t much of a solution either, because the huge criminal profits are rarely kept in banks, where such designation is effective.
Mexicans, meanwhile, rightly blame America’s endless thirst for narcotics that fuel the cartel’s profits. Yet, a drug user’s weakness rarely diminishes the pusher’s guilt.
So what to do?
Suspect arrested in Mexico Mormon massacre
We may launch an American-led all-out military campaign that can eventually defeat the cartels — but not before turning it into a costly “endless war,” exacting numerous American casualties and likely losing public support in the process.
Or we can deprive cartels of profits by legalizing all drug use in America — as back when we ended prohibition. Good idea, but politically unrealistic for now.
Another option: continue what we’ve been doing all along. Since 2007, under a cooperation pact known as the Merida initiative, America has allotted nearly $2 billion to fight the drug wars in Mexico, providing arms, intelligence and training.
It hasn’t worked, but it could, with more money and arms (such as helicopters that were missing in the recent Sinaloa raid.) Further intel and training cooperation between America’s and Mexico’s cartel-fighting authorities — on both federal and local levels — and developing aggressive strategies, could perhaps begin to reverse the cartels’ fortunes.
But Trump, so far, is more eager to isolate Mexico with a big, beautiful wall than tighten cooperation with it. And AMLO, an America-skeptic his entire career, likes to cuddle Mexico’s real enemies more than fight them. That’s no recipe for success.
https://nypost.com/2019/11/09/inside-trumps-odd-relationship-with-mexicos-vicious-drug-cartels/
