US Indicts Sinaloa Governor Rubén Rocha Moya and Officials in Major Cartel Corruption Case

In a sweeping legal maneuver that threatens to severely strain bilateral relations between the United States and Mexico, US federal prosecutors have unveiled a landmark indictment against Rubén Rocha Moya, the sitting governor of Mexico's Sinaloa state. The charges accuse the governor and nine other current and former Mexican government officials of operating a vast conspiracy to protect and empower the Sinaloa Cartel in exchange for lucrative bribes and political backing.

The unsealing of the indictment in New York represents a rare and aggressive escalation in cross-border law enforcement. By targeting a sitting governor aligned with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and the ruling Morena party, the US justice system has struck at the heart of Mexico's political establishment.

The Anatomy of the Indictment

The federal indictment, brought forward by the Southern District of New York (SDNY), outlines a deeply entrenched network of systemic corruption. According to the court documents, elected leaders and high-ranking officials actively conspired with cartel leadership to facilitate the importation of massive quantities of illicit narcotics into the United States.

The charges specifically link Rocha Moya to a notorious faction of the Sinaloa Cartel known as Los Chapitos—a syndicate historically led by the sons of the imprisoned drug lord Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. Prosecutors allege that the governor abused his executive authority to provide a protective shield for this specific faction, allowing them to operate with impunity while suppressing rival groups in an ongoing, violent territorial conflict.

The scope of the indictment extends far beyond the governor's mansion. The nine additional Mexican officials charged include a diverse array of power brokers, reflecting the cartel's alleged infiltration of multiple levels of the state apparatus:

• A high-ranking state police official accused of subverting law enforcement operations.
• A sitting senator implicated in leveraging federal influence.
• A local mayor alleged to have maintained municipal safe havens for cartel logistics.

"As the indictment lays bare, the Sinaloa cartel, and other drug trafficking organisations like it, would not operate as freely or successfully without corrupt politicians and law enforcement officials on their payroll," stated US Attorney Jay Clayton.

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrator Terrance Cole echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the evolution of the cartel's threat profile. "The Sinaloa Cartel is not just trafficking deadly drugs, it is a designated terrorist organization that relies on corruption and bribery to drive violence and profit," Cole noted, adding that the indicted officials "used positions of trust to protect cartel operations, enabling a pipeline of deadly drugs into our country."

Political Fallout and the "Fourth Transformation"

The geopolitical shockwaves of the indictment were immediately felt in Mexico City. The targeting of Rocha Moya is particularly sensitive because he is a prominent figure in the "Fourth Transformation" (4T)—the foundational political and social reform project championed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and continued by current President Claudia Sheinbaum.

The 4T platform was built heavily on promises of eradicating endemic corruption and pacifying the country through social programs rather than direct military confrontation with cartels. Consequently, the US allegations strike a direct blow to the ruling party's core narrative.

Rocha Moya vehemently rejected the allegations, framing the legal action as a politically motivated assault on his party's ideology. "This attack isn't only against me, it's against the Fourth Transformation," he declared in a statement published on X (formerly Twitter), categorically and absolutely denying the drug charges.

Diplomatic Friction and the Burden of Proof

The Mexican government's institutional response has been one of cautious defiance, utilizing bureaucratic and legal hurdles to push back against Washington's demands. The Mexican Foreign Ministry issued a formal statement declaring that the extradition requests and supporting documents provided by the US Embassy lacked sufficient evidence. According to the ministry, the files "do not include the elements of proof" required to justify the immediate arrest and eventual extradition of the accused officials.

While the ultimate decision regarding extradition rests with the Mexican Attorney General's office, the immediate pushback highlights the complex sovereignty issues at play. Extraditing a sitting governor of the ruling party would be politically disastrous domestically, forcing the Sheinbaum administration to walk a tightrope between appeasing a vital international trade partner and maintaining national sovereignty.

To that end, Mexican authorities have initiated a parallel domestic inquiry. Attorney General spokesperson Ulises Lara announced via social media that Mexico will conduct its own investigation to determine if "the accusation made by US authorities has legal grounds." Historically, such parallel investigations have occasionally been used to preempt US extradition efforts by trying—and sometimes exonerating—officials within the Mexican judicial system.

A Shift in US Anti-Cartel Strategy

This unprecedented indictment cannot be viewed in isolation; it is a clear manifestation of an aggressive, recalibrated strategy by the Trump administration to dismantle transnational criminal organizations.

By aggressively pursuing high-level political enablers rather than just cartel gunmen, the administration is signaling a fundamental shift in its approach to the drug war. This strategy encompasses several key analytical takeaways:

1. Targeting the State-Cartel Nexus: Law enforcement is increasingly focusing on the symbiotic relationship between organized crime and corrupt state actors, recognizing that cartels require institutional protection to manage global supply chains.
2. Terrorist Designations: The explicit framing of the Sinaloa Cartel as a "designated terrorist organization" by DEA leadership opens the door to expanded surveillance, financial sanctions, and potentially broader jurisdictional authority under US law.
3. Bilateral Pressure Tactics: Indicting a sitting governor serves as a high-stakes leverage point, implicitly pressuring the Sheinbaum administration to either cooperate with US law enforcement or risk being painted as complicit on the international stage.

As the legal proceedings unfold in the Southern District of New York, the case against Rubén Rocha Moya and his co-defendants will likely serve as a defining stress test for US-Mexico relations. The outcome will not only determine the fate of a powerful political figure but will also set a crucial precedent for how the two nations navigate the murky, violent intersection of cartel operations and state corruption in the years to come.

Read More

A Comprehensive Analysis of the Golders Green Terrorist Incident: Community Impact and National Security Responses

In the heart of North London, Golders Green has long stood as a vibrant, historic epicenter for the British Jewish community. However, the quiet rhythm of this suburban enclave was violently disrupted when two Jewish men were subjected to a sudden, unprovoked knife attack. The Metropolitan Police have officially declared the stabbings a terrorist incident, a designation that has sent shockwaves through the capital and prompted a high-level national security response.

As investigations unfold, the attack is increasingly viewed not as an isolated tragedy, but as a severe escalation in a broader, deeply concerning pattern of antisemitism and targeted violence across the United Kingdom. This comprehensive overview examines the timeline of the attack, the complex profile of the suspect, the resilience of the victims, and the sweeping governmental measures enacted to protect vulnerable communities.

The Chronology of a Crisis: How the Attack Unfolded

The violent sequence of events on Wednesday morning was captured extensively by CCTV footage, body-worn police cameras, and eyewitness accounts, painting a harrowing picture of a sudden crisis. The Metropolitan Police were first alerted to the violence at 11:16 BST, responding to desperate reports of a stabbing on Highfield Avenue, a residential street branching off the bustling Golders Green Road.

The established timeline provides critical insight into the suspect's movements and the rapid response of law enforcement:

• 11:15 BST: Security cameras on Highfield Avenue capture the suspect jogging along the pavement toward Golders Green Road. Without warning, he initiates an attack on a male pedestrian, chasing him out of the camera's frame.
• Moments Later: Footage recorded from a passing vehicle traveling north on Golders Green Road shows the suspect relentlessly pursuing a man along the pavement.
• 11:20 BST: Additional CCTV footage shows the suspect approaching a local bus stop. He repeatedly attacks a man waiting for transport, ultimately forcing him into the roadway.
• The Confrontation: Responding officers intercept the suspect. Body-worn camera footage released by the police reveals the suspect advancing toward officers while refusing repeated, urgent commands to "drop the knife."
• Apprehension: Assessing a clear and present threat—and harboring concerns that the suspect might be carrying an explosive device—officers deploy a Taser. The suspect is incapacitated and brought to the ground. Officers immediately move to restrain him while simultaneously administering CPR before he is loaded onto a stretcher and transported via ambulance.

The Human Toll: Victims and Community Resilience

The victims of this targeted violence have been identified locally as 34-year-old Shloime Rand and 76-year-old Moshe Shine. Both men were treated extensively at the scene by emergency medical personnel before being transferred to a local hospital, where they currently remain in a stable condition.

The survival of both men has been described by community leaders as deeply fortunate. Rabbi Levi Schapiro of the Jewish Community Council, who visited the victims in the hospital, noted that while Mr. Shine suffered more severe injuries, medical professionals remain highly "optimistic" about his full recovery. Rabbi Schapiro underscored the gravity of the attack, describing Mr. Rand as a "living miracle" who could have easily succumbed to his wounds based on the trajectory of the blade.

The psychological impact on the families and the wider community is profound. Mr. Rand’s mother articulated the chilling reality facing the neighborhood: "As a mother, I'm pretty horrified that these things could happen in the streets of London, in an innocent community where we try our best not to hurt anyone."

Despite the trauma, the community's response has been defined by a quiet, steadfast fortitude, emphasizing a refusal to be intimidated by acts of terror.

Analyzing the Suspect: The Intersection of Extremism and Mental Health

The individual apprehended at the scene is a 45-year-old British national born in Somalia, who, according to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, entered the UK lawfully as a child. He was initially taken to the hospital following the Taser deployment but was subsequently discharged into police custody, where he was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder.

The suspect's background presents a complex challenge for the UK's counter-terrorism apparatus. The Metropolitan Police confirmed that the individual had previously been referred to Prevent, the government's early-intervention counter-radicalization programme, in 2020. However, his case was closed within the same year.

This revelation raises critical, systemic questions regarding the efficacy of the Prevent programme, particularly when dealing with individuals who present a volatile mix of ideological extremism, a history of serious violence, and documented mental health issues. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley noted that the suspect's history of mental instability and violence is a central focus of the ongoing investigation.

Furthermore, detectives are linking the suspect to an earlier altercation that occurred at approximately 08:50 BST on Great Dover Street in Southwark, South London. Reports indicate an armed suspect engaged in a confrontation with a resident before fleeing, suggesting a premeditated trajectory of violence leading up to the Golders Green stabbings.

A Broader Pattern of Escalating Violence

To view the Golders Green stabbings in isolation would be to misunderstand the current threat landscape in the UK. This attack is the latest, and arguably most severe, flashpoint in a sustained campaign of intimidation and violence directed at Jewish sites and individuals over recent months.

Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis summarized the chilling reality for the community, stating: "Today's event proves that if you are visibly Jewish you're not safe, and far more needs to be done."

Recent intelligence and police reports highlight a disturbing timeline of targeted property damage and violence:

• October: A severe car-ramming and stabbing attack outside a synagogue in Manchester left two Jewish individuals dead and three others in serious condition, culminating in the attacker being fatally shot by police.
• March 23: Four ambulances owned by a Jewish charity were targeted in an arson attack within a Golders Green synagogue car park.
• April 15: Incendiary devices, including bottles believed to contain petrol, were hurled at the Finchley Reform Synagogue in North London.
• April 17: Suspicious packages were discovered near the Israeli embassy in London, coinciding with social media threats of a drone attack.
• April 18: An accelerant-filled bottle was thrown through the window of the Kenton United Synagogue.
• April 27: A suspected arson attack targeted a memorial wall in Golders Green, which held tributes to victims of the Iranian regime and those killed in the 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.

Jonathan Hall KC, the government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, provided a sobering analysis, warning that attacks on Jewish citizens have now escalated into "the biggest national security emergency" the UK has faced since the wave of terror attacks in 2017.

The National Security Response: Policy and Protection

The severity of the Golders Green incident has unified political leaders in their condemnation and catalyzed immediate governmental action. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer declared the incident "utterly appalling," reinforcing the sentiment that "attacks on our Jewish community are attacks on Britain." Buckingham Palace also issued a statement confirming that King Charles III was deeply concerned and offered his heartfelt gratitude to the first responders.

Recognizing the urgent need for tangible security enhancements, the UK government has authorized an emergency £25 million funding package. This financial injection is specifically earmarked to dramatically increase police patrols and fortify security infrastructure around highly vulnerable targets, including synagogues, Jewish faith schools, and community centers.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has formally classified the situation as a national emergency. Emphasizing a zero-tolerance policy toward the "abhorrent" rise of antisemitism, she articulated a firm commitment to inter-community solidarity: "This land is their land, it is my land too, we share this land and we must all work together to keep each other safe."

As the investigation into the Golders Green stabbings continues, the incident stands as a critical stress test for Britain's domestic security policies. It highlights the urgent necessity for intelligence agencies, local law enforcement, and community leaders to collaborate closely. The dual challenge moving forward will be refining counter-terrorism strategies to better identify individuals who slip through the cracks of programmes like Prevent, while simultaneously ensuring that every citizen, regardless of their faith or visibility, can walk the streets of the UK without fear.

Read More

Global Oil Prices Surge as US Considers Military Intervention to Reopen the Strait of Hormuz

The global energy market is experiencing its most severe shock in recent years, driven by escalating geopolitical tensions and the effective closure of one of the world's most critical maritime chokepoints. Brent crude—the international benchmark for oil prices—momentarily surged by nearly 7% to peak at $126.31 per barrel, marking its highest valuation since the immediate aftermath of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The catalyst for this sudden market volatility was a report indicating that the US military is preparing to brief President Donald Trump on a series of decisive new strategic options regarding the ongoing Iran war. As diplomatic negotiations stall and the vital Strait of Hormuz remains impassable to commercial shipping, the intersection of military strategy and global economics has never been more precarious.

The Geopolitical Catalyst: Breaking the Hormuz Deadlock

The Strait of Hormuz is the undisputed jugular vein of the global energy supply. Historically, approximately 20% of the world's crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) traverses this narrow waterway. Its current closure, a direct result of the escalating conflict that began on February 28 between US-Israeli forces and Iran, has effectively severed a fifth of the world's energy supply from the open market.

According to reports initially surfaced by Axios, US Central Command has developed a contingency plan designed to break the current diplomatic and military deadlock. The proposed military options include:

• Targeted Infrastructure Strikes: A wave of "short and powerful" tactical strikes aimed at degrading Iranian military and coastal infrastructure to deter further harassment of commercial vessels.
• Ground Force Deployment: A highly complex and risky operation to physically secure portions of the Strait of Hormuz using ground troops, ensuring the waterway can be reopened for international shipping.
• Extended Blockades: Maintaining and expanding the current US blockade of Iranian ports, a tactic designed to exert maximum economic pressure on Tehran.

The Iranian response has been equally uncompromising. A statement attributed to Iran's Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared that Tehran intends to secure the strait independently and eliminate what he termed "the enemy's abuses of the waterway." Khamenei emphasized that a "new chapter" for the Middle East has been unfolding since the outbreak of the war, signaling a protracted and deeply entrenched conflict.

Market Mechanics: Dissecting the Price Spike

The commodity markets reacted violently to the prospect of prolonged supply chain disruptions. While Brent crude touched an intraday high of $126.31, the price experienced a sharp correction later in the trading session, settling near $114 per barrel.

This volatility is partially driven by the mechanics of the oil futures market. The current futures contracts for June delivery were set to expire, forcing traders to close out their positions in a highly illiquid and panicked environment. Meanwhile, the more active July contract traded at a relatively cooler $109 per barrel, suggesting that while immediate physical supplies are constrained, the market anticipates some form of stabilization—or demand destruction—in the medium term.

Naveen Das, a senior oil analyst at Kpler, noted that the $125 per barrel mark is a psychological and economic threshold. "It does seem as though escalation in the war is back on the table," Das explained. "An oil price approaching $125 is the point where businesses and politicians start to get a bit more jittery. We might start seeing more headlines of trying to de-escalate again, because the increase in prices has a knock-on effect not only on oil, but oil-related products, inflation, and basically every factor of our day-to-day lives."

The Cascading Economic Impact: From Pump to Plate

The macroeconomic consequences of a sustained closure of the Strait of Hormuz extend far beyond the trading floors of London and New York. The immediate impact is already being felt by consumers at the fuel pump, but the secondary effects threaten to reignite global inflation.

In the United Kingdom, the cost of refined fuels has skyrocketed. According to the motoring group RAC, petrol currently averages 157p per litre—a 24p increase since the onset of the war. Diesel has reached 188.5p per litre, representing a staggering 46p jump compared to pre-war levels.

Simon Williams, head of policy at the RAC, provided critical insight into the wholesale dynamics: "Our analysis of wholesale costs shows petrol is now more expensive for retailers to buy than at any time since the war began. However, diesel, which has come down by 3p a litre, is currently well below its highest wholesale price since the start of the conflict, so should fall further."

Beyond transportation fuels, the broader supply chains are facing severe stress testing. The UK government and independent analysts have warned of a trifecta of rising costs:

• Aviation Costs: Airlines are already hiking fares and reducing flight schedules as jet fuel (a direct derivative of crude oil) becomes prohibitively expensive.
• Agricultural Disruption: The closure of the strait has trapped shipments of urea, a vital component in agricultural fertilizers. Because urea production is highly energy-intensive and reliant on natural gas, the bottleneck has caused fertilizer prices to rocketing.
• Food Inflation: Higher fertilizer costs, combined with increased diesel prices for agricultural machinery and transportation, will inevitably be passed on to consumers at the supermarket.

Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at Wealth Club, highlighted the long-term danger of these agricultural disruptions. "Urea shipments are blocked and costs have rocketed for farmers around the world who didn't buy stocks in advance," she noted. "The worry is that all these costs will be passed on through supply chains, pushing up the price of everyday goods later in the year and into next year."

Strategic Outlook and Market Sentiment

The political ramifications of this energy crisis are becoming acute. Energy executives reportedly met with President Trump to discuss emergency measures to insulate US consumers from the war's economic fallout. These high-level meetings have inadvertently fueled market anxieties, signaling that the administration is deeply concerned about an extended disruption to global energy supplies.

"The big question in my mind is how long the Trump administration can stand the economic heat," observed Will Walker-Arnott, investment manager at Raymond James. "People are really beginning to worry about the inflationary impact coming through from the rise in the oil price."

Global equities have shown a mixed, highly regionalized reaction to the crisis. Asian markets, heavily dependent on Middle Eastern energy imports, closed lower. Japan's Nikkei fell by 1.1%, and South Korea's Kospi dropped by 1.4%. Conversely, European markets demonstrated unexpected resilience, with London's FTSE 100 rising 1.6% (buoyed by heavy-weight energy stocks), Germany's DAX climbing 1%, and France's CAC 40 edging up 0.1%.

As military planners brief the White House and commercial vessels idle outside the Persian Gulf, the global economy remains held hostage by the geopolitical maneuvering in the Strait of Hormuz. Whether through diplomatic de-escalation or decisive military intervention, the resolution of this maritime blockade will dictate the trajectory of global inflation and economic stability for the remainder of the year.

Read More

Tragedy in the Capital: Ukraine Police Chief Resigns Following Kyiv Mass Shooting

Amidst the relentless backdrop of the ongoing war, the resilient city of Kyiv was recently shattered by a different kind of terror. In a shocking domestic incident that has shaken public trust and prompted high-level accountability, the head of Ukraine's patrol police, Yevhen Zhukov, has officially stepped down. His resignation follows intense public outrage and critical scrutiny after video footage allegedly showed two of his officers fleeing the scene of a deadly mass shooting in the capital.

This devastating event not only resulted in a tragic loss of civilian life but has also sparked a nationwide conversation about law enforcement readiness, wartime mental health, and the complexities of gun ownership in Ukraine.

The Unfolding Crisis in the Holosiivskyi District

The horrifying sequence of events began on a Saturday in Kyiv's southern Holosiivskyi district. According to the Ukrainian authorities, the attacker first set fire to his own apartment before descending onto the streets to unleash a shooting spree.

The gunman opened fire on unsuspecting pedestrians before retreating into a nearby supermarket, where he took several terrified civilians hostage. The standoff ultimately concluded when the shooter was killed in a fierce shoot-out with responding police units.

The human toll of this tragic event has been profound. Officials have confirmed the following casualty details:

• Six fatalities, which tragically included the father of a young boy injured in the attack, as well as a woman believed to be the child's aunt.
• 14 individuals injured during the chaotic crossfire.
• Eight victims remain hospitalized, with one adult listed in an extremely serious condition and three others in a serious condition.

A Breach of Duty: Officers Flee the Scene

While the mass shooting itself was a deeply traumatic event, the subsequent emergence of bystander footage escalated the tragedy into a national scandal. Videos shared widely across social media networks appeared to show two patrol officers abandoning civilians and running away from the active shooter scene.

In a profession defined by courage and public service, this alleged dereliction of duty sent shockwaves through the Ukrainian law enforcement community. Interior Minister Igor Klymenko swiftly confirmed that the two officers in question had been suspended pending a comprehensive investigation into their actions.

"'Serve and protect' is not just a slogan," Klymenko stated emphatically on Telegram. "It must be supported by appropriate professional actions. Especially at critical moments, when people's lives depend on it." However, he also urged the public to remain objective, cautioning that it is "not entirely correct to make generalisations about the entire police only by the actions of two employees."

Leadership Accountability: The Resignation of Yevhen Zhukov

In a powerful display of leadership and accountability, Yevhen Zhukov addressed the media the following Sunday. During a solemn news conference, he did not mince words regarding the actions of his subordinates, stating that the officers had "failed to assess the situation properly and left civilians in danger." He condemned their response as both "unprofessionally and unworthily" executed.

Taking full responsibility for the conduct of his department, Zhukov announced his immediate departure. "As a combat officer, I have decided to submit my resignation from the position I currently hold," he declared, marking a significant leadership shift within the national police force.

Presidential Outrage and Official Investigations

The gravity of the situation prompted immediate commentary from the highest levels of the Ukrainian government. President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the nation, expressing deep sorrow and condemning the officers who failed to intervene.

In his Sunday address, Volodymyr Zelensky confirmed that the officers were "at the scene of the crime, but did not stop the murderer, and fled on their own." He explicitly accused them of "inaction" and announced that the national investigations bureau has launched a formal criminal case to scrutinize their conduct, which will also include a thorough review of their previous service records.

"We are going through a war and every day, unfortunately, there are human losses from Russian strikes," Zelensky reflected. "It is especially painful to lose people like this, in an ordinary city, just on the street."

Profiling the Attacker and the Complexities of Armed Self-Defense

As investigators piece together the motive behind what they are currently treating as a terrorist act, details about the shooter have begun to emerge. The assailant has been identified as a 58-year-old man originally from Moscow, Russia. Prior to moving to the Holosiivskyi district, he had resided in the eastern Donetsk region—an area largely under Russian occupation and the site of prolonged separatist conflict prior to the 2022 full-scale invasion.

Interior Minister Igor Klymenko noted that the attacker's mental state was "clearly unstable." Surprisingly, the firearm used in the massacre was officially registered. Authorities are now rigorously investigating how the shooter managed to obtain the necessary documentation to renew his gun licence.

Despite this isolated tragedy, Klymenko confirmed that the government will not initiate mass checks on legal gun owners. He reaffirmed his belief in the right to armed self-defence, particularly in the context of the ongoing war where civilians have taken up arms for national resistance.

Currently, gun ownership in Ukraine is permitted for non-automatic firearms, provided citizens meet strict licensing conditions, which include:

• Having no prior criminal record.
• Having no documented history of mental illness.
• Passing necessary background checks for civilian carry.

Despite the wartime easing of restrictions to allow citizens to defend their country, a 2023 small arms survey indicated that only about 3.4% of Ukrainian adults officially own a personal firearm.

Moving Forward: Rebuilding Trust in Times of Crisis

Shootings of this nature are exceptionally rare in Kyiv, a city that has otherwise demonstrated remarkable resilience and unity in the face of external aggression. The resignation of Yevhen Zhukov underscores a critical moment for Ukrainian law enforcement as they work to rebuild public trust and ensure that the principles of "serve and protect" are upheld without exception.

As the national investigations bureau continues its work and the injured fight for their recovery in local hospitals, the community is left to mourn the senseless loss of life on an ordinary city street.

Read More

FBI: Nearly 5X More Murders Committed With Knives Than Assault Rifles

Far more murders are committed with knives than so-called “assault rifles,” according to the FBI.

The new crime statistics released by the agency reveal that out of 11,961 murders performed within the U.S. in 2014, 660 were committed unarmed, 1,567 were committed with knives and only 248 murders were known to have been committed using rifles of any type, including single-shot long arms and “assault rifles” routinely demonized by gun control groups.

Granted, the FBI did list 2,052 murders under “unknown firearm type,” but given the percentages of the known firearm categories, it is unlikely that more than four percent of the “unknown firearms” were in fact rifles, and less than that were semi-automatics.

In other words, despite the calls to ban “military-style assault rifles” by anti-gun groups, conservatively less – and likely much less – than four percent of murders were committed using AR-15s, AK-47s and other semi-automatic long arms.

This figure is a decrease from 2013.

In comparison, AR-15s are used far less often in murders than shotguns, a fact which contradicts Vice President Joe Biden who once implied otherwise.

That isn’t that surprising considering the recent study by the University of Chicago Crime Lab which revealed that AR-15s and AK-47s are unpopular amongst criminals.

Overall the number of murders involving guns has plunged from 8,855 in 2012 to 8,454 in 2013 and now 8,124 in 2014, following a significant decline in gun-related violent crimes since the mid-1990s.

“…The 2014 estimated violent crime total was 6.9 percent below the 2010 level and 16.2 percent below the 2005 level,” the FBI stated.

Guns are used exponentially more often to stop crime than to kill; each year firearms prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes in the U.S., usually without a shot being fired, meaning that guns are used over 300 times more often to save innocent lives, given the 8,124 murders committed with firearms in 2014.

It’s also been estimated that over 56 million people have died due to gun control in the last century, according to Gun Owners of America:

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. Subsequently, from 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, deprived of the means to defend themselves, were rounded up and killed.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. Then, from 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 millon dissidents were rounded up and killed.

In 1938 Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945 over 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill, union leaders, Catholics and others, unable to fire a shot in protest, were rounded up and killed.

In 1935, China established gun control. Subsequently, between 1948 and 1952, over 20 million dissidents were rounded up and killed.

In 1956, Cambodia enshrined gun control. In just two years (1975-1977) over one million “educated” people were rounded up and killed.

In 1964, Guatemala locked in gun control. From 1964 to 1981, over 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and killed as a result of their inability to defend themselves.

In 1970, Uganda embraced gun control. Over the next nine years over 300,000 Christians were rounded up and killed.

Read More

HBO and Snapchat are Actively Working with the U.S. Government to Create Propaganda

In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters.

The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception.

– From Carl Bernstein’s 1977 article: The CIA and the Media

What is art, when the artist is working with the host government to promote a particular message?

It is propaganda, and just because it’s your government doing it with the help of your friends and neighbors, doesn’t make it any less so. Even if you agree with the message, it is still propaganda. No wonder so many movies suck.

Today, we learn that both HBO and Snapchat are actively working with the U.S. State Department to push an anti-ISIS message. Again, even if the message is a good one, make no mistake about it, it is still propaganda. This is a very slippery slope, and something that Americans shouldn’t tolerate.

The National Journal reports:

The State De­part­ment is seek­ing a counter-nar­rat­ive to the pro­pa­ganda be­ing spread by IS­IS, and it is re­portedly turn­ing to some of Amer­ica’s pree­m­in­ent storytellers for help. Ac­cord­ing to The Daily Beast, ex­ec­ut­ives from both HBO and Snapchat are part of a team of film­makers and so­cial me­dia spe­cial­ists that’s brain­storm­ing how to hamper the ef­fect­ive­ness of ISIL’s mes­saging.

Notice that when ISIS does it, it’s propaganda, but when the U.S. government does it, it’s a “counter-narrative.”

Cit­ing un­named in­dustry and gov­ern­ment sources, The Daily Beast re­ports that HBO and Snapchat rep­res­ent­at­ives were in­vited to Sunny­lands, a Cali­for­nia re­treat known for host­ing im­port­ant gov­ern­ment fig­ures, in June to meet with State of­fi­cials on how best to counter the IS­IS nar­rat­ive, which has lured young men from the Middle East, Europe, and even the United States, to join its vi­ol­ent ranks. Mark Boal, the Oscar-nom­in­ated screen­writer of Zero Dark Thirty, is re­portedly part of the team as­sist­ing the State De­part­ment.

Ah, Zero Dark Thirty. Where have we hear about that before? Oh yeah…

Remember Zero Dark Thirty? Turns Out it was a CIA Propaganda Film After All

Now back to the National Journal:

Neither HBO nor Snapchat have re­spon­ded to re­quests for com­ment. The State De­part­ment, in a state­ment to Quartz, neither con­firmed nor denied the Daily Beastre­port but noted that film “is an es­pe­cially power­ful me­di­um for build­ing cross­cul­tur­al un­der­stand­ing” of world is­sues. It also said:

Through film, music, and the visual and performing arts, cultural diplomacy helps us make global connections with audiences that are traditionally harder to reach. By supporting creative expression, we help the development of civil society, promote positive role models, and amplify alternative voices. ”

Reread that paragraph from the State Department. Now read it again. I don’t think I could come up with a better definition of government propaganda if I tried.

Finally…

Ac­cord­ing to The Daily Beast, the U.S. now wants to con­nect “in­flu­en­tial Hol­ly­wood fig­ures” with Middle East­ern film­makers, to pro­mote power­ful stor­ies of young people in the Middle East who have re­jec­ted IS­IS’s reign of ter­ror and are act­ively work­ing to make the re­gion a bet­ter place to live. 

Here’s a better suggestion for the U.S. State Department: Stop creating terrorist groups in the first place. And yes, the U.S. government is largely responsible for creating ISIS, as we learned in the following post:

Additional Details Emerge on How U.S. Government Policy Created, Armed, Supported and Funded ISIS

Thanks for playing.

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Read More

Invincible Saudi Prince: Kidnapped, Beat, Raped 3 Women in Beverly Hills Compound, US Lets Him Go. Won't even release his picture.

On the 23rd of September, a servant employed at a Beverly Hills mansion compound saw a woman screaming for help while desperately trying to climb the tall wall surrounding the $37 million estate.

She was bleeding and had just been raped by 28 year old Saudi prince; Majed Abdulaziz al-Saud, the Times reported. She was only the latest of his several victims, who have now come forward. The servant who came to the brutalized woman’s rescue lived and worked within the compound. The police were called and the prince, who had been renting the mansion, was arrested.

The accused prince, a lower-ranking member of the House of Saud, does not have diplomatic immunity and can thus be legally tried for his crimes. He was set to appear in court on October 19th. Yet, despite his status as a non-national and being the very definition of a high flight risk, he was quickly released by the Beverly Hills, California police on a $300,000 bail; a paltry sum for a prince.

He has apparently now fled and hasn’t been seen or heard from since. No photographs of him have been released, and none exist in the public space. In similar fugitive cases, the police have released mugshots to help identify the suspects. Neighbor, Eric Stiskin offered his take on the prince’s whereabouts, “I am sure he has taken off on his private jet by now. I don’t think he even needs a passport to get out of here.”

The Beverly Hills, CA mansion compound rented by the royal kidnapper, as seen on Google Maps.

Last Friday, Three of the victims filed a civil lawsuit against Al-Saud. In it, they accuse him of “inflicting emotional distress, assault and battery, sexual discrimination, and retaliation against his domestic employees.” It is commonplace for affluent Beverly Hills residents to employ illegal immigrants as servants, so that they have no rights and protections and will be unlikely to report abuse for fear of deportation by the state.

Policing of the wealthy in the United States is a very different animal than the brutal tactics employed in low income communities. While a crime suspect from a low-income background will almost always be sucked up by the country’s infamous prison industrial complex; commoditized by the gigantic private prisons that turn every prisoner into a profit source, the authorities are incredibly lenient on wealthy lawbreakers. It is exceedingly unusual in the US, for a kidnapper and rapist of several women to be released on bail. The only logical explanation for the leniency is the suspect’s status as a member of the royal family of Saudi Arabia; one of the US’s key allies.

The ultra-wealthy royal House of Saud is composed of 15,000 members, with about 2,000 of the family enjoying the highest wealth and power. A royal whistleblower revealed more details about her clandestine family:

“We have 15,000 royals and around 13,000 don’t enjoy the wealth of the 2,000. You have 2,000 who are multi-millionaires, who have all the power, all the wealth and no-one can even utter a word against it because they are afraid to lose what they have.”

The Saudi government is about to behead and crucify a young critic of the regime. The record of human rights abuses under the Saudi monarchy is absolutely staggering, so it should be of no surprise to any keen observer that a member of the Saudi ruling class would kidnap, beat and rape women while holidaying overseas, or that he would deny his servants basic worker rights.

In the latest horrific massacre by the Saudi regime, at least 28 people at a party celebrating a wedding in the village of al-Wahga, Yemen were killed by 2 successive airstrikes, with scores more maimed for life. The Saudi’s said the attack was a ‘mistake’.

The US is also famous for its long list of human rights abuses and the invasion and occupation of less affluent nations, so the steadfast alliance between the two ultra-wealthy nations is, if nothing else, a logical pairing.

The ongoing social apartheid that protects the rich and criminalizes the poor has long been the status quo in every capitalist nation. Both the US and Saudi Arabia have a long history of executing dissidents accused of fabricated crimes. The US arguably has a worse record, since many of their executions of the poor are carried out by police officers, without as much as a mock trial.

A US judge recently threw out a lawsuit filed against Saudi Arabia by the families of the almost 3,000 9/11 victims. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were mainly Saudi citizens. District Judge George Daniels of Manhattan, New York, stated that Saudi Arabia cannot be sued due to the sovereign immunity granted to it by the US government.

Saudi Arabia has just been made chair of the UN Human Rights Council. The US President, Barack Obama is the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

Read More