Putin dismisses top ranking officials

© Alexei Nikolsky/Russian presidential press service/TASS
Russian president Vladimir Putin

    

Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed a number of top-ranking officers of the Russian Interior Ministry, Emergencies Ministry, the Investigations Committee and the Federal Service for Drug Control, according to a decree posted on the official internet portal of legal information on Friday.

Thus, the president dismissed internal services Major General, chief of the directorate for relations with civil society institutions and mass media of the Russian Interior Ministry Andrei Pilipchuk.

Among those dismissed are Major General of justice, first deputy head of the chief organizational and inspection directorate of the Investigations Committee Alexei Istomin, Major General of justice, head of the Moscow interregional transport investigation directorate of the Investigations Committee Alexei Ustinov, and a number of other top-ranking officers.

.

Comment: Putin has a long history of cleaning house when needed. Ustinov, linked to the "siloviki" hardliners, had previously been removed from his position as Prosecutor-General in 2006. It appears Putin may again be taking a stand against some of the more hawkish influences of the Russian government.

Read More

Obama might have just given up on Ukraine, and Western media simply ignored it

© Unknown
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry at the meeting in Sochi: "Yes, this would be the way to avert further disaster, John."

    

On Tuesday, May 12th, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was asked at a press conference in Sochi Russia, to respond to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko's recent statements promising renewed war against Donbass, which were made first on April 30th, "The war will end when Ukraine regains Donbass and Crimea," and which were repeated on May 11th, by his saying, "I have no doubt, we will free the [Donetsk] Airport, because it is our land." In other words, Poroshenko had repeatedly made clear that he plans a third invasion of Donbass, and, ultimately, also to invade and retake Crimea. (The Western press, however, had not reported any of these threats that were being made by Poroshenko.)

Kerry responded:

" I have not had a chance - I have not read the speech. I haven't seen any context. I have simply heard about it in the course of today [which would be shocking if true]. But if indeed President Poroshenko is advocating an engagement in a forceful effort at this time, we would strongly urge him to think twice not to engage in that kind of activity, that that would put Minsk in serious jeopardy. And we would be very, very concerned about what the consequences of that kind of action at this time may be."

None of this was reported by Western 'news' media. Even Russia's own Sputnik News, which was Russia's main English-language medium reporting on Kerry's comment, ignored this shocking assertion by the U.S. Secretary of State contradicting the nominal leader of the Ukrainian Government that the U.S. itself had installed in February 2014.

The Obama Administration now had slammed Poroshenko down on the key issue of whether to resume the war against Ukraine's former Donbass region, and also slammed him on whether Ukraine should invade Crimea, which is Russian territory and would therefore mean a war against the Russian armed forces. America's stooge-regime in Kiev was here being publicly taken to the woodshed about the advisability of yet another Ukrainian invasion of Ukraine's former southeastern breakaway regions, Donbass and, even Crimea.

Sputnik didn't quote any of this from Kerry. Instead, they headlined, "Kerry: Poroshenko Should 'Think Twice' Before Using Force in Donbass," and they opened their news-report by saying: "Following an extensive six hour discussion between US Secretary of State John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and President Putin, Kerry stressed that any Ukrainian efforts to seize the Donetsk Airport through force would violate the Minsk Protocol and would face strict opposition from Washington." That assertion was true, and important, but all that was quoted from Kerry was the nondescript: "What is important is to make sure that both sides are moving forward in implementing the Minsk accord in its full measure." Even Kerry's stunning "think twice" statement, which was actually Washington's first-ever verbal slam-down of the stooge-regime the U.S. itself had installed in Ukraine in February 2014, in an extremely bloody coup, wasn't being quoted at all by Sputnik. (Only that two-word phrase was in the headline, but it — and its surrounding passage and context — were entirely absent from the report itself.) Nor was the significance of Kerry's remark there discussed, at all. Their news-report was a total botch.

Western 'news' media were far worse than a botch; they were outright dishonest. Typical was BBC, which headlined on May 12th, "Ukraine Crisis: Kerry Has 'Frank' Meeting with Putin," and their article said nothing whatsoever about Kerry's shocking slam-down of his Ukrainian stooge. To that 'news' report was also appended an "Analysis: Bridget Kendall, BBC News, Sochi," which simply blathered, and concluded, "There was no breakthrough on anything." That statement was the exact opposite of the truth.

The one good, and, really, brilliant, news-analysis on this important matter, was from the legendary specialist on "the Empire's [Washington's] War on Russia," the anonymous blogger who goes by the name, "The Saker." His was not really a news-report, because he, too, failed to quote Kerry's pathbreaking and shocking statement. He didn't even quote the insignificant squib that Sputnik itself had quoted from Kerry's remarks. Instead, he merely paraphrased Kerry, which is far less reliable than a quotation, and also far less informative than the packed shocker that Kerry actually delivered. Saker's paraphrase was far briefer than was Kerry's statement which is quoted here; it was merely: "Kerry made a few rather interesting remarks, saying that the Minsk-2 Agreement (M2A) was the only way forward and that he would strongly caution Poroshenko against the idea of renewing military operations." That's all there was to it. So, The Saker failed to provide a news-report on Kerry's shocker. But his news-analysis of its significance was superb, and it's extremely worth reading (it's worth clicking onto the link which will now be provided on the article's title). That analysis was dated May 13th, and it was bannered, "Yet Another Huge Diplomatic Victory for Russia."

© AFP / Reuters (RFE/RL Graphics)
"Shit, Jeffrey. I can't believe they're making me do this. Wimps."

    

But also there was just a slice of real news in The Saker's article, when he said, only in passing (as if it were insignificant, which it was not), "Then, there was the rather interesting behavior of [Victoria] Nuland, who was with Kerry's delegation, she refused to speak to the press and left looking rather unhappy." Nothing more than that, but that's plenty. In other words: Nuland, the agent whom President Obama had placed in charge of arranging the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, and of selecting the leader of the junta that would be imposed upon Ukraine ("Yats" Yatsenyuk), and who told the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine what to do and how to do it, was now exceedingly disturbed to find herself overridden at this late date in her Ukrainian escapade, publicly overridden by her own immediate boss, Secretary of State Kerry.

In other words: she is now sidelined. That's important news, but The Saker there merely hinted at it, and only in passing. So, as a news-report, The Saker's article was poor but perhaps the best around; but as a news-analysis, it was excellent, and by far the best.

Nuland now knows that she has lost, and that Obama has thrown in the towel on the original plan for Ukraine, which had been for an all-out military conquest of the region, Donbass, where the people had voted over 90% for the man whom Nuland's team had overthrown on 22 February 2014, Viktor Yanukovych, and so Obama had wanted those people to be either killed or else expelled from Ukraine (so that they'd never again be able to vote in a Ukrainian national election and thus possibly restore a neutralist leadership of Ukraine, such as had existed under the man Obama deposed, Yanukovych).

Consequently, clearly, now, Obama is on-board with the "Plan B" for Ukraine, which Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel had put into place, the Minsk II Agreement, which brought about the present ceasefire, which now has become clearly the utter (even accepted by Kerry) capitulation of Obama's Plan A on Ukraine, which plan Nuland had been carrying out. Kerry's public statement there was a public slap in the face to his own #2 official on Ukraine; and it could not have been asserted by him if he were not under Obama's instruction that the previous plan, to exterminate or drive out all the residents of Donbass, was no longer worth trying, and that the Hollande-Merkel plan would be America's fall-back position.

Obama's message in this, through Kerry, to Ukraine's President Poroshenko, and indirectly also to Ukraine's Prime Minister Yatsenyuk (the leader whom Nuland herself had selected), is: we'll back you only as long as you accept that you have failed our military expectations and that we will be stricter with you in the future regarding how you spend our military money. We're getting in line now behind the Hollande-Merkel peace plan for Ukraine.

Dmitriy Yarosh, and the other outright nazis who had been threatening to overthrow Poroshenko if he doesn't renew the war against Donbass and seize Crimea; Dmitriy Yarosh, who was the man who had led the Ukrainian coup for the U.S., and whose thugs had dressed as Yanukovych's security forces when gunning down both police and demonstrators in the February 2014 coup, in order for Yanukovych to become blamed for the bloodshed on that occasion; is now, in effect, being told: if you will try another coup, this time to overthrow our own stooges in Ukraine, then you're finished, Mr. Yarosh. Don't do it.

Merkel and Hollande thus won. Putin had decidedly won. Obama and the nazis he had empowered in Ukraine have now, clearly, been defeated. But the mess that Obama's people have created in Ukraine by their coup and subsequent ethnic-cleansing to eliminate the residents of Donbass, will take decades, if ever, to repair.

Western 'news' media can cover it all up, but they can't change this reality, which, increasingly as time goes by, will expose the press's failure to have even reported on this historically important U.S. coup in Ukraine and its ultimate failure. As a story about the press, it is about yet another system-wide press-deceit upon the public, comparable to their 'news coverage' of 'Saddam's WMD,' and other lies, in 2002 and 2003.

More and more people are coming to know what utter rot the Western press are. The news-report that you are now reading here, has been submitted to all of them, but they'll probably all reject it like they've all refused to report the truth that it and its predecessors report and reported about Obama's nazi (i.e., racist-fascist) takeover of Ukraine. How the Western press will get out of their cover-ups and outright lies, yet again, is hard to imagine. But maybe they'll just not report it at all — yet again. Obama has thrown in the towel on Ukraine, and still the press hasn't yet reported it. But now I have, and you're reading it here, perhaps for the first time, even though Kerry's sensational remark was made a week ago.

Thus, major historical events (like Kerry's statement here) occur, in broad daylight, which never were even reported by the Western press — they were instead covered-up, not covered at all, by 'our' 'free' press.

———-

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at http://bit.ly/1xcsdoI.

Read More

How George Soros dodges his $6.7 billion tax bill

    

Hedge Fund schemers are the modern version of robber barons. At the top of the list of unscrupulous manipulators is the Nazi collaborator, George Soros. With reports like in Forbes that George Soros May Owe Billions In Taxes, an alarm should go off to all investors.

"By the early 2000s, hedge funds were considered de rigeur for sophisticated investors willing to take a risk in exchange for potential wealth. As that potential wealth grew, so did the potential tax bill, and managers began looking at other options. The solution? Investing in offshore hedge funds. Hedge fund managers are generally taxed on income in the country where the fund is located making relocating to the usual offshore suspects such as the Caymans, Bermuda and Ireland attractive. Tax was essentially deferred on fees from these funds until it landed in the hands of those in the U.S."

The 2008 financial meltdown had all the Wall Street elites scrambling to protect their investment, while avoiding the day of reckoning with the tax man. One such effort as cites allowed for another deferred work around.

The change was inserted into the (Public Law 110-343) - and if that sounds familiar, you're not imagining it. That law was also instrumental in the administration of the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP. The new law essentially banned the deferral of fees and compensation by these offshore hedge funds.

Moving the domicile for the Soros fund to Ireland was an attempt to circumvent the intent of an ill-written law.

The Street lays out the basis for the enormous tax bill coming due.

"At the end of 2013, Soros—through Soros Fund Management—had amassed $13.3 billion through the use of deferrals, according to Irish regulatory filings by Soros.

Congress closed the loophole in 2008 and ordered hedge fund managers who used it to pay the accumulated taxes by 2017. A New York-based money manager such as Soros would be subject to a federal rate of 39.6 percent, combined state and city levies totaling 12 percent, and an additional 3.8 percent tax on investment income to pay for Obamacare, according to Andrew Needham, a tax partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. Applying those rates to Soros's deferred income would create a tax bill of $6.7 billion."

Now this background provides the business analysis but far more important is the relevance of the political clout that Soros has wheeled for decades and how that influence will effect if he will actually pay his tax bill.

Review the long laundry list of Organizations Funded Directly by George Soros and his Open Society Institute that have received direct funding and assistance from George Soros.

Note that the deadline for payment is 2017, just after the next election. Image the next puppet taking office using an executive order to further delay or water down the actual collection of the Soros tax obligation.

It should be self-evident that the weight of Wall Street influence will be enormous in the 2016 Presidential coronation.

Dismiss the obvious hypocrisy of advocating for higher taxes while avoiding your own tax payment and focus on the actual results.

"A manager with Soros's track record who started with $12 million from investors, took 20 percent of the profits, and reinvested that money tax-free over 40 years, would end up with $15.9 billion. If that same manager paid federal, state, and local taxes on the fees and related investment gains before reinvesting them, the figure would shrink to $2.4 billion..."

This strategy is not unique but it is symbolic of the way the financial elites benefit from their extraordinary influence over the biased tax regulations that favors the politically well connected.

The difficulty for leftist supporters of the Soros mind numbing collectivist culture is that they are unable to separate between the rhetoric and the reality of actual actions.

Soros is a pied piper for the naïve and misguided. All the millions he spends on altering the political landscape have a financial component to protect his own fortune.

Restructuring tax law and regulations never reforms the system. This one example, how hedge funds circumvent taxes, should illustrate that inserting loopholes into statutes is the function of lobbying and providing campaign contributions.

George Soros has a long record of avoiding paying taxes, while undermining political regimes. But he is not alone in avoiding taxes. Bankers Anonymous outlines how the game is played.

"If you set up a traditional hedge fund, first things first: you'll want to charge the traditional "2/20."Embedded in this short-hand lingo of "2/20" for hedge fund fees are two types of income.

With the two types of income, you need the two entities to keep the income tracked separately. Entity #1 collects the "2," which is taxed like regular business income, and Entity #2 collects the "20," which collects your totally awesome income at a lower tax rate.

The "2" refers to an annual management fee of 2% of assets under management. On a small/medium-sized hedge fund of, for example, $500 million under management, you will collect $10 million in management fees per year."

Since the standard format for a hedge fund treats fees as different tax rates, the hidden deception is why such hedge funds go unregulated by the SEC? The sweet heart tax treatment deal that allows circumvention of normal rates is a profound offence. Moving the venture offshore just adds to the outrage. Targeting 2017 for final settle up will be forgotten as the next deferment exception is adopted.

Unless people admit the elite as the real power behind the political charade, there will never be equitable tax accountability. Soros plots to overthrow governments. Ignoring the tax bill should be a cake walk. A better solution is to institute serious and comprehensive oversight over the 2-20 tax dodge and apply the same rules to the financial privileged that ordinary citizens must observe. If you agree, keep the pressure on Soros and demand a long overdue resolution.

Read More

'Nuclear disaster waiting to happen': Royal Navy probes Trident whistleblower's claims

© Reuters / Danny Lawson
HMS Victorious is seen berthed at the Clyde Naval Base in Scotland

    

The Royal Navy has launched an investigation into whistleblower William McNeilly, who exposed horrid security lapses in UK's trident nuclear program which make it easier for intruders to access some secured areas than enter "most nightclubs."

UK authorities are of the 25-year old whistleblower, who went absent without leave and cooperated with WikiLeaks to post a detailed 18-page report called The Nuclear Secrets.

McNeilly, a weapons engineer, who allegedly served from January to April this year on board the HMS Victorious, claims that a number of security lapses and technical faults with the Trident missiles carrier exposes the UK nuclear deterrent to potential terrorist attacks that

Possible attackers have e claims.

In his revelations, the whistleblower notes some 30 safety and security flaws on Trident submarines that are based out of Faslane on the Clyde, Scotland. McNeilly took his time outlining the ease at which potential terrorist can infiltrate the secured base.

the whistleblower explains.

McNeilly wrote.

An intruder could bring inside the secured facility any private electronic device to potentially steal top secret data - or even weapons and explosives, since the whistleblower claims, contractors and their equipment are hardly ever being searched.

Lack of security checks was not because McNeilly was among the Royal Navy personnel, but because

he wrote.

Besides the evident security flaws, the weapons technician lists a number of equipment problems, including a seawater leak, a flooded torpedo compartment and defective toilets. His revelations include missile compartment being used as an exercise gym, and the communication system that was difficult to understand.

he wrote.

The state of affairs is so chaotic that McNeilly says any can gain access to UK's nuclear site.

It's just a matter of time before we're infiltrated by a psychopath or a terrorist," he says."There were some people that I served with on that patrol who showed clear psychopathic tendencies."

In his testimony the runaway weapons engineer submariner also claims that the missile launch tests failed on three occasions during his serve time, meaning a successful launch would likely be impossible.

Basically they're endangering the public and spending billions upon billions of tax payers money for a system so broken it can't even do the tests that prove it works," he wrote.

McNeilly also writes that there was a "massive cover-up" of the HMS Vanguard submarine colliding with a French nuclear submarine, Le Triomphant, in the Atlantic in February 2009. In his report, he quotes a senior officer who was on Vanguard at the time as saying:

The Royal Navy has launched an investigation into McNeilly's report, calling his claims adding that

While acknowledging that McNeilly's report does the Ministry of Defense is nonetheless working with the police to find him.

the Navy said.

The whistleblower who has not returned from his leave of absence since taking off last week, acknowledged that

The worst fear for me isn't prison or being assassinated, it's the fear of sacrificing everything I have just to warn the public and yet never be heard," the 25-year-old wrote.

Some Scottish Civil Rights organizations have welcomed the sailor's courageous act.

He should be commended for his action, not hounded by the Royal Navy. He has exposed the fact that Trident is a catastrophe waiting to happen - by accident, an act of terrorism or sabotage," John Ainslie, co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, told The Herald.

Meanwhile the leader of SNP in London, MP Angus Robertson has called for full explanation and action remedy from the Royal Navy.

Robertson said.

Read More

Doctor speeds to save dying baby, cops pull him over and give him multiple charges, baby dies as a result

© WSFA.com Montgomery Alabama news.

    

Dr. Bhagwan Bang was at his home in Opp, Alabama on Sept. 8th, 2014, when he received a call about a baby that had stopped breathing and turned blue at the Andalusia Regional Hospital. Having been in this exact situation several times before, he knew that he had just minutes to be there in order to save the baby from life-altering brain damage or even death.

He has been pulled over by police several times previously for emergency medical calls. The police in Opp even gave him a specific route to take any time he had to rush to the hospital for emergency medical situations and was informed to call 911 on his way there any time he needed to get there in a hurry. He followed those exact instructions but ended up getting pulled over anyway.

When he got pulled over, he was on the phone frantically telling the hospital why he couldn't be there sooner. The police detained him even after he explained to them the situation. They held him for fifteen minutes and threatened to put handcuffs on him but eventually, they let him go.

When the Dr. Bhagwan Bang got to the hospital, he did what he could but unfortunately, the baby died several days later, likely as a result of the doctor being stopped for so long.

Not only did the baby die as a result but the police charged the man with reckless driving along with several other charges even after doctors and nurses gave testimonies in his favor that this was in fact an emergency. The Opp Municipal Court decided that Dr. Bhagwan Bang is guilty of all charges so now he faces losing his driver's license for 6 months.

Members of the community have started a petition that they will show to the Opp Police Department and Judge Ronnie Penn, the link to that is here.

WSFA.com Montgomery Alabama news video here.

Read More

International community seems fine letting Saudi Arabia acquire nuclear weapons...

© Reuters / Mian Khursheed
Nuclear-capable missile Shaheen II.

    

At the prospect of the international community's nuclear deal with Iran, Saudi Arabia has reportedly taken a decision to call in an old favor from Pakistan and get some of its nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia is widely believed to have bankrolled the Pakistani nuclear weapons program. In exchange, Riyadh reportedly expects Islamabad to provide missiles in times of trouble to defend the kingdom.

"For the Saudis the moment has come," a former American defense official told The Sunday Times newspaper. "There has been a longstanding agreement in place with the Pakistanis, and the House of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward."

According to the report, no actual transfer of weapons has taken place yet, but "the Saudis mean what they say and they will do what they say," the source reportedly said.
The report comes a month ahead of a meeting between Tehran and the P5+1 group to finalize a deal, which would lift sanctions from Iran in exchange for making its nuclear program more transparent and restricted. Key US allies in the Middle East, Israel and Saudi Arabia, are objecting to the deal, saying it would ultimately allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.

Reports of Saudi Arabia getting nukes aren't new. In November 2013, BBC's Newsnight reported on the alleged nuclear sharing agreement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

The program cited Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, telling a conference in Sweden that if Iran got the bomb, "the Saudis will not wait one month. They already paid for the bomb, they will go to Pakistan and bring what they need to bring."

The speculation came just as nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 were showing progress in Geneva.

Some experts, however, doubted that the supposed nuclear arming by Saudi Arabia was as simple as calling in the debt.

"I doubt that Pakistan is ready to send nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia," Mark Fitzpatrick, a non-proliferation expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies,told the Guardian at the time.

"Pakistan's reputation suffered greatly the last time they assisted other countries with nuclear weapons technology (i.e., the sales by [Pakistani nuclear project chief] A.Q. Khan, with some governmental support or at least acquiescence, to North Korea, Iran and Libya). Pakistan knows that transferring nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia would also incur huge diplomatic and reputational costs."

The potential of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East triggered by the Iran deal is one of the argument critics use to denigrate the talks. At the moment there are several countries in the region known or believed to have nuclear weapons.

Pakistan has a stockpile of 80 to 120 warheads designed to counterbalance India's arsenal, while Turkey hosts NATO nuclear weapons. Israel is said to have a stockpile, although it has never officially confirmed this.

Several other nations have civilian nuclear programs, including Iran, Egypt and UAE.

Read More

Five Mexican children detained over six-year-old's murder

© Daniel Acosta, AFP
Relatives of Cristopher Raymundo Marquez Mora, 6, mourn during his funeral service in Chihuahua, Mexico on May 17, 2015.

    

Mexico sought answers Monday after five children aged 11 to 15 stoned, stabbed and buried a six-year-old boy, a shocking case that raised questions about the influence of drug violence on kids.

The boy was found in a shallow grave by a stream on Saturday, two days after he was last seen with a group of children on the outskirts of the Chihuahua state capital, the regional prosecutor's office said.

Cristopher Raymundo Marquez Mora was found after investigators interrogated the children, who include two 13-year-old girls, one 11-year-old boy and two 15-year-old boys.

The five were detained as "probable culprits in an act that reflects a problem of social decay," the prosecutor's office said in a statement.

The victim disappeared late Thursday and his mother reported his disappearance the next morning, sparking a search.

The boy and the other children are neighbors who knew each other.

© Daniel Acosta, AFP/File
Police and forensic personnel carry the body of Cristopher Raymundo Marquez Mora in Chihuahua on May 16, 2015.

    

"They were playing, they tied him up and they put a stick on his neck that semi-asphyxiated him," the statement said.

"When the boy fell to the ground, they hurled rocks at him, they stuck a knife in his back and once dead, they dragged him where they deposited the body, in a shallow dig," it said.

"They covered the body with dirt and put plants and a dead animal on the surface" in a bid to hide him, the statement said.

The two 15-year-old boys could be jailed if found guilty but the other three other minors face "other types of sanctions," prosecutors said.

The murder took place in a state that has endured some of the worst bloodshed in Mexico's drug war, with thousands of people killed in turf wars between cartels.

'Generation of psychopaths'

© Daniel Acosta, AFP
Relatives of Cristopher Raymundo Marquez Mora during his funeral service in Chihuahua on May 17, 2015.

    

Chihuahua, which borders Texas, is home to Ciudad Juarez, which was once considered the world's murder capital outside a warzone as the Juarez and Sinaloa drug cartels fought for the territory.

The city's murder rate has dramatically dropped in the past four years but the state continues to witness murders, torture, kidnappings and extortion.

The five children accused of murder "are victims of an environment of extreme violence," said Juan Martin Perez, executive director of the Children's Rights Network, a non-governmental organization.

"There's a strong presence and culture of organized crime and a lack of culture of rule of law," he said. "The children reflect what they experience every day."

Carlos Ochoa, a forensic and criminology expert, said cases like the six-year-old's killing mark "the start of a generation of psychopaths, who are getting younger."

© Jesus Alcazar, AFP/File
Police officers take part in a security operation on February 12, 2013 in a street of Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua state.

    

Ochoa recalled the 2013 case of a 17-year-old girl from Chihuahua who poisoned and burned her adoptive parents.

The mother of Cristopher, Concepcion Mora, angrily rejected the explanation that the children killed her son during a game.

"It's illogical for it to be a game," she said Sunday as relatives and neighbors joined her in a protest. "They should pay for my son's life."

One of the boy's aunts warned: "We want vengeance. If they don't give us justice, we will take revenge."

Read More