Sunday, March 8, 2026
Home Blog Page 24

Why does Peru want to declare Sheinbaum a persona non grata?

The official news portal of the Peruvian Congress reported that the proponents of the persona non grata motion believe that Sheinbaum has demonstrated a "hostile" attitude toward Peru since she took office in October 2024. (Mario Jasso/Cuartoscuro).

by Mexico News Daily

The Foreign Affairs Committee of the Congress of Peru approved on Monday a motion that seeks to declare President Claudia Sheinbaum a persona non grata due to her refusal to recognize Dina Boluarte as the legitimate president of Peru and her support for ex-president Pedro Castillo.

The motion — supported by 12 members of the Foreign Affairs Committee and opposed by six — will be considered by the 130-seat unicameral Congress of Peru in the coming weeks and is likely to be approved given the makeup of the legislature.

A persona non grata designation would prevent Sheinbaum from visiting Peru — although she would be unlikely to do so while Boluarte is in office — and would further sour the relationship between Mexico and Latin America’s fifth most populous country, both of which belong to the four-member Pacific Alliance trade bloc.

The official news portal of the Peruvian Congress reported that the proponents of the persona non grata motion believe that Sheinbaum has demonstrated a “hostile” attitude toward Peru since she took office in October 2024 due to her failure to recognize “the constitutional succession” in the country after Castillo was removed from office in 2022, and by referring to the ex-president as the “legitimate president of Peru.”

On Tuesday, Sheinbaum described the ousting of Castillo as a “coup.”

Ernesto Bustamante, a congressman with the right-wing Popular Force party, said that the motion seeks to punish Sheinbaum for her “high-flown and offensive” statements against Peru.

Congresswoman María del Carmen Alva Prieto said that the motion is not against the Mexican people, “with whom we share a history and friendship.”

Instead, it represents “a legitimate defense of national dignity,” she said.

“Peru demands respect for its sovereignty and its institutions,” Alva said.

The text of the motion refers to remarks made by Sheinbaum as “an unacceptable interference in Peru’s internal affairs and an insult to the national democratic system.”

The tension between Peru and Mexico dates back to late 2022, when Castillo was ousted from office by the Peruvian Congress due to “moral incapacity.”

Boluarte, who was Castillo’s vice president, assumed the presidency.

Castillo, a former teacher and union leader who was sworn in as president in July 2021, was arrested after his removal as president and has been detained since Dec. 7, 2022, on charges of rebellion and conspiracy, among other crimes. On that day, “he gave a televised speech in which he declared the dissolution of Congress and his intent to rule by decree,” the Associated Press reported.

Later in December 2022, then-president Andrés Manuel López Obrador declared that Mexico’s diplomatic relations with Peru were “on hold,” and said that his government still considered Castillo to be the leader of the South American nation.

He said that Castillo had faced “an atmosphere of confrontation and hostility” from the beginning of his “legitimate presidency” due to “the interests of the economic and political elite.”

López Obrador also said that Castillo was a “victim of harassment and confrontation” and considered an uncultured “mountain-dweller” by the political and economic elite in Peru.

“… He was always harassed and they weakened him until they managed to remove him,” said AMLO, who accused Boluarte of “usurping” the presidency.

Sheinbaum unconcerned about possible persona non grata designation

At her Tuesday morning press conference, Sheinbaum said that her remarks about the political happenings and situation in Peru didn’t amount to an act of “aggression” against the South American nation.

The Peruvian Foreign Affairs Committee’s approval of the motion seeking to designate the president as a persona non grata came 10 days after Sheinbaum welcomed Castillo’s lawyer, Guido Croxatto, to the National Palace in Mexico City.

In a social media post at the time, Sheinbaum said that Castillo is “unjustly imprisoned in Peru.”

“On behalf of Mexico, I express my deepest solidarity with him and his family, because we know that his situation is not only a personal case, but a serious precedent of political persecution and discrimination in our region,” she wrote.

“The United Nations must act decisively to guarantee respect for human rights and justice. The freedom of Pedro Castillo is also the defense of democracy and the dignity of our peoples,” Sheinbaum wrote.

On Tuesday, she once again noted that she met with Castillo’s lawyer, and stated that “from our point of view,” the ex-president was a victim of “a coup.”

“I showed solidarity with him, that’s what I did. It’s a policy that comes from the government of president López Obrador,” Sheinbaum said.

She noted that Mexico also broke off diplomatic relations with Ecuador due to “the invasion” in 2024 of the Mexican Embassy in Quito, where an ex-vice president of Ecuador was holed up for months until his arrest during the raid carried out by Ecuadorian authorities.

With Peru, “we maintain the same criteria,” Sheinbaum said, adding that the proposal to declare her a persona non grata “doesn’t matter.”

“We’re going to maintain our position,” she said.

Mexico has a constitutionally-enshrined foreign policy of non-intervention in the internal affairs of foreign countries. But that hasn’t stopped Sheinbaum — and didn’t stop López Obrador — from denouncing what she sees as an injustice in Peru.

With reports from La Jornada and El País.

spot_img

Hidden in Trump’s spending package: A surprise boost to California’s affordable housing

Architects work on the construction of the Ruby Street Apartments in Castro Valley on February 6, 2024. The construction project is funded by the "No Place Like Home" bond, passed in 2018 to create sufficient housing for homeless people with mental health issues. Photo by Camille Cohen for CalMatters. -- Oculto en el paquete de gastos de Trump: Un impulso inesperado a la vivienda asequible en California

Trump’s spending bill includes cuts to Medicaid, food assistance and more. But it also increases a federal tax credit that helps build affordable housing in California

by Ben Christopher and Marisa Kendall

California lawmakers are preparing for a historic surge in federal funding for affordable housing construction, a tsunami of subsidy that advocates say could as much as double the number of low-rent units produced by the state over the next decade.

It comes from an unlikely source.

Buried deep among the cuts to social services in President Donald Trump’s signature spending package, the One Big Beautiful Bill, is an increase in support for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit that affordable housing advocates have sought for years. Those tax credits are the most important federal funding available for affordable housing, and they’re used in low-income projects throughout California.

Exactly how much difference this boost will make in the Golden State depends on many factors, including tariffs, labor costs, state funding, and more. But experts agree the change could help California build thousands more affordable homes each year.

“It’s a very big deal,” said Matt Schwartz, president and CEO of the affordable housing nonprofit California Housing Partnership. “These provisions are a huge shot in the arm for an affordable housing field that has been suffering under exhausted state resources.”

It’s no wonder those provisions haven’t gotten much public attention. The federal law, which Trump signed on July 4, extends and expands tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the richest and adds trillions to the federal debt while imposing historic spending cuts to Medicaid, other patches of the social safety net and clean energy programs over the next decade. For California’s Democratic leadership and its liberal-leaning electorate, there isn’t much to love and plenty to hate.

“From a California perspective, there have certainly been a lot of concerns with that bill,” said Ray Pearl, executive director of the California Housing Consortium, which advocates for affordable housing development.

But the spending package gives affordable housing boosters something to celebrate, even if many in blue California are reluctant to do so publicly.

Because the expansion to the tax credit program, part of a preexisting bill, was folded into the broader package, “the federal government has given us a green light to double production,” said Pearl.

Last week, the state committee that oversees these credits approved changes to its application process that incentivize developers to take advantage of the new federal policy.

What exactly do tax credits have to do with affordable housing?

Rather than fund public housing construction directly like it used to, the federal government rerouted most of its affordable housing funds through the tax code beginning in the 1980s. These tax credits are issued by states to affordable developers, who then sell them on to deep-pocketed banks, insurance companies and other financial behemoths, trading tax cuts for ownership shares in affordable housing projects.

It’s a financial Rube Goldberg machine, and it’s everywhere. If there’s an apartment project designated for unhoused people or low-income tenants in your neighborhood, chances are tax credits helped get it off the ground.

The credits come in two basic flavors. Both are getting a major boost under the new federal law.

One credit lets its owners write roughly 9 percent of the cost of construction on a project off their tax bill each year for 10 years. Those 9 percent credits are doled out by the federal government to the states, who then turn around and award them to developers. There are always more qualifying projects than there are credits to fund them, especially in California. The Trump-backed spending package boosts the total number of these credits by 12 percent each year indefinitely.

The other type of credit, the 4 percent credit, doesn’t come with a cap, which means it is technically available to any developer who qualifies. How a developer qualifies is the rub. Historically, an affordable project needs to cover half of its costs with particular tax-exempt bonds — which, like the 9 percent credits, are in short supply — to make full use of the 4 percent credits. The federal bill reduces that requirement, so that a project only needs to cover a quarter of its cost with the bonds.

“The bottom line is the federal government is making additional tax credits and bond capacity available,” Pearl said, “which is one of the biggest things you need to produce affordable housing nationwide, and especially in California.”

The state receives more requests for bond financing each year than it can grant, said Marina Wiant, executive director of the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. Her committee last week voted to change its application to line up with the new federal requirements — reducing the percentage of a new project that must be financed via bonds, and allowing projects already approved to reduce their bond financing. That lower threshold means there will be more bond money to go around, and more projects will get funded, she said.

“There are a lot of projects still in the queue that are waiting for bond financing,” Wiant said. “So this immediate change will have a pretty immediate impact this fall.”

How did this affordable housing boost get into Trump’s spending plan in the first place?

Schwartz’s group and others have been fighting for this tax credit increase for years, garnering bipartisan support along the way, he said. Republican lawmakers tend to view tax credits as a “good kind of subsidy,” he said. Because they are used by corporations, they are more palatable than food stamps and other direct assistance that are viewed as handouts.

Just how much could these new tax credits help? That depends on who you ask.

The changes in policy could fund the construction of an extra 1.22 million affordable rental units nationwide over the next 10 years, according to an estimate by the accounting firm Novogradac. That works out to roughly 20,000 extra units per year in California.

But many things could get in the way. If the cost of building goes up because of tariffs, increased labor costs or interest rate hikes, developers might decide not to use the tax credits. Trump’s spending package also keeps corporate tax rates low, which could reduce the value of the housing tax credits.

And, because housing is so expensive to build in California, most projects can’t rely solely on tax credits — they need other local and state funding, too. But that funding is in short supply. Extra money given out during the COVID-19 pandemic has dried up. A regional $20 billion affordable housing bond was set to go before Bay Area voters last year, but it was pulled off the ballot amid fears it would fail.

As a result, Schwartz estimates California will see closer to 10,000 new low-income homes built per year as a result of these extra tax credits, not 20,000.

“I think it’s going to take us a couple of years to ramp up,” he said.

Another potential obstacle: The cuts Trump’s spending package imposes on other areas — including the cuts to Medicaid that are expected to result in 3.4 million Californians losing coverage over the next 10 years — could exacerbate poverty for many people and undermine the benefits of the tax credits.

“It’s a tremendous irony,” Schwartz said, “that (the tax credit increase) was in this incredibly harmful ‘big ugly bill,’ as we call it.”

For the record, a previous version of this story mischaracterized the scope of the housing bond that was pulled off the ballot last fall. It was a Bay Area regional bond.

spot_img

The rise of “femicidio”: Media, gender politics, and the debate over naming violence

by the El Reportero’s staff

In recent decades, the language of crime and justice has undergone profound changes, shaped in large part by social movements and their influence on governments, legal systems, and the press. One of the most striking examples is the rise of the term femicidio or feminicide, a word now present in headlines, courtrooms, and political speeches across Latin America and beyond. This concept has become a rallying point for women’s rights advocates, but it has also generated controversy, particularly when one asks whether such terminology should apply equally when the victims are men.

Strictly speaking, the word femicidio refers to the killing of a woman precisely because she is a woman, within a social context marked by misogyny, discrimination, or systemic violence. It is not a synonym for homicide; rather, it is a recognition of gendered violence, rooted in centuries of cultural and structural inequality. When legislators in countries such as Mexico, Argentina, and Guatemala included “feminicide” in their penal codes, they intended to highlight that these murders were not random but tied to deep societal patterns of male dominance.

The press quickly adopted the term. Today, when a woman is murdered under suspicious or brutal circumstances, newspapers and television anchors often describe it as a femicide even before investigators determine motive. Activists argue this is necessary to pressure authorities who historically ignored or minimized violence against women. For them, naming is an act of justice. By calling it femicide, society acknowledges that women are not merely victims of crime in general but of crimes rooted in patriarchy.

Yet this widespread adoption of femicidio has sparked an inevitable question: what happens when the victim is a man killed because of his gender? Is there an equivalent term? The language exists—academics sometimes speak of androcide (from the Greek andros, meaning man) or masculinicidio. But these words rarely appear in news reports or legislation. Governments have not recognized them in criminal codes. The absence has created a sense of imbalance for critics who argue that equality should apply in both directions.

The debate is not merely semantic. It touches the core of how societies conceptualize violence, gender, and power. Proponents of the term femicide argue that there is a historical asymmetry: women have been subjected to systematic violence for centuries, often unpunished, while men as a group have not suffered the same structural vulnerability. From this perspective, introducing the concept of “masculinicidio” would dilute the urgent need to address violence against women specifically.

On the other side, skeptics contend that violence should be addressed with gender-neutral terminology. Murder is murder, they say, and to create a special category for one gender but not the other risks politicizing justice. For them, the media’s embrace of femicide often feels like advocacy disguised as reporting. They point to cases where headlines proclaim a femicide before the facts are established, reinforcing a narrative rather than respecting journalistic neutrality.

This tension reflects the broader influence of feminist movements in shaping contemporary politics and media discourse. Over the last three decades, women’s rights organizations have become powerful voices in the public sphere, pushing governments to adopt laws, create special prosecutors’ offices, and track statistics on gender violence. The international press, attuned to these shifts, has followed suit, ensuring that femicide remains part of the daily vocabulary. In this sense, the word represents a triumph of activism: it has forced states and societies to confront a reality that was once invisible.

At the same time, critics warn of unintended consequences. They argue that framing violence primarily through a gendered lens risks obscuring other drivers, such as poverty, organized crime, or mental health crises. Moreover, the exclusive focus on women as victims can feed a perception—fair or not—that men’s suffering is less visible or less worthy of unique recognition. When men are killed in acts motivated by misandry, revenge, or gender hatred, the lack of a recognized equivalent term creates an asymmetry that some see as unjust.

The controversy, then, is not about denying the reality of femicide but about whether justice and journalism should employ symmetrical language. If the goal is equality, should not a gender-based killing of a man also carry a name, whether androcide or otherwise? Or does symmetry miss the point, ignoring the historical weight that makes femicide distinct?

What complicates the matter further is that language shapes perception. Once a term is entrenched in legal codes and public discourse, it guides how people interpret events. When the press labels a murder as femicide, it sends a clear message that misogyny is a factor to be considered. The absence of an equivalent for men signals that such considerations are, at least officially, unnecessary in reverse. Whether one views that as progress or imbalance depends largely on one’s political and philosophical stance.

For policymakers and journalists, the challenge lies in balancing recognition of structural gender violence with the commitment to fairness and precision. Governments must ensure that laws do not become tools of ideological favoritism, while the press must resist the temptation to adopt activist language prematurely. At the same time, ignoring the specific realities of violence against women would be a step backward after decades of advocacy and sacrifice.

Ultimately, the debate over femicide and its possible counterparts is a mirror of our societies’ struggles with gender, equality, and justice. It forces us to ask difficult questions: Do we achieve fairness by creating special categories, or by treating all victims under one standard? Is the media advancing awareness, or blurring the line between reporting and activism? And perhaps most importantly, what kind of language will help us confront violence without deepening division?

What is certain is that words matter. The rise of femicidio demonstrates the power of naming to transform public consciousness. Whether or not we eventually recognize terms like androcide, the discussion itself reveals the complex interplay between movements, media, and the state in shaping the narrative of violence in the twenty-first century.

spot_img

Independence Day Celebration in San Francisco

By Magdy Zara

Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica commemorate their independence during the month of September, and colorful celebrations have been planned throughout the city. Below, we list some of them so you can share with your family and reconnect with your roots.

Share a Mexican Night, where you will experience a cultural experience with the Ballet Folklórico México Danza. The venue is the Douglas Morrison Theater, located at 22311 N 3rd St, Hayward, next Saturday, September 13, starting at 7 p.m.

To celebrate Guatemala’s Independence, there will be a marimba concert at the Palacio Latino, where attendees can also sample traditional Guatemalan food such as a delicious Atol broth, meat, chicken or duck broth, or pepián. The event is this Sunday, September 14th, starting at 1 p.m. at 13993 San Pablo Ave. For reservations, please contact unnai123@hotmail.com.

In Redwood City, the 2025 Fiestas Patrias celebration will be a joint event for several Latin American countries.

For this event, the Courthouse Square will be transformed into a festive, beautiful, and fun setting.

You can enjoy live music and entertainment, authentic Mexican food, craft vendors, and the traditional Flag Ceremony presided over by the Consul General of Mexico.

Redwood City’s Fiestas Patrias are scheduled for this Sunday, September 14th, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m., at Courthouse Square, 2200 Broadway, Redwood City. Admission is free to the public.

The Consulate General of Mexico in San Francisco, the Mexican Civic Committee of San Francisco, and MNC Inspiring Success invite the general public to the celebration of El Grito de Dolores, which includes a cultural program beginning with the flag raising at 8 p.m.

This celebration takes place on Monday, September 15, at the Civic Center Plaza, 355 McAlister Street. As you may recall, this is a free annual event.

Teatro Nahual Premieres “Two Husbands for Enriqueta”

If you want to have a unique time and see one of the funniest comedies of recent times, you have to attend the world premiere of “Two Husbands for Enriqueta,” a play by Teatro Nahual.

The play “Two Husbands for Enriqueta” is based on the classic play, “The Wise Women” by French playwright Molière. This comedy ridicules intellectual pedantry and hypocrisy in 17th-century French society.

The play will premiere on Saturday, October 4 at 7:30 p.m. and on Sunday, October 5 at 2:00 p.m. at Second Stage-Mountain View for the Performing Arts.

On October 11, 18, and 25, it will be presented at 7:30 p.m. at the Movimiento de Arte y Cultura Latino Americana (MACLA) in Madrid. San José.

For more information and to purchase tickets, visit: www.teatronahual.org

spot_img

Keith Thurman dismisses Canelo vs. Crawford as “Celebrity Boxing”

by the El Reportero‘s news services

Keith Thurman believes Terence Crawford missed a chance to level the playing field ahead of his September 13 clash with Canelo Álvarez. The former welterweight champion argues Crawford could have pushed for a catchweight below 168 pounds but instead agreed to fight at Canelo’s full super middleweight limit.

That decision, Thurman says, makes the matchup feel more spectacle than sport. He has gone so far as to label it “celebrity boxing,” pointing out that Crawford is jumping multiple divisions for an immediate title shot. “Crawford never said, ‘Let’s do this at 162.’ He didn’t bring that up,” Thurman told Fighthype. “That’s why I see it as celebrity boxing.”

The remarks contrast with UFC president Dana White, who recently dismissed celebrity boxing as “goofy” in an interview with Ring Magazine. Yet Thurman maintains that Crawford’s fast track to a 168-pound title fight, without facing ranked contenders first, resembles an exhibition and undermines boxing’s competitive structure.

Question Marks for Crawford

Crawford has not fought since narrowly defeating Israil Madrimov in August 2024. Instead of easing into the division with tune-ups, he chose to leap straight into a bout with one of boxing’s most experienced champions. Thurman suggested the decision may have been strategic—avoiding the risk of looking vulnerable—but it leaves doubts about how Crawford will handle the extra weight and Canelo’s power.

Why Thurman Favors Canelo

“Canelo’s experience is the difference,” Thurman said. “We’ve never seen Crawford carry that kind of weight for 12 rounds.”

Álvarez, who has faced top competition throughout his career, brings far more big-fight experience than Crawford, whose standout wins came at lighter weights. Even his biggest welterweight victories—over Errol Spence Jr., Shawn Porter, Kell Brook, and Amir Khan—came against fighters no longer at their peak.

Fighting for Legacy

Thurman acknowledges Canelo could knock Crawford down, but he insists the real intrigue lies in whether the smaller man can endure three weight classes above his natural division.

For Crawford, Thurman argues, this isn’t about money but about cementing his legacy against one of boxing’s best.

– With reports by Michael Collins.

spot_img

Ignacio Allende in the Mexican Independence: Father of the Nation?

Ignacio Allende was a key leader in the Mexican Independence. Discover his most significant actions and why he is one of the founding fathers.

by El Reportero news services

Every September, a question arises that sparks debate: Was Ignacio Allende the true Father of the Nation? Official history grants that title to Miguel Hidalgo, but the truth is that Ignacio Allende’s role in the Mexican Independence was so decisive that he is also recognized as one of the nation’s fundamental heroes.

Ignacio Allende in the Independence Plot

Ignacio Allende, born on January 21, 1769, in San Miguel el Grande (today San Miguel de Allende, Guanajuato), was a captain in the Queen’s Dragoon Regiment. His military experience gave him a central role in the secret meetings in Querétaro, where, along with Miguel Hidalgo, Juan Aldama, and Josefa Ortiz de Domínguez, he organized the uprising against the Spanish Crown.

Allende was one of the main liaisons between civilians and the military within the conspiracy. His strategic skill helped lay the foundations for the independence movement that would erupt in 1810.

Allende’s Role in the Beginning of Mexico’s Independence

Although it was Hidalgo who delivered the famous Grito de Dolores, Allende played a decisive role in the beginning of the War of Independence. He led insurgent troops and, thanks to his military training, became the tactical mastermind behind several battles.

He was present at the capture of the Alhóndiga de Granaditas and at the Battle of Monte de las Cruces, where the insurgent army achieved one of its most resounding victories. His discipline contrasted with Hidalgo’s more improvisational style, which generated tensions between the two leaders, but also reflected the diversity of perspectives within the movement.

Strategist of the Insurgent Movement

Allende believed in the need to transform the insurgency into a formal army. He sought to organize troops with discipline and hierarchy, convinced that improvisation could cost them the cause.

This military vision was key to giving continuity to the movement after its initial successes and failures. Although differences with Hidalgo led him to distance himself at times, the combined leadership of both parties proved essential to sustaining the struggle.

Capture of Ignacio Allende, leader of the Mexican Independence

In 1811, after the defeat at Puente de Calderón, Allende, Hidalgo, and other insurgents began their retreat north. However, they were betrayed and captured in Acatita de Baján.

Allende was taken to Chihuahua, where he was shot on June 26 of that same year. His death, far from extinguishing the movement, strengthened the spirit of those who continued the fight for independence.

Today, Allende is remembered as one of the great leaders of the Independence. His military vision, his courage in battle, and his conviction place him among the undisputed protagonists of national history.

Determining whether or not he was the true Father of the Nation is less important than recognizing that, along with Hidalgo and other insurgents, Allende laid the foundations for Mexican freedom. Every September, his name resonates as an essential part of that chorus of voices that shaped independent Mexico.

– With reports from México Desconocido.

spot_img

A nation in mourning: Violence is never the answer to political differences

Marvin Ramírez, editor

by Marvin Ramírez

Today our nation grieves. On Wednesday, September 10, 2025, Charlie Kirk was murdered at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. The conservative leader, known for addressing college campuses and mobilizing young voters, was pronounced dead at the scene after what authorities described as a targeted attack. He leaves behind a wife and two young children. His assassination—a crime that has already shocked millions—has struck a deep chord, not only among conservatives but also among Americans of all political persuasions.

Charlie Kirk was, without doubt, a powerful figure in the conservative movement. His influence on young people, his advocacy for family values, faith, free expression, and constitutional liberties were central to his work. Many admired him; many others disagreed with him. But whether one loved him or opposed him, one cannot deny that he was a man who exercised his right to speak and to persuade peacefully, through words and ideas—not through violence. He used the tools that democracy provides. For that alone, his presence was an example of how political life in a free nation should operate.

What happened to Kirk is not merely a crime against one person. It is an attack on the very foundation of free society: the ability to speak, to organize, and to participate in shaping the future of the nation without fear of death. When disagreements turn into violence, when words are silenced by bullets, we all lose. America loses. Humanity loses.

In moments like these, it is tempting for both sides of the political spectrum to retreat into their corners, to point fingers, to inflame further anger. But if we are honest, we must admit that this cycle of hate and dehumanization is precisely what creates an environment where tragedies like this can occur. Conservatives are not monsters. Progressives are not enemies. They are fellow citizens, neighbors, coworkers, and friends. They are human beings. When any group teaches itself to despise and demonize the other, it plants seeds of violence that eventually grow into destruction.

The United States has long prided itself on being a beacon of democracy and a defender of liberty around the world. Yet in recent years, political assassinations, violent protests, and attacks on individuals for their beliefs have made headlines with disturbing regularity. These acts do not represent the majority of Americans, who yearn for peace, justice, and stability. Instead, they are carried out by small groups driven by radical ideologies—groups that often receive disproportionate attention and legitimacy through sensationalist media coverage.

It is time to say, with one voice, that this is not who we are. Violence does not strengthen democracy; it destroys it. Silencing opposing views through bloodshed is not justice; it is tyranny. Those who raise their fists and weapons against political opponents do not defend freedom—they betray it.

Charlie Kirk’s legacy will be debated for years to come, as is the case with all public figures. But one thing must remain beyond dispute: no American should fear for their life because of the ideas they speak. Freedom of expression is not a partisan value. It is not conservative or liberal. It is a human right and the cornerstone of our republic. If we lose that, we lose everything.

This tragedy calls for more than mourning; it calls for reflection. Have we, as a people, abandoned the principles of civil discourse and mutual respect? Have we allowed hatred to replace dialogue? Have we permitted the loudest, most extreme voices—whether in politics or the press—to drown out the quiet but steady call of our better angels? If so, then we must turn back, before the path leads us to even darker places.

To my fellow citizens on both sides: let us honor Charlie Kirk’s memory not with more division, but with a renewed commitment to peace. Let us meet speech with speech, idea with idea, ballot with ballot—not gun with gun. Let us remember that behind every belief is a human being, with dignity, with worth, with a family that loves them.

The world is watching. America still has the opportunity to prove that democracy is stronger than violence, that words are stronger than weapons, and that our common humanity is greater than our divisions. But that choice belongs to each of us, here and now.

Charlie Kirk’s voice has been silenced, but ours has not. May we use it not to deepen the wounds of hate, but to heal them.

spot_img

Crawford adds power ahead of super middleweight title bout with Canelo

by the El Reportero staff

LAS VEGAS — Terence Crawford’s camp says the undefeated champion has added punching power as he prepares to move up two weight divisions to challenge Canelo Alvarez for the undisputed super middleweight title on Sept. 13 at Allegiant Stadium.

Crawford’s sparring partner, Steven Nelson, said the 36-year-old has kept his trademark speed and movement while gaining strength at 168 pounds.

“He’s always had power, but now it’s different,” Nelson told Fighthype. “He still has the speed, the movement, the ability. The only thing that’s changed is his power. People are going to see on September 13.”

Crawford (41-0, 31 KOs) has fought most of his career at lightweight, junior welterweight and welterweight, collecting titles in each division. His last bout was in August 2024 against WBA junior middleweight champion Israil Madrimov, where observers noted his power appeared limited against a naturally larger opponent.

Despite the questions, Crawford’s supporters believe the added size gives him a chance to upset Alvarez (63-2-2, 39 KOs), who remains one of boxing’s most dominant champions. Alvarez has held the undisputed crown at 168 pounds since 2021.

Alvarez is known for throwing fewer punches than many of his opponents but landing with heavier impact. In his most recent defense, he defeated William Scull by unanimous decision despite throwing only 152 punches over 12 rounds.

Skepticism about Crawford’s ability to compete at super middleweight has also come from former heavyweight champion Mike Tyson, who told Sports Illustrated that Crawford’s performance against Madrimov was not impressive. “You gotta look good in order to not mess up your next fight,” Tyson said.

Crawford, who turned professional in 2008, has been criticized for sitting out the past year rather than testing himself against contenders at 168. His camp argues that the layoff has allowed him to adapt physically before facing Alvarez.

The fight will mark Crawford’s attempt to become a four-division world champion, while Alvarez seeks to defend his status as one of boxing’s biggest stars.

—With reports from ESB / Boxing News 24/7.

spot_img

Paint Sausalito Celebrates Its Third Annual Edition

By Magdy Zara

The third annual Paint Sausalito event kicked off on August 18th. This is a unique opportunity to celebrate art outdoors, bringing together live painting sessions, artist talks, and a shared passion for this unique art form.

The Sausalito Center for the Arts has an outdoor talk scheduled for this Sunday, September 7th, dedicated to the art and essence of painting outdoors.

A closing reception is scheduled for next Sunday, September 14th, where you are invited to the final hours of an outdoor Paint Sausalito exhibition.

The outdoor talk will be on Sunday, September 7th, while the closing reception (Last Look) is on September 14th, both at the Sausalito Center for the Arts, located at 750 Bridgeway Sausalito, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.

Live, outdoor music in Valencia

With three simultaneous stages, the free monthly party takes place on Valencia Street in San Francisco, taking place on the second Thursday of every month.

Take advantage of this opportunity to spend time with family or friends. You can dance to salsa, samba, R&B, rock, and much more, while Valencia Street becomes a giant party.

Attendees can also enjoy a cocktail and stroll the streets while exploring one of San Francisco’s most vibrant neighborhoods.

The event is this Thursday, September 11, starting at 5 p.m., on Valencia Street between 16th and 19th Streets, San Francisco.

San Francisco celebrates Mexican Independence

Mexican independence was a long process that, like all wars of independence, was fought in stages. Therefore, it has several important dates, two of which fell during the month of September.

For this reason, several organizations have planned activities to commemorate this important date.

The 24th Street Latino Cultural District organizes the Fiesta de las Américas annually to celebrate Mexican Independence Day. This year, it presents a varied program that includes live music, mariachi bands, a show band, several dance companies with traditional dance performances, craft and food sales, and more.

This event will take place this Saturday, September 13th, starting at 11 a.m., on 24th Street from Folsom Street to Bryant Street in San Francisco.

The Mission Cultural Center for the Latino Arts is celebrating its Noche Mexicana 2025 event with an unforgettable evening of culture, cuisine, and community.

The invitation is extended for this Saturday, September 13th, 2025, starting at 5 p.m., at the MCCLA, located at 2868 Mission Street, San Francisco. Tickets are $5.

For more information and to reserve your table, please contact info@missionculturalcenter.org

spot_img

Celebrating Latin American roots and sharing history in the U.S.

by the El Reportero staff

Every year, the month of September is filled with flags, music, dances, and traditions that commemorate the independence of numerous Latin American countries. In particular, September 15 marks a key date for five Central American nations: Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, which commemorate their independence from Spain, proclaimed in 1821 in Guatemala City. For Latin American communities in the United States, this commemoration not only commemorates a historical event but also serves as a bridge between cultural heritage and the lives of new generations.

Central American independence emerged after three centuries of Spanish colonization, marked by social and economic limitations imposed on the region’s inhabitants. The 1821 proclamation temporarily united Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica under the name of the United Provinces of Central America. Although the union dissolved 18 years later, each nation developed its own institutions and traditions, keeping alive the spirit of freedom that began that day. Festivities include civic parades, school ceremonies, flag-raising, traditional music, and typical cuisine—from Salvadoran pupusas to Guatemalan tamales—that evoke cultural identity and allow history to be tangibly experienced.

In Mexico, independence is celebrated on September 16 with “El Grito de Dolores,” the famous ceremony commemorating the beginning of the struggle in 1810 led by Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla. Chile celebrates on September 18 with “Fiestas Patrias,” featuring parades, ramadas, folk music, and traditional foods. Other countries, such as Costa Rica, also have dates close to September, turning this month into a vibrant calendar of patriotic symbols for the entire Latin American community. In U.S. cities with large Latino populations—such as Los Angeles, Houston, Miami, New York, Chicago, and San Francisco—the festivities adapt to a multicultural environment, organizing community events, cultural fairs, concerts, parades, and school competitions, where children learn about history and culture while enjoying the celebration.

For young Hispanics born in the United States, these festivities go beyond a civic event or a parade. They are an educational tool that allows them to learn about the history of their countries of origin, the heroes who fought for independence, and the values ​​that inspired their freedom. Parents, grandparents, and teachers play a fundamental role, passing on stories, songs, dances, and recipes that might otherwise be lost over time. Thus, commemorative events become a living learning experience about history and culture, strengthening young people’s identity and sense of belonging.

Each Central American country has its own unique traditions. In Guatemala, a school flag parade and marching bands mark the day, while in Honduras, civic events are held with patriotic speeches and painting and poetry contests in schools and communities. El Salvador stands out for its school parades and folk dance performances. Nicaragua organizes marching bands, official events, and cultural festivals that include traditional foods and games. Costa Rica, although smaller, celebrates with school ceremonies and public events that commemorate independence and promote historical education from an early age.

The independence celebration also strengthens the bond between the different Latin American communities in the U.S. It is common for events to bring together Guatemalans, Salvadorans, Hondurans, Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans, and Mexicans, creating spaces for cultural exchange where music, cuisine, and traditions are shared. This strengthens community ties and allows young people to feel part of a larger community, appreciating the diversity of histories and cultures that converge in a single country.

Furthermore, preserving these traditions in the United States is an act of cultural resistance against homogenization. Teaching children and grandchildren about their countries’ origins, independence heroes, and cultural richness ensures that historical memory remains alive. Every parade, school event, or community festival is an opportunity for young people to recognize their roots, develop pride in their heritage, and share their history with new generations.

Independence celebrations in the United States also provide visibility for the Latino community. Local media, municipal governments, and schools often cover these events, showcasing the region’s cultural richness and fostering respect and understanding of diversity.

spot_img