House Democrats call on house Republicans to begin negotiations on Puerto Rico
by Rep. Raúl M. Grijalba
Washington, D.C. – The House Natural Resources Committee is holding its third hearing on Puerto Rico’s financial and economic crisis tomorrow. A representative from the U.S. Treasury Department will testify and present the Obama Administration’s assessment of the Commonwealth’s debt crisis. Democrats are calling for the Committee to begin bipartisan negotiations and draft a legislation that outlines a responsible solution to Puerto Rico’s crisis by March 31, the deadline set by House Speaker Paul Ryan.
On Oct. 21, 2015, the Obama Administration unveiled a detailed legislative outline to help Puerto Rico address its serious fiscal challenges. While the Administration has worked extensively with Puerto Rican officials to find solutions to the Commonwealth’s fiscal crisis, Congress has authority to provide Puerto Rico with the tools required to lay the foundation for the Commonwealth’s recovery, and Congress should act.
Last summer Puerto Rico’s governor, Alejandro García Padilla, declared that the commonwealth’s $72 billion in debt “is not payable.” This past week, the Puerto Rican government announced that “it had substantial doubt about its ability to operate in the long term” after the Government Development Bank signaled that it is likely to miss its next bond payment.
“As we enter tomorrow’s hearing on Puerto Rico, I want my colleagues to remember that we are dealing with people’s lives here – parents, children, teachers, nurses, law enforcement officers – all U.S. citizens,” said House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ). “The 3.5 million Puerto Ricans living on the island have endured more than a decade of austerity and deserve economic relief. Following tomorrow’s hearing we should immediately start discussions on drafting bipartisan legislation that can be reported to the floor without further delay. The clock is ticking; March 31 will be here before we know it.”
“Our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico continue to face a contracting economy and an unsustainable debt burden,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. “Only Congress can empower Puerto Rico with the meaningful tools to restructure its public debt and restore the economic stability necessary to create jobs and a brighter economic future. I urge my Republican colleagues to act expeditiously in enacting a comprehensive and bipartisan solution that brings urgent relief to the people of Puerto Rico.”
“I join in calling on House Republicans to begin bipartisan negotiations on legislation to address the debt crisis in Puerto Rico,” stated Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer. “Puerto Rico is an integral part of the United States of America, and like other jurisdictions who have found themselves in deep fiscal trouble, we ought to allow the island to restructure its debt. House Democrats will continue to push for commonsense legislation to confront the financial crisis in Puerto Rico, and I am hopeful both parties can reach agreement on a path forward before Speaker Ryan’s March 31 deadline.”
“Congress has a responsibility to every American citizen to make sure we don’t get in the way of their prosperity,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Xavier Becerra (D-CA). “The American citizens of Puerto Rico have been waiting for months for Congress to act. American citizens can’t afford a do-nothing Congress.”
“What’s happening in Puerto Rico is not only a financial crisis, but a humanitarian one,” said Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY). “It is critical the Committee move forward swiftly with meaningful, broad based legislation that allows the Commonwealth to restructure its debt, without imposing further hardship on the people of Puerto Rico who have already endured major cuts to public services. Congress has a moral obligation to act.”
“Puerto Rico can’t solve its economic problems alone and only Congress can take the necessary action at the federal level,” said Congressman José E. Serrano (D-NY). “The island is on the verge of a humanitarian crisis and more than 3.5 million American citizens are suffering the consequences of Congress’ inaction. I trust tomorrow’s hearing will allow us to reach some consensus and make significant progress in addressing this crisis. The Speaker’s deadline is approaching- and it is time to act.”
“The people of Puerto Rico want and deserve respect from the Congress and want to know that their opinions, their aspirations, and their lives will be taken seriously by Congress and by Washington,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutiérrez (D-IL).
“Puerto Rico is facing a financial and humanitarian crisis, and Congress has both a duty and moral responsibility to act,” said Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY), Vice Chair of the Democratic Caucus. “The people of Puerto Rico are a part of our American family, and they deserve immediate action by their Congress. I join my colleagues in urging House Republicans to make this issue a priority.”
They can already hack the iPhone – FBI’s public display is propaganda
FROM THE EDITOR:
Dear readers, if you are a mainstream media watcher and reader, you’ve probably been somewhat aware that the FBI and Apple Co. have been in a controversial conversation where the government wants Appel to create a door in your iPhone security and allow the government to have access to the private data. A dangerous break from our freedom as free people is about to happen if Apple cedes to the government demands. The following article, written by Justin Gardner, brings up a bit of what the controversy is all about.
by Justin Gardner
The apparent battle between Apple and the FBI at least tells us that the post-Snowden privacy debate is still alive. The subject of the controversy is an iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, and the FBI did not choose this case randomly.
If the surveillance state is to have any hope of gaining their vaunted “backdoor” into the electronic devices of everyone, then preying on the fear of terrorism has the biggest chance of success.
James Comey appears quite earnest about protecting Americans from evil:
“Fourteen people were slaughtered and many more had their lives and bodies ruined,” Comey wrote on the Lawfare blog. “We owe them a thorough and professional investigation under law.
We simply want the chance, with a search warrant, to try to guess the terrorist’s passcode without the phone essentially self-destructing and without it taking a decade to guess correctly,” he wrote. “That’s it. We don’t want to break anyone’s encryption or set a master key loose on the land.”
Apple CEO Tim Cook does not agree:
“The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true,” Cook wrote. “Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.”
Comey said the phone’s data might have information leading them to other terrorists, even though indications are that the two shooters were self-radicalized.
However, what if this debate is actually a sideshow? What if the government already has the ability to hack into the iPhone?
As the surveillance state was met with fierce resistance for trying to force companies to install “backdoors” to their encryption, it was looking for other ways to gain the access it desires.
A secret “decision memo” was recently leaked to the press which details a meeting of the National Security Council that took place last November. The meeting of senior officials provided a framework for attempts to work around the “backdoor” issue, and shows that agencies already possess a deep understanding of tech companies’ encryption.
“What the court is ordering Apple to do, security experts say, does not require the company to crack its own encryption, which the company says it cannot do in any case. Instead, the order requires Apple to create a piece of software that takes advantage of a capability that Apple alone possesses to modify the permanently installed “firmware” on iPhones and iPads, changing it so that investigators can try unlimited guesses at the terror suspect’s PIN code with high-powered computers. Once investigators get the PIN, they get the data.
Knake said that the Justice Department’s narrowly crafted request shows both that FBI technical experts possess a deep understanding of the way Apple’s security systems work and that they have identified potential vulnerabilities that can provide access to data the company has. In this case, the government wants Apple’s help in exploiting such weaknesses. But experts say they could find ways to do it themselves, and the NSC “decision memo” could lead to more money and legal authorization for a smorgasbord of similar workarounds.”
Many security experts believe that the FBI and NSA can already hack into an iPhone without Apple’s help, using a number of techniques such as “infrared laser glitching” or “de-capping.” Edward Snowden backed this up last week in a virtual interview with Johns Hopkins University. These techniques, although risky to the chip, are already in use by the most advanced hackers and, very likely, the NSA.
If the government already has its own access to the iPhone, then the FBI’s chosen “debate” with Apple is an exercise in wearing down public resistance to the surveillance state.
The Department of Justice (DoJ) could have used a dozen other cases of locked phones to push this debate. On Tuesday, it was reported that DoJ was pursuing about 12 court orders to force Apple to help extract data from iPhones. But the San Bernardino terror case gave them an opportunity to sway public opinion.
Indeed, as The Intercept reports, authoritarians are salivating at the possibility of trampling over the last defense of tech companies and privacy advocates.
“In Suffolk County, Massachusetts, district attorney’s office spokesperson Jake Wark said prosecutors “can’t rule out” bringing their own case of a locked cellphone before a judge, too. “It may be a question of finding the right case,” he told the Wall Street Journal.
“It’s going to have significant ramifications on us locally,” Matt Rokus, deputy chief of Wisconsin’s Eau Claire Police Department, told the city’s Leader-Telegram newspaper on Monday.
In South Dakota, Minnehaha County State’s Attorney Aaron McGowan told the Sioux Falls Argus Leader that “the court’s ruling could have a significant impact on conducting sensitive criminal investigations.”…
In a new letter to customers posted on Monday, Apple drew attention to the enthusiastic response from other law enforcers: “Law enforcement agents around the country have already said they have hundreds of iPhones they want Apple to unlock if the FBI wins this case.”
Then there is the unusual piece of news that the Apple password on the shooter’s iPhone was changed less than 24 hours after the shooting, which meant that automatic iCloud backups were put on hold. The password was changed by someone at the San Bernardino Health Department at the FBI’s behest.
Apple says that if this had not happened, all the information sought by the FBI might be present on iCloud backups. It now only has backups up to the week of October 19. The FBI claims that it did this to gain “immediate access to the iCloud backup data.” But why would it sacrifice total access to gain immediate access?
After having created the difficulty of gaining the access it wants, government is now attempting to force the tech company to create the backdoor to encryption wanted so badly by the surveillance state.
Federal government is unrelenting in its drive to sacrifice freedom for “security,” and they never let a tragedy go to waste.
Turmeric able to ‘smart kill’ cancer
Chemotherapy and radiation now medically obsolete Radiation now medically obsolete
by Daniel Barker
Turmeric has long been one of the most prized spices from the East, but its benefits extend far beyond the wonderful flavor and color it lends to many recipes. The health-promoting properties of turmeric have been known for millennia, but only recently has it been discovered that the bright orange spice is also a powerful ally in preventing and curing cancer.
It’s been cultivated for more than 5,000 years in the tropics of Asia, where the brown-skinned root with the bright-orange flesh has been valued for the treatment of a number of conditions including “toothache, chest pain, urinary tract infection, flatulence, jaundice, menstrual discomforts, bruises, hemorrhage, and colic.”
The spice made its way to the West through Arab trade routes during the 13th century and has become popular throughout the world. Turmeric is now grown in tropical regions such as India, the Philippines and the Caribbean, and is probably best known as one of the fundamental ingredients of curry dishes.
It has more recently been discovered that turmeric has the potential to replace chemotherapy and radiation in the treatment of certain cancers – and it has been proven to prevent and fight virtually every type of cancer.
From TheTruthAboutCancer.com:
Turmeric’s active ingredient is an extracted compound called curcumin. Studies have shown that curcumin helps prevent several forms of cancer including breast, lung, stomach, liver, and colon because of its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. It stops the development of cancer by interfering with the cellular signaling aspects of the chronic disease.
Curcumin’s nearly miraculous “smart kill” properties work to inhibit the growth of tumors and the spread of cancer in fundamental ways at the cellular level. It has the laboratory-proven capability to inhibit a particular cancer-promoting enzyme (COX-2), impede blood supply to cancer cells, induce tumor-suppressing genes, stop metastasis (the spread of cancer throughout the body’s organs), kill lymphoma cells and prevent the regrowth of cancer stem cells.
The ability to target cancer stem cells is one of curcumin’s most powerful anti-cancer properties, as a recent study revealed.
From GreenMedInfo.com:
[T]he study describes the wide range of molecular mechanisms presently identified by which curcumin attacks cancer stem cells (CSCs), which are the minority subpopulation of self-renewing cells within a tumor colony, and which alone are capable of producing all the other cells within a tumor, making them the most lethal, tumoriogenic of all cells within most if not all cancers.
Because CSCs are resistant to chemotherapy, radiation, and may even be provoked towards increased invasiveness through surgical intervention, they are widely believed to be responsible for tumor recurrence and the failure of conventional treatment.
It can only be hoped that the FDA and Big Pharma don’t find a way to outlaw curcumin, since it seems to have as much promise as marijuana as a cancer preventative and cure. That statement is made only partly in jest because, as always, if a potential cure for a disease can be found in Nature, the pharmaceutical drug makers have no use for it since it cuts into their profit margins.
When natural cures and preventatives are proven to have merit, the drug industry will typically go to great lengths to denounce and prevent their use, or at least find ways to synthesize and patent them so that they can be sold to the public for enormous profits, whether their versions are safe and effective or not – and often the pharmaceutical versions are neither.
So it’s a good idea to begin introducing turmeric into your diet now (if you haven’t already) – and it happens to be a very versatile spice.
Curries wouldn’t be the same without turmeric – it’s one of the main spices found in most variations of the dish and provides its distinctive color and taste – but it’s also a fantastic ingredient that can be used in many other recipes, including soups, meats, rice dishes, and stews. It’s also great with eggs, potatoes and even smoothies. In addition, you can also pair it with black pepper, which helps make curcumin more effective.
The amazing spice turmeric is yet another proof that Mother Nature provides us with everything we need… (Naturalnews).
Beyond deportation
Fixing a broken immigration system
by David Bacon
The American Prospect
When President Obama appointed Dollie Gee to the U.S. District Court in 2010, he undoubtedly didn’t expect her to mount a frontal challenge to his administration’s detention and deportation policies. But five years after her elevation as the first Chinese American woman on the federal bench, Gee ruled last summer that holding Central American women and children in private detention lockups was illegal.
Gee didn’t mince words. She called the detentions “deplorable.” And she denounced as “fear-mongering” the claim by Homeland Security lawyers that the detentions would discourage more people from leaving Central America.
Her angry tone shouldn’t have come as a surprise. Gee’s father was an immigrant engineer and her mother a garment worker in a Los Angeles sweatshop. After law school, as a young lawyer, Gee sued employers for discrimination and then worked for the Teamsters Union, helping workers and immigrants win representation elections. For Chinese Americans, today’s detentions contain ugly echoes of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which led to the brutal detention of thousands of Chinese immigrants on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay 128 years ago.
Gee ruled that imprisoning families violated the Flores Settlement, an agreement by the federal government in 1997 that it would release children whenever possible, and hold them in the least restrictive conditions when it could find no one to care for them. But the U.S. appealed Gee’s ruling, handed down in August of last year, and in December the Obama administration announced that it would begin deporting Central American migrants who had arrived after May 2014, and who had lost their appeals before immigration judges. Agents then picked up 121 people, including women and children, and sent them to detention centers in Texas.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, defended the action. “Our borders are not open to illegal migration,” he said at a press conference. “If you come here illegally, we will send you back consistent with our laws and values.”
The statement captures one side of the administration’s contradictory treatment of Central American immigrants. On the one hand, President Obama acknowledges that families crossing the border are fleeing violence at home in Central America. On the other, he blames people for coming.
The latest wave of women and children from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala began arriving on the U.S. border in 2014, prompting the antiimmigrant Breitbart News Network to launch a campaign of hysteria. Agents at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, presumably at the behest of conservatives within their ranks, chimed in with allegations that detention centers were being “flooded” by Central American children.
In response, the Obama administration pushed forward construction of two privately run facilities in Texas, designed to hold 1,500 people between them. When immigrant advocates voiced outrage, the administration began processing asylum claims more rapidly, to shorten stays in the centers. At the same time, the administration defended its much broader decision to defer the deportation of family members of legal residents and citizens. When a Texas judge declared that decision illegal in 2014, the administration began a long appeals process that has now brought the case before the Supreme Court. Twenty-six states, almost all with Republican governors, joined the suit against the Obama order.
Both the administration’s threats and detentions have failed to reduce migration, however. Some 58,650 non-Mexicans were picked up on the U.S.-Mexico border during the last three months of 2015. The number of unaccompanied children apprehended was 17,370, compared to 7,987 during the same period the year before, while the number of families went from 7,468 to 21,469.
Blaming the wave of migration on “violence” is far too simple. Modern migration from Central America began with the counterinsurgency wars of the 1980s. The Reagan administration cast as a Cold War threat what were essentially civil conflicts to change societies dominated by wealthy elites, and intervened to support militaries and contras. As U.S.-backed armies and contras waged war on civilians, hundreds of thousands of people fled.
Sergio Sosa, a Guatemalan immigrant who now directs Omaha’s Heartland Workers’ Center, recalls bitterly: “The U.S. was responsible for the coups that happened in Guatemala in 1944 and later in ‘54. Our army was trained at the School of the Americas, and they would come back afterwards and kill our own people. The U.S. used its power and we buried the dead.”
An estimated 500,000 Salvadorans arrived in the U.S. in the 1980s, and tens of thousands more fled Honduras and Guatemala. As a result, thousands of families have been separated for decades.
Many settled in the poorest and most dangerous neighborhoods of big U.S. cities, including Los Angeles, and were recruited into gangs. The Los Angeles police-many of whom were later found guilty of robbery, murder, and selling drugs themselves-launched the notorious Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums (CRASH) program that arrested and deported young immigrants by the thousands.
But instead of convincing young people in L.A. not to join gangs, deportation spread gang culture through Central America. The name of the Trece (13) gang, for instance, refers to 13th Street in Los Angeles, not in Tegucigalpa.
Obama’s Russian rationale for $1 trillion nuke plan signals news arms race
by Alex Emmons
The Intercept
The Obama administration has historically insisted that its massive $1 trillion nuclear weapons modernization program does not represent a return to Cold War-era nuclear rivalry between Russia and the United States.
The hugely expensive undertaking, which calls for a slew of new cruise missiles, ICBMs, nuclear submarines, and long-range bombers over the next three decades, has been widely panned by critics as “wasteful,” “unsustainable,” “unaffordable,” and “a fantasy.”
The administration has pointed to aging missile silos, 1950s-era bombers, and other outdated technology to justify the spending, describing the steps as intended to maintain present capabilities going forward — not bulking up to prepare for a future confrontation.
Last year, speaking to NATO allies, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter insisted that “the Cold War playbook … is not suitable for the 21st century.”
But President Obama’s defense budget request for 2017 includes language that makes it clear that nuclear “modernization” really is about Russia after all.
The budget request explicitly cites Russian aggression, saying, “We are countering Russia’s aggressive policies through investments in a broad range of capabilities … [including] our nuclear arsenal.”
In December, Brian McKeon, principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, testified before Congress: “We are investing in the technologies that are most relevant to Russia’s provocations … to both deter nuclear attacks and reassure our allies.”
The public acknowledgement that Russia is the impetus for U.S. modernization has critics concerned the Cold War-era superpowers are now engaged in a “modernization” arms race.
“Both Russia and the United States are now officially and publicly using the other side as a justification for nuclear weapons modernization programs,” said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project, in a statement emailed to The Intercept.
Early in his presidency, Obama was an outspoken advocate of nuclear disarmament. In April 2009, he pledged his commitment “to achieving a nuclear free world,” together with former Russian President Dimitri Medvedev. Later that month, Obama delivered a celebrated speech in Prague, saying he sought “the security of a world without nuclear weapons.” And he negotiated a 2011 nuclear treaty with Russia, which required both countries to reduce their arsenals to 1,550 operational warheads each.
But according to Obama’s advisers, Russia’s invasion of Crimea halted his disarmament efforts. In a 2014 interview with the New York Times, Gary Samore, one of Obama’s top first-term nuclear advisers, said, “The most fundamental game changer is Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. That has made any measure to reduce the stockpile unilaterally politically impossible.”
Former officials have proposed ways of trimming the trillion-dollar budget. In December, former Defense Secretary William Perry called for the Pentagon not to replace its aging ICBMS, arguing that submarines and bombers were enough to deter nuclear threats.
Retired Gen. Eugene Habiger, the former head of U.S. Strategic Command, which overseas the Pentagon’s nuclear weapons, has argued that U.S. nuclear forces have little to no deterrent effect on Russia and China, and that the U.S. can safely reduce its active arsenal to 200-300 weapons.
Last year, in an effort to cut the costs of nuclear modernization, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., introduced a bill that would reduce the number of planned missile-bearing submarines from 14 to eight. The bill, which would save an estimated $4 billion per submarine, was co-sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont Democrat who is now running for president.
When asked about nuclear modernization at a campaign event in Des Moines, Iowa, Hillary Clinton responded, “Yeah, I’ve heard about that, I’m going to look into that, it doesn’t make sense to me.” Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio, on the other hand, supported the expense, saying, “Deterrence is a friend to peace.”
Religious groups have also voiced opposition to nuclear modernization. “We were pleased with the president’s statement calling for a world without nuclear weapons,” said Mark Harrison, director of the Peace with Justice program at the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society.
David Culp, a legislative representative at the Quaker-affiliated Friends Committee on National Legislation, said, “The increased spending on U.S. nuclear weapons is already provoking similar responses from Russia and China. We are slowly slipping back into another Cold War, but this time on two fronts.”
Contracts are already being signed. In October, the Pentagon awarded Northrop Grumman the contract for the new long-range bomber. The total cost is secret, but expected to exceed $100 billion.
In other related news:
Western bankers are provoking Russian into starting WWIII
by Daniel Barker
Collapse News
Many have speculated about the possibility that the recent drop in oil prices was part of a ploy by Western bankers and governments to punish Vladimir Putin over his actions in Ukraine and challenges of NATO authority.
But there are some who see an even darker agenda. Is it possible that the West is deliberately pushing Russia into starting WWIII?
According to Dave Hodges of The Common Sense Show, it’s not just manipulated oil prices but also the cutting off of liquidity to Russian banks – two moves which he believes are designed to push Russia into a war with the West.
As frightening and reckless as that sounds, there seems to be solid evidence that this is indeed the case.
In a recent article, Hodges first compares the current situation to events leading up to WWII. He argues that Pearl Harbor was also the result of a deliberate plan:
This reminds me of the days before World War II in which the United States followed a doctrine called the eight point plan which was designed to provoke Japan into attacking America so Roosevelt could use this as the excuse to get involved in World War II.
That assertion may cause many to shake their heads in disbelief, but Hodges is not the first to suggest that this may have been the case. Many wars have been the result of manipulation behind the scenes — not just the ones of the 20th century.
Hodges goes on to ask his readership whether there has been any logical explanation for the recent drop in oil prices. A fair question in light of the fact that the price for crude oil has decreased by 50 percent in a matter of just a few months — and at a time of year when they normally spike.
It’s difficult to believe that, even if there were a “glut” of oil, as has been claimed, prices would drop so far and so fast.
And now there seems to be a concerted effort by Western bankers to ditch the ruble as a valid currency. As Hodges points out:
[B]rokers are now advising their clients that any existing Russian Ruble positions will be terminated without any further notice because of concerns related to the lack of Russian “capital controls“. At least that is the excuse that Western banks are using to run from the Ruble. The truth of the matter is that the West has declared war on Russia and its BRICS partners for undermining the Petrodollar.
Mexico and the U.S. reach agreements for orderly repatriation
by the El Reportero’s wire services
The Foreign Ministry of Mexico called historic the negotiation that led to agreements with the U.S. for ‘’decent, safe and orderly repatriation of Mexican nationals’’ it was known here today.
Both sides finished in El Paso, Texas, the review process and signing of the Local Arrangements of Repatriation at the border to ensure the safety and proper reception of the returned Mexicans.
As a result of historical trading, for the first time the agreements include a commitment to carry out the repatriations at certain times (primarily diurnal) and to limit the repatriations to 12 points (11 of them borderly and Mexico City for the flights of the Repatriation Program to the Interior) where there is infrastructure and assistance programs for people who return.
So it says a statement from the Foreign Ministry releasing the analysis of initiatives to improve care for unaccompanied children and teenagers arrested in their attempt to enter the United States.
Both countries agreed to increase to three the weekly flights of the Mexican Interior Repatriation Program (MIRP).
The National Migration Institute received 205,417 repatriations of Mexican people from the United States and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its consular network, attended 180,908 cases of protection and assistance, the statement adds.
Nobel Peace prizes visit political prisoners in Guatemala
Nobel Peace Prizes Rigoberta Menchú (1992) and Jody Williams (1997) visited five Guatemalan community leaders, who remain in prison after a year for defending their communities’s rights in the country.
During their visit to the Detention Centre in Zone 18 in the capital, the Nobel Women’s Initiative (NWI) learned details of the delays of the process of securing justice in favor of Rigoberto Juárez, Domingo Baltazar, Arturo Pablo, Francisco Juan and Adalberto Villatoro.
Each conscious prisoner offered details about their fights against the installation of hydro projects in the territories of Santa Eulalia and Santa Cruz Barillas, in the western department of Huehuetenango, as well as their experiences in prison.
This visit encourages us to keep fighting, along with the Nobel Women’s Initiative, it helps us make more contributions and provides us with inputs to do our bit for their release, she added.
Pemex’’s debt is unsustainable; its revenues drop
The debt accumulated today by Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex, in Spanish) is no longer sustainable, recognized its director, José Antonio González, while the company’’s revenues continue to decline.
González said that despite the debit Pemex has a long-term viability.
It has a large inventory of total reserves, low production cost and the recognized ability and talent of its technicians, said the executive.
However, indicators of the oil company after the first month of the year brought bad news.
The revenues from oil exports dropped by 50 percent a year, due to a fall of 34 percent of oil prices in January.
On that date, Pemex entered just 815 million dollars, compared with the 1,630 million recorded in the same month of 2015.
It was also specified that the volume of oil exports fell 11 percent year to January 2016, totaling 1.12 million barrels per day, compared with the 1.26 reported in the same month of 2015.
By contrast, Pemex increased its imports of natural gas in 47.2 percent per year.
The decision of the government led by President Enrique Peña Nieto to liberalize the imports of gasoline and diesel from next April, represents another blow to this company of the Mexican state.
Mexican Museum to host Amalia Mesa-Bains
Compiled by the El Reportero’s staff
The Mexican Museum will host a talk by Renowned professor Emeritus of Visual and Public Art at California State University at Monterey Bay.
Dr. Amalia Mesa-Bains, as part of TMM’s public lecture series, will highlight Museum founder, Peter Rodriguez’s extensive career as an artist, collector, curator, and figurehead in the Chicano community. This program is being presented in conjunction with the Vida, Cultura y Color: The Art of Peter Rodríguez exhibition at The Mexican Museum.
TMM is located at the Fort Mason Center, Building D, Marina Boulevard and Buchanan Street, San Francisco. For more information, please call: (415) 202-9700. The lecture is free and open to the public.
Dr. Amalia Mesa-Bains is an educator, artist and cultural critic who has pioneered the documentation and interpretation of long Chicano traditions in Mexican-American art, both through her cultural activism and through her own altar-installations. Her work as an artist has been exhibited in national and international venues. She is a recipient of a distinguished MacArthur Fellowship. She founded and directed the Visual and Public Art department at California State University at Monterey Bay where she is now Professor Emerita.
At The Mexican Museum. Fort Mason Center, 2 Marina Blvd., Bldg. D. On Saturday, Jan. 23, 2016 from 5 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. Free and open to the public.
Two of the most respected musicians from Galicia, Spain in SF
Uxía & Narf unite for the first time to present a joint musical project that features reinterpretations of classics, including poems by Rosalía de Castro and García Lorca, original compositions, and adaptations of traditional alalás, the oldest and best-known form of Galician music.
Building bridges across cultures through music, they create their respective repertoires after more than 20 years of traveling and exchanging experiences with artists from Brazil, Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde, and Guinea-Bissau. The duo unites harmonious vocals and intimate melodies through the shared pursuit of originality and cultural crossroads.
At the Red Puppy, 2698 Folsom St. @ 23rd St., San Francisco, on March 3 at 7:30 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. Admission: $20-25. Doors at 7 p.m. Show at 7:30 p.m. All ages welcome.
Noche Bohemia en la Bahía
Golden Promotion Entertainment presents live, Noche Bohemia en la Bahía, from Culiacán, Sinaloa, Mexico, Benny Camacho; from Los Angeles California, Korina López, José Montes de Oca; y como talento local a Sergio García Checo. On Saturday, Feb. 27.
Absolute Beginning Taiko Workshop with Bruce Ghent
Learn the ancient art of Japanese Taiko drumming with Sensei Bruce ‘Mui’ Ghent. The Introductory taiko class will cover basic fundamental skills and history which will prepare students to advance to the next level of classes.
Beginners ages 12-adult, with little or no music experience are welcome. Taiko drumming is a rigorous physical activity. Bring water and wear clothes to exercise in…sweat happens : ) Class is taught with traditional martial arts etiquette and discipline as outlined in the student handbook supplied.
For more information, contact Bruce “Mui” Ghent at bruceghent@gmail.com or visit www.maikazedaiko.com.
March 6-April 10: Sundays, 10:30 a.m.-12 p.m., at the Dance Mission Theater. To register call 415-826-4441 or email dancemissiontheater@yahoo.com.