George Soros NGO Partners with Facebook for “Election Security”

Darth Soros

Facebook partners with Atlantic Council to improve election security

ALI BRELAND – 

Facebook announced on Thursday that it is launching a partnership with the Atlantic Council to boost its global election security efforts.

Experts from the international think tank’s Digital Forensic Research Lab will help provide Facebook “real-time insights and updates on emerging threats and disinformation campaigns from around the world.”

Facebook said it will also use the Atlantic Council’s Digital Research Unit Monitoring Missions during elections and other “highly sensitive moments,” according to a post written by Facebook’s global politics and government outreach director, Katie Harbath.

The social media company will also consult with the Atlantic Council to address other political security issues that could arise on its platform.

The partnership comes as a part of Facebook’s efforts to beef up election security on its platforms following some groups attempting to use it as a tool to interfere in other countries’ elections.

The company has fielded heavy criticism from politicians over how Russian trolls spread misinformation and attempted to sow discord during the 2016 presidential race. Foreign groups attempted similar operations in other countries’ elections as well.

Though the most firey criticism directed at Facebook over the issue of election security has come from the U.S., the company said that it is focused on making sure its platform can’t be manipulated by nefarious groups abroad as well.

Read More: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/388166-facebook-partners-with-atlantic-council-to-improve-election-security

Why Was the Establishment so Against a Trump/Putin Summit?

Make Earth Great Again Trump and Putin in Helsinki

Because they were afraid someone would say something very inconvenient, like Putin did:

For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case.  Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton.  Well that’s their personal case.

It might have been legal, the contribution itself but the way the money was earned was illegal.  So we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions.  So we have an interest in questioning them.

This Browder guy is apparently a hedge fund billionaire that plundered Russia during the post-Soviet era, effectively steeling tons of Russian wealth in the regulatory confusion. Then he snuk the money out of Russia, without paying any taxes (according to Putin.) 

According to Philip Giraldi at The Strategic Culture Foundation, that’s not all. Browder has been up to plenty since the late nineties.

Browder is also symptomatic of why the United States government is so poorly informed about international developments as he is the source of much of the Congressional “expert testimony” contributing to the current impasse. He has somehow emerged as a trusted source in spite of the fact that he has self-interest in cultivating a certain outcome. Also ignored is his renunciation of American citizenship in 1998, reportedly to avoid taxes. He is now a British citizen.

Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. The Act sanctioned individual Russian officials, which Moscow has rightly seen as unwarranted interference in the operation of its judicial system.

Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as “Putin’s enemy #1,” portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading “lawyer” who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail.

Many have been skeptical of the Browder narrative, suspecting that the fraud was in fact concocted by Browder and his accountant Magnitsky. A Russian court recently supported that alternative narrative, ruling in late December that Browder had deliberately bankrupted his company and engaged in tax evasion. He was sentenced to nine years prison in absentia.

William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico.

Fusion GPS, which was involved in the research producing the Steele Dossier used to discredit Donald Trump, was also retained to provide investigative services relating to a lawsuit in New York City involving a Russian company called Prevezon. As information provided by Browder was the basis of the lawsuit, his company and business practices while in Russia became part of the investigation. Simmons maintained that Browder proved to be somewhat evasive and his accounts of his activities were inconsistent. He claimed never to visit the United States and not own property or do business there, all of which were untrue, to include his ownership through a shell company of a $10 million house in Aspen Colorado. He repeatedly ran away, literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

Per Simmons, in Russia, Browder used shell companies locally and also worldwide to avoid taxes and conceal ownership, suggesting that he was likely one of many corrupt businessmen operating in what was a wild west business environment. My question is, “Why was such a man granted credibility and allowed a free run to poison the vitally important US-Russia relationship?” The answer might be follow the money. Israel Shamir reports that Browder was a major contributor to Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who was the major force behind the Magnitsky Act.

Of course the oligarch owned-and-controlled media at Politifact, WaPo and NYTimes have rolled out their lazy-brained “fact checks,” all relying on the idea that:
– Browder is an upstanding patriot that would never break the law,
– that that donation was never reported by the Clinton campaign,
– if they had taken that much money it would have been illegal,

If you read these entire articles, you can see for yourself that they’re gas lighting again, which is mouthing off a bunch of inanity and fallacies to deflect the real issues being raised.

It’s true that, it would have been illegal to take that much money from a single source (and to also not report it.) But what if the someones we’re talking about broke the law?

Judging from the reactions of some of the Deep State, they aren’t too happy. For instance, the claim of treason made by former CIA director Brennan…

Last Rablings of a Gitmo Detainee Brennan

…Also, there was the call for “patriots to stand up and reject the behavior” of this [sitting U.S. president,] from former FBI Director Comey…

It sure does seem like the Putin and Trump summit stirred up the Deep State’s Pretty Hate, propaganda machine. It will be very interesting to see if anything comes out of this.

The American Empire and its Media

The CFR Media Empire
The Council of Foreign Relations, The Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission Control the Entire Mainstream Media

Swiss Propaganda Research
July 2017

Largely unbeknownst to the general public, executives and top journalists of almost all major US news outlets have long been members of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). 

Established in 1921 as a private, bipartisan organization to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities”, the CFR and its close to 5000 elite members have for decades shaped U.S. foreign policy and public discourse about it. As a well-known Council member once explained, the goal has indeed been to establish a global Empire, albeit a “benevolent” one.

In a column entitled “Ruling Class Journalists”, former Washington Post senior editor and ombudsman Richard Harwood described the Council and its members approvingly as “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”.

Harwood continued: “The membership of these journalists in the Council, however they may think of themselves, is an acknowledgment of their active and important role in public affairs and of their ascension into the American ruling class. They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it. () They are part of that establishment whether they like it or not, sharing most of its values and world views.”

Read More: https://swprs.org/the-american-empire-and-its-media/

Corporate Media Always Pushes More War b/c They’re Part-Owned by the Weapons Manufacturers

The Media always uses Neural Linguistic Programming to subconsciously control people’s thinking. 

kermit great awakening

The Diseased, Lying, Condition of America’s ‘News’Media

ERIC ZUESSE | 21.06.2018

… Because of America’s ‘news’media, it still isn’t “ceding Syria to the Syrians” — as Ban ki-Moon and international law would. That wouldn’t be profitable for Lockheed Martin etc. (whose biggest customers other than the US Government are the Sauds, and Trump alone sold $400 billion of US weapons to them); so, it’s not done.

Syria’s sovereignty is utterly denied by the US regime, but if the US regime were to succeed, the big winners would actually be the Saud family.

Do the American people have sovereignty, over ‘their’ (our) Government? US ‘news’media effectively ban that question. Perhaps what controls the US Government is the Saudi-Israeli alliance: the Sauds have the money, and the Israelis have the lobbyists. Of course, the US ‘news’media are obsessed whether Russia controls the US Government. That diversionary tactic is extremely profitable to companies such as General Dynamics, and America’s other weapons-manufacturers, which thrive on wars — especially by selling to the Sauds, and to their allies (and, obviously, not at all to Russia) …

Read More: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/21/diseased-lying-condition-americas-news-media.html

Fact Checkers and the Entire Legacy Media are simply Propaganda for Oligarchs and Corporations

Of Course Snopes is Credible

Three Glaring Examples Proving Snopes and the AP Have No Business Being Official ‘Fact Checkers’

Snopes and the Associated Press have been given power over social media to define truth but they are often wrong and the consequences are grave.

While our readers are still smart enough to check multiple sources and keep us honest, the power of Snopes and the rest of the “fact checkers” has grown immensely and ominously. Now, Snopes, the AP, and Politifact have woven themselves into the fabric of social media and have become the be all end all of “truth.” As a result of this new cozy relationship, they have the power to silence anyone they deem to be false—facts and reality be damned.

What’s more, if these new arbiters of online truth do deem content to be “false,” whether it is or not, the victims have zero recourse to challenge them and will see social media reach—no matter if it took years to build up—throttled and subsequently turned off.

But they are doing a service to weed out fake news, right? While Snopes and the like certainly do debunk many fake stories, the idea of solely relying on them for the truth is chilling.

Case in point. Within the last month, Snopes and the Associated Press both claimed that articles we wrote were false when they clearly were not. As a result of their illegitimate claims, the Free Thought Project has watched our website traffic drop.

On June 8, Snopes attempted to claim that a story we wrote about Veterans on Patrol was false by claiming that we said this veterans group discovered a child trafficking camp in Tuscon, AZ. The only problem with this claim is that we never made it. The Free Thought Project merely reported on the activities of VOP and noted the possibility that this camp could also simply be a homeless camp. It’s why we used quotes in the title around “Child Trafficking Camp” because these were their words, not ours.

Nevertheless, thousands of Facebook users who shared our article received a notification that they had shared news that was determined to be false—when, in fact, it was not.

Fake News: The Corporate Media are the Ones Lying to America

Ultimately, we understand that both Obama and the New York Times are tools of the CIA and it’s corporate interests, but here’s a detailed  rundown of how the lies work…

Thanks Corporate News Woman at a typewriter salutes, "You write what you're told."

How the New York Times Lies About Lies: Obama v. Trump as Example

ERIC ZUESSE  Jun 17 2018

Although the New York Times says that President Donald Trump lies vastly more than did President Barack Obama, the definite liar in that comparison — based on the factual record, to be presented here — is the New York Times itself. It lies in alleging this, which isn’t to say that either President lies more frequently than the other, but instead, that the Times’s calculation fails to count, at all, but instead altogether ignores, some of President Obama’s very worst lies — ones that were real whoppers. These were lies that were essential to his maintaining support among Democrats (such as the owners of this corporation, the NYT, are), and that would keep Democrats’ support only if they failed to judge him by his actual decisions and actions (such as the NYT’s owners do — or else they secretly know the truth on this, but prevent this truth from being published by their employees). Even to the present day, Obama is evaluated by Democrats on the basis of his lies instead of on the basis of his actions. He’s admired for his stated intentions and promises, which were often the opposite of what his consistent actual decisions and actions turned out to be on those very same matters, on which he had, in retrospect, quite clearly lied (though that was covered-up at the time — and still is).

For example, among the list of lies that the NYT counts from Obama, is excluded Obama’s having asserted on 20 May 2009, at the signing into law of both the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act and the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act: “This bill nearly doubles the FBI’s mortgage and financial fraud program, allowing it to better target fraud in hard-hit areas. That’s why it provides the resources necessary for other law enforcement and federal agencies, from the Department of Justice to the SEC to the Secret Service, to pursue these criminals, bring them to justice, and protect hardworking Americans affected most by these crimes. It’s also why it expands DOJ’s authority to prosecute fraud that takes place in many of the private institutions not covered under current federal bank fraud criminal statutes — institutions where more than half of all subprime mortgages came from as recently as four years ago.”

Also not counted, but excluded, by the NYT, as having been an Obama lie, was his 24 January 2012 State of the Union Address assertion: “Tonight, I’m asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. (Applause.) This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans. Now, a return to the American values of fair play and shared responsibility will help protect our people and our economy.”

But both statements were lies. …

Read more: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/17/how-new-york-times-lies-about-lies-obama-v-trump-as-example.html

FAKING the NEWS: The CIA’s Use of the American News Media

The corporate media has been lying for decades under the direction of the CIA

Anderson Cooper

After leaving The Washington Post in 1977, Carl Bernstein spent six months looking at the relationship of the CIA and the press during the Cold War years. His 25,000-word cover story, published in Rolling Stone on October 20, 1977, is [linked] below.

THE CIA AND THE MEDIA

How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up

BY CARL BERNSTEIN

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

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters. Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.

The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception for the following principal reasons:

■ The use of journalists has been among the most productive means of intelligence‑gathering employed by the CIA. Although the Agency has cut back sharply on the use of reporters since 1973 primarily as a result of pressure from the media), some journalist‑operatives are still posted abroad.

■ Further investigation into the matter, CIA officials say, would inevitably reveal a series of embarrassing relationships in the 1950s and 1960s with some of the most powerful organizations and individuals in American journalism.

Read More: http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php

Newsflash: When a Government Legalizes Lying, That Means The Government is Lying

Amish Guy Asks If You Remember Before the Smith-Mundt Act was Repealed

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans

BY  

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries. The programming varies in tone and quality, but its breadth is vast: It’s viewed in more than 100 countries in 61 languages. The topics covered include human rights abuses in Iran, self-immolation in Tibet, human trafficking across Asia, and on-the-ground reporting in Egypt and Iraq.

The restriction of these broadcasts was due to the Smith-Mundt Act, a long-standing piece of legislation that has been amended numerous times over the years, perhaps most consequentially by Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright. In the 1970s, Fulbright was no friend of VOA and Radio Free Europe, and moved to restrict them from domestic distribution, saying they “should be given the opportunity to take their rightful place in the graveyard of Cold War relics.” Fulbright’s amendment to Smith-Mundt was bolstered in 1985 by Nebraska Senator Edward Zorinsky, who argued that such “propaganda” should be kept out of America as to distinguish the U.S. “from the Soviet Union where domestic propaganda is a principal government activity.”

Zorinsky and Fulbright sold their amendments on sensible rhetoric: American taxpayers shouldn’t be funding propaganda for American audiences. So did Congress just tear down the American public’s last defense against domestic propaganda?

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA “present fair and accurate news.”

“They don’t shy away from stories that don’t shed the best light on the United States,” she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: “Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate.”

A former U.S. government source with knowledge of the BBG says the organization is no Pravda, but it does advance U.S. interests in more subtle ways. In Somalia, for instance, VOA serves as counterprogramming to outlets peddling anti-American or jihadist sentiment. “Somalis have three options for news,” the source said, “word of mouth, al-Shabab, or VOA Somalia.”

This partially explains the push to allow BBG broadcasts on local radio stations in the United States. The agency wants to reach diaspora communities, such as St. Paul, Minnesota’s significant Somali expat community. “Those people can get al-Shabab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn’t get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia,” the source said. “It was silly.”

Lynne added that the reform has a transparency benefit as well. “Now Americans will be able to know more about what they are paying for with their tax dollars — greater transparency is a win-win for all involved,” she said. And so with that we have the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, and went into effect this month.

But if anyone needed a reminder of the dangers of domestic propaganda efforts, the past 12 months provided ample reasons. Last year, two USA Today journalists were ensnared in a propaganda campaign after reporting about millions of dollars in back taxes owed by the Pentagon’s top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan. Eventually, one of the co-owners of the firm confessed to creating phony websites and Twitter accounts to smear the journalists anonymously. Additionally, just this month, the Washington Post exposed a counter-propaganda program by the Pentagon that recommended posting comments on a U.S. website run by a Somali expat with readers opposing al-Shabab. “Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership,” reported the Post.

Read More: http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

Conflict of Interest: Criminal Global Banking Conglomerates Own the Media

Trust Me

Yesterday I pointed out that…

even when global banking conglomerates are caught red-handed, profiting from human misery (including human trafficking and sex trade) they only get fined. No one goes to jail, because the politicians are on the take…
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/outrageous-hsbc-settlement-proves-the-drug-war-is-a-joke-20121213

Well, today I would like to further point out how the media is partially owned by the big banks, so they won’t go very far to raise outrage when they get caught supporting human traffickers…

It’s just one example but it turns out that HSBC holds massive amounts of Time Warner stock. Time Warner owns Turner, Turner owns CNN. CNN pays Anderson Cooper to read whatever they tell him to.

“Hsbc Holdings PLC increased its position in shares of Time Warner (NYSE:TWX) by 24.6% in the 1st quarter, according to the company in its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm owned 1,984,015 shares of the media conglomerate’s stock after buying an additional 391,221 shares during the period. Hsbc Holdings PLC’s holdings in Time Warner were worth $187,648,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period.”

Read More: https://www.tickerreport.com/…/time-warner-twx-position…

Well, just one example of how an international bank that was caught profiting from Cartel money (which includes profits from human trafficking) is also a major investor in an American Media conglomerate.

Do you really think that international corporations work for the good of the people?

You really think that what they call “news” and “information” are legitimate and not pro-corporate, pro-crime propaganda? 

It’s propaganda-for-profit.

Which is worse? Children being detained at certified detention centers, or children being sex trafficked?

Who profits from international human smuggling and sex trafficking?

If You Dont Want to be Separated From Your Children Dont Cross the Border Illegally

The reason the media wants open borders is because they’re a part of a global corporate machine that profits from drugs and weapons smuggling, and from human smuggling and sex trafficking….
https://www.theguardian.com/…/…/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs

What about sex trafficking?
“Sex trafficking is a $99 billion a year industry.”
“4.5 million people are victims of sex trafficking. The average age is 15, but 20% of sex trafficking victims are children.”
https://www.army.mil/article/165364/operational_contract_support_joint_exercise_combats_human_trafficking

And what about human smuggling?
“2.5 million people were smuggled in 2016, for an estimated profit of $7 billion.”
https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/glosom/GLOSOM_2018_ExecutiveSummary_web_small.pdf

Where does all of that profit go?

Does it all stay as billions of dollars in cash?

No. It gets laundered by global banks, and is in turn funneled to complicit politicians…
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/hsbc-has-form-mexico-laundered-drug-money

Even when the corporations get caught, they only get fined. No one goes to jail, because the politicians are on the take…
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/outrageous-hsbc-settlement-proves-the-drug-war-is-a-joke-20121213

HSBC lobbying by year…
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021791&year=2017

The media companies are also on the take…
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31517545

The politicians are on the take…
“Clinton Foundation recieved $81 million from clients of HSBC’s Swiss Money Laundering bank”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/10/hillary-clinton-foundation-donors-hsbc-swiss-bank

The law that separates children from smugglers was on the books since 2002. The law states how unaccompanied minors and minors being smuggled by smugglers should be detained and moved into foster parenting or kept in certified centers…
https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=614

In 2014 Obama announced that they would no longer enforce the law and would allow undocumented, illegal border crossers to not be immediately deported…
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Volpp.Immigrants.Outisde.the_.Law_.pdf

Since the Obama executive branch stopped enforcing the law, child smuggling and illegal border crossings increased to emergency levels..
“The Obama administration last year initially blamed bad economies and growing gang violence in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala for sparking the surge, but later acknowledged that human traffickers were marketing the journey by pointing out a loophole in U.S. immigration system that requires non-Mexican children to be released into the U.S. while they await final immigration decisions. That gives them a chance to abscond and disappear into the shadows with the more than 11 million other illegal immigrants in the country.”
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/6/illegal-immigrant-children-surge-across-border-at-/

The law, if properly applied, is to NOT separate children from families that seek asylum and cross the border LEGALLY…
“Children continue to be released to their relatives or to shelters. But since the zero-tolerance policy took effect, parents as a rule are being prosecuted.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/06/19/the-facts-about-trumps-policy-of-separating-families-at-the-border/?utm_term=.868b6eee98df

But there has been a rise in people falsely claiming to be relatives of smuggled children…
“…a growing number of cases, illegal immigrants who aren’t even related to the children are showing up and fraudulently claiming to be families.Homeland Security recorded 191 cases of children having to be separated because of fraudulent family claims during the first five months of fiscal year 2018. That already eclipses the 46 cases reported for all of 2017.”
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/22/children-abducted-illegals-posing-families-us-bord/

Should people crossing the border illegally not be prosecuted?
Should children being smuggled across the border illegally be put in jail with the adults that smuggled them?

How much should we encourage illegal entries when we know that they are fueling an illegal industry of human smuggling, sex trafficking and drug and gun smuggling?
http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/18/migrant-crisis-is-about-the-drug-cartel/