https://www.mashalasegerika.co.za/

Global News, Centurion (2025)

27/09/2025

Assata Shakur, remembered: how a CNN intern found the FBI’s most-wanted in Havana 🕵🏽‍♂️🇨🇺

What happened: In a first-person essay, journalist Patrick Oppmann recalls tracking down Assata Shakur (JoAnne Chesimard) in 1998 while interning for CNN in Cuba—at a time when she was the FBI’s most-wanted US fugitive on the island. He met her—alone—at the Hotel Comodoro restaurant after a tip from another exile. Shakur spoke about racism in Cuba vs. the US, refused to detail her prison escape (“friends helped me”), and insisted she couldn’t have fired the fatal shot due to her own injuries. The essay notes Cuba has now announced Shakur’s death at 78, decades after granting her asylum in 1984 following her 1977 conviction for killing a New Jersey state trooper and her 1979 escape.

Why it matters: Shakur has long been a Rorschach test—cop-killer and terrorist to many; icon of resistance to others. Her presence in Cuba strained US-Cuba ties, later feeding decisions like Washington’s renewed terrorism designation for Havana. She was eventually added as the first woman on the FBI’s most-wanted terrorists list, with a $2M reward—pressure that coincided with her retreat from public view.

Details that stand out:

“If he only knew.” Shakur described being stopped by a Cuban cop for being Black—released once he thought she was a tourist—then contrasted leadership attitudes toward racism in Cuba vs. the US.

Public, then underground. She wrote, lectured, and was even seen at a May Day VIP section in the ’80s/’90s. After the bounty rose and Cubans got online, she vanished—no sightings for a decade.

Cuban realpolitik. A diplomat told Oppmann that irritating Washington was once reason enough to shelter US fugitives—many of whom later clashed with Cuba’s regimented life.

Big picture: The story is a window into the afterlives of ’70s radicalism, the messy overlap of race, policing, and state power, and how Cold-War geopolitics let some American fugitives build new identities—until changing incentives (bounties, diplomacy, the internet) pushed them back into the shadows.

Open questions: With her death now official, does any sealed cooperation or intelligence about her escape and networks ever see daylight? How will her legacy be told—through the lens of state violence vs. revolutionary violence, or something more complicated?

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports and public accounts shared online and in media.

27/09/2025

Obama: “No Military Rationale” for Gaza Offensive — Calls for Palestinian Statehood 🇺🇸🇵🇸🇮🇱

Former President Barack Obama just weighed in from Dublin, saying there’s “not a military rationale for continuing to pummel what is already rubble” in Gaza. He urged immediate relief for civilians and doubled down on a long-term path where a Palestinian state exists alongside a secure Israel.

What he said: Children must not starve; leaders on all sides play cynical politics; he and Netanyahu “were not the best of friends.” He also rejected Hamas’s tactics as putting its own people at risk.

Why it matters: It’s a rare, blunt intervention from Obama as UNGA week churns. It lands while Israel pushes deeper into Gaza City and Western recognition of Palestinian statehood gathers steam—fueling global pressure on Jerusalem.

US policy crosscurrents: The Trump administration is pushing a 21-point Gaza plan (hostages, permanent ceasefire, governance without Hamas, phased Israeli withdrawal). Trump also drew a red line: no West Bank annexation.

My take:

Humanitarian urgency vs. strategic endgame: Obama’s framing centers on immediate civilian protection and a viable political horizon. The question is whether current operations serve a clear, achievable objective—or keep deepening the crisis.

Leverage over rhetoric: Statements move headlines; conditions, timelines, and enforcement move outcomes—on aid flows, hostage deals, and settlement policy.

Political arithmetic: As Washington signals limits (e.g., on annexation), Netanyahu’s coalition faces tougher choices. That friction could either open space for a deal—or harden positions.

Your turn:
Do Obama’s remarks actually shift the debate—or just amplify it?
Should Washington pair its words with concrete sticks and carrots (aid conditions, timelines, diplomatic guarantees)?
Can a ceasefire + hostage deal be sequenced with real movement toward Palestinian statehood without collapsing either track?

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

27/09/2025

Trump’s Big Ask: Can He End Birthright Citizenship? 🇺🇸👶🏽⚖️

So this just escalated. The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to bless an executive order that would end birthright citizenship for babies born in the US to parents who are here unlawfully or only temporarily. Supporters call it common-sense border policy. Critics say the Constitution already settled this more than a century ago. Big vibes, high stakes. 🧯

Here’s the core clash in plain English: the 14th Amendment says anyone born in the United States is a citizen. That’s how most of us learned it. An 1898 Supreme Court case (Wong Kim Ark) reinforced that understanding for generations. Team Trump is arguing courts misread that history—and that the federal government shouldn’t recognize citizenship in those cases. Lower courts have blocked the order so far, and now the administration wants the justices to decide once and for all. ⚖️

Why this matters beyond D.C. talk shows: if the Court takes the case and sides with Trump, hospitals, schools, passport offices, and Social Security would be thrown into a maze. Imagine two babies born in the same delivery ward on the same day—one recognized as a citizen, the other not—based on mom and dad’s status. Even if you agree with the policy in theory, the rollout could be messy in practice. 🏥🍼📝

Fair point from supporters: they say citizenship is a privilege, not a loophole, and that redefining it could deter illegal immigration and protect resources. Fair point from opponents: the Constitution’s text is clear, and changing the rules for newborns punishes kids for circumstances they didn’t choose—opening the door to a second-class tier of Americans. 🇺🇸

My take: this is less about a press release and more about mechanisms. If the Supreme Court says “yes,” what’s the plan for implementation, appeals, and decades of documents built on the old rule? If the Court says “no,” are we ready to address the real frustrations driving this push—border management, legal pathways, and timeline chaos—without turning newborns into a legal battleground? 🧩

What do you think?
Do you see this as protecting the system or breaking a constitutional promise?
If the Court hears it, how should they interpret the 14th Amendment in 2025—not 1898?
And if the policy were to change, how do we prevent chaos for families and agencies on day one? 💬

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

27/09/2025

Netanyahu’s Fiery UN Speech Sparks Walkouts — Strength or Self-Isolation? 🇮🇱🔥🌍

Whew. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hit the UN stage swinging — blasting Western countries that recently recognized a Palestinian state and accusing leaders of “buckling” to pressure. Delegations walked out as he spoke. He praised President Donald Trump, waved a map of Iran and its proxies, and doubled down that the war in Gaza goes on until Hamas is destroyed. 🗺️🎤

Here’s the vibe: the global mood is shifting toward recognition, while Israel’s leadership is digging in — a hard clash with today’s diplomatic tide. The walkouts weren’t just theater; they underscored growing isolation and make future coalition-building tougher. On hostages, his gestures from the podium sparked anger among some families who felt their loved ones were used as props. And while Washington is floating a ceasefire-hostage framework with phased withdrawal and no role for Hamas in governing Gaza, Netanyahu’s “finish the job” stance highlights a widening gap between a military endgame and a political off-ramp. 🧭

My take: speeches move headlines; mechanisms move reality. Recognition moves, aid corridors, security guarantees, and verifiable steps on settlements and hostages are the levers that actually change lives. Every walkout chips at Israel’s diplomatic capital; even friends who share threat assessments may balk if there’s no credible path for civilians, governance, and a real “day after.” Two clocks are ticking — the humanitarian clock (hostages, civilians, aid) and the security clock (dismantling Hamas capabilities). If they aren’t wound together, both run out badly. ⏳

Your turn: do UN walkouts matter or are they just optics? Should Western recognition continue even while fighting drags on? What’s the minimum package — hostages, aid, a settlement freeze — that could restart trust? And does this speech strengthen Israel’s hand or shrink its room to maneuver? Drop your thoughts below — let’s keep it grounded and respectful. 💬🕊️

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Netanyahu’s “Scenic Route” to the UN: Smart Security or Optics War? ✈️🗺️⚖️

So here’s the tea: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took a long, unusual flight path to the US—skirting chunks of European airspace—amid chatter about a possible war-crimes arrest warrant being enforced. Instead of the usual hop over Europe, the plane hugged the Mediterranean, looped past the Strait of Gibraltar, and only briefly crossed Greece and Italy. Meanwhile, it reportedly avoided France and Spain, stretching the trip (and, let’s be honest, the fuel bill). ⛽️

What’s interesting:

No clear explanation from the PM’s office, which earlier said some journalists and entourage members weren’t coming due to “seating and security” (some say that’s also about extra fuel weight).

A French source reportedly claimed France would’ve allowed an overflight—yet the flight route still dodged it. Mixed signals, anyone? 🧭

Why this matters:

Legal + optics: If you’re flying around whole countries to avoid legal risk, that’s a story in itself—about diplomatic isolation, international law, and how leaders manage perception vs. exposure.

Cost + precedent: Longer routes mean more money and logistics—who pays, and do we start seeing more of this from leaders facing potential legal trouble?

UNGA stagecraft: As he heads to the UN General Assembly, the route becomes part of the narrative: is this prudent security or political theater?

My take:

Security first isn’t unreasonable—but the silence invites speculation. A straight, factual explanation would calm the noise.

If overflight was indeed available but not used, that suggests risk calculus > PR. If it wasn’t available, that hints at real diplomatic headwinds.

Either way, the route turned a routine trip into a headline about legitimacy and leverage—before a single word hits the UN mic.

Alright fam, your turn 👇
• Was this smart caution or unnecessary drama?
• Should leaders facing legal action limit travel—or does that hand opponents a win?
• Do flight paths like this actually change the UN optics, or do speeches and outcomes matter more?
• If you were advising the PMO, would you go full transparency on routing—or keep it tight for security?

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Trump Draws a Red Line: “No West Bank Annexation.” Real Shift—or Just Talk? 🇺🇸🇮🇱🧭

President Trump just said, “I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank… It’s not going to happen.” He says he told Prime Minister Netanyahu the same thing. That’s a rare, public red line—and a big deal because annexation would pretty much slam the door on a viable Palestinian state.

This lands as the White House is floating a multi-point plan to end the Gaza war—hostage releases, a permanent ceasefire, a governance plan for Gaza without Hamas, and a phased Israeli withdrawal. Regional leaders have been pushing hard for no West Bank annexation to be baked in.

Globally, the temperature is shifting: European and Arab capitals have warned that annexation would torpedo any path to a two-state solution—and could even chill broader regional normalization.

On the ground, far-right coalition partners in Israel have been advancing settlement expansion, including the E1 plan critics say would split the West Bank in two, while restrictions and checkpoints have tightened movement. The rhetoric is hot; the facts on the ground are hotter.

My take:

Words vs. mechanisms: A red line only matters if there are clear consequences. If annexation moves anyway, what follows—sanctions, arms conditions, visa bans?

Regional math: Arab states want a credible path toward two states—no annexation, real limits on settlements, and genuine humanitarian relief in Gaza. Without those, normalization stalls.

Israeli politics: This statement pressures Netanyahu’s coalition (which includes ministers who celebrate E1). If Washington holds firm, expect coalition friction.

Your turn 👇
• Is this a real policy shift or just headline management?
• What enforcement tools should the U.S. use if annexation advances?
• Can a Gaza ceasefire + hostage deal coexist with a genuine West Bank freeze?
• Do the Abraham Accords survive if settlement expansion continues?

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Moldova’s Election on Edge: “Hundreds of Millions” and a Flood of Disinfo 😬🗳️🌍

Whew. Moldova heads to the polls this Sunday, and the alarms are LOUD. President Maia Sandu says the Kremlin is pouring “hundreds of millions of euros” into a massive interference push—think cash-for-votes schemes, crypto-fueled networks, TikTok content farms, and even provocateurs sent to stir up “disorder, violence and fear.” That’s not a drizzle; that’s a tsunami. 🌊

Here’s the tea, in plain language:

Big money, small country: Officials say the playbook is part bribes, part disinfo, part pressure—aimed at flipping momentum away from Sandu’s pro-EU PAS toward the Patriotic Bloc.

From Telegram to face-to-face: It’s evolved. Instead of one loud operator, it’s local micro-networks: trained messengers with tight talking points, pushing content that games algorithms (especially on TikTok). 📲

Diaspora & disruption: Moldova’s diaspora has been decisive in recent votes. Now there are warnings about moves to demotivate or derail voting abroad—remember those fake bomb threats at overseas polling stations last time?

GRU links & street tactics: Security officials say they’ve dismantled a cell trained abroad to spark pre-/post-election violence. Even if some rings get rolled up, there’s fear others slip through.

Energy leverage fizzled: Moscow once choked gas supplies; Chisinau diversified. Moldova even snagged EU candidate status. That story—tiny state pushing back—may be exactly why pressure is so intense now. ⚡️🇪🇺

My take:

Democracy is a vibe and a system. You need both: people who show up, and infrastructure that can spot fake accounts, money trails, and intimidation.

Disinfo works best in fog. Clear, boring facts are underrated armor. Sunlight beats spectacle. 🧯

Don’t sleep on the “gray zone.” You don’t need tanks to tip a result—just confusion, fear, and fatigue at scale.

Alright fam, weigh in 👇
• Should platforms throttle election content that’s clearly coordinated—yes or slippery slope?
• What’s the best way for diaspora voters to protect their vote (and sanity) abroad?
• Are cash-for-votes and covert networks the new frontline of modern warfare?
• If PAS needs a coalition, how do you guard reforms from “disruptors” planted to stall everything?

Sending strength to everyone trying to vote clean and count clean. 🗳️💙

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

General Squid Games”? Hegseth Summons Hundreds of Top Brass to Quantico — And No One Knows Why 🪖🇺🇸🤔

So here’s the tea: reports say Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered hundreds of US generals and admirals to Quantico, Virginia next Tuesday for a sudden, highly unusual in-person meeting. Even many of the officers reportedly don’t know the agenda. Cue the rumor mill: mass fitness test? Big-picture DoD briefing? 🤷🏽‍♀️ Or the spicy one… mass firings? (Some insiders are jokingly calling it the “general squid games” 😬).

Meanwhile, the security folks are side-eyeing the idea of putting that much leadership in one place at once. And at the White House presser, President Trump played it light, saying leaders want to be here, they’ll review equipment, tour sites, and talk new weapons. Still, with the recent firing spree of several four-stars and a push to cut 20% of four-star billets, the optics are… loud. 🔊

Why this feels different 🔎

Unusual scale: Pulling this many flag officers off posts worldwide at the same time is rare.

Opaque timing: Last-minute calendar drop + no clear agenda = maximum speculation.

Recent context: High-profile dismissals and rhetoric about “wrong rules” in the senior ranks have raised tensions about politicization vs. readiness.

Signal vs. substance: Is this about unity and readiness—or loyalty and control? Either way, it sends a message.

My take 🧭

Transparency > mystery. If this is routine (equipment reviews, readiness sync), a clear agenda calms the country—and the ranks.

Civilian control is vital, but so are healthy guardrails. The military works best when strategic direction comes from civilians, and promotions/discipline follow consistent, apolitical standards.

Security common sense: Concentrating top leadership in one location deserves risk planning (redundancy, secure comms, continuity of command).

Morale matters. Even the perception of score-settling can rattle a force that depends on trust up and down the chain.

Talk to me, fam 👇

• If you ran DoD, what would justify a mass in-person summons like this?
• Do you read this as readiness huddle or loyalty check—and why?
• Should Congress demand a post-meeting briefing for oversight?
• Is it smart or risky to gather so many flag officers in one place at once?

Keep it respectful—people in uniform (and their families) are living this in real time. 💬

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Amazon’s $2.5B “Prime Time” Penalty: Win for Shoppers or Just the Cost of Doing Business? 🛒💳⚖️

Welp… regulators just hit Amazon with a record $2.5 billion settlement over claims it nudged people into Prime and made it way too hard to cancel. The deal includes a $1B civil penalty + $1.5B in refunds for an estimated 35 million customers. That’s a lot of “uh, how do I cancel again?” clicks. 😅

What changes now?

Clearer sign-up screens with plain-English terms (no more sneaky design tricks).

Easier cancellation (goodbye to endless “are you sure?” loops).

And that infamous button like “No, I don’t want Free Shipping”? Yeah… that’s out. 🚫

Amazon didn’t admit wrongdoing and says it already made updates. But here’s the math nugget folks are chewing on: Prime costs about R249/month (or $14.99 in the US) and reportedly pulls in massive revenue—so is $2.5B enough to change behavior or just a parking ticket for a tech giant? 🤔

My take:

Dark patterns are a tax on your time. If you need a tutorial to unsubscribe, the design is doing more than “guiding.” 🧭

Refunds are great—but the best refund is the one you never need because the choice was honest up front. 🧾

This could push the whole subscription world (gyms, apps, streaming, you name it) to clean up their UX. Your thumbs will thank you. 👍

Alright fam, your turn 👇
• Have you ever been stuck in a cancel maze—with Prime or any other sub? What happened?
• Should regulators fine per affected user, or is a big lump sum enough?
• What’s one subscription that makes cancelling delightfully easy (so we can all stan good design)?
• If you’re due a refund, how would you want to be notified—email, app alert, or automatic credit?

Drop your stories (and hacks) below—let’s help each other dodge surprise charges. 💬✨

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Kremlin Slams the Brakes on Fuel Exports: Drones, Shortages & Long Lines ⛽🛑🇷🇺

Russia just pulled a drastic move: a ban on most fuel exports until year-end after weeks of reports about pumps running dry—especially in occupied areas—and drone strikes hammering refineries. Officials say it’s about stabilizing supply at home, but the timing tells its own story.
Reuters
+1

Here’s the picture right now:

Drone damage → refinery shutdowns. Ukraine has been targeting fuel production and pumping sites—including a Gazprom site in Bashkortostan—to squeeze Russia’s logistics.
The Moscow Times
+1

Rationing on the ground. Multiple regions reportedly limited how much drivers can buy. Crimea looks hardest hit—local reports say roughly half of stations were out and queues formed fast whenever a tanker arrived.
The Moscow Times
+1

Markets feel it. With diesel/gasoline exports curbed, global prices nudged up as traders priced in tighter supplies.
Reuters

My take:

Short-term fix, long-term risk. Export bans can calm domestic panic—briefly. But they also choke revenue and can push up global prices, boomeranging back through costs of transport and food.
Reuters

Drones are changing the map. Cheaper unmanned strikes are now a strategic lever—hitting supply nodes hurts more than battlefield skirmishes. (We’re seeing that pressure add up across Russia’s energy network.)
Reuters

Civilians stuck in the middle. Whether you’re in Crimea or deep inside Russia, rationing + price spikes mean ordinary drivers, farmers, and small businesses carry the weight.
The Moscow Times

Alright fam, your turn 👇
• Do export bans stabilize supply or backfire by fueling panic (and black markets)?
• Are energy sites fair-game targets in war—or does it cross a line when civilians feel the pinch?
• If prices keep rising globally, what’s the knock-on effect you’ll feel first—transport, groceries, or something else?

Drop your thoughts—keep it respectful and insightful. 💬✨

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Comey Indictment & The Guardrails: Accountability or Power Play? ⚖️🚨🧭

Whew. According to multiple reports, the DOJ has indicted former FBI Director James Comey—days after President Trump publicly pressed for it and shook up prosecutors who resisted going after his political foes. Add in talk of probes into other named adversaries and threats against critics, and it’s giving… new era, no brakes. 😬

Here’s the gist :

Comey charged: The move landed right after public pressure from the Oval and reported personnel changes. Critics call it “selective prosecution,” supporters call it overdue accountability.

Score-settling or standards? We’re seeing a broader push to centralize power—replacing people who say “no,” rewarding those who say “yes,” and testing the line between presidential influence and an independent justice system.

Dissent heat check: From licensing threats at media to lawsuits and government pressure on critics, the message some folks hear is: think twice before pushing back.

Beyond Comey: The playbook reportedly stretches into other areas—policy, culture wars, even foreign/economic moves—with fewer internal “guardrails” than before.

My take:

Two truths can coexist: If you believe certain targets did wrong, you can still want a transparent, apolitical process. If you’re worried about retribution politics, you can still want equal enforcement of the law.

Precedent matters: Whatever feels “fine” when your side is up can feel terrifying when it flips. Norms protect everyone, not just opponents.

What would reassure the public? Clear charging memos, consistent standards across cases, and distance between public demands and prosecutorial decisions. Sunlight > vibes. ☀️

Alright fam, over to you 👇
• Should a president name specific people they want prosecuted—ever?
• If you support the Comey charges, what process safeguards do you still want to see?
• If you’re alarmed, what’s the non-hysterical path to push for independence—Congress, courts, public pressure?
• Are we witnessing accountability or an erosion of guardrails? What’s your read?

Keep it civil—this one’s heavy, and real people will live with the outcomes. 💬

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

26/09/2025

Bad Bunny’s “Una Más” Felt Like a Love Letter to Puerto Rico—On Maria’s Anniversary 🇵🇷🎤🌪️💙

Thirty sold-out hometown shows, and then one more—streamed to the world. On September 20, Bad Bunny wrapped his San Juan residency with “Una Más”… on the 8th anniversary of Hurricane Maria. No grand speech, no dramatic monologue—just a night that knew what day it was. You could feel it in the crowd, the flags, the lump-in-throat energy.

One detail said it loud: Ñengo Flow stepped out in a jersey reading 4,645—the reported death toll from Maria. Beyond that, Benito let the music do the talking, weaving in the spirit of “El Apagón – Aquí Vive Gente” (the documentary track that dragged inequality into the light) and turning a concert into a mirror of the island’s resilience. 💡

Outside the arena? Block-party vibes: vendors, handmade florals, unofficial merch, a sea of red-white-blue. Inside? All ages—from abuelas to toddlers in strollers—dancing shoulder to shoulder. Cameos stacked like dominoes—Marc Anthony, Jowell & Randy, and more—forming what the internet dubbed the “Avengers of reggaetón.” It felt less like a show and more like a national roll call. 🙌

Benito’s parting words hit home: “Mientras uno esté vivo, uno debe amar lo más que pueda… Lo que ya pasó no se puede cambiar. Podemos aprender de ello… No me quiero ir de aquí. Seguimos aquí.” 🫶
Translation or not, the message was clear: remember, rebuild, remain.

And now? He’s taking the story on the road with the “Debí Tirar Más Fotos” tour—kicking off Nov 21 in Santo Domingo, moving through Latin America, then to Australia, Europe, and Japan in 2026. Notably, he’s skipping the US, citing fears around ICE. The art is global; the stance is personal. 🌍

My take:

Anniversary without spectacle can be powerful. Sometimes the date itself is the tribute. 📅

Culture as connective tissue: Streets outside, beats inside—community first, commerce second. 🫂

Pop star → public square: When a residency lifts spirits, highlights inequity, and calls people in, that’s more than a concert—it’s a civic moment. 🗳️

Alright fam, your turn 👇
• Did the no big speech choice feel respectful or did you want an explicit tribute to Maria?
• What moment from the livestream hit you hardest?
• For Boricuas in the diaspora, how did this show land in your chest?
• Should artists keep politics/social issues in the setlist—or is the music escape enough?

Abrazos to Puerto Rico—may the power of the people outlast any blackout. 🔌💜

Disclaimer: This post is based on reports from the internet and social media.

Global News

27/09/2025

27/09/2025

27/09/2025

27/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

26/09/2025

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category