Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

Bipartisan lawmakers want to strip Big Tech’s legal immunity that can shield social media companies

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

It was the mid-1990s. And the world was online.

Advertisement

No doomscrolling for hours through Instagram and X.

But people were plowing through GeoCities. There were Hotbot searches – before the days of Google and AI. There was even Ask Jeeves, long before Grok.

The U.S. Capitol building is shown in Washington, D.C. A Romanian man admitted to participating in a series of «swatting» calls that targeted members of Congress, as well as other government officials. (Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

Advertisement

Congress was on the precipice of adopting a landmark telecommunications law which would dictate the digital landscape for decades.

When signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law, former President Clinton declared how the measure would plow «a superhighway to serve both the private sector and the public interest.»

RAND PAUL SAYS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH YOUTUBE AND GOOGLE CHANGED HIS MIND ABOUT PLATFORM LIABILITY

Advertisement

Yup. Back then, some still referred to the internet as «The Information Superhighway.»

The 1990s were heady. Full of optimism and possibility. The. U.S. won the Cold War. The economy boomed and was «new.» The internet linked the world.

But there was a serious debate about free speech. Who should regulate what was online? Should the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) address what was proper to post, the same way it oversaw the TV and radio airwaves?

Advertisement

In the early ‘90s, the National Security Agency (NSA) used a cryptographic backdoor to intercept phone calls called the «clipper chip.» That raised questions about government surveillance. Would that carry over to what the government «watched» when people posted content online?

US National Security Agency logo displayed on smartphone screen with stock market percentages in background

A U.S. National Security Agency logo is displayed on a smartphone screen with stock market percentages in the background in this photo illustration on Jan. 30, 2024, in Poland. (Omar Marques/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images)

Congress ultimately decided to give the internet a lot of leeway – in the interest of free speech. Telecommunications firms persuaded lawmakers to grant them a legal shelter. «Carriers» weren’t responsible if  «customers» posted questionable or offensive material.

«We said that the FCC would not regulate either the content or the character of the internet,» said then- Rep. Chris Cox (R-Calif.) during a 1995 floor debate. «We can’t have the government in the interest of uniformity coming up with standards to regulate this industry.»

Advertisement

Cox was a key player behind shaping policy in that 1996 telecommunications law. So was then-Rep. and now Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

«The internet is the shining star of the information age,» proclaimed Wyden in 1996.

RULING AGAINST META AND GOOGLE COULD SET THE STAGE FOR CHANGES IN HANDLING HATE CONTENT

Advertisement

But the Oregon Democrat fretted about some of the filth which was already permeating the internet in its earliest renditions.

«My wife and I have seen our kids find their way into these chat rooms which make their middle age parents cringe,» said Wyden.

But like Cox, Wyden feared that «censorship could really spoil much of its promise.»

Advertisement

So they fought to keep some government regulation out of the telecommunications law. And they inoculated internet providers with something called «Section 230» of that law. Section 230 shielded telecom firms with immunity from lawsuits and criminal charges based on what customers posted on their forums. 

Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) described the logic behind Section 230 and the role of service providers:

«If you, as a public service, put up a billboard in a hall and someone puts something on the billboard that says, ‘Congressman Obernolte beats his wife,’ the owner of the billboard is not responsible for the content of that message,» said the California Republican.

Advertisement
Rep. Jay Obernolte speaking at a House Natural Resources Subcommittee hearing

Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., attends a House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands hearing on the 9/11 Memorial and Museum Act and other legislation in the Longworth Building on Dec. 7, 2021. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images)

But lots of people and entities post all sorts of things on today’s worldwide «billboard.» That’s why some lawmakers want to fundamentally alter social media as we know it by paring back Section 230.

«Section 230 is absolute liability protection, immunity for the largest social media companies in the world. It’s driving people to suicide. It is ruining our society,» said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of the most ardent advocates for changing the law. «If you buy a bad car, you can sue. Every product you buy, the company has to stand behind it. This is the only area of the law I know where the largest companies in the world have absolute legal immunity.»

Graham went as far to suggest that what is available online – and how people use social media – is «as dangerous as drinking.»

Advertisement

WHY META AND GOOGLE ARE LOSING COURT BATTLES FOR DAMAGING KIDS BY TRYING TO GET THEM ADDICTED

«It’s putting profits over people,» chimed in Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). «(Social media) should not have this absolute shield when it is destroying the lives of young people by driving toxic content at them through its algorithms.»

Bipartisan lawmakers are boiling about what social media firms allow users to post without legal consequences – even though Congress is partially responsible for creating this problem three decades ago.

Advertisement

«As long as these companies believe they’re immune from liability, they’re going to tell all of us to go to hell,» said Graham.

UNDER OATH, META’S ZUCKERBERG SHOWED WHY BIG TECH CAN’T POLICE ITSELF

Some lawmakers want to strip legal immunity from Big Tech for what winds up on their platforms.

Advertisement

«What we ought to do is start by allowing victims of child porn and other child abuse material and sexual abuse material to sue these companies,» said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)

Lawmakers believed that enhanced opportunities for voices and speech would enable the internet to flourish. They argued that the free market would create a rich environment online. So they sidelined their instincts to overregulate.

«Government is going to get out of the way and let parents and individuals control it rather than government doing that job for us,» said Cox in 1995.

Advertisement
Sen. Lindsey Graham

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., talks with reporters in the U.S. Capitol during votes on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

But lofty hopes for a lush «marketplace of ideas» online are dashed by some of the digital slop – and addictive nature of «phones» today.

«You talk to people and they’re scared to death of social media. They’re scared to death of AI,» said

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.).

Advertisement

That’s why lawmakers demand changes to Section 230.

One lawmaker says free speech safeguards are crucial for the people deciding what users see online. But not the technology behind it. Today, the technology makes many of those decisions about what we see and hear on our phones.

«If you just have an algorithm spewing all this information..» sighed Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). «The First Amendment doesn’t protect an algorithm.»

Advertisement

In 1996, Ron Wyden told C-SPAN during an interview that «censorship could really spoil much of (the internet’s) promise.»

And in 2026, Wyden is still leery of infringing on free speech through regulation. He says the hands-off approach helped the development of Wikipedia and the social media platform Bluesky. A more aggressive posture could stifle development.

«To get rid of (Section) 230, you’re going to have to roll over me,» said Wyden this year.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In 2026, people are struggling to harness the technology. Trying to ween themselves off addiction to phones. Figuring out ways to keep kids from phones in order to build reading and vocabulary skills. 

The digital optimism of the mid-1990s is gone. And those who were there are nostalgic for the sound of an old, staticky modem and the delightful proclamation that «you’ve got mail.»

Advertisement

first amendment, big tech backlash, technology, fcc, regulation, politics

INTERNACIONAL

AOC, Mamdani interaction caught on cam at 9/11 memorial sparks online fury

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., were lambasted Friday for appearing to share a moment of levity at the 9/11 Memorial in lower Manhattan during the solemn reading-of-the-names of victims.

Advertisement

Mamdani was already facing criticism from some 9/11 victims’ families over his attendance when a television feed showing the reading of victims’ names cut from a young man sobbing at the memorial to the mayor and congresswoman appearing to grin and laugh as they spoke, though their conversation was inaudible.

«Disgraceful,» said Steve Guest, a former top staffer for Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. «AOC and Mamdani look happy.»

MAMDANI HEADS TO 9/11 MEMORIAL DESPITE 110,000-SIGNATURE PUSH FROM VICTIMS’ FAMILIES TO STAY AWAY

Advertisement

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., left, and Mayor Zohran Mamdani, right, laugh during the reading of names at the 9/11 Memorial. (Screenshot/Fox News)

«They always show us who they really are,» another critic on X said.

Others critics were more direct. 

Advertisement

«Why the f— are these two laughing?» Meghan McCain, daughter of the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., asked. 

FAMILIES OF 9/11 VICTIMS’ MESSAGE TO MAMDANI: ‘PLEASE DO NOT COME’ TO MEMORIAL CEREMONY

New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani

Democratic nominee for mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks to reporters outside the Federal Jacob Javits Building in New York Aug. 7, 2025. (Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

However, a top member of former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s entourage claimed that the video was taken out of context.

Advertisement

«The videos of [them] laughing are not true. I was standing next to them the whole time,» tweeted Michael Ragusa, reportedly head of Giuliani’s security as of 2025, according to WPIX-11.

«The camera just caught her greeting him hello. Multiple other politicians were laughing and joking behind me. Republicans and Democrats.»

The Pittsburgh Republican Committee suggested on X that the sight was one of the reasons 9/11 victims families didn’t want the mayor there, while former Los Angeles mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt also sounded off.

Advertisement

ZOHRAN MAMDANI URGED TO SKIP NEW YORK CITY’S 9/11 MEMORIAL: ‘VILE ANTISEMITE’

«While normal Americans cry, commie Mamdani and AOC laugh it up at the 9/11 memorial in New York,» Pratt said.

«They hate you. They hate your country. They enjoy your misery. We cannot allow these people to have power.»

Advertisement

A New York City lawmaker added that she was outraged to see Mamdani and Ocasio-Cortez acting that way.

«After thousands of families of victims of terror beg Mamdani not to show up, he stands there and laughs while families weep,» said Councilwoman Inna Vernikov, R-Brighton Beach. «This is NYC’s Mayor.»

RETIRED PORT AUTHORITY OFFICERS TELL MAMDANI, HOCHUL TO STAY AWAY FROM GROUND ZERO ON 9/11

Advertisement
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, center, holds hands with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., at the end of a campaign rally at Forest Hills Stadium in the Queens borough of New York City Oct. 26, 2025 (Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

Richard Sementa, better known as «Mr. Producer» for Mark Levin’s national radio show, tweeted, «Un-freaking believable.»

Juanita Broaddrick called Mamdani and AOC «two disgusting degenerates» on X.

Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., who continues to criticize democratic socialists and opponents of Israel, called the mayor «Jihad Mamdani» and said he and the congresswoman should not be anywhere near Ground Zero.

Advertisement

«They do not mourn this country, they mock it,» he tweeted. «Have some damn respect.»

«As the names of Americans murdered on September 11th are read aloud at Ground Zero, AOC and Mamdani are laughing and smiling together,» said Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas.

«There is a time and a place for politics. This isn’t it. Ground Zero is sacred ground.»

Advertisement

«September 11 is not a photo op, it is not a networking event,» said Hunt.

Separately, Mamdani was seen at other points standing somberly between New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill and New York first gentleman William Hochul Jr.

But critics continued pointing out what one called the «jarring split-screen» of the mayor joking around with Ocasio-Cortez a split-second after the mourner was seen sobbing over the shadow «fountain» at the footprint of the Twin Towers.

Advertisement

«What exactly is funny?» former Trump White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson asked.

Former NYPD cop and Fox News contributor Paul Mauro tweeted what he envisioned the two discussing.

«Zo[hran]: You’re not buying into this ‘never again’ bull— are you? AOC: ‘No, not me,’ Hilarity ensues.»

Advertisement

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

It was not immediately clear what the two politicians were chatting about at that moment.

Fox News Digital reached out to Mamdani and Ocasio-Cortez for comment.

Advertisement

alexandria ocasio cortez, politics, new york city, zohran mamdani, new york, counter terrorism

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

America built a fortress after 9/11. Then the threat started hiding in plain sight

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, Javed Ali drove past the Pentagon on his way to work in northern Virginia.

Advertisement

Roughly half an hour later, American Airlines Flight 77 slammed into the building.

From his office in Falls Church, Ali could see smoke rising from the Pentagon. A year later, in a turn that captured how dramatically the country had changed, he was walking into the still-damaged building himself — now working in the Defense Intelligence Agency’s counterterrorism office.

TRUMP CONFIRMS PENTAGON PLANS FOR 25TH ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11 ATTACKS, DISPUTES REPORT ON GROUND ZERO ABSENCE

Advertisement

Thousands of brave Americans still dying from 9/11 toxic exposure effects decades later. (iStock)

«It was a very eerie and odd and surreal moment in my career,» Ali told Fox News Digital.

Ali’s career would eventually take him from the DIA to the newly created Department of Homeland Security and later the FBI, giving him a front-row seat to the enormous national security architecture America constructed after the deadliest foreign attack on U.S. soil.

Advertisement

Twenty-five years later, that architecture presents something of a paradox.

By one of its clearest measures, the post-9/11 system appears to have made another attack on the scale of 9/11 far harder. The United States has not suffered another terrorist attack remotely approaching the scale and complexity of 9/11, which killed 2,977 people. U.S. intelligence and military operations dismantled much of the al Qaeda network that planned it, while new agencies, surveillance authorities, watchlists and intelligence-sharing systems were designed to ensure that another group could not exploit the same seams in American defenses. The 2026 U.S. intelligence community assessment said counterterrorism operations have degraded al Qaeda and ISIS’s ability to quickly rebuild their leadership and plan large-scale attacks against the U.S. homeland.

But success against the threat of 2001 did not eliminate terrorism. It helped change it.

Advertisement

AMERICAN YOUTH RADICALIZED ONLINE, BUSTED IN SUSPECTED TERROR PLOTS AFTER HATING COUNTRY ON SOCIAL MEDIA

9/11 Museum

A boy points towards the center of the reflecting pool at the National September 11 Memorial Museum in New York on Sunday, Sept. 11, 2022. (Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Today’s most difficult threats increasingly involve individuals radicalized online, small cells with little warning signature, foreign terrorist organizations seeking to inspire attacks from afar, and an expanding layer of cyber and state-sponsored threats capable of reaching deep inside the United States without hijacking an airplane.

The question 25 years after 9/11, therefore, is not simply whether Americans are safer.

Advertisement

They are safer from one kind of attack — while increasingly exposed to others.

AN AI CYBERATTACK COULD TURN OFF AMERICA’S LIGHTS BEFORE WASHINGTON EVEN UNDERSTANDS WHY

Pentagon building

Aerial view of the Pentagon building in Arlington, Va., on Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

Building a security state after 9/11

The scale of the American response was extraordinary.

Advertisement

Just over two months after the attacks, President George W. Bush signed legislation creating the Transportation Security Administration. TSA says its creation amounted to the largest civilian undertaking in U.S. government history at the time, with the federal government rapidly assuming responsibility for airport passenger and baggage screening.

The following year, Congress created the Department of Homeland Security, combining all or part of 22 federal agencies and offices. DHS began operating in March 2003 and today employs more than 260,000 people across missions ranging from border and aviation security to cybersecurity, intelligence and emergency response.

The changes went far beyond new agencies.

Advertisement
DHS

President George W. Bush discusses creating the Department of Homeland Security following 9/11. (Getty Images)

The 9/11 Commission found that the pre-attack breakdown was deeper than the familiar failure to «connect the dots.» Responsibility had been scattered across agencies, information was not consistently shared, and no single entity was empowered to integrate intelligence and drive joint action across the foreign-domestic divide. The commission concluded that «responsibility and accountability were diffuse.»

Washington spent the next two decades trying to close those gaps.

Brown University’s Costs of War project estimates that post-9/11 wars and related obligations have cost roughly $8 trillion. It estimates that more than $1.1 trillion has been spent on homeland security efforts to prevent and counterterrorism inside the United States since DHS was created.

Advertisement

Al Qaeda didn’t disappear overnight

Ali said it can be easy, with 25 years of hindsight, to forget how persistent the original threat remained.

Even after the United States invaded Afghanistan, killed or captured senior al Qaeda figures and put the organization under extraordinary pressure, the group continued attempting to find ways back into the homeland.

During Ali’s years at DHS, he said officials repeatedly confronted plots involving al Qaeda and its affiliates, including a 2006 plot originating in Britain to bomb transatlantic airliners traveling to North America.

Advertisement

The threat then evolved again.

Usama bin Laden was killed by U.S. forces in Pakistan in May 2011. But rather than marking the end of the era of jihadist terrorism, the following years produced a new and in some ways more difficult challenge.

ISIS grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq, expanded rapidly amid the wars in Iraq and Syria and declared a self-described caliphate in June 2014. At its height, the group controlled vast territory and millions of people in Iraq and Syria while encouraging or directing attacks far beyond its borders. The State Department reported that ISIS had emerged from al Qaeda in Iraq and expanded dramatically during 2013 and 2014.

Advertisement

For U.S. counterterrorism officials, Ali said, the center of gravity increasingly shifted from identifying trained operatives sent by an organized group to finding individuals who might be radicalizing inside Western countries.

Then came another shift: attacks by lone offenders across different ideologies, often with no direct operational relationship to an organization overseas.

«Mostly lone actors, lone offenders, not tied to groups overseas, not traveling overseas, and not being directed by people overseas,» said Ali, now an associate professor of practice at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy.

Advertisement

DHS CHIEF ANNOUNCES CHANGES TO ITS SEAL TO REFLECT THAT DEPARTMENT IS ‘AT WAR EVERY SINGLE DAY’

U.S. Navy Seal member providing cover for teammates in a desert environment

A U.S. Navy SEAL provides cover for teammates advancing on a suspected al Qaeda and Taliban location during missions in Afghanistan supporting Operation Enduring Freedom. (Mai/Getty Images)

The terrorist organization became a phone screen

The transformation is now reflected in the government’s own threat assessments.

The 2026 Annual Threat Assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said setbacks to the ability of Islamist terrorist groups to conduct «large-scale complex attacks» have pushed them toward information operations and propaganda designed to inspire or enable people in or with access to Western countries.

Advertisement

The assessment said there were at least three Islamist terrorist attacks in the United States in 2025 and that law enforcement disrupted at least 15 U.S.-based Islamist terrorist plotters that year. Roughly half of those disrupted plotters had some online contact with Islamist terrorists or were inspired by foreign terrorist organizations, according to the assessment.

The vulnerability was demonstrated on New Year’s Day 2025, when Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a U.S. citizen from Texas, drove a pickup truck into a crowd on Bourbon Street in New Orleans, killing 14 people. The FBI described the attack as an act of terrorism and said Jabbar had become increasingly isolated before adopting extremist views.

In the days after that attack, the FBI said lone actors and small cells who radicalize online had posed the greatest terrorism threat to the homeland in recent years precisely because they can be so difficult to detect and disrupt.

Advertisement

That presents almost the inverse of the 9/11 problem.

The 9/11 plot required 19 hijackers, overseas leadership, financing, international travel, flight training and years of planning. The challenge for investigators was collecting pieces of information held across different agencies and assembling them quickly enough.

A lone actor may offer far fewer pieces to collect in the first place.

Advertisement

Ali said many recent attackers or alleged plotters had not previously come onto the radar of the FBI or local law enforcement, leaving authorities with the extraordinarily difficult task of identifying people who may not commit an obvious crime until they move toward violence.

«So yes, we are safer from a certain type of threat,» Ali said, «but again, we are not immune from terrorism, and other types of threats are much more difficult to identify or stop.»

KASH PATEL REVEALS THE CHILLING HOLIDAY TERROR PLOTS FBI FEDERAL AGENTS QUIETLY STOPPED

Advertisement
Al Shabab in Somalia

A handout released to Reuters by IntelCenter shows members of Somalia’s Islamist rebel group al Shabaab in Mogadishu Jan. 1. (IntelCenter Handout/Reuters)

A security system built for yesterday?

That changing threat has also fueled a broader debate over whether the institutions created after 9/11 became too large, too expensive or too focused on the dangers of the previous era.

Morgan Murphy, who served as press secretary to the secretary of Defense during the first Trump administration and later worked in the Trump White House, argues that Washington built too much bureaucracy around the 9/11 threat while other vulnerabilities grew.

«TSA agents still pat down grandma and gum up travel while Beijing wires our living rooms with cheap TVs and selfie sticks through the supply chain handed to them by Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden,» Murphy said. «We spent two decades frisking American passengers while our adversaries plugged themselves into our homes and businesses.»

Advertisement

«The genius of America after Pearl Harbor was that we built to fight. After 9/11, we built to process,» Murphy told Fox News Digital, «Real security means sovereignty at home and lethality abroad — a sealed border, an untangled supply chain, and enemies who fear us.»

Theo Wold, who served as acting assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy and as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy during the first Trump administration, offered a similar critique, arguing that post-9/11 Washington relied too heavily on large bureaucracies, expansive government authorities and wars in the Middle East.

«George W. Bush and the D.C. governing elite responded to 9/11 the way their politics demanded: create large, unwieldy bureaucracy, push for special legal authorities with limited oversight and activate ground wars in the Middle East,» Wold told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

«Those wars didn’t make us safer, the legal authorities were wielded against Americans, and the bureaucracy is full of waste and has proven nearly unworkable,» he said.

Wold argued that the lesson from the past quarter-century should be a more narrowly targeted national-security model.

«Now we know better. Americans are safest when we are nimble and focus ruthlessly on targeting real enemies,» he said.

Advertisement

The next threat may not look like 9/11

 The challenge now extends beyond terrorism.

ICE arrests suspected Al Qaeda member released into U.S. by Biden admin.

ICE arrests a suspected al Qaeda member released into the U.S. by the Biden administration. (ICE)

The 2026 intelligence assessment warns that China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and non-state ransomware groups continue seeking access to U.S. government networks and private critical infrastructure for espionage, financial gain and possible future disruption. It also warns that artificial intelligence is accelerating cyber capabilities and that several state adversaries are developing missile systems capable of threatening the homeland.

The security landscape that began with al Qaeda operatives training to fly passenger jets has therefore expanded into something far less geographically defined: terrorist propaganda transmitted to an individual’s phone, malicious code inserted into a computer network, attacks on critical infrastructure and state adversaries capable of reaching Americans from thousands of miles away.

Advertisement

For Ali, however, the evolution of the threat should not lead Washington to conclude that the original threat has vanished.

One of the central lessons of the years before Sept. 11, he said, was that emerging terrorist organizations have to be confronted before they have the time and space to develop operational capability.

«When these terrorist threats start to emerge, whether it’s overseas or here, you have to put pressure on them before they gather momentum to carry out operations,» Ali said.

Advertisement

The danger, he argued, would be allowing counterterrorism to fall so far down Washington’s list of priorities that the country begins recreating the complacency that existed before 9/11.

«Terrorism as a tactic is probably never going to be defeated,» Ali said.

Twenty-five years after he watched smoke rise from the Pentagon, Ali’s answer to whether America is safer reflects the contradiction at the heart of the post-9/11 era.

Advertisement

The United States built a massive system to prevent the next 9/11.

It appears to have made another 9/11 far harder to execute.

NYC World Trade Center

Two flags flutter on a fence in front of Lower Manhattan and One World Trade Center at the Tear Drop 9/11 Memorial at sunset on June 13, 2026, in Bayonne, New Jersey. (Gary Hershorn/Getty Images)

The harder question now is whether that system can recognize the attack that doesn’t look anything like it.

Advertisement



september 11, counter terrorism, homeland security, fbi, national security, tunnel to towers steel across america

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Cámaras empresariales en Guatemala piden Estado de Prevención al Ejecutivo para liberar rutas, mientras se reporta 14 bloqueos

Published

on



Guatemala registró este viernes 11 de septiembre 14 bloqueos en rutas y zonas urbanas, mientras la Cámara de Comercio de Guatemala, la Asociación Guatemalteca de Exportadores y la Cámara de Comercio Guatemalteco-Americana reclamaron medidas para restablecer la circulación y cumplir las resoluciones de la Corte de Constitucionalidad sobre la libre locomoción.

La Dirección General de Protección y Seguridad Vial informó que los cierres permanecían activos a las 12:42 y afectaban corredores hacia el norte, oriente y occidente del país, además de distintos sectores de la Ciudad de Guatemala y del departamento de Petén.

Advertisement

La Cámara de Comercio de Guatemala solicitó al presidente de la República y al Consejo de Ministros que decreten un Estado de Prevención. La organización consideró insostenibles las interrupciones al tránsito y los delitos vinculados con esos hechos.

La petición incluye restablecer el orden público, garantizar la libre locomoción, proteger las carreteras estratégicas, evitar nuevas interrupciones y aplicar la ley. La cámara advirtió que los cierres dejan a personas varadas o las obligan a recorrer largos trayectos a pie para llegar a sus empleos, hogares, centros educativos y servicios de salud.

Agexport solicita al gobierno de Guatemala decretar un estado de prevención para liberar las vías y garantizar la libre circulación ante los bloqueos en el país. (Agexport)

Producción, distribución y servicios bajo presión

La Asociación Guatemalteca de Exportadores (Agexport) se sumó al reclamo y exigió una intervención inmediata para liberar las vías y asegurar la circulación en los corredores estratégicos. La entidad señaló que las protestas afectan las cadenas de producción y distribución.

Advertisement

Los productos perecederos y los compromisos comerciales figuran entre los sectores expuestos a las interrupciones. Agexport sostuvo que las consecuencias también alcanzan a trabajadores, consumidores y empresas.

La asociación afirmó que los bloqueos no resolverán el alza de los combustibles y, en cambio, elevan los costos operativos y paralizan actividades laborales. También alertó sobre el riesgo para el acceso a la salud y la seguridad de la población.

La Cámara de Comercio Guatemalteco-Americana (AmCham Guatemala) expresó preocupación por las protestas en distintos puntos del país, al considerar que vulneran el derecho a movilizarse y afectan la actividad económica nacional. La organización pidió a las autoridades actuar conforme a la ley y respetar los derechos constitucionales.

Advertisement

AmCham Guatemala instó a garantizar el cumplimiento de las resoluciones de la Corte de Constitucionalidad (CC). La cámara sostuvo: “El Estado de Derecho debe prevalecer”.

La entidad solicitó medidas para recuperar el libre tránsito, impedir nuevos bloqueos durante los próximos días y garantizar certeza jurídica. Además, llamó al diálogo bajo los principios de legalidad, respeto a los derechos y libertad para trabajar, producir y movilizarse.

La Cámara de Comercio de Guatemala solicita al presidente y al Consejo de Ministros un estado de prevención para garantizar la libre circulación. (Cámara de Comercio)

Los 14 cierres reportados en carreteras y áreas urbanas

En la CA-9 Norte se reportaron cinco bloqueos: en el kilómetro 8, en la entrada a San Rafael de la zona 18; en el kilómetro 13, en la Cuesta del Águila; en el kilómetro 17,5, en Llano Largo; en el kilómetro 21, en Azacualpilla, Palencia; y en el kilómetro 126, en Santa Cruz Río Hondo, Zacapa.

Advertisement

La Ciudad de Guatemala concentraba tres puntos bloqueados: Bethania, en la zona 7; la avenida Petapa, en la zona 12, en el sector de Prados de Villa Hermosa; y el kilómetro 15 de la CA-1 Occidente, en la calzada Roosevelt.

Petén registraba cuatro interrupciones: el kilómetro 447,7 de la CA-13, en el Aeropuerto Mundo Maya de Santa Elena; el kilómetro 434 de esa misma ruta, en la aldea El Chal; el kilómetro 460, en Santa Ana; y el kilómetro 445 de la RD-PET-11, en La Libertad.

Un comunicado de la Cámara de Comercio Guatemalteco-Americana insta a las autoridades de Guatemala a cumplir las resoluciones de la Corte de Constitucionalidad ante los bloqueos viales. (AmCham Guatemala)

Los otros dos cierres se ubicaban en el kilómetro 67 de la CA-1 Oriente, en Los Esclavos, Santa Rosa, y en el kilómetro 254 de la RN-01, en El Boquerón, Esquipulas, San Marcos.

Advertisement

La Corte de Constitucionalidad convocó a una sesión extraordinaria para conocer una solicitud de debida ejecutoria vinculada con el amparo que ordena garantizar la libre locomoción en el país. Entre tanto se conoció que el presidente Bernardo Arévalo se reunió con su consejo de seguridad para asumir una decisión.

tránsito vehicular,transporte público,autobús,motocicleta,Guatemala

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tendencias