#49 ¿Que pasó? with Señor B - week of 3/2

Just last week, the world watched as a massive joint military operation by the U.S. and Israel targeted Iran, resulting in the killing of the country’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Khamenei had held power for 37 years, rising to head the state in 1989 . His rule came in the wake of the Iranian Revolution; a revolution that was itself a direct response to the reign of the U.S.-backed Shah, Reza Pahlavi.

While many Iranians have expressed relief or even rejoiced at the death of a leader whose administration was defined by documented human rights abuses and authoritarianism, we must look at the context of this "liberation." Every people deserves free and fair elections and the fundamental right to self-determination. However, history has repeatedly shown us that when the United States facilitates regime change, humanity and the well-being of the local population are rarely the priority.

Despite years of campaign promises to avoid dragging the U.S. into new Middle Eastern conflicts, President Trump bypassed Congressional approval last week to launch this war; one that the American people have made clear they do not want. As the days pass, the Department of Homeland Security’s initial narrative is already beginning to unravel. While the administration scrambled to frame this as a "preemptive" necessity, emerging reports suggest Iran was not planning an imminent attack on the U.S. instead, these strikes are being increasingly described by international observers as unprovoked and illegal.

The human and environmental cost is already staggering. It has now been confirmed that an attack on a girls' school in Minab killed over 150 people, the majority of them students. Just yesterday, the strikes moved to Iran’s fuel depots in Tehran. These attacks don't just destabilize the government; they create immediate environmental disasters and long-term health risks for the families living nearby. They ensure that the coming months will be defined by chaos, fear, and economic ruin for ordinary citizens.

At a time when we have a myriad of crises to fix here at home, our government is instead funneling millions of dollars into a war of choice that creates more harm than it could ever solve. I continue to stand with the vulnerable communities who are always the first to be sacrificed in the games of governments. We must speak out against these atrocities and demand a swift end to the suffering of the Iranian people at the hands of this intervention.

A viral clip has been making the rounds lately that reveals something deeply crooked, though unfortunately not surprising. We are seeing a coordinated effort by high-profile U.S. influencers to manufacture a crisis narrative about cartel violence in Mexico.

In this specific video, a prominent right-wing influencer misrepresents a situation involving three women traveling in Mexico. They claim that these "liberal women" were trapped by cartels and begging for U.S. intervention to save them.

The reality, as is often the case, was far different from the script. Not only were these women not asking for a military rescue, but at least two of them were actually Republicans. The influencer didn't just get the politics wrong; he invented a plea for help that never existed to serve a very specific, very dangerous agenda.

It’s important to look at the facts on the ground. Is there violence in Mexico? Yes. It is a work in progress, and we did see a spike following the death of Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes (El Mencho). But the "war zone" imagery being pushed by these influencers isn't a reflection of daily life; it’s a calculated exaggeration.

Why go through the trouble of staging these lies? Because fear is a powerful tool for manufacturing consent. By painting Mexico as a lawless land in need of "saving," these groups are building an excuse for the U.S. to violate Mexican sovereignty; whether through an invasion or increased military intervention.

They want us to view our neighbors not as a community, but as a threat that requires a tactical response. As we see these narratives spread, we have to be incredibly careful with the misinformation we consume.

This week, I heard from parents at Bancroft Elementary School in Walnut Creek with news that felt like a gut punch: the district is phasing out its two-way dual immersion program. Families described being completely blindsided by the announcement, but they didn’t sit back. They showed up to the school board meeting in force, bringing a petition signed by more than 300 community members to demand a reversal of the decision.

On the surface, it might look like a simple administrative change, but let’s be clear about what’s actually happening. Dismantling a dual immersion program is a direct strike against Spanish-speaking families. By removing the very bridge that integrates these students into the school, the district is effectively sidelining our community and signaling that they should seek education elsewhere; likely pushing them toward schools in lower-income areas.

What makes this move even more cynical is the history of the area. Just a few years ago, there was a high-profile attempt by some parents in this wealthier pocket of Walnut Creek to break away and form a separate school district. That effort was ultimately shut down because it was a clear attempt at segregation. Now, it feels like the same goal is being pursued through a different, quieter door: if you can’t legally draw a line around the neighborhood, you just dismantle the programs that make it inclusive.

We cannot allow our community to be treated as disposable or moved around like pieces on a board to suit a "richer" demographic. Public education is supposed to be the great equalizer, not a tool for displacement. I’m asking you to watch the video of these parents fighting for their children’s future. Please engage with it, share it, and help us make sure the school board knows that we see exactly what they are doing.