How the world’s tallest bridge changed the map of Europe
Soaring across the scenic landscape, it’s indisputably one of the most beautiful bridges in the world.
Often swathed by mist, so that it feels like crossing through clouds, it is so famous that it has its own visitor center, and people plan trips to the area solely to drive across it. The bridge can even be easily seen from space.
The Golden Gate? No. This is the Millau Viaduct, a perfect example of where engineering meets art. Cantilevered high over the Tarn gorge in southern France, and yawning 2,460 meters (8,070 feet) in length, the Millau Viaduct is the world’s tallest bridge, with a structural height of 336.4 meters (1,104 feet).
But not even those impressive statistics do it justice.
Unlike other famous bridges, which usually connect two points of similar altitude, the Millau Viaduct effectively becomes the opposite of a rollercoaster, plying a flat course across the valley, as the land ripples up and down underneath it.
The seven piers range from 78 meters to 245 meters (256-804 feet) in height, each calculated to the millimeter to make a perfectly smooth experience for drivers soaring across the Tarn. There’s a 342m (1,122ft) span between each pairing – large enough for the Eiffel Tower to slot in the gap. The piers are coupled with seven steel pylons, each 87 meters (285 feet) high, with 11 cable stays fanning out on either side. This all helps keep the “deck” – the road surface, which is around 14 feet thick and weighs 36,000 tons, or the equivalent of 5,100 African elephants – steady.
At the same time as being a work of absolute precision, it’s also beautiful. The Gorges du Tarn area is a protected landscape, yet instead of spoiling the view, the Millau Viaduct enhances it.
It’s a “wonder of the modern world” and an “engineering marvel,” says David Knight, director of design and engineering at Cake Industries and specialist adviser to the Institution of Civil Engineers.
“It’s that perfect interplay of architecture and engineering that means that everybody who sees it thinks it’s spectacular.”
Those living in the valley below look up with wonder; those driving across it – this road, the A75 from Clermont-Ferrand to Béziers, is one of the main north-south routes in France – see the gentle curve arcing across the landscape as they approach. “It gives everyone who uses it a sense of awe,” says Knight.
No wonder that for many, driving across the viaduct is something you travel to do, not something you do while traveling.
So how did this wonder of the modern world come to be built in the middle of France? Why did it take two decades to plan, before opening to traffic in December 2004? And how did it effectively change the map of Europe?
A bridge too far?
The answer to all those questions is geography. The Massif Central is a vast area of highlands cut by deep valleys and gorges, roughly located in the middle part of the bottom half of France. Sprawling across about 15% of the country, and bordered by the Alps to the east, it’s one of the obstacles anyone traveling from north to south of the country – or from northern Europe to Spain – must pass.
So important was this viaduct – but also so difficult – that it was two decades in the planning, according to Michel Virlogeux, the engineer who led the design team – and who first started work on it in September 1987.
“The first problem was not what bridge to build, but where the motorway would pass,” he says.
At the time the Massif Central was remote, despite its central location. There was a single-track railway line, and the roads “weren’t very good,” he says. “The central part of France couldn’t develop due to lack of transport.”
So in the 1980s, the French government decided to upgrade the road network, with then-president Valery Giscard d’Estaing deciding on a freeway. One of the aims was to unclog the notoriously choked road around Millau, where the road descended into the valley and crossed the Tarn river in the city center. Every day there were tailbacks of around 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) either side of the town.
“Going through Millau used to be a traffic blackspot for tourists,” says Emmanuelle Gazel, current mayor of Millau. “There were lots of traffic jams. There were kilometers and kilometers of tailbacks. It gave a very bad image of our area… in terms of pollution it was terrible. And locals took a long time getting from one point to another.”
In the words of Lord Norman Foster, who became the architect of the bridge, the area was “a valley of extreme beauty which had become one of France’s worst bottlenecks.”
The decision to build a bridge around Millau was taken in September 1986, says Virlogeux, who at the time was head of the large bridges division of the French administration. There was just one problem: the geography of the area meant there was no obvious solution. “We started looking where was possible, but many options were bad, and it took almost three years to find a solution,” he says.
One idea was to route the freeway east of Millau, keeping the road on the plateaus, with two suspension bridges to cross the valleys on either side. But that wouldn’t have allowed a connection with Millau – “the only big city between Clermont-Ferrand and Béziers,” says Virlogeux – which needed the economic boost.
So they called in the experts: geologists, geo technologists, road engineers and Virlogeux, who had already designed the Pont de Normandie – the 7,032-foot bridge spanning the river Seine in the northern region of Normandy.
The team’s first idea was to run west of Millau, bringing the road lower in altitude down into the valley, across a bridge at a lower level and up again to the plateau and then a tunnel. They were in the stages of planning when the team’s road engineer, Jacques Soubeyran, had a lightbulb moment.
“He asked, ‘Why are you going into the valley?’ and it was a big shock,” remembers Virlogeux. “The motorway was passing 300 meters above the river. I hadn’t even considered the possibility of passing at a high level. Immediately, I said we were being stupid. We started working on the idea of passing plateau to plateau.”
After just eight days they had detailed drawings of the rippling ground levels, as well as a possible altitude for a freeway snaking across it.
The importance of elegance
They knew where they wanted the viaduct – but what should it look like?
Virlogeux immediately knew that the best option would be a cable-stayed bridge. “Cable is the most efficient structure to carry a load, and you can have a very slender deck so it’s much better to look at,” he says.
Slenderness was important. There was already controversy about the idea of running a bridge through such a famous landscape. To avoid ruining the landscape, it had to “look very quiet.”
Getting the go-ahead took some years. The French government started a competition for the design of the bridge, and in 1996 the commission was won by a group led by Virlogeux as engineer (who had left his previous job a year earlier) and the UK’s Norman Foster – now Lord Foster – as architect. Foster calls their plan to span the valley, rather than the river, a “philosophical concept” that distinguished them from other competitors.
But with the local community up in arms at the idea of their area of natural beauty being spoiled, they face what Foster calls a “design challenge… to create something that would enhance the landscape, sit gently on the floor of the valley – to be the most delicate and light intervention.” Virlogeux says it had to be “pure and simple.”
Yet this precious landscape, which had to be protected aesthetically, was extremely difficult to work around.
“The wind forces at this level are huge and the columns have to accommodate the enormous expansion and contraction of the deck,” says Foster. And we’re not just talking a gentle bounce. The 2,460-meter (8,070-foot) bridge can expand or contract by 50 centimeters (1.6 feet) depending on the weather. Their solution was to add extension joints.
Luckily, while the old adage is that architects and engineers should be at loggerheads, and while you might imagine that two titans of architecture and engineering might clash, Foster and Virlogeux have nothing but praise for each other. Virlogeux says it was a “very easy” working relationship, while for Foster it was a “meeting of minds.” The team had twice-monthly meetings in London while working on the design. “He would ask me, ‘Why do you want this and not that?’ and after that he’d take a decision in five minutes,” says Virlogeux. “Once there was a major controversy about the shape of the deck. He asked me what I proposed, if I was sure it would work. Then he said, ‘OK – architecture must not go against scientific needs.’”
Above the road, the sturdy columns “split” into two more flexible arms, making an artistic statement out of an engineering necessity.
The same goes for the curve of the road, which gently arcs across the valley. It’s not just beautiful; it ensures that there’s no visual overlap – and therefore confusion – for drivers at such a great height. Meanwhile the piers become slimmer as they rise towards the roadway, more or less halving from 24 meters wide at the bottom to 11 meters at the top.
Their design for a cable-stayed bridge with seven elegant piers marching across the landscape and what Foster calls “the snake of a road, improbably thin like a razor blade,” has stood the test of time.
The anxious build
If the design wasn’t challenging enough, then came the construction which started in October 2001. The project cost a cool 400 million euros ($437 million) and was financed by Eiffage, a private construction company which still has the concession for the bridge today. There were 290,000 tons of steel and concrete used to build it, and around 600 builders working on it.
“The huge challenge is what happens when you build it,” says Knight. “As you put the weight in different locations, it moves in different directions. There are different materials interacting with each other – this is as difficult as engineering gets.”
Foster calls the assembly of the deck “a true challenge.”
“It was serenely and slowly launched simultaneously from both sides over the temporary structural supports, meeting in the middle with millimeter precision.”
Virlogeux remembers the “critical wind situation” which risked damaging the structure during the build. Each “launching” operation – during which the deck was installed from both sides – would take up to three days, so they had to monitor the five-day forecast before starting out, to avoid causing damage before the deck reached the next pier.
It was only as the viaduct was put into place that the team could see if their design had worked – from an aesthetic point of view as much as an engineering one.
Every detail had been considered for its potential effect on the landscape, as well as whether it could resist the forces at that altitude.
Foster says that the first time he went to see it, “I was anxious to the point of almost being physically ill.” He had “agonized” over the color of the 154 cable stays – if they were light, they’d blend in with the sky but stand out against the landscape. He went with white – “but the agony was that I wouldn’t know if it was the right decision until it was built – and then it would be too late to change it.”
Luckily for him, the white worked. “I was almost sick with apprehension, but I remember arriving in a car and the bridge gradually coming into view and finally realizing that it was, after all, the right decision.”
Virlogeux was more sanguine. For him, the greatest challenge was overcoming local opposition to be able to build. Getting the contract signed, he says, was the most stressful part. Signing it was “the moment I knew we would build it.”
President Jacques Chirac came to open the bridge and shake hands with the construction workers. Two days later, Virlogeux drove across it on his way back to Paris.
Bridging local hearts and minds
The viaduct may have been controversial when it was first mooted, but local hostility started melting away once it became clear what the project would look like.
“People thought that creating a bypass would mean tourists could avoid Millau and the town would empty out,” says Gazel, the mayor. “Some people thought that it would spoil our landscape, but actually it magnified it.” And it attracted visitors – in its first year alone, 10,000 cars would stop every weekend at the service area to take in the view.
Suddenly, going from the north to south of France, and on from northern Europe to Spain (or vice versa) was an easy experience.
Foster says he was “delighted” at the residents’ change of heart. “A bridge is about communication in the widest sense, not just connecting two plateaus but also linking people,” he says.
Today, the viaduct “has brought lots of tourists to discover Millau,” says Gazel.
“Many come for the viaduct, but discover all the other facets of our area. Others are traveling on vacation and stop off. Millau isn’t a blackspot anymore. It has become a destination – tourists choose to visit Millau, and they no longer have to endure the terrible tailbacks. So it didn’t empty out the town; on the contrary.”
As well as being an area of outstanding natural beauty, there is history around Millau. In Roman times, it was famous for its pottery, which was exported all around the empire, from northern Africa to England.
Visitors can walk around the base of the famous piers, or take a boat ride under the viaduct.
A long future ahead
Today, as it approaches its 20th anniversary, the Millau Viaduct is still going strong. Virlogeux says he’s “confident… it can resist a long time.” Where he is still, to this day, working on the Normandy Bridge, which needs regular maintenance, he stopped working on Millau a long time ago.
Each year it saves around 40,000 tons of CO2 emissions from heavy goods vehicles alone, according to Foster’s figures – the equivalent of 40,000 trees absorbing emissions over 40 years.
Gazel says the viaduct – which is part of the A75 autoroute – has changed the image of her town.
“It put us on the world map – when I say I’m mayor of Millau, it doesn’t matter where I am in the world, everyone knows Millau, thanks to the viaduct,” she adds. “The architectural and technological prowess, 20 years on, is still innovative – still extraordinary.”
Read More...
High-stakes Gaza ceasefire talks have ended. Here’s what to know
The death toll in Gaza since Israel started its war against Hamas passed 40,000 this week, just as mediators arrived in Doha to discuss a ceasefire. Abed Rahim Khatib/dpa/picture alliance/AP/File
Editor’s Note: A version of this story appears in CNN’s Meanwhile in the Middle East newsletter, a three-times-a-week look inside the region’s biggest stories. Sign up here.
CNN
—
Mediators in talks for a ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel made a last-ditch effort this week to revive stalled negotiations, with high-stakes discussions wrapping up Friday against a backdrop of tension and desperation in the region.
The meeting in Doha started on Thursday and has now ended, a diplomat familiar with the discussions told CNN. A breakthrough wasn’t expected but efforts will continue. Technical teams will meet again in the coming days, starting Saturday, until the main figures meet again in Cairo next week, the diplomat said.
It took place as the Middle East braces for a possible Iranian attack on Israel, and after the death toll since October in Gaza reached 40,000 people, a bleak figure that underscores 10 months of suffering, malnutrition and despair in the enclave.
The fear of an Iranian attack poses a serious threat to any hopes of a ceasefire that have already appeared tenuous in recent weeks, after Israeli strikes took out Hamas’ former political leader and senior figures in Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.
But the talks went ahead, despite some initial fears they would be scrapped. Participants on Thursday included CIA director Bill Burns, Mossad chief David Barnea, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Jassim Al Thani and Egyptian intelligence head Abbas Kamel, a diplomatic source close to negotiations told CNN.
In the meeting, Qatar, Egypt and the United States were expected to present a plan to implement a deal that could bring about a ceasefire in the war in Gaza and free the remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas. The deal was proposed by US President Joe Biden in May – but unresolved differences have left the path forward unclear.
Here’s what we know about the status of the talks.
People protest in Tel Aviv ahead of the latest round of talks, calling for a deal that would secure the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.
People protest in Tel Aviv ahead of the latest round of talks, calling for a deal that would secure the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza. Florion Goga/Reuters
What happened in the talks?
Mediators presented a bridging proposal to Israel and Hamas to close the remaining gaps of disagreement between both sides, a joint statement between the US, Qatar and Egypt said on Friday after talks wrapped up for the week.
The statement, published by the Egyptian presidency and Qatari foreign ministry, said the proposal presented to both sides “builds on the areas of agreement over the past week,” and “bridges remaining gaps in a manner that allows for a swift implementation of the deal.”
The talks were “serious and constructive,” the statement said.
video
Related video
Hear from woman who’s husband is still held by Hamas
But the statement did not elaborate on what points of agreement were achieved over the past week.
Hamas had said it would not participate in talks but engaged separately with Qatari and Egyptian mediators, a source told CNN, adding that the mediators are still working to bridge the gap on the remaining key differences.
“Our position was clear… we will not go for new negotiation rounds. We will only go to implement what has been agreed on,” Basem Naim, a member of the Hamas political bureau, told CNN on Tuesday.
On Thursday, the militant group reiterated that there will be no hostage deal or ceasefire agreement without a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.
What is Biden’s proposal?
In May, Biden laid out a three-phase proposal the administration said was submitted by Israel that would pair a release of hostages from Gaza with a “full and complete ceasefire” and a release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel.
The first phase would last six weeks and include the “withdrawal of Israeli forces from all populated areas of Gaza” and the “release of a number of hostages, including women, the elderly, the wounded in exchange for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners” and the implementation of a temporary truce.
Related article
More than 40,000 Palestinians have been killed in 10 months of war in Gaza, health ministry says
Phase 2 would allow for the “exchange for the release of all remaining living hostages, including male soldiers” and a permanent end to the fighting.
In Phase 3, a “major reconstruction plan for Gaza would commence and any final remains of hostages who’ve been killed will be returned to their families,” the US president said.
Israel launched its war against Hamas after the group’s cross-border October 7 attacks, in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and 250 taken hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 100 of those hostages remain in Gaza, their families back home pleading for a breakthrough to secure their safe return. It is unclear how many of the original hostages set for release are still alive.
Hamas and Israel have been engaged in tedious negotiations for months. Officials from Qatar and Egypt act as intermediaries, delivering messages to Israeli and Hamas representatives in shuttle-style diplomacy since representatives from the warring parties are not present at the same location. Technical teams have flown in and out of Doha and Cairo to iron out details for a potential agreement.
What are the key remaining sticking points?
Despite an initial positive reaction from Hamas and Israel, both sides failed to agree on the implementation of the finer details of the proposal including the sequencing of the hostage-prisoner exchange, the number of Palestinian prisoners to be released and how far back Israeli forces should withdraw in Gaza.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been accused of undermining the deal as far-right members of his ruling coalition threaten to collapse the government despite pressure from the US and families of hostages.
Throughout the war, the prime minister has been caught between two potent political forces: the far-right members of his governing coalition who have been opposed to any suggestion that Israeli troops should leave Gaza, and the relatives of hostages held by Hamas, who have formed a powerful pressure group and have implored Netanyahu to reach a deal.
Last month, the prime minister reversed on a key Israeli concession in ceasefire negotiations, demanding that armed men be barred from returning to northern Gaza during an eventual ceasefire, an Israeli source familiar with the talks told CNN. Israel had previously agreed to allow Palestinians unrestricted access to northern Gaza.
Netanyahu’s office on Tuesday rejected claims that the prime minister had changed positions, saying his most recent stance “does not introduce extra conditions and certainly does not contradict or undermine” the May proposal. Netanyahu’s office instead accused Hamas of adding unrealistic demands to its position.
A regional diplomat familiar with the negotiations told CNN that the remaining sticking points for Hamas are Israel’s restrictions on the movement of people from southern Gaza to the north, its demand for a veto over which Palestinian prisoners would be released, as well as its continued presence at the Philadelphi corridor and the Rafah border crossing with Egypt.
The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.
What is Hamas’ position?
US officials had said that talks had reached an advanced stage until Hamas’ political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, was killed in Tehran in late July in an assassination Iran blamed on Israel. Israel hasn’t confirmed or denied responsibility, but Iran has vowed vengeance.
There were concerns that the assassination would throw a wrench in the negotiations between Israel and Hamas. The militant group replaced Haniyeh with Yahya Sinwar, the hardline Hamas leader in Gaza who is one of Israel’s most wanted men. While Haniyeh, a relative moderate, lived in Qatar and was susceptible to pressure from his host country, Sinwar is believed to be deep underground in a tunnel in Gaza and is hard to reach.
Hamas on Thursday denied it was having difficulty communicating with its leader Sinwar, after one of its top officials Osama Hamdan reportedly acknowledged in an interview with the Associated Press on Tuesday that there are “some difficulties” and delays in communicating with him.
Hamas hasn’t ruled out an agreement with Israel, but said that it won’t engage in further negotiations. It instead asked mediators for a plan to implement a ceasefire proposal put forward by Biden.
A Hamas source told CNN on Wednesday that the group has adopted a position of “intentional ambiguity” over whether it will attend ceasefire talks, adding that its position on a potential ceasefire is firm whether not it attends the talks.
Asked why Hamas has been unclear about whether it will attend the ceasefire talks, the source said: “This ambiguity is the movement’s position, which was announced in its latest statement, is intentional and did not come by chance. It comes as a result of Netanyahu’s behavior.”
Why is this round of talks so important?
This latest round of ceasefire talks were the result of a major diplomatic effort by mediators Qatar, Egypt and the US to push for a last-ditch effort to end the war and free the hostages as Iran prepares to attack Israel.
The urgency of the talks was highlighted by the three mediators, who issued a rare joint statement last week calling on the warring parties to return to negotiations and offered what they called a “final bridge proposal” to overcome the remaining sticking points. The details of that proposal have not been made public.
In parallel, US and Middle East diplomats have been mobilizing to dissuade Iran from launching an attack on Israel that could lead to a wider regional war. Both Iran and the US have said that that lines of communication between them are open through intermediaries.
There have been some indications that Iran may abandon plans to attack Israel if a ceasefire deal is reached. But the country’s mission to the United Nations said on Saturday that Tehran’s retaliation is “totally unrelated to the Gaza ceasefire.”
As of Tuesday afternoon, US officials didn’t believe that Iran has decided on a course of retaliatory action against Israel, according to two US administration officials. Furious diplomatic backchannel efforts are ongoing to try to deter a wide-scale attack and de-escalate the volatile situation, one of those officials said.
The second official added that the Biden administration does believe that the US’s public warnings in recent days have affected Iran’s calculus.
The conversation between Al Thani and Kani was “positive,” a diplomat familiar with the call said.
Biden acknowledged the challenges facing a ceasefire deal Tuesday, telling reporters traveling with him to New Orleans he’s “concerned” about negotiations between the two parties amid the looming threat of an attack on Israel from Iran.
The president rebuffed questions on what he’s doing to pressure Israel and Hamas to come to the bargaining table for proposed ceasefire deal talks Thursday, telling reporters, “If I told you what pressure that I’m putting on it, it wouldn’t be very much pressure would it?”
The regional diplomat who spoke to CNN said there is concern that Iran may not hold back on striking Israel, as the diplomat believes the Biden administration is not applying enough pressure on Netanyahu to reach an agreement.
The lack of clarity on whether the Israeli prime minister will adhere to Biden’s May proposal, the source added, suggests time is running out to strike a deal before an Iranian attack. Qatar and Egypt, the source said, may not have enough influence to push Hamas to compromise.
Read More...
A black X is appearing on the doors of Maduro opponents in Venezuela
In a poor Caracas neighborhood, the letter “X” is appearing on people’s homes – crude chest-high slashes of paint that residents say amount to a threat.
Residents living in 23 de Enero, once the stronghold of the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, believe pro-regime paramilitary groups are behind the spray paint. The groups, known as colectivos, are marking people who had protested the outcome of July’s presidential election, residents told CNN.
“There are some fifty homes in my street, and thirty-two have been marked,” said one resident, who asked to use the alias “Pablo”, due to fear of retaliation for speaking out.
The Xs appeared in Pablo’s neighborhood days after Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro claimed victory at the polls on July 28 – a result disputed by the opposition and questioned by foreign observers.
Members of a Venezuelan paramilitary unit took photos of his neighbors as they stood outside their homes and called for Maduro to step down by banging pots. The next morning, “we woke up and all the houses were marked with a cross,” Pablo said.
Pablo told CNN he could hear the painting on his own door in the middle of the night, the rattle and spray waking him up from his sleep.
“The following days, they would ride around the street saying this mark is for cowards and that they would come back with guns if anyone protested,” he said.
Paramilitary groups have historically been used by the Maduro regime to intimidate or attack opposition supporters. In many of Caracas’ poorest neighborhoods, they are the only law.
CNN is attempting to contact Valentin Santana, the leader of one of the most notorious colectivo, La Piedrita, for comment.
Another resident of the same neighborhood said her home was not grafittied, but that she is now too intimidated to join planned anti-government protests on Saturday. She is fearful of a crackdown by the government, which has already detained hundreds of opposition supporters for protesting against Maduro or casting doubt about his disputed victory.
She says that paramilitary groups have installed surveillance cameras in her area, and she does not know who to trust. The Venezuelan government recently repurposed an app originally intended to report public administration malfunctions to allow anonymous charges against opposition supporters.
“This is the app to snitch on the fascists,” Maduro himself told a recent rally, presenting the new service. It has since been blocked on Apple’s App store but is still available on Google Play.
She believes that about 80% of the area she lives in would be in favor of Venezuela’s political opposition – but are too intimidated to make their voices heard.
“A couple days after the election, two young protesters were taken away, there’s no trust among neigbhbors also because of the app,” Valentina said.
A pattern of repression
Venezuelans have felt this fear before. In 2019, when opposition leader Juan Guaido declared himself to be the interim president of Venezuela, with widespread popular support, motorcycle riding colectivo members terrorized anti-government rallies with gunfire and prevented opposition lawmakers and journalists from entering the National Assembly.
That pattern of repression appears to be ramping up today.
Pablo accuses colectivo members of making threats, such as being taken to prison, blacklisting for vital government benefits for cheap gasoline and food handouts. There have also been threats of overt violence in the past few days, though he maintains he will keep protesting.
“Going to jail, that is scary, because at my age that almost certainly means dying in jail. But I don’t want to stop, people are angry… I am very angry, furious,” Pablo, who is in his seventies, told CNN.
Such accounts echo the warnings of opposition leader María Corina Machado, who told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday that Maduro is “exercising violence on innocent people” in the aftermath of the disputed vote.
“Young people are [taken] out of their houses, houses are marked with a cross at their doors. Journalists have been detained, four of them have been accused of terrorism. This is happening as we speak,” she said.
Since the contested election, Maduro has been at the forefront of the government crackdown, ordering the opening of two new prisons to accommodate detained protesters and openly calling for everyone in the streets to be imprisoned.
Maduro has also endorsed what is informally referred to as “Operation Knock-Knock,” that has seen security services knocking at opposition members’ doors.
“Knock Knock! Don’t be a crybaby… You’re going to Tocorón (a jail)” Maduro shouted at a rally last week.
Even after Venezuela’s electoral and judicial authorities announced the victory of Maduro, they have not shown detailed results and electoral records to support it, prompting anger and concern across the country and abroad.
Meanwhile, the team of opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia has released independently collected polling station data that, although partial, appears to suggest that Maduro lost.
Numerous countries say they will not recognize the official election result until the vote tallies are published in full.
In a report shared Tuesday, a panel of experts from the United Nations said the presidential election lacked “basic transparency and integrity.” They also strongly criticized the National Electoral Council (CNE) for announcing the winner without revealing the tabulated results from each of the country’s polling stations, saying it had “no precedent in contemporary democratic elections.”
“The note … from the UN is giving us a lot of hope. The world must know that we have a neo-Nazi for president,” Pablo said.
Read More...
Venezuelans have seen this movie before, but Maduro should beware. This time, the ending could be different
It happened in Caracas on June 9, 2016, when I was there to cover a series of violent protests that had broken out in Venezuela.
That sunny day, as our CNN team was walking towards the building that houses the National Assembly for interviews, we noticed a group of men heading the same way from the opposite side of the street.
“Hurry up!,” CNN en español’s correspondent in Caracas Osmary Hernández said. “I think the colectivos are up the street.” We all picked up our pace and breathed a sigh of relief when we made it to the building. Colectivos are armed groups that function like a street gang, but are closely affiliated with the socialist government and often do their dirty work.
Moments after we made it inside the building, Julio Borges, an opposition member of the assembly and its former president, arrived in bad shape. He had a bloody nose and said a group of opposition legislators like him had been attacked by colectivos as they were headed to the office of the national electoral authority. The month before, President Nicolás Maduro had declared a “constitutional state of emergency.”
Even before that tumultuous period, it had become abundantly clear that Maduro’s government had absolute control of all three branches of government as well as the the National Electoral Council (CNE).
And, as we had just witnessed, it also controlled the streets of Caracas. Maduro, now 61, is a former bus driver who became a Caracas metro system union leader and rose through the ranks. He is the handpicked successor of the late strongman Hugo Chávez, who ruled Venezuela from 1999 until his death in 2013.
A new wave of violence shook Venezuela once again in 2019. In January of that year, Juan Guaidó, then president of the National Assembly, had proclaimed himself interim president of Venezuela. The then-35-year-old Guaidó argued that he had the constitutional right to the presidency as leader of the assembly because Maduro, who had been sworn in only days before, was an illegitimate president.
Both the opposition and leaders of several countries in the region had called the previous year’s election a sham. Guaidó convinced 50 countries that he had a right to be president, including the United States.
By June 2019, when I returned to Caracas, Guaidó had already attempted a military uprising that almost succeeded on April 30, followed by weeks of violent clashes between protesters and security forces that left dozens dead.
The world started to pay close attention to Venezuela once again in the last few months as the country was getting ready to hold a new presidential election. Would Maduro allow the opposition to run a candidate of its choosing? Would this be a free, fair, and transparent election? Would the colectivos once again be used to intimidate voters as they had done in previous elections?
The first and second questions were answered in January when opposition leader María Corina Machado was barred by Venezuela’s highest court from running for president (or any other elected position) for 15 years over alleged financial irregularities. Machado had won more than 90% of the vote in last October’s opposition primary. She attracted large crowds everywhere she went, even though the government did everything possible to stop her, even persecuting those who rented sound systems to her campaign.
The third question was answered in the last hours of the election itself on Sunday when colectivos showed up at at least one polling center in Caracas and started beating up opposition sympathizers who had been asked by the leadership to keep an eye on ballot boxes in an effort to prevent tampering.
Those of us who have been following Venezuela for decades have seen this movie before: a “sham” election to justify Maduro’s staying in power. Democracy has been gradually weakening in Venezuela over the last 25 years since the charismatic socialist leader Chávez rose to power in 1999.
While Venezuelans and the world awaited results Sunday night, the country’s electoral authority delayed publication, alleging the system had been targeted by hackers operating from North Macedonia without showing any evidence. This was not surprising in a country where all three branches of government are in the hands of government loyalists, hundreds of opposition leaders have been imprisoned, and true democracy hasn’t existed in a generation.
“Is there anything different this time?” That’s the question I asked Michael Shifter, the former president of the Inter-American Dialogue and current professor of Latin American Politics at Georgetown University, who has been following Venezuelan politics for decades.
Shifter said the Maduro victory was a “blatant, massive and egregious fraud,” but the opposition managed to do something it had been unable to do before: uniting behind a single candidate and going to the polls in massive numbers.
“The alternative [to participating in the election] was taking themselves completely out of the political game, saying ‘we refuse to take part in this unfair and unjust election,’ but that would’ve left the opposition in a weaker position in practical and political terms” as it happened in 2018 when the opposition decided to boycott the whole process.
“I think the opposition learned that refusing to take part in elections was not helping their cause. They recognized that even when the elections weren’t free and fair, they needed to defeat Maduro on his terms, which they’ve done,” Shifter said.
Venezuela’s CNE declared Maduro the winner Monday saying he had won with 51.2% of the votes, with 80% of the ballots counted. His main rival, opposition candidate Edmundo González, had obtained 44.2% of the votes, according to the body.
Critics like former Bolivian President Jorge Fernando “Tuto” Quiroga, who was one of several former heads of state prevented from flying to Venezuela by its government as they tried to serve as observers, called the Maduro government a “desperate regime; an open, pure and hard tyranny that has chosen to steal the presidency staging a fraudulent coronation.” In an interview with CNN, he said that even the math didn’t add up when Venezuelan electoral authorities declared a winner with 80% of the vote counted.
“When you’re in first grade, you learn that 20 is more than seven,” Quiroga said. “The probability that [opposition presidential candidate] Edmundo [González] could’ve won was low, but still arithmetically possible,” at that point, he said, adding that prior to the election there were credible exit polls showing González was ahead by as much as 40 percent.
Just like 2016 and 2019, violence has returned to Venezuela. At least 11 people died during protests in Venezuela on Monday, according to the non-governmental organization Foro Penal on social media. Venezuelan authorities say more than 700 people were detained in the protests. The Venezuelan opposition political party Voluntad Popular said Tuesday that its leader Freddy Superlano has been kidnapped.
Unlike the 2018 election, Shifter says, this time the opposition “knows they won, and the regime knows they won.” The question now is how long the governing coalition that includes not only the socialists, but the armed forces can hold, Shifter said.
If that coalition becomes “divided and weaker, the armed forces may say ‘this ship is sinking and we don’t want to go down with it,’” Shifter said.
SOURCE: CNN
Read More...
in 1961, Ranger 1, the first mission in the Ranger program, launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.
#OTD in 1961, Ranger 1, the first mission in the Ranger program, launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. A rocket malfunction during launch caused the spacecraft to get stranded in low-Earth orbit. Read More...
bastard staff app x, they did shadow ban again
while we have to gather people in underground communities to carry out resistance & war against Globalists, Cabals & Zionist Israel!!!
#news #community #alert #global #wars #globalist #ww3 #civilunrest #revolution #freedom #palestine
Read More...
The tallest mountain in the solar system, Olympus Mons on Mars. It has a height of 25 km, Mount Everest is 'only' 8.8 km tall.
💫Welcome💫
Checkout Our YouTube Channel & Do Subscribe
Read More...
Drought-hit Danube River reveals scuttled German World War II ships
Mohacs, Hungary/Prahovo, Serbia
Reuters
—
The wrecks of explosives-laden Nazi ships sunk in the Danube River during World War II have emerged near Serbia’s river port town of Prahovo, after a drought in July and August that saw the river’s water level drop.
Four vessels dating from before 1950 have also come to light in Hungary’s Danube-Drava National Park near Mohacs, where the Danube’s water level stood at only 1.5 meters (4.9 feet) on Tuesday, the lingering effect of severe heat waves and persistent drought in July and August.
The vessels revealed in Prahovo were among hundreds scuttled along the Danube by Nazi Germany’s Black Sea fleet in 1944 as they retreated from advancing Soviet forces, destroying the ships themselves. The wrecks can hamper river traffic during low water levels.
Strewn across the riverbed, some of the ships still have turrets, command bridges, broken masts and twisted hulls, while others lie mostly submerged under sandbanks.
Endre Sztellik, a guard at the Danube-Drava national park, said of one of the ships, “we still don’t know what this is exactly. What is visible and an unfortunate fact is that the wreck is diminishing as people are interested in it and parts of it are going missing.”
The Danube stood at 1.17 meters (3.8 feet) in Budapest on Tuesday, which compares with an all-time record low of around 0.4 meters (1.3 feet) registered in October 2018. During floods, the Danube rises well above 6 meters (19.7 feet).
“Eastern Europe is experiencing critical drought conditions that are affecting crops and vegetation,” the European climate service Copernicus said on its website in its latest drought report, published earlier this month.
Long-awaited rainfall set in on Monday, which is expected to raise Danube levels to around 3 meters (9.8 feet) at Mohacs by the weekend, with the river likely to submerge the shipwrecks again.
The level of Poland’s longest river, the Vistula, has fallen to a record low, leaving sandbanks exposed in Warsaw and water so shallow a moose was filmed walking across it in a section in the countryside.
#news
Read More...
I've got 2 brain cells left and it's these two 🫠🤣
#meme #cartoon #funny follow for more 😉 Read More...
Iranian Hackers Allegedly Leak Trump Campaign’s 271-Page Dossier on JD Vance’s Weaknesses
The Trump campaign has claimed that a massive leak of internal documents, including a detailed 271-page file on Senator J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) potential vulnerabilities, may have been orchestrated by Iranian hackers. While these claims have yet to be confirmed, the leaked information has raised significant concerns within the campaign.
Politico, the outlet that received the leaked communications, reported that the documents were sent by an anonymous source claiming to have obtained them through hacking. The Trump campaign confirmed the authenticity of the communications on Saturday, attributing the leak to foreign entities hostile to the United States. According to campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung, these documents were obtained illegally with the intent to disrupt the 2024 election and create chaos within the American democratic process.
Supporting this claim, a recent report from Microsoft indicated that Iranian hackers had compromised the email account of a high-ranking official within the Trump campaign in June 2024. This hacking incident reportedly coincided with the period when President Trump was in the process of selecting his vice-presidential running mate.
The Microsoft report further detailed that another Iranian group, believed to be connected to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), attempted a spear phishing attack on a senior official in a presidential campaign. The phishing email, sent from the compromised account of a former senior advisor, contained a malicious link designed to reroute traffic through a domain controlled by the hackers.
Politico revealed that it began receiving emails on July 22 from an AOL account under the alias “Robert.” These emails included internal communications from the Trump campaign, with one email containing the extensive 271-page dossier on J.D. Vance titled “POTENTIAL VULNERABILITIES.” When questioned about the source of the documents, “Robert” advised Politico not to investigate further, suggesting that such inquiries could legally jeopardize the publication of the information.
This incident is not the first time Trump has been targeted by hackers. In 2020, his social media account was compromised when a hacker guessed his password, “maga2020!” Moreover, Trump has allegedly been the target of an Iranian assassination plot, leading to charges against a Pakistani man with ties to the Islamic Republic by the Department of Justice.
#Election2024 #CyberSecurity #Hacking #IranianHackers #TrumpCampaign #JDVance #PoliticalLeaks #ForeignInterference #CyberThreats #USPolitics
Read More...
Israel launches air attacks near Syria’s Tartous
Israel has carried out air strikes near Syria’s Mediterranean port city of Tartous, Syrian state media has reported.
An Israeli army statement on Monday said that its forces “struck a military site where weapons belonging to the previous Syrian regime were stored in the area of Qardaha”, the hometown of deposed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, some 60km (37 miles) north of the Tartous port.
#Aljazeera #News #Israel #Syria
Read More...
