U.S. warns Americans not to travel to Venezuela citing risks of torture, kidnapping
Christian Castaneda understands those risks painfully well, because he says his brother Wilbert Joseph Castaneda is currently being wrongfully detained in Venezuela.
It was just before Labor Day weekend of 2024 when Christian says he got a strange late-night call from an international number. When he picked up, it was his brother Wilbert.
'He said Christian I'm in Venezuela. It's a really really bad situation,' Castaneda said.
He was immediately concerned, but it would take some time to discover just how bad the situation was. It turns out his brother Wilbert had been vacationing in Colombia and then traveled to Venezuela, where the Venezuelan government imprisoned him.
The Venezuelan government accuses Castaneda and other foreign visitors of a plot to assassinate President Nicholas Maduro. Christian says that's completely untrue.
'They have not provided a single shred of evidence,' Castaneda said.
Wilbert is a U.S. Navy Seal and a father of four. It's been months since his family has been able to see or talk to him.
Christian shared that they're very worried for his safety, especially after hearing from former American detainees about how dangerous Venezuela can be.
'Very rough conditions, including torture. And so absolutely very concerned that that could be the case. Not just for my brother, but for other Americans that are there as well,' Castaneda said.
That's why the U.S. State Department just launched a new campaign to warn Americans not to go to Venezuela for any reason. State Department Deputy Spokesperson Mignon Houston says it's critically important for them to spread the word.
'No travel is safe right now in Venezuela, absolutely no travel,' Houston said. 'We are asking Americans, don't risk it, don't take the chance. Not even to travel to the border.'
Right now, the State Department says more U.S. nationals are wrongfully detained in Venezuela than anywhere else in the world. Strained relations between the U.S. and Venezuela mean that the U.S. government has no access to American detainees.
'The stories that we have heard from detained Americans, they're horrific. The beatings, the torture. This is not a place you want to spend your summer travel. This is not a place you want to go,' Houston said.
The Castaneda family is actively working with hostage advocacy groups, lawmakers, and the Trump administration to get Wilbert back home.
'I hope that he knows that we're fighting for him. And I know that he does, that his family misses him very much. His kids are looking forward to seeing him again soon,' Castaneda said.
He says he's hopeful.
'There's no doubt in my mind that he'll be reunited with us and with his family soon,' Castaneda said.
'Not a day goes by that we are not thinking about the Americans who are wrongfully detained around the world, and Venezuela is included,' Houston said.
While the State Department works to free all Americans, including Castaneda, they want to make sure others don't end up imprisoned in Venezuela.
'This is a campaign to ensure that we don't have another name to add to that list,' Houston said. 'There is no trip that is worth the price of your freedom.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Medicaid was signed into law 60 years ago. Trump's big bill is chiseling it back
WASHINGTON (AP) — On this day in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed legislation into law that launched Medicaid, creating a U.S. health care safety net for millions of low-income Americans in what would become one of the crowning achievements of his domestic legacy. A year earlier, he did the same for food stamps, drawing on President John F. Kennedy's first executive order for the development of 'a positive food and nutrition program for all Americans.' This summer, with the stroke of a pen, President Donald Trump began to chisel them back. The Republican Party's big tax and spending bill delivered not just $4.5 trillion in tax breaks for Americans but some of the most substantial changes to the landmark safety net programs in their history. The trade-off will cut more than $1 trillion over a decade from federal health care and food assistance, largely by imposing work requirements on those receiving aid and by shifting certain federal costs onto the states. While Republicans in Congress argue the trims are needed to rightsize the federal programs that have grown over the decades and to prevent rising federal deficits, they are also moving toward a long-sought GOP goal of shrinking the federal government and the services it provides. 'We're making the first changes to the welfare state in generations,' House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a recent podcast interview. As the tax breaks and spending cuts law begins to take shape, it is unleashing a new era of uncertainty for the safety net programs that millions of people in communities across the nation have grown to depend on, with political ramifications to come. Big safety net changes ahead Polling shows most U.S. adults don't think the government is overspending on the programs. Americans broadly support increasing or maintaining existing levels of funding for popular safety net programs, including Social Security and Medicare, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Local governments are scrambling to figure out how they will comply with the new landscape, calculating whether they will need to raise their own taxes to cover costs, trim budgets elsewhere or cut back the aid provided to Americans. 'The cuts are really big, they are really broad and they are deeply damaging,' said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a research institute in Washington. 'The consequences are millions of people losing health care coverage,' she said. 'Millions of people losing food assistance. And the net result of that is higher poverty, more hardship.' At the same time, certain people who receive aid, including parents of teenagers and older Americans up to age 64, will have to prepare to work, engage in classes or do community service for 80 hours a month to meet new requirements. All told, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 10 million more people will end up without health insurance. Some 3 million fewer people will participate in the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, known as SNAP. 'People are really concerned what this means for their fiscal health,' said Mark Ritacco, chief governmental affairs officer at the National Association of Counties, which held its annual conference the week after Trump signed the bill into law. The organization had pushed senators to delay the start dates for some Medicaid changes, and it hopes that further conversations with lawmakers in Congress can prevent some of them from ever taking hold. At its conference, questions swirled. 'We're talking about Medicaid and SNAP — these are people's lives and livelihoods,' Ritacco said. GOP bill trims back health care and food aid Republicans insist the law is adhering to Trump's vow not to touch Medicaid as the changes root out waste, fraud and abuse. A memo from the House GOP's campaign arm encourages lawmakers to focus on the popularity of its new work requirements and restrictions on benefits for certain immigrants. 'Those safety nets are meant for a small population of people — the elderly, disabled, young pregnant women who are single,' the House speaker said on 'The Benny Show.' He said the years since the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, came into law, 'everybody got on the wagon.' 'All these young, able-bodied, young men who don't have dependents, riding the wagon,' the speaker said. Medicaid then and now When President Johnson established Medicaid alongside Medicare — the health care program for seniors — as part of the Social Security Amendments of 1965, it was meant for low-income families as well as the disabled. And it quickly took off. Almost every state signed on to participate in Medicaid by 1970, according to the KFF, an organization focused on health policy. It soon went beyond covering its core population to include pregnant women, school-age children and not just the very poor but also those with incomes just over the federal poverty limit, which is now about $15,650 annually for a single person and $26,650 for a family of three. In the 15 years since the Affordable Care Act became law under President Barack Obama, Medicaid has grown substantially as most states opted to join the federal expansion. Some 80 million adults and children are covered. While the uninsured population has tumbled, the federal costs of providing Medicaid have also grown, to more than $880 billion a year. 'There are a lot of effects Medicaid has on health, but the most stark thing that it does is that it saves lives,' said Bruce D. Meyer, an economist and public policy professor at the University of Chicago who co-authored a pivotal study assessing the program. The law's changes will certainly save the federal government 'a substantial amount of money,' he said, but that will come at 'substantial increases in mortality. And you have to decide what you value more.' Food stamps, which had been offered toward the end of the Great Depression but were halted during World War II amid rationed supplies, launched as a federal program when Johnson signed the Food Stamp Act of 1964 into law. Today, SNAP provides almost $200 in monthly benefits per person to some 40 million recipients nationwide. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who delivered the longest speech in House history while trying to stall the bill, said the changes will hurt households and communities nationwide. 'Who are these people?' Jeffries said. 'Ripping health care away from the American people. The largest cuts in Medicaid in American history. Ripping food out of the mouths of children, seniors and veterans who are going to go hungry as a result of this one big, ugly bill.'
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed ending rules that address the contribution of motor vehicles to climate change. In a statement, the EPA said that its proposal would 'repeal all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines, thereby reinstating consumer choice and giving Americans the ability to purchase a safe and affordable car for their family while decreasing the cost of living on all products that trucks deliver'. Transportation is the largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the US and for years the EPA has pushed vehicle makers in the US to reduce their contribution with steps that have included strict tailpipe standards and target a big transition to EVs and plug-in hybrids by 2030. In his presidential election campaign, Donald Trump pledged to roll back 'electric vehicle mandates' and boost the oil and gas industry. He framed his policies as about restoring consumer choice. They were also supported by the oil and gas industry and climate change sceptics, as well as parts of the US auto industry who have said tailpipe standards are too strict and costly to meet. The EPA's 'endangerment finding' in 2009 determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions are a form of air pollution that the agency can regulate under the Clean Air Act, because climate change harms human health. The EPA's latest proposal would revoke the endangerment finding, seen by many as a cornerstone of US federal rules designed to tackle multiple sources of greenhouse gases – such as motor vehicles. Although CAFE standards remain in place, the US Department of Transport is reviewing them and Congress has already voted not to enforce big fines for vehicle manufacturer non-compliance. It has also voted to end the State of California's so-called 'EPA waiver' that meant it adopted tougher greenhouse gas policies than federal rules. The Trump administration has also scrapped consumer EV tax credits. 'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' said EPA Administrator Zeldin. 'In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. We heard loud and clear the concern that EPA's GHG emissions standards themselves, not carbon dioxide which the Finding never assessed independently, was the real threat to Americans' livelihoods. If finalized, rescinding the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.' 'Thanks to President Trump's leadership, America is returning to free and open dialogue around climate and energy policy - driving the focus back to following the data,' said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. 'Today's announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans.' Administrator Zeldin also announced the agency would reconsider the Model Year 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles. "US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
UNESCO sites in Illinois safe amid U.S. withdrawal
President Trump's decision to withdraw from UNESCO by the end of next year will not affect U.S. participation in one of its key initiatives. The big picture: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization honors natural and cultural sites across the globe that must be preserved due to their significance to history and humanity. It has identified more than 1,200 sites for the World Heritage List, including three in Illinois. Driving the news: The Trump administration announced last week that the U.S. was pulling out of the organization because it "supports woke, divisive cultural and social causes that are totally out-of-step with the commonsense policies that Americans voted for in November," White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. Flashback: Trump also pulled the U.S. out of UNESCO in 2017, citing anti-Israel bias, but President Biden had the country rejoin in 2023. State of play: The U.S. will no longer pay dues. UNESCO Director General Audrey Azoulay said the organization had financially prepared for the U.S. withdrawal. The U.S. remains a member of the World Heritage Convention, and it will continue to preserve and promote the 26 U.S. sites included on the list, an UNESCO spokesperson told Axios. "Even during previous UNESCO withdrawals in 1984 and 2017, the United States continued to nominate and support World Heritage inscriptions," Barbara Gordon of the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy told Axios. Eight U.S. Wright properties are included on the World Heritage List. Yes, but: "While UNESCO does not provide direct funding to the sites that comprise 'The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright,' several U.S. agencies that do support public Wright sites have experienced severe cuts," Gordon said. She added, "These funding reductions pose a serious risk to the continued stewardship, preservation, and interpretation of Wright's architectural legacy." Zoom in: Illinois sites include one near St. Louis and two in the Chicago area.
