“Éste es un proceso que ya no tiene marcha atrás”
Diagonal
La investigadora Cristina Híjar y el director de fotografía Juan García han estudiado durante tres años las estructuras organizativas zapatistas plasmando sus resultados en un documental y un libro.
¿Qué está ocurriendo en el interior del territorio zapatista en Chiapas? ¿Cómo está sobreviviendo el movimiento? ¿Cómo están construyendo su autonomía? Las respuestas a estas preguntas son quizá la esencia del movimiento zapatista, y lo son también la del documental Autonomía zapatista: otro mundo es posible, realizado por la productora mexicana independiente Arte Música y Video. Ahora que el EZLN cumple su aniversario, el cortometraje se presenta oportunamente necesario para conocer de manera profunda cómo funcionan los llamados caracoles y las Juntas de Buen Gobierno, que son las estructuras político-organizativas que se construyen día a día en los territorios autónomos. Cristina Híjar explica: “Nos parecía muy importante documentar la vida cotidiana de las comunidades indígenas y el significado que para éstas tiene haber decidido dar un paso adelante en términos organizativos desde el mismo momento en que se plantearon ejercer su autonomía de facto, después de haberlo intentado por los caminos de la negociación y el diálogo, que fueron traicionados por distintos gobiernos de México”. Se decidió que fueran únicamente las bases y las autoridades zapatistas las que hablaran: “No queríamos ninguna interpretación, sino explicar directamente en voz de los militantes el funcionamiento de los caracoles y las Juntas de Buen Gobierno”. Y es que estas dos estructuras, que son el núcleo político del zapatismo, no son suficientemente conocidas, ni siquiera entre los simpatizantes del EZLN.
Los cinco caracoles (Oventik, La Realidad, Morelia, Roberto Barrios y La Garrucha) son figuras que tienen un espacio geográfico físico donde se adscriben un determinado número de municipios. En cada Caracol hay espacios de beneficio común como clínicas, oficinas de ‘buen gobierno’ o comisiones de vigilancia o información. A su vez, los Caracoles albergan, cada uno, su oficina de Junta de Buen Gobierno, que se encarga precisamente del gobierno y de la administración. Todos los caracoles operan de igual manera bajo la premisa del ‘mandar obedeciendo’ (quien manda lo hace obedeciendo las decisiones que se toman en las comunidades), pero cada Caracol tiene sus particularidades y sus propios desafíos.
Aprender a gobernar
Las juntas resuelven problemas agrarios, de acceso al agua e incluso familiares, además de garantizar los insumos y coordinar a los promotores de educación y salud. Según Híjar, “estamos hablando de una tarea mayúscula, y son gente que está aprendiendo a gobernar en el proceso mismo de gobernar”. De este proceso se desprende, continúa Híjar, lo que más le impresionó: “La construcción de este sujeto autónomo.
Eso implica un cambio de relación con los demás, y con el mundo. Implica también una forma de inserción en las colectividades, y creo que eso es el mayor aporte, pues gracias a esto funciona todo lo demás”.
Se trata de sujetos totalmente conscientes de lo que están llevando a cabo, claros en los objetivos, y que no se achican ante nada. “Cuando una escucha hablar a una chica de 17 años, que es una autoridad autónoma, y te explica por qué están haciendo lo que están haciendo, te das cuenta de por qué funciona todo. Hay promotores (de 16 o 14 años) de salud o educación que, sin alharacas, son disciplinados y dedicados. Es la garantía de que esto ya no tiene marcha atrás”.
Aunque no existe ningún censo, por lo menos público, de los pobladores que de alguna manera pertenecen o están adscritos a los territorios autónomos, “la presencia zapatista mancha la mitad del Estado de Chiapas”. Actualmente hay más de 40 municipios autónomos, compuestos por varias comunidades, y éstas a su vez pueden estar compuestas por cien miembros o por 2.000”.
Este proceso de construcción, finaliza la investigadora, es la muestra de que el “otro mundo es posible” no es sólo una frase bonita, “pues ahí está la dignidad y el esfuerzo de los zapatistas, y creo que ahora también a nosotros nos toca, desde los sectores donde estemos, contribuir a esto”.
Share This
Tecpatl
Our Word is Our Weapon, if you have anything you would like us to publish please send us an email @ maiz_centeotl_chicomecoatl@riseup.net
Subscribe To Maiz Today!!!!
Posts
All Comments
1/26/09
Documents Say Oakland Police Beat Suspect Who Died
The Chauncey Bailey Project, News Report, Thomas Peele and Bob Butler
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news
OAKLAND, Calif.--About 7:10 p.m. March 23, 2000, on Holly Street near 73rd Avenue in East Oakland, a man named Jerry Andrew Amaro III bought two "dimes" of what he thought was rock cocaine from undercover police officers posing as drug dealers.
When the officers went to arrest Amaro, 38, he ran and was tackled before he surrendered.
Then, according to officers who have read Internal Affairs documents about the matter, Lt. Edward Poulson kicked Amaro several times in the ribs as he lay on the ground.
About a month later, Amaro died of complications from broken ribs, according to a coroner's report. His body was found surrounded by drug paraphernalia on the dirt floor of a friend's basement April 21, 2000, according to police documents.
An envelope containing X-rays of his broken ribs was found near his body.
Amaro told several people he was beaten by police, including a doctor who treated him April 17, 2000.
He had been treated several times at a free clinic but declined hospitalization, perhaps because of a drug addiction, according to police documents.
An autopsy showed that Amaro had five ribs that were healing after blunt force trauma to his chest and that he had died of pneumonia and a collapsed left lung, according to documents.
Then-homicide Sgt. Gus Galindo investigated the case aggressively, according to his 12 pages of case notes obtained by the Chauncey Bailey Project. He interviewed Poulson and six others present during the arrest. Each said they saw no one strike Amaro.
But when the Internal Affairs Division began investigating the matter, the same officers who told Galindo there was no use of force changed their stories. They said Poulson had kicked Amaro and had told them to say Amaro wasn't assaulted, according to officers who have read documents about the case.
Eventually, Internal Affairs investigators recommended Poulson be fired for the failure to be truthful, for telling the officers to lie and for interfering in an Internal Affairs investigation.
Then-Chief Richard Word downgraded the discipline to a two-week suspension without pay. Word said in a recent interview he could not discuss why he didn't follow the recommendation and fire Poulson, citing confidentiality laws.
Civil rights lawyer John Burris said late Thursday he looked into Amaro's death shortly after it happened but couldn't get enough facts to bring a case on behalf of his family.
"Now it turns out there might have been a real cover-up that could have prevented me from getting info, and I'm pleased that in the very least it's surfacing now," Burris said.
"It was a very unsatisfying experience for me," Burris added. "I had the sense that he had been killed by the police but couldn't get the info to corroborate that. I felt really bad for the family, and they were so adamant. I didn't walk away feeling like I had done my job."
Amaro's survivors could not be reached late Thursday.
Oakland Tribune reporter Kamika Dunlap contributed to this report.
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news
OAKLAND, Calif.--About 7:10 p.m. March 23, 2000, on Holly Street near 73rd Avenue in East Oakland, a man named Jerry Andrew Amaro III bought two "dimes" of what he thought was rock cocaine from undercover police officers posing as drug dealers.
When the officers went to arrest Amaro, 38, he ran and was tackled before he surrendered.
Then, according to officers who have read Internal Affairs documents about the matter, Lt. Edward Poulson kicked Amaro several times in the ribs as he lay on the ground.
About a month later, Amaro died of complications from broken ribs, according to a coroner's report. His body was found surrounded by drug paraphernalia on the dirt floor of a friend's basement April 21, 2000, according to police documents.
An envelope containing X-rays of his broken ribs was found near his body.
Amaro told several people he was beaten by police, including a doctor who treated him April 17, 2000.
He had been treated several times at a free clinic but declined hospitalization, perhaps because of a drug addiction, according to police documents.
An autopsy showed that Amaro had five ribs that were healing after blunt force trauma to his chest and that he had died of pneumonia and a collapsed left lung, according to documents.
Then-homicide Sgt. Gus Galindo investigated the case aggressively, according to his 12 pages of case notes obtained by the Chauncey Bailey Project. He interviewed Poulson and six others present during the arrest. Each said they saw no one strike Amaro.
But when the Internal Affairs Division began investigating the matter, the same officers who told Galindo there was no use of force changed their stories. They said Poulson had kicked Amaro and had told them to say Amaro wasn't assaulted, according to officers who have read documents about the case.
Eventually, Internal Affairs investigators recommended Poulson be fired for the failure to be truthful, for telling the officers to lie and for interfering in an Internal Affairs investigation.
Then-Chief Richard Word downgraded the discipline to a two-week suspension without pay. Word said in a recent interview he could not discuss why he didn't follow the recommendation and fire Poulson, citing confidentiality laws.
Civil rights lawyer John Burris said late Thursday he looked into Amaro's death shortly after it happened but couldn't get enough facts to bring a case on behalf of his family.
"Now it turns out there might have been a real cover-up that could have prevented me from getting info, and I'm pleased that in the very least it's surfacing now," Burris said.
"It was a very unsatisfying experience for me," Burris added. "I had the sense that he had been killed by the police but couldn't get the info to corroborate that. I felt really bad for the family, and they were so adamant. I didn't walk away feeling like I had done my job."
Amaro's survivors could not be reached late Thursday.
Oakland Tribune reporter Kamika Dunlap contributed to this report.
La herencia del zapatismo en los movimientos sociales
El tejido de nuestro pasamontañas
Guillermo Zapata
Diagonal
Han pasado 15 años desde aquel “¡Ya Basta!” que transformó de manera radical las formas de hacer política de los movimientos sociales en el mundo. Pero, ¿cuáles son esos aportes del zapatismo?
UNA ÉTICA, UN MÉTODO. El zapatismo incorpora una ética en la que no hay manera de distinguir fines y medios. En el que resultado final y proceso tienen la misma importancia. Un método sostenido por la pregunta y la consulta permanente, que pone toda su atención en la propia dinámica comunitaria y de construcción del movimiento. Resitúa el método y la forma del conflicto social, no a través de la oposición frontal a una determinada forma de ejercer el poder, sino a partir de la apertura de procesos colectivos que obligan al propio poder a redefinirse o que constituyen en sí mismos formas autónomas de poder. “Mandar obedeciendo” y “Caminar preguntando” son dos de los planteamientos que atraviesan los nuevos espacios sociales a partir de su aparición.
UN LENGUAJE. Los zapatistas resaltan que uno de los espacios fundamentales de producción de organización social y conflicto, es el comunicativo. Su lenguaje nace de una investigación profunda en sus propios mitos, es una obsesión por hacerse comprensible a partir de sus propias comunidades. Desenterrar del mito de la nación mexicana las imágenes que componen el común de un lenguaje colectivo y mezclarlo con la singularidad indígena. También es importante su capacidad para gestionar la ausencia de comunicación, los tiempos de silencio. Otro de los aportes más interesantes es quizás la introducción del humor, la ironía y la paradoja.
UNA FORMA ORGANIZATIVA. La organización de las reivindicaciones en torno a demandas (salud, tierra, libertad, etc), que luego se van construyendo en el proceso de resistencia comunitaria, indica una concepción de la organización que no apela a lo trascendente, ni pide nada a otras instancias que deben legitimarlo, sino que se ejerce a partir de la inmanencia, de lo concreto. No es posible entender la organización zapatista sin recordar la constante presencia de las mujeres en los procesos centrales de toma de decisiones, los esfuerzos por construir una organización igualitaria y desarrollar la autonomía de las mujeres y sus propios espacios de construcción comunitaria. UN TIEMPO Y UN ESPACIO. Otra de las aportaciones nace de estar donde no se le espera, de resultar imprevisible. Esa capacidad de territorializar su experiencia y a la vez producir redes de forma constante y utilizar a su favor el factor sorpresa, los convierte en una especie de magos de la gestión de un espacio y un tiempo propios.
LA REBELDÍA Y EL FIN DE LAS DICOTOMÍAS. Como conclusión, la aparición de la figura del rebelde como principal aportación del zapatismo a la práctica de los movimientos. Una figura que deconstruye tanto la figura del “reformista” como la del “revolucionario”. El zapatismo es, en realidad, una deconstrucción de la mayor parte de las oposiciones de la izquierda del siglo XX: “Reforma/Revolución”, “Violencia/Noviolencia”, etc. Pero no podemos dejar de resaltar que el zapatismo no nace desconectado de sus propios filones ortodoxos y heterodoxos de acción política y sería injusto no recordar alguna de las constantes que lo conectan y nos conectan con una múltiple tradición de luchas. Ellos saben que no hay transformación sin conflicto social. No hay conflicto social sin sujetos. No hay sujetos sin procesos organizativos.
Guillermo Zapata, del EPA Patio Maravillas de Madrid
Guillermo Zapata
Diagonal
Han pasado 15 años desde aquel “¡Ya Basta!” que transformó de manera radical las formas de hacer política de los movimientos sociales en el mundo. Pero, ¿cuáles son esos aportes del zapatismo?
UNA ÉTICA, UN MÉTODO. El zapatismo incorpora una ética en la que no hay manera de distinguir fines y medios. En el que resultado final y proceso tienen la misma importancia. Un método sostenido por la pregunta y la consulta permanente, que pone toda su atención en la propia dinámica comunitaria y de construcción del movimiento. Resitúa el método y la forma del conflicto social, no a través de la oposición frontal a una determinada forma de ejercer el poder, sino a partir de la apertura de procesos colectivos que obligan al propio poder a redefinirse o que constituyen en sí mismos formas autónomas de poder. “Mandar obedeciendo” y “Caminar preguntando” son dos de los planteamientos que atraviesan los nuevos espacios sociales a partir de su aparición.
UN LENGUAJE. Los zapatistas resaltan que uno de los espacios fundamentales de producción de organización social y conflicto, es el comunicativo. Su lenguaje nace de una investigación profunda en sus propios mitos, es una obsesión por hacerse comprensible a partir de sus propias comunidades. Desenterrar del mito de la nación mexicana las imágenes que componen el común de un lenguaje colectivo y mezclarlo con la singularidad indígena. También es importante su capacidad para gestionar la ausencia de comunicación, los tiempos de silencio. Otro de los aportes más interesantes es quizás la introducción del humor, la ironía y la paradoja.
UNA FORMA ORGANIZATIVA. La organización de las reivindicaciones en torno a demandas (salud, tierra, libertad, etc), que luego se van construyendo en el proceso de resistencia comunitaria, indica una concepción de la organización que no apela a lo trascendente, ni pide nada a otras instancias que deben legitimarlo, sino que se ejerce a partir de la inmanencia, de lo concreto. No es posible entender la organización zapatista sin recordar la constante presencia de las mujeres en los procesos centrales de toma de decisiones, los esfuerzos por construir una organización igualitaria y desarrollar la autonomía de las mujeres y sus propios espacios de construcción comunitaria. UN TIEMPO Y UN ESPACIO. Otra de las aportaciones nace de estar donde no se le espera, de resultar imprevisible. Esa capacidad de territorializar su experiencia y a la vez producir redes de forma constante y utilizar a su favor el factor sorpresa, los convierte en una especie de magos de la gestión de un espacio y un tiempo propios.
LA REBELDÍA Y EL FIN DE LAS DICOTOMÍAS. Como conclusión, la aparición de la figura del rebelde como principal aportación del zapatismo a la práctica de los movimientos. Una figura que deconstruye tanto la figura del “reformista” como la del “revolucionario”. El zapatismo es, en realidad, una deconstrucción de la mayor parte de las oposiciones de la izquierda del siglo XX: “Reforma/Revolución”, “Violencia/Noviolencia”, etc. Pero no podemos dejar de resaltar que el zapatismo no nace desconectado de sus propios filones ortodoxos y heterodoxos de acción política y sería injusto no recordar alguna de las constantes que lo conectan y nos conectan con una múltiple tradición de luchas. Ellos saben que no hay transformación sin conflicto social. No hay conflicto social sin sujetos. No hay sujetos sin procesos organizativos.
Guillermo Zapata, del EPA Patio Maravillas de Madrid
Political Leaders Moving Toward a United States of Africa
Final Call, News Analysis , Saeed Shabazz
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/
John Atta Mills has become president of Ghana, returning the National Democratic Congress, the party founded by former president, Jerry Rawlings, to power after an eight year hiatus. Some analysts believe the recent election in Ghana marked a new era of democracy in Africa.
“That is the greatest lesson for Africa,” stated a representative of the Nigerian-based Alliance for credible Elections, according to press reports. Francois Grignon, analyst and Africa director for the International Crisis Group said the Ghanaian election resonated throughout the whole of Africa. “In 2009 we have to try to get some more positive results,” Mr. Grignon said.
Voters in Angola, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa are going to the polls between March and June. There are also elections slated in 2009 for Algeria, Comoros, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Niger, Sudan and Tunisia.
Analysts are also saying that more African nations are moving towards stability and peace; the African Union has asserted itself as a regional diplomatic and peacekeeping force; and there are signs of a growing middle class throughout the continent. Mobile phones and the internet are also revolutionizing how Africans communicate throughout the continent.
Akbar Muhammad, journalist, author and director of the African Middle East Literary Association calls this the era of a new “African Renaissance.” “There is a new leadership emerging, coming out from behind the shadows of the old,” Mr. Muhammad told The Final Call.
“The key in Africa is what happens in Egypt if President Hosni Mubarak’s son does not succeed him, then there is a strong possibility that a new leadership would emerge in Egypt, which is very important for Africa,” Mr. Muhammad said.
Mr. Muhammad also said Tanzanian Pres. Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, Sierra Leone’s Pres. Ernest Bai Koroma, Mali’s Pres. Amadou Toure and Pres. Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, were African leaders to watch.
“The economic collapse of the Western world offers a golden opportunity for Africa,” Mr. Muhammad said. There are 900 million people on the continent, and that is rapidly growing to a billion, he said. Economic experts say that from the Cape to Cairo there is an economic bloc with a combined Gross Domestic Product of U.S. $625 billion; and that’s not counting the Northern African nations.
“We need leaders in Africa with a mindset to restoring Africans at the head of the human family,” stressed Dr. Leonard Jeffries professor of African Studies at City Univ. of New York. “The world economic collapse means people around the globe will be getting together to re-group; and that means Africa has to come together to place Africa at the global economic table as equal partners,” Dr. Jeffries said.
Both Dr. Jeffries and Mr. Muhammad say that Africa must adopt Pres.-elect Barak Obama’s vision of “change.”
However, some American-based analysts and think tanks such as Africa Action believe that the new administration should not concentrate on African economic issues at first, urging Mr. Obama to make human rights in Sudan a priority from day one.
The Washington-based Africa Focus Bulletin said Somalia should be the first test of an Africa foreign policy for the Obama administration to correct “a short-sighted U.S. policy that has actively contributed to worsening an already desperate situation.”
“Somalia is a good place to start as any; and I understand that Mr. Obama has expressed interest in the crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). He has expressed a need for change in the U.S. role in developing economics and peace in Africa,” Bill Fletcher, executive editor of the Black Commentator and founder of the Center for Labor Renewal told The Final Call.
Sadia Aden, president of the Somalia Diaspora Network explained to The Final Call that “in talking to people on the Obama Transition Team, there is a feeling that Somalia will be at the top of the new administration’s ‘first 100-day’ agenda.” There is hope Obama will learn from the mistakes of the Bush administration in Somalia, she added.
On Dec. 29, Somalian Pres. Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed resigned. “The reaction on the ground in Somalia is that his resignation does not mean an end to the War Lords. Yusuf was the head but not the body,” Ms. Aden said.
“With a United States of Africa you would not see cases like Somalia and the DRC,” stated Mr. Muhammad. He said it is important for Africa to move towards uniting the 53 independent states that make up the African Union. “Moving towards a strong common currency for all of Africa, and establishing a central bank, that should be at the top of Africa’s priority list,” insists Mr. Muhammad.
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/
John Atta Mills has become president of Ghana, returning the National Democratic Congress, the party founded by former president, Jerry Rawlings, to power after an eight year hiatus. Some analysts believe the recent election in Ghana marked a new era of democracy in Africa.
“That is the greatest lesson for Africa,” stated a representative of the Nigerian-based Alliance for credible Elections, according to press reports. Francois Grignon, analyst and Africa director for the International Crisis Group said the Ghanaian election resonated throughout the whole of Africa. “In 2009 we have to try to get some more positive results,” Mr. Grignon said.
Voters in Angola, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa are going to the polls between March and June. There are also elections slated in 2009 for Algeria, Comoros, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Niger, Sudan and Tunisia.
Analysts are also saying that more African nations are moving towards stability and peace; the African Union has asserted itself as a regional diplomatic and peacekeeping force; and there are signs of a growing middle class throughout the continent. Mobile phones and the internet are also revolutionizing how Africans communicate throughout the continent.
Akbar Muhammad, journalist, author and director of the African Middle East Literary Association calls this the era of a new “African Renaissance.” “There is a new leadership emerging, coming out from behind the shadows of the old,” Mr. Muhammad told The Final Call.
“The key in Africa is what happens in Egypt if President Hosni Mubarak’s son does not succeed him, then there is a strong possibility that a new leadership would emerge in Egypt, which is very important for Africa,” Mr. Muhammad said.
Mr. Muhammad also said Tanzanian Pres. Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, Sierra Leone’s Pres. Ernest Bai Koroma, Mali’s Pres. Amadou Toure and Pres. Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, were African leaders to watch.
“The economic collapse of the Western world offers a golden opportunity for Africa,” Mr. Muhammad said. There are 900 million people on the continent, and that is rapidly growing to a billion, he said. Economic experts say that from the Cape to Cairo there is an economic bloc with a combined Gross Domestic Product of U.S. $625 billion; and that’s not counting the Northern African nations.
“We need leaders in Africa with a mindset to restoring Africans at the head of the human family,” stressed Dr. Leonard Jeffries professor of African Studies at City Univ. of New York. “The world economic collapse means people around the globe will be getting together to re-group; and that means Africa has to come together to place Africa at the global economic table as equal partners,” Dr. Jeffries said.
Both Dr. Jeffries and Mr. Muhammad say that Africa must adopt Pres.-elect Barak Obama’s vision of “change.”
However, some American-based analysts and think tanks such as Africa Action believe that the new administration should not concentrate on African economic issues at first, urging Mr. Obama to make human rights in Sudan a priority from day one.
The Washington-based Africa Focus Bulletin said Somalia should be the first test of an Africa foreign policy for the Obama administration to correct “a short-sighted U.S. policy that has actively contributed to worsening an already desperate situation.”
“Somalia is a good place to start as any; and I understand that Mr. Obama has expressed interest in the crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). He has expressed a need for change in the U.S. role in developing economics and peace in Africa,” Bill Fletcher, executive editor of the Black Commentator and founder of the Center for Labor Renewal told The Final Call.
Sadia Aden, president of the Somalia Diaspora Network explained to The Final Call that “in talking to people on the Obama Transition Team, there is a feeling that Somalia will be at the top of the new administration’s ‘first 100-day’ agenda.” There is hope Obama will learn from the mistakes of the Bush administration in Somalia, she added.
On Dec. 29, Somalian Pres. Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed resigned. “The reaction on the ground in Somalia is that his resignation does not mean an end to the War Lords. Yusuf was the head but not the body,” Ms. Aden said.
“With a United States of Africa you would not see cases like Somalia and the DRC,” stated Mr. Muhammad. He said it is important for Africa to move towards uniting the 53 independent states that make up the African Union. “Moving towards a strong common currency for all of Africa, and establishing a central bank, that should be at the top of Africa’s priority list,” insists Mr. Muhammad.
Unos 1.500 líderes indígenas presentes en Foro Social Mundial brasileño
Tele Sur
Los dirigentes étnicos aprovecharán su asistencia a esta celebración para denunciar las agresiones a su población y al medio ambiente, asimismo, participarán en diversas actividades y debates en esta edición del Foro Social Mundial de Brasil.
Desde el próximo martes, se llevará a cabo la novena edición del Foro Social Mundial, en la que participarán unos mil 500 dirigentes indígenas, 500 de ellos de fuera de Brasil, a celebrarse en la localidad amazónica de Belem.
El Consejo Indigenista Misionero (Cimi) de Brasil, anunció este domingo que los líderes indígenas participarán en actos, caminatas, asambleas y debates durante su participación en este encuentro mundial, donde aprovecharán la cita para denunciar las agresiones a los pueblos autóctonos y a la naturaleza.
Una de las propuestas trazadas se refiere a la creación de una agenda común entre las poblaciones étnicas de Latinoamérica.
Asimismo, otro de los puntos a tratar, serán los proyectos de infraestructura, la violencia contra los pueblos, sus líderes, y los acuerdos de libre comercio.
En el plano institucional, las actividades y participación de los líderes indígenas en otras mesas de discusión estarán bajo la responsabilidad de la Coordinación Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas (CAOI) y la Coordinación de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica (COICA).
El mandatario brasileño Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, el boliviano Evo Morales, el venezolano Hugo Chávez y el paraguayo Fernando Lugo, están confirmados para asistir a este foro.
El presidente Lula fue uno de los fundadores del Foro Social Mundial en 2001, en la localidad de Porto Alegre, cuando aún no era jefe de Estado. En esta misma línea, el mandatario venezolano, Hugo Chávez, recibió una invitación para la celebración de 2005 y participó de forma activa en la ciudad de Caracas un año después.
En esta reunión, se espera la asistencia de unas 120 mil personas, con más de 7 mil miembros de la Policía y las Fuerzas Armadas para la seguridad del foro.
Los dirigentes étnicos aprovecharán su asistencia a esta celebración para denunciar las agresiones a su población y al medio ambiente, asimismo, participarán en diversas actividades y debates en esta edición del Foro Social Mundial de Brasil.
Desde el próximo martes, se llevará a cabo la novena edición del Foro Social Mundial, en la que participarán unos mil 500 dirigentes indígenas, 500 de ellos de fuera de Brasil, a celebrarse en la localidad amazónica de Belem.
El Consejo Indigenista Misionero (Cimi) de Brasil, anunció este domingo que los líderes indígenas participarán en actos, caminatas, asambleas y debates durante su participación en este encuentro mundial, donde aprovecharán la cita para denunciar las agresiones a los pueblos autóctonos y a la naturaleza.
Una de las propuestas trazadas se refiere a la creación de una agenda común entre las poblaciones étnicas de Latinoamérica.
Asimismo, otro de los puntos a tratar, serán los proyectos de infraestructura, la violencia contra los pueblos, sus líderes, y los acuerdos de libre comercio.
En el plano institucional, las actividades y participación de los líderes indígenas en otras mesas de discusión estarán bajo la responsabilidad de la Coordinación Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas (CAOI) y la Coordinación de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica (COICA).
El mandatario brasileño Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, el boliviano Evo Morales, el venezolano Hugo Chávez y el paraguayo Fernando Lugo, están confirmados para asistir a este foro.
El presidente Lula fue uno de los fundadores del Foro Social Mundial en 2001, en la localidad de Porto Alegre, cuando aún no era jefe de Estado. En esta misma línea, el mandatario venezolano, Hugo Chávez, recibió una invitación para la celebración de 2005 y participó de forma activa en la ciudad de Caracas un año después.
En esta reunión, se espera la asistencia de unas 120 mil personas, con más de 7 mil miembros de la Policía y las Fuerzas Armadas para la seguridad del foro.
Where Principles Go to Die
In America, Speaking the Truth is a Career-Ending Event
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
http://www.counterpunch.com/
"The evidence is sitting on the table. There is no avoiding the fact that this was torture.”
These are the words of Manfred Nowak, the UN official appointed by the Commission on Human Rights to examine cases of torture. Nowak has concluded that President Obama is legally obligated to prosecute former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
If President Obama’s bankster economic team finishes off what remains of the US economy, Obama, to deflect the public’s attention from his own failures and Americans’ growing hardships, might fulfill his responsibility to prosecute Bush and Rumsfeld. But for now the interesting question is why did the US military succumb to illegal orders?
In the December 2008 issue of CounterPunch, Alexander Cockburn, in his report on an inglorious chapter in the history of the Harvard Law School, provides the answer. Two brothers, Jonathan and David Lubell, both Harvard law students, were politically active against the Korean War. It was the McCarthy era, and the brothers were subpoenaed. They refused to cooperate on the grounds that the subpoena was a violation of the First Amendment.
Harvard Law School immediately began pressuring the students to cooperate with Congress. The other students ostracized them. Pressures from the Dean and faculty turned into threats. Although the Lubells graduated magna cum laude, they were kept off the Harvard Law Review. Their scholarships were terminated. A majority of the Harvard Law faculty voted for their expulsion (expulsion required a two-thirds vote).
Why did Harvard Law School betray two honor students who stood up for the US Constitution? Cockburn concludes that the Harvard law faculty sacrificed constitutional principle in order not to jeopardize their own self-advancement by displeasing the government (and no doubt donors).
We see such acts of personal cowardice every day. Recently we had the case of Jewish scholar and Israel critic Norman Finkelstein, whose tenure was blocked by the cowardly president of DePaul University, a man afraid to stand up for his own faculty against the Israel Lobby, which successfully imposed on a Catholic university the principle that no critic of Israel can gain academic tenure.
The same calculation of self-interest causes American journalists to serve as shills for Israeli and US government propaganda and the US Congress to endorse Israeli war crimes that the rest of the world condemns.
When US military officers saw that torture was a policy coming down from the top, they knew that doing the right thing would cost them their careers. They trimmed their sails. One who did not was Major General Antonio Taguba. Instead of covering up the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal, General Taguba wrote an honest report that terminated his career.
Despite legislation that protects whistleblowers, it is always the whistleblower, not the wrongdoer, who suffers. When it finally became public that the Bush regime was committing felonies under US law by using the NSA to spy on Americans, the Justice (sic) Department went after the whistleblower. Nothing was done about the felonies.
Yet Bush and the Justice (sic) Department continued to assert that “we are a nation of law.”
The Bush regime was a lawless regime. This makes it difficult for the Obama regime to be a lawful one. A torture inquiry would lead naturally into a war crimes inquiry. General Taguba said that the Bush regime committed war crimes. President Obama was a war criminal by his third day in office when he ordered illegal cross-border drone attacks on Pakistan that murdered 20 people, including 3 children. The bombing and strafing of homes and villages in Afghanistan by US forces and America’s NATO puppets are also war crimes. Obama cannot enforce the law, because he himself has already violated it.
For decades the US government has taken the position that Israel’s territorial expansion is not constrained by any international law. The US government is complicit in Israel’s war crimes in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.
The entire world knows that Israel is guilty of war crimes and that the US government made the crimes possible by providing the weapons and diplomatic support. What Israel and the US did in Lebanon and Gaza is no different from crimes for which Nazis were tried at Nuremberg. Israel understands this, and the Israeli government is currently preparing its defense, which will be led by Israeli Justice (sic) Minister Daniel Friedman. UN war crimes official Richard Falk has compared Israel’s massacre of Gazans to the Nazi starvation and massacre of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto. Amnesty International and the Red Cross have demanded Israel be held accountable for war crimes. Even eight Israeli human rights groups have called for an investigation into Israel’s war crimes.
Obama’s order to close Guantanamo Prison means very little. Essentially, Obama’s order is a public relations event. The tribunal process had already been shut down by US courts and by military lawyers, who refused to prosecute the fabricated cases. The vast majority of the prisoners were hapless individuals captured by Afghan warlords and sold for money to the stupid Americans as “terrorists.” Most of the prisoners, people the Bush regime told us were “the most dangerous people alive,” have already been released.
Obama’s order said nothing about closing the CIA’s secret prisons or halting the illegal practice of rendition in which the CIA kidnaps people and sends them to third world countries, such as Egypt, to be tortured.
Obama would have to take risks that opportunistic politicians never take in order for the US to become a nation of law instead of a nation in which the agendas of special interests override the law.
Truth cannot be spoken in America. It cannot be spoken in universities. It cannot be spoken in the media. It cannot be spoken in courts, which is why defendants and defense attorneys have given up on trials and cop pleas to lesser offenses that never occurred.
Truth is never spoken by government. As Jonathan Turley said recently, Washington “is where principles go to die.”
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
http://www.counterpunch.com/
"The evidence is sitting on the table. There is no avoiding the fact that this was torture.”
These are the words of Manfred Nowak, the UN official appointed by the Commission on Human Rights to examine cases of torture. Nowak has concluded that President Obama is legally obligated to prosecute former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
If President Obama’s bankster economic team finishes off what remains of the US economy, Obama, to deflect the public’s attention from his own failures and Americans’ growing hardships, might fulfill his responsibility to prosecute Bush and Rumsfeld. But for now the interesting question is why did the US military succumb to illegal orders?
In the December 2008 issue of CounterPunch, Alexander Cockburn, in his report on an inglorious chapter in the history of the Harvard Law School, provides the answer. Two brothers, Jonathan and David Lubell, both Harvard law students, were politically active against the Korean War. It was the McCarthy era, and the brothers were subpoenaed. They refused to cooperate on the grounds that the subpoena was a violation of the First Amendment.
Harvard Law School immediately began pressuring the students to cooperate with Congress. The other students ostracized them. Pressures from the Dean and faculty turned into threats. Although the Lubells graduated magna cum laude, they were kept off the Harvard Law Review. Their scholarships were terminated. A majority of the Harvard Law faculty voted for their expulsion (expulsion required a two-thirds vote).
Why did Harvard Law School betray two honor students who stood up for the US Constitution? Cockburn concludes that the Harvard law faculty sacrificed constitutional principle in order not to jeopardize their own self-advancement by displeasing the government (and no doubt donors).
We see such acts of personal cowardice every day. Recently we had the case of Jewish scholar and Israel critic Norman Finkelstein, whose tenure was blocked by the cowardly president of DePaul University, a man afraid to stand up for his own faculty against the Israel Lobby, which successfully imposed on a Catholic university the principle that no critic of Israel can gain academic tenure.
The same calculation of self-interest causes American journalists to serve as shills for Israeli and US government propaganda and the US Congress to endorse Israeli war crimes that the rest of the world condemns.
When US military officers saw that torture was a policy coming down from the top, they knew that doing the right thing would cost them their careers. They trimmed their sails. One who did not was Major General Antonio Taguba. Instead of covering up the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal, General Taguba wrote an honest report that terminated his career.
Despite legislation that protects whistleblowers, it is always the whistleblower, not the wrongdoer, who suffers. When it finally became public that the Bush regime was committing felonies under US law by using the NSA to spy on Americans, the Justice (sic) Department went after the whistleblower. Nothing was done about the felonies.
Yet Bush and the Justice (sic) Department continued to assert that “we are a nation of law.”
The Bush regime was a lawless regime. This makes it difficult for the Obama regime to be a lawful one. A torture inquiry would lead naturally into a war crimes inquiry. General Taguba said that the Bush regime committed war crimes. President Obama was a war criminal by his third day in office when he ordered illegal cross-border drone attacks on Pakistan that murdered 20 people, including 3 children. The bombing and strafing of homes and villages in Afghanistan by US forces and America’s NATO puppets are also war crimes. Obama cannot enforce the law, because he himself has already violated it.
For decades the US government has taken the position that Israel’s territorial expansion is not constrained by any international law. The US government is complicit in Israel’s war crimes in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.
The entire world knows that Israel is guilty of war crimes and that the US government made the crimes possible by providing the weapons and diplomatic support. What Israel and the US did in Lebanon and Gaza is no different from crimes for which Nazis were tried at Nuremberg. Israel understands this, and the Israeli government is currently preparing its defense, which will be led by Israeli Justice (sic) Minister Daniel Friedman. UN war crimes official Richard Falk has compared Israel’s massacre of Gazans to the Nazi starvation and massacre of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto. Amnesty International and the Red Cross have demanded Israel be held accountable for war crimes. Even eight Israeli human rights groups have called for an investigation into Israel’s war crimes.
Obama’s order to close Guantanamo Prison means very little. Essentially, Obama’s order is a public relations event. The tribunal process had already been shut down by US courts and by military lawyers, who refused to prosecute the fabricated cases. The vast majority of the prisoners were hapless individuals captured by Afghan warlords and sold for money to the stupid Americans as “terrorists.” Most of the prisoners, people the Bush regime told us were “the most dangerous people alive,” have already been released.
Obama’s order said nothing about closing the CIA’s secret prisons or halting the illegal practice of rendition in which the CIA kidnaps people and sends them to third world countries, such as Egypt, to be tortured.
Obama would have to take risks that opportunistic politicians never take in order for the US to become a nation of law instead of a nation in which the agendas of special interests override the law.
Truth cannot be spoken in America. It cannot be spoken in universities. It cannot be spoken in the media. It cannot be spoken in courts, which is why defendants and defense attorneys have given up on trials and cop pleas to lesser offenses that never occurred.
Truth is never spoken by government. As Jonathan Turley said recently, Washington “is where principles go to die.”
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Armas
